photonius

photonius

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jan 5, 2008

Comments

Total: 76, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ConanFuji: Fujifilm...wake up.
You've been stuck on 16MP since the F500EXR like 5 years ago.
There's smartphones with more megapixel than these!
And what's with the slooooooooooooooooooowwwww lens on pinhead sized sensors?
It's the era of the Full Frame, baby!

I guess that was ironic. You know of course how big a 1200mm lens is on FF : http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/newsLetter/Mother-of-All-L-Lenses.jsp
And that at f5.6 diffraction on that size sensors limits resolution to about 3MPs...

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2014 at 17:03 UTC
On Tamron to develop 150-600mm F5-6.3 ultra-telephoto zoom article (193 comments in total)

Hopefully this will bring some movement into the long tele zoom market, if it achieves similar quality as the Tamron 70-300 VC. In Canon land, nothing really beats the aging 100-400 L so far, the cheaper Sigmas being worse and heavier.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2013 at 10:38 UTC as 57th comment
On Nikon Df preview (2792 comments in total)

Does the ISO wheel spin when the camera is set to AUTO ISO? ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 16:42 UTC as 604th comment | 1 reply
On Niki Feijen's haunting images of abandoned houses article (218 comments in total)

picture 9, the church. Is that staged? must be, can't believe there would be dead bodies sitting there. so, in all pictures, how much is staged, versus real?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2013 at 13:09 UTC as 98th comment

too bad they didn't put the GPS in there that can be found in their smaller cameras. For traveling, it's nice to sometimes tag photos in remote areas.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2013 at 10:18 UTC as 33rd comment
In reply to:

abortabort: Seriously? The 16-28mm is a great lens, but 5 TIMES the price?! Samyang's cine versions are something like $50 more, if that. I suppose this will still be cheaper than the competition though.

I don't think they will make substantial better quality control on this lens - certainly not the way Roger suggests that cinema lenses need to be highly calibrated in his blog. The optical specs are the same as the normal lens, it's really just the barrel which is different. I think they look at it as a niche product, selling few copies to pros that can afford it.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2013 at 11:51 UTC
In reply to:

CarVac: They may have reworked some of the mechanisms to provide for parfocal zooming. That would certainly account for an increased price.

based on the optical diagram, they are the same.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2013 at 11:47 UTC
In reply to:

Jorginho: I just decided on the 84.5 filter series. Quite a few Dutch reviews by pro photographers convinced me. In general: in spite of the hard (organic) glass not scratch free, but no colour cast not even when you put two or three in your filterholder. Price is okey. So...no Cokin (creative) for me.

But a good thing they survive.

ah, nice, but not available everywhere yet. Still, they fit the Cokin P and same material as Cokin, Hitech, Lee, Singh-Ray (C39). perhaps dyes are better (no IR leak??)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 6, 2013 at 21:10 UTC

Decent price with decent quality will sell. Look at how Lee is continuously sold out, despite the high price. They just need to update for modern needs, i.e. NDs, and gradients (no color necessary usually) for photography, and sets of filters for video (effects that are not easy to do in post).

Direct link | Posted on Sep 6, 2013 at 16:31 UTC as 34th comment
In reply to:

Hoefie: If I have a 77mm lens, what filter should I get: M, L or XL ?
As there is an overlap on all sizes; is the size really the only difference between the four ranges ?

Depends on focal length and what body it's on, i.e. the angle of view. You should get the range that covers the lens with your largest front diameter, taking into account the angle of view. I.e. on a tele, you can stack a bunch of 77mm filters with little effect, while on a wide angle, a thick filter (e.g. variable NDs) may already give hard vignetting.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 6, 2013 at 16:30 UTC
On Kenko-Tokina buys filter maker Cokin article (11 comments in total)

NT

Direct link | Posted on Sep 6, 2013 at 16:23 UTC as 18th comment
On Kenko-Tokina buys filter maker Cokin article (11 comments in total)
In reply to:

Richard H Goodman: GOOD! Maybe I can finally get a 77mm P series adapter!

What's the problem? For a few $ you get a 77mm adapter ring plus P holder on ebay.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 6, 2013 at 16:21 UTC

Well, despite the advantages of dSLR, a nice print on good quality film paper should last a long time. In that time you have to keep buying new technology every few years and copy your stuff again and again if you want to save it into the future. Hopefully some new stable technology will come along. I thought CDs and DVDs would last, but seems they don't. (hard drives fail of course routinely).

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2013 at 09:10 UTC as 39th comment | 3 replies
On Battle of the Wi-Fi Cards: Eye-Fi vs. Transcend article (181 comments in total)
In reply to:

photonius: What about the Sandisk Eye Fi cards? Is this simply a licensed version of the Eye-Fi card with the same software and features as described here, or are there differences?

Thanks for the info on the Sandisk. Yes, looks like the Eye-Fi itself is not readily available in europe. hmm, if nobody wants to sell a decent product, so be it, they won't get my money then.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 30, 2013 at 12:39 UTC
On Battle of the Wi-Fi Cards: Eye-Fi vs. Transcend article (181 comments in total)
In reply to:

photonius: What about the Sandisk Eye Fi cards? Is this simply a licensed version of the Eye-Fi card with the same software and features as described here, or are there differences?

Thanks, yes, the Sandisk Eye-Fi cards are slower, but also cheaper. I noticed they are not sold everywhere though. Perhaps licensing issues, or WiFi regulation issues. I'd be interested to have some cheap WiFi capability for a non-WiFi body for test shoots in a home environment, no large data transfers, just avoiding a cable to stumble over.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2013 at 11:43 UTC
On Battle of the Wi-Fi Cards: Eye-Fi vs. Transcend article (181 comments in total)

What about the Sandisk Eye Fi cards? Is this simply a licensed version of the Eye-Fi card with the same software and features as described here, or are there differences?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2013 at 09:06 UTC as 62nd comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Timmbits: yet another itty bitty crappy tiny sensor!
I wish they would offer these camera with a bigger one - especially at these very long focal lengths, where IQ suffers significantly.

That's the whole point of the small sensor. This lens is 200mm in focal length to give 1200mm FF equivalent field of view. If you make the sensor bigger, you need a bigger lens. For a m43 sized sensor, you need a 600mm lens - look up how big those are.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2013 at 18:44 UTC
On Preview:canon-eos-70d (1311 comments in total)
In reply to:

D1N0: This sensor is useless for people that shoot through the viewfinder. Canon should put it in a mirrorless and focus on superior iso for their dslrs (not just almost on par with Nikon because that won't last very long). Wouldn't you need even better lenses because it is actually a 40mp sensor with only half the pixels actually used for imaging?.

No, there are still only 20 Mp microlenses. It's the sensor under the microlenses that is split into two photosites, so the phase can be read by only reading the left or right one. However, for the image, the signal from both is combined, so the result should be similar to a "simple" 20Mp sensor, unless all the extra electronics makes a lot of extra noise. On the other hand, averaging two photosites will reduce shot noise, so the image could actually be less noisy than a simple 20MP sensor. Dynamic range could suffer, if each of the two photosite would hold less than 50% of photons a single large photosite could hold.

Posted on Jul 2, 2013 at 12:22 UTC
On Samsung introduces 10mm F3.5 Fisheye for NX article (101 comments in total)
In reply to:

qwertyasdf: I really hope the NX line success with it incredible lenses
But the unnecessary long flangeback distance is like a genetic disorder that will plague generations to come
The inability to use m mount lenses and the stupid protruding lens mount killed the deal for me

But it means one should be able to use this fish-eye with an adapter on Sony or Canon mirror-less... ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2013 at 21:43 UTC
On Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Preview preview (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jefftan: Sony NEX 10-18 F4 225 gram
Canon 11-22mm F4-5.6 220 gram

not as wide, not as bright and same weight

What's going on? Is this the best what Canon can do?
Can't understand

Well, look at the photozone review of the Sony lens. It's optical properties are not that great, rather poor at f4. All points towards the Canon being even better than it's well regarded EF-S 10-22. So, I rather prefer Canon's approach, even if on paper Sony's specs seem better.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2013 at 18:41 UTC
Total: 76, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »