Rod McD

Rod McD

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Jan 15, 2010

Comments

Total: 200, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

I'm not into 'street' at all. (Perhaps just a little when I travel in other countries.) But I am into cycling, hiking and kayaking and shooting largely landscapes on the way. So, the X70 potentially appeals in a different way.

I can see the X70 as lightweight back up to my ILC and as a single ultra-light option. The fact that it doesn't change size at all might also make it good possibility for kayaking if a third party offers one of those inexpensive polycarbonate housings. It might be one of the few larger sensored cameras in a housing to stay reasonably small.

It's a concern that a camera claimed to be 'tack sharp' may not have been - at least in your sample. There have been other samples from Beta cameras posted on the web that have looked very good in terms of cross frame sharpness. No doubt we'll learn more.....

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2016 at 21:39 UTC as 41st comment | 1 reply
On article Design, looks and desire: Olympus does it again (396 comments in total)

Even if photographers look first at function, I have to agree that camera looks have a great bearing on our choices. Read a few DPR posts and it's obvious that they're a key aspect for many people. And it only gets worse - there are just as many posts on strap design, Italian leather half cases, flash shoe cover design and soft release buttons. Enough for a whole psychiatric conference.

OTOH there is a tendency to write off the success of retro designs as nostalgia where I think that people forget that analogue knobs and dials were actually the product of decades of ergonomic development that actually worked - and very well. Digital technology made DSLR scroll wheels possible, but it's matter of personal preference which works better at the individual level.

I bought a Fuji XT1 for a host of reasons, including the features and lens range, but modest size and analogue control were up there amongst them. Yeah, OK, it looks fine too.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 22:25 UTC as 51st comment
On photo Riddler time in the Wildlife - King fisher challenge (17 comments in total)

Congratulations! Top shot. Out of interest, could you tell us how you chose your prefocus, given that the exact spot for birds dive and exit from the water would be dependent on wherever the fish was? Even if the bird often hunted from the same perch, I assume that you couldn't place much reliance on DOF with a 300mm lens..... it would be very thin indeed.

Thanks.

Rod

Direct link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 00:37 UTC as 16th comment

I'm all in favor of some larger sensor compacts emerging in the so called "rugged" waterproof and shockproof market. I'm tired of using small-sensor compacts when I go kayaking. OTOH, $3K is too pricey for me and rather a lot to risk in those activities. Most of them leak in the end - there's not a decent "o" ring amongst them and the manufacturers won't fix leaks under the warranty. I'll pin my hopes on someone developing one of those small polycarbonate waterproof shells for the Fuji X70.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 08:22 UTC as 11th comment
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (367 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rod McD: Interesting, though there are possibly some additional questions that could have been asked...... Where are they with the fabled organic sensor, will they entertain IBIS, and where to with EVF development (4-5mpx coming)?

I was glad to hear that they are considering some smaller lenses. They've received accolades for their fast lenses like the 16, 23, 56 and 90mm, but some of us went mirror-less to get small light kit. Yes there are a few small lenses in their range, but only in limited FLs. Quite a few people are hoping that their new sealed 35/2 heralds a few more FLs in more moderate apertures. I'd love to see smaller 16, 23, 56 and 90mm lenses.

Fish-eyes, TS and some long primes? Why not, for those that need them?

Yes - agree with you on that (and have in fact done so).

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 23:34 UTC
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (367 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rod McD: Interesting, though there are possibly some additional questions that could have been asked...... Where are they with the fabled organic sensor, will they entertain IBIS, and where to with EVF development (4-5mpx coming)?

I was glad to hear that they are considering some smaller lenses. They've received accolades for their fast lenses like the 16, 23, 56 and 90mm, but some of us went mirror-less to get small light kit. Yes there are a few small lenses in their range, but only in limited FLs. Quite a few people are hoping that their new sealed 35/2 heralds a few more FLs in more moderate apertures. I'd love to see smaller 16, 23, 56 and 90mm lenses.

Fish-eyes, TS and some long primes? Why not, for those that need them?

I understand the physics, but my point was that many people would accept a modest reduction in maximum aperture to have smaller lenses than the f1.4 versions. There is nothing wrong with f2/2.4/2.8 lenses for many uses even on APSC sensors and I really don't care about their equivalence in FF. Not everyone is obsessed with maximum aperture. The new 35/2 seems to be very popular.

And I don't understand why you claim that Fuji APSC is suited to a maximum FL of 85mm. I doubt Fuji do either - apart from the 90mm, they've already released four zoom lenses with maximum FLs of 140, 200, 230 and 400mm. Very good lenses too.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 10:49 UTC
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (367 comments in total)

Interesting, though there are possibly some additional questions that could have been asked...... Where are they with the fabled organic sensor, will they entertain IBIS, and where to with EVF development (4-5mpx coming)?

I was glad to hear that they are considering some smaller lenses. They've received accolades for their fast lenses like the 16, 23, 56 and 90mm, but some of us went mirror-less to get small light kit. Yes there are a few small lenses in their range, but only in limited FLs. Quite a few people are hoping that their new sealed 35/2 heralds a few more FLs in more moderate apertures. I'd love to see smaller 16, 23, 56 and 90mm lenses.

Fish-eyes, TS and some long primes? Why not, for those that need them?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 07:24 UTC as 68th comment | 5 replies
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (367 comments in total)
In reply to:

Raist3d: if fuji makes more small primes i may go back to them

@ RStyga. Too bad if you happen to want some small lenses that aren't 18mm or 27mm. If you were to read the Fuji Forum posts you'd see that there's a good deal of support for small 16mm, 23mm, 56mm and 80/90mm lenses. I'm well aware of the role Fuji's excellent fast lenses have in their lens line-up but not everyone went mirror-less to get very fast lenses that pay size, weight and price penalties for their speed. And please don't tell me that they're smaller than FF lenses of the same speed. Of course they are, but that's irrelevant to the fact that lenses of moderate aperture for APSC could be smaller.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 07:10 UTC

I'm not sure who the X70 is aimed at. If the reported weight of 113g is correct, which I doubt, I could see the camera being great for hiking, climbing and cycling, or in a small neat waterproof housing for kayaking, snorkeling etc. But let's see the IQ.

It has competition. Apart from the much-mentioned Ricoh GR and Coolpix A, high end large-sensor compacts like the MFT LX100 and the 1.5" Canon G1X II are more versatile and might just approach it in IQ depending on your uses. You can get an LX 100 for less than an X70 + OVF and it comes with a built-in EVF and a similar control set.

To me, the X70 loses marks for its add-on OVF. It's expensive (making the X70 $1K in total at launch) and seems to make the camera taller than it would have been if they'd simply increased the body size a little to build one in. They can easily get lost or left at home and they block the flash shoe in use. And if you don't buy one, you finish up composing at arms length like a P&S. Bad idea.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2016 at 06:29 UTC as 36th comment

Time for some honesty. Flash manufacturers are taking more liberties with naming conventions to market their products..... It only has a GN of 44(m) when used with a 105mm lens. It would be far more useful to know what the GN is when it's used with a normal lens. Flashes usually used to be specified with a 35mm lens (on FF) and a second figure for what ever angle their WA diffuser covered. I'd bet that it's actual GN is more like 27-30 with a 35mm lens. It's not even in the spec sheet on Metz's website.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2016 at 07:58 UTC as 3rd comment | 5 replies

It seems there are a lot critics here, before the first of these lenses has been reviewed or sold. How about a bit of objectivity and a fair go?

Choice is good. The big boys were also once new and we should welcome new manufacturers competing in what is a tough market. They're a collaboration between German design and Chinese manufacture, but so what? Many other brands are building or assembling in China and elsewhere. Sooner or later one of the Chinese independents is going to turn out some good lenses.

I actually like the concept here...... the consistency of design in a matched set. Let's see their IQ. The fact that they're MF doesn't worry me at all - it just depends on what you like. It works for Leica, Zeiss, Samyang and Voigtlander....... Just don't buy them if your need for AF is a priority.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 12:08 UTC as 1st comment

Choice is good. I'll look forward to seeing this when it finally emerges. (Anyone else think that the ad with black camera on slab of dark stone looks familiar??)

I like what looks like analogue ergonomics, but the specs remain to be seen. In any case, a camera body is only one part of a camera system. The real decider for their new FF system will be the lenses. Pentax had and still has some great FF lenses in its line up and has recently released a few new FF zooms. More will be needed to fill the gaps, especially in the wide angle prime range.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 1, 2015 at 02:11 UTC as 75th comment

Hi,

Congratulations on winning the challenge. That's a spectacular landscape. I'd like to now more about the geology. Is that red a rock or mineral? Or a plant, lichen, etc growing on specific mineral layers? I'd be fascinated to know.

Thanks, Rod

Direct link | Posted on Nov 28, 2015 at 00:22 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

Lee Jay: The assumption being, the purpose of photography is to create art.

I have only recently realized that many, even most photographers think this way.

I've been shooting for over 35 years and I never really thought of photography as a way to create art, at least for me.

I guess I'm now wondering if there aren't two totally different types of photography - artistic and documentary. I've always thought of photography as a way to document events, not as a way to create art. For that reason, very little of what he said made much sense to me.

I suspect it's different things to different photographers including both art and documentary (and probably other purposes) according to the intention of the photographer.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2015 at 04:14 UTC
On article What's missing? Ming Thein on the state of mirrorless (751 comments in total)

Ming Thein makes some good points, but his article seems to hold the underlying assumption that DSLRs set the benchmark for camera systems as if it would be impossible to write a similar list about DSLRs. They aren't perfect either.

One chooses one's set of features AND limitations. I chose to change from a APSC DSLR to an APSC mirror-less system because it offered me things that no DSLR does. I'm happy with my decision and won't go back. Fundamental for me is the fact that DSLR systems - bodies and lenses - have become bloated and weighty. Certainly Canon and Nikon have abandoned any pretence of servicing that part of the market interested in small kit and their lenses just keep getting ever bigger.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2015 at 01:36 UTC as 39th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

surlezi: No EVF no buy.

Widely tipped. Only Pentax know and they aren't saying. We'll know when it's announced next year.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 27, 2015 at 02:14 UTC
In reply to:

surlezi: No EVF no buy.

Some people like having the option of both - like on the Fuji X Pro 1. You can get either the brightness and immediacy of the OVF or the wysiwyg view and data of the EVF. Nothing wrong with choice.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2015 at 06:59 UTC
In reply to:

surlezi: No EVF no buy.

It might have an EVF overlay on the ground glass screen in the VF. That would offer both optical and EVF viewing with wysiwyg and data etc - sort of like a DSLR version of Fuji's OVF/EVF hybrid in the X Pro 1.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2015 at 22:44 UTC

Glad to see a small and sealed 35mm option. The fact that it's an unusual optical design suggests that Fuji have gone out of their way to offer something special. I'll be interested to see how it performs. The only things that are distinctly missing are focusing and DOF scales.

Ironically, no-one really thought that Fuji's 35/1.4 was large and what many Fuji users really want are some smaller alternatives to the larger 16/1.4, 23/1.4 and 56/1.2 lenses. Hopefully this lens signals the start of a series of small, sealed lenses. All with an aperture ring of course.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 05:34 UTC as 59th comment | 1 reply

This is certainly faster than Zeiss's DSLR Distagon 21/2.8, but it weighs almost a kilo by itself and we've yet to see how it compares in IQ. Add Nikon's new 20/1.8 into the comparison. For mirror-less adapters it will also be interesting to see how its IQ compares to the newly announced Zeiss Loxia 21/2.8 which like the Nikon only weighs 350gms.

I'm into landscape, hiking and travel and I don't want mega weight WA primes at all. For me UWA images are all about what happens in the foreground, not shallow DOF. So again for me personally, f1.4 in UWA lenses is a complete waste of time. I'd love to see modern optical design expertise applied to give us better high grade *small* lenses. Yes they'd be slower, but in an UWA lens, that's fine for many people.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2015 at 01:55 UTC as 40th comment | 16 replies
Total: 200, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »