shigzeo ?

shigzeo ?

Lives in Japan Chiba, Japan
Works as a Writer, Audio Critic
Has a website at http://ohm-image.net
Joined on Sep 14, 2010
About me:

utterly impressionable

Comments

Total: 196, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On Fujifilm announces XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS wideangle zoom article (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

D 503: Seems over priced.

If the only metric left by which customers choose their products is price, expect lots of plastic crap to hit the shelves, and by and by, deteriorating quality.

I welcome a Fuji that could focus on a market they want to capture and tweak until they have it. This do all and be all to everyone strategy will only dilute their brand. Focus on the mid-high end of the mirror less market and get rid of the toenail and puppy dog shooters.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2013 at 12:41 UTC
On Fujifilm announces XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS wideangle zoom article (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

tr4driver: It looks like the aperture control ring is similar to the one on the other zoom lenses - NO MARKINGS? I understand the reasoning for this on the other lenses that have a variable largest aperture through the zoom range, but why leave the markings off on this lens with a constant f4?

Variable aperture lenses from other manufacturers have always had marked aperture stops. I have no idea why Fuji would release unmarked aperture stops for the XF zoom line.

It could be that the aperture ring itself doesn't do anything and is only an electronic control ring. Perhaps that is the reason. It makes little sense.

I would JUMP on Fuji'x XF lenses if they were mechanically coupled to helicoids and aperture irises. Too limiting for me no matter how well some of them shoot.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2013 at 12:37 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R real-world samples gallery article (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

D200_4me: How long will it take one of the internet experts to whine about the X-Trans sensor design/performance? ;-) Come on....get it over with so we can go back to enjoying real photos...

Whine about x-trans performance. Whine about size of lens.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 9, 2013 at 13:01 UTC
On Enthusiast interchangeable lens camera 2013 roundup article (267 comments in total)
In reply to:

drummercam: Don't like "Relatively unrefined onscreen interface" . . .

What? This is a camera, not an iPad.

Sometimes, refined interfaces help a user get around. I'm using the Sony a7r and the X-Pro 1. Of the two, the X-Pro 1 is simple to operate, the a7r is a headache of immemorable niches and confusing panels/slides.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2013 at 07:04 UTC
On The Long Jetty in the Human portrait at Sunset III challenge (5 comments in total)

The circular flare is wonderful. I don't see enough images with it.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2013 at 23:39 UTC as 2nd comment
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)
In reply to:

six34sigma: Priced at a point where this camera will make no practical difference to Nikon or it's user base. My opinion, another shot gone off in the wrong direction.

How retro is it going to look with a 24-70 attached to it.

Judgement passed, meh!

@mgblack:

My FE is the same size as an X-Pro. The reason the X-pro comes with attachments like grips is because there isn't a shutter cock/film advance lever, which were used until D4 style cameras came out for hooking your hand.

The modern grip is necessary because there is nowhere to hook your hand onto. Smaller bodies like the FE/FM (same size as XPro) rest against the heel of your hand. Even without hooking your thumb in the shutter cock, they are as sturdy as a D800 is because you wrap from the bottom the top and the side. Cameras like the D800 relies mostly on prehensile strength and a small bird finger tab to stay in the hand, not on the mechanics of the hand.

I agree that it is comfortable- but only to a point. The larger size means that pressure comes to the fingers, where there is less strength, whereas the smaller bodies of the F3/FE/M allowed you to use a larger group of muscles AND a the shutter cock to support the camera.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 05:03 UTC
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)
In reply to:

nathanleebush: No video? Exqueeze me? Is this 2007? I mean even companies like Fujifilm who couldn't care less about video tack it on. It's a software solution, for chrissake. You've got a D4 processor and won't enable basic video functionality? But, phew, they've got a fisheye and miniature effects in the firmware lol.

A7 it is..

While I don't use video and I dig the design ethos of the past, I think Nathan is right. Why? Because this camera isn't like the X series in trying to deliver a retro experience. It is a fully uber modern camera that keeps all the auto controls of its digital ancestors while putting on a retro skin.

If it were to be wrapped in a small body with minimal controls that eschewed auto speed for manual ergonomics, video wouldn't make as much sense. But this camera is basically just a Dxx. Nikon had the chance to make real waves by making a retro digital camera. They didn't and this … thing, should have video as it isn't anything but a contemporary camera.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 04:57 UTC
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)
In reply to:

shigzeo ?: DPREVIEW: it isn't that the camera has gone too far backwards, it is that it has kept all the modern conveniences while trying to look backwards. Too many buttons, massive, thick body, reliance on small viewfinders- it is a modern camera wrapped up in a skin.

The only thing it does right is give a few dials. Nikon didn't commit to the design; instead they met less than half way and gave, as you said, an oversized F3, but one that is beset by modern flourishes which are the exact antithesis to the direct controls that immediately catch the eye.

I hope that this will merely be ONE of a new series and that FE styled and sized cameras as small as the X-Pro/leica M will come out. Obviously they will have longer flange distances and a prism hump, but if that box size (not merely length) but width and weight can be factored in, a number of us who really have very little need for auto everything will pick one or two of these up.

It's a 'retro' skin on a fully normal Nikon FX camera. And the FX label, too, is hideous. Nikon's designers should go on a desert wander through somewhere in Northern Europe to learn how to design by getting rid of ridiculous things, or keeping with a certain ethos.

This is goulash. Everything there is to throw, throw it. Make a bit of a design ethic, follow it for a few steps, then thrash it. The tiny Viewfinder is a real shame.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 04:53 UTC
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)
In reply to:

six34sigma: Priced at a point where this camera will make no practical difference to Nikon or it's user base. My opinion, another shot gone off in the wrong direction.

How retro is it going to look with a 24-70 attached to it.

Judgement passed, meh!

Nothing looks retro with a 24-70 anything on it. That is a very modern lens.

Nikon went out of their way to design a camera that almost had something to do with the design perfection of the past. Instead, they keep the unlabelled dials, add a PASM dial, make the thing thick, have the audacity to keep the same D800/D4 sized viewfinder, and beef up the size of the F3. Even an F3, a fully professional camera comparable in function and utility (for the day), to today's D4 is much much smaller.

I don't see who they were aiming for. Yes, it has the look (like makeup on a model) but underneath it is the same old digital camera merely wrapped in a very thin skin.

One reason many want a 'retro' styled camera is that retro controls are direct, easy to decipher, and can be set when a camera is off. This one has those things but keeps all the ridiculous stuff and adds weight and size. Look at the top plate swimming in the ocean of other stuff beneath it.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 04:31 UTC
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)
In reply to:

expoboy52: Love the look, hate the price. Reminds me so much of the late-60s / early-70s cameras I learned to shoot with.

Except that it is MUCH larger/thicker and bristles with superfluous controls that the cameras you learned on never had.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 04:26 UTC
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)

DPREVIEW: it isn't that the camera has gone too far backwards, it is that it has kept all the modern conveniences while trying to look backwards. Too many buttons, massive, thick body, reliance on small viewfinders- it is a modern camera wrapped up in a skin.

The only thing it does right is give a few dials. Nikon didn't commit to the design; instead they met less than half way and gave, as you said, an oversized F3, but one that is beset by modern flourishes which are the exact antithesis to the direct controls that immediately catch the eye.

I hope that this will merely be ONE of a new series and that FE styled and sized cameras as small as the X-Pro/leica M will come out. Obviously they will have longer flange distances and a prism hump, but if that box size (not merely length) but width and weight can be factored in, a number of us who really have very little need for auto everything will pick one or two of these up.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 04:17 UTC as 1030th comment | 2 replies
On Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows article (1514 comments in total)
In reply to:

tabloid: Lots of professional photographers now use mirror less cameras.

Me for one.

Its the future, or should i say its the present.

Just look at the new full frame cameras from Sony. (A7 and A7R).

If those cameras like the A7 and A7R had the new Canon 70D sensor they would world beaters.

I shoot advertising and catalogue images for audio companies (headphones/earphones/amps) mainly. Currently I'm using a D800 but am looking to replace it with a Sony A7R because what I need more than anything is time- time to move, time to adjust, time to add new reflectors, grips, and angle lights. The D800's live view isn't good enough. It is grainy and hard to focus in dark situations even with bright modelling lights.

There are heaps and heaps of professional applications beyond the typical wedding/sprot/photo journalist niches out there. And a number of people who make their living off images are using mirror less cameras. They are few for sure, but every year are growing.

I also shoot 'snapshot' (as they are called in Japan) of school field trips and typically I use a Fuji X-Pro 1 and a 12 mm lens. The Fuji's flash sync is poor and the battery life short and the SD card interaction isn't great but it works. I'd rather carry 2 XPro than 2 D800s.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 2, 2013 at 12:42 UTC
In reply to:

LensBeginner: Call me Mr. Grumpy, but I mainly see many oversaturated, overexposed and overprocessed photos...
I like some, though, like Nos. 4-5-6-10.
Not much else.

Not grumpy at all, perfectly right. The truth is that professionals simply don't know what they are doing. What the RAF needs is a bunch of good armchair captains to round up their photo compilations and kick out the riffraff. Your comment has convinced me to put full support behind you. Show those professionals how to do their job!

Gogogo!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2013 at 11:35 UTC
In reply to:

Anzere08: Am I the only one seeing a lot of issues in the way these samples were shot? Lots of very low shutter speed in moving scenes (1/160 with a running horse) ? 1/100s with a moving singer? 1/50s using a 55mm non-stabilized lens etc? A lot of shots look blurry for that reason. Was it shot in auto mode?

MarkJH, someone up voted me. Why not. But it's true, there is no ONE way to shoot every scene. If the photographer chose to use low ISO and slow shutter speeds, perhaps she or he wanted to shot motion or how the camera handles blurred pixels or some other thing.

If the photographer was tasked with making the sharpest of all images and only shoot tree bark, I would agree completely with Anzere08. In that case, make sure you are controlling your environment. But if you are testing a camera and having fun, have fun and test it. Is it able to pan well? How is focus under low shutter speed panning? How does it handle when you aren't trying to nail focus but do something else? There really are a variety of ways to shoot the same scene.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2013 at 04:11 UTC
In reply to:

Anzere08: Am I the only one seeing a lot of issues in the way these samples were shot? Lots of very low shutter speed in moving scenes (1/160 with a running horse) ? 1/100s with a moving singer? 1/50s using a 55mm non-stabilized lens etc? A lot of shots look blurry for that reason. Was it shot in auto mode?

Ah yes, there is only ONE way to shoot any scene. You tell 'em Anzere08!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2013 at 03:37 UTC
In reply to:

MAubrey: I'd say they came up with a great idea if it wasn't for the fact that these have been around for quite some time already...

What is wrong with improving upon something that right now, is quite flawed? It is a great idea. My Hawk's is a great idea, but it is a weak design. Infinity must be searched for, the helicoids grind, the mount is aluminium, not steel or brass, and wears fast. It is good, but not great. I'd rather pay once and get a great adapter that will last the life of my lenses than a make-do adapter that merely does the job but may need to be replaced.

Also, the Hawk's has a reflective inner surface that causes very bad flare with longer lenses such as LTM nikkor 10,5/2,5 and Leica 90/2,8 tele-elmarit. I've taped the inside in order to ameliorate the flare.

Voight is a better brand. I hope that the issues of the Hawks' will be addressed. I always will pay more for better quality.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2013 at 01:43 UTC
In reply to:

M Jesper: I sure hope there will be one for Fuji X-Mount as well !

I hope so, too. I have the Hawk's Factory adapter. It is decent, but made of aluminium and wears fast. Its helicoids are pretty weak and grind when lenses heavier than 180g are attached. And no infinity lock.

The VM one looks to be much better made. The infinity lock would be a great asset as currently infinity focus necessitates checking very carefully at the lens' largest aperture and then when switching to the shooting aperture, hoping that you don't bump the ring at all.

The Hawks may be the first, and currently it is one of the best, but it looks to be outclassed completely by the VM-E.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2013 at 01:39 UTC
On Nikon video hints at long-desired 'digital FM' article (554 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bjorn_L: I am a Nikon shooter. I currently shoot mostly FX. I would not buy this camera for half the rumored price. What does this camera solve that that d610 and d800 do not solve better for less?

The point of a stripped down FX body would seem to be to give a low cost entry for photographers not wanting or needing to pay extra for features they don't care about. Leaving out features and charging a premium for that just makes no sense.

On the other hand leaving Nikon pro DX shooters to choose between the ancient d300s and the consumer d7100 also makes no sense. The d400 is long over due and should be their next body not some niche thing like this.

That and of course they should make a camera capable of fast video focus so Nikon video buffs aren't torn between manual AF in video or buying a GH3.

I think this camera is aimed at people who either owned an FE/M series or smaller OM series back in the day, who enjoy a good viewfinder (I hope this one is as large as the FE/M series) and ergonomic manual controls. The current designs are meant to be gripped and work well for that, but have few immediately obvious cues.

You press a button and it clicks, but there is little to no connection with the mechanics underneath. I have no idea if the DF will solve this issue. I really doubt it. I'm one of those people who gets sick when I am passenger in a luxury car, or a bullet train. When I use the D800, I enjoy the results, but really find nothing in the experience worth the effort.

When my FE was working, I loved every minute of it. The big OVF was the best part, plus small body. Current digital bodies are simply monsters. The FE was a D800 level camera back in the Day. The D800 is much larger than the F3 or F2, cameras that were the D3 of their day.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2013 at 01:20 UTC
In reply to:

AlanG: This is just superficial surface work. A good designer would have figured out how to incorporate a high res EVF.

Perhaps you forgot that this was a charity auction of an expensive bling bling item that is meant for one thing: to draw funds to cover a few nasty diseases. This is NOT a camera meant to go click click click of your dogs and girlfriend's kids.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2013 at 06:05 UTC
In reply to:

peevee1: Why would anybody use that system vs say D800 with Sigma 35/1.4?

I'm a product photographer who would very much like to move up to an S in the next few years. D800 is great, but it is just a stop gap vs. a better 'medium' format with larger dynamic range, better flash sync speed, speedier controls and a lot more.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2013 at 13:53 UTC
Total: 196, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »