Rod McD

Rod McD

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Jan 15, 2010

Comments

Total: 146, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Rod McD: Should we assume that all the existing FE lens image circles are big enough to allow for IBIS?

Isn't it? Do you know that for sure? It may not be an issue at all, but that's an assumption. Pentax's IBIS can shift the sensor by whole millimetres. And in each direction from centre. It's allowed them to use IBIS for concepts that weren't originally envisaged, like levelling, composition adjustment and short term star-tracking. The question needs to be asked.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 07:33 UTC

Should we assume that all the existing FE lens image circles are big enough to allow for IBIS?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 06:42 UTC as 265th comment | 6 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review preview (669 comments in total)

For me as a stills photographer the LX100 looks great. The reviewer's "cons" aren't critical. I can live with 12mpx for the output of a compact. I accept the lens range. The EVF tearing will have minimal effect on still composition. I like the dials and aperture ring, and won't worry about reconfiguring controls. I prefer not to have a flip screen or a touch screen. I prefer filter threads and a separate cap. I've always used 'centre point and recompose' for compacts rather than moving the AF point, so - no change. For me the only downer is the power zoom - I'd have preferred a zoom ring on the lens, but we rarely get everything we want..... All good.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 19, 2014 at 07:35 UTC as 83rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

lemonadedrinker: It's not enough to talk about the lens and nothing else, when that lens comes from China.
Small rant coming up.
In the 'free' world you buy the lens and support the owner of the company; in China however, you buy the lens and support the Chicoms buying up another factory in the UK or USA, or killing protesters in Tibet etc etc. Buy nothing from them if you have the choice.

Welcome to humanity. I'm not condoning any of it, but civilisation is a thin veneer and the only thing that changes is who's doing the buying of the factories and the shooting of the protesters and where and when.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 28, 2014 at 07:30 UTC

Choice is good. Let's give a new manufacturer a break from the conjecture and await some tests and user reports on the lens. (I'd personally be more interested in how their forthcoming 24/1.7 fares.)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 27, 2014 at 22:07 UTC as 17th comment | 1 reply
On Pentax launches K-S1 Sweets Collection article (231 comments in total)

This is business, so I suppose that Ricoh wouldn't do this unless it paid the ROI. I can only conclude that I'm just not in the target market.......

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2014 at 00:48 UTC as 90th comment | 2 replies
On Canon PowerShot G7 X First Impressions Review preview (954 comments in total)

The references to the compensation dial being unusual because it turns 'backwards' are a bit odd. The dial is exactly the same as every other Canon Powershot in that you turn the dial anti-clockwise to go into negative compensation. If you're doing it by feel, say if you're using a VF for example, you always scroll the near side of the dial to the right whatever Canon compact you're using.
The dial markings may appear to have the scale one way around or the other according to whether the dial is on the left hand side of the camera top plate (eg G10,11,12, or on the right hand side eg G16, G1X, G7x, but it's always an anti-clockwise turn to go negative.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 21, 2014 at 22:19 UTC as 58th comment | 4 replies
On Google announces Nexus 9 8.9-inch tablet post (39 comments in total)

I hate carrying a laptop, even a light one, on extended travels but until someone offers a tablet with real USB capabilities, I guess I'm stuck with it. And no SD slot?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 05:58 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Rod McD: I've had a DSLR. I now have a MILC - which happens to be Fuji - and half a dozen lenses. Often I take only the 18-55 as my minimum kit. If I was in the market for a second smaller, lighter camera, it would be an all-in-one with a retracting lens, not another MILC system.
I already have one - the Canon G1X (original). I'm tempted to get a different camera because although the G1X IQ meets my expectations of a compact, it's tunnel OVF is poor, and even if its AF is accurate, it's between-shot times are glacially slow.
To me the LX100 appeals because it has 1) a 24mm start to the zoom 2) a good EVF 3) dial exposure controls, 4) dial compensation, and 5) NO touch screen. Its only downer for me is the power zoom (as compared to a manual lens ring) but maybe I could live with that....... No commitments yet, but I'll look at one.

I guess my main point was that since I've got one MILC, I don't need or want another.
MILC retracting lenses like the Olympus and Sony products tend to be a lot slower than the retracting lenses in high grade all-in-one cameras. I'm not sure why.
I don't want auto self-closing lens caps. They're handy but some have scratched the lens and I've used DSLRs and MILCs for long enough to be comfortable with a separate cap. And it means you get filter threads......
There is also another reason that people might buy the camera. An overwhelming one. They might just LIKE it. No-one ever bought a camera for any other reason.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 3, 2014 at 07:18 UTC

I've had a DSLR. I now have a MILC - which happens to be Fuji - and half a dozen lenses. Often I take only the 18-55 as my minimum kit. If I was in the market for a second smaller, lighter camera, it would be an all-in-one with a retracting lens, not another MILC system.
I already have one - the Canon G1X (original). I'm tempted to get a different camera because although the G1X IQ meets my expectations of a compact, it's tunnel OVF is poor, and even if its AF is accurate, it's between-shot times are glacially slow.
To me the LX100 appeals because it has 1) a 24mm start to the zoom 2) a good EVF 3) dial exposure controls, 4) dial compensation, and 5) NO touch screen. Its only downer for me is the power zoom (as compared to a manual lens ring) but maybe I could live with that....... No commitments yet, but I'll look at one.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 3, 2014 at 06:10 UTC as 57th comment | 2 replies
On Hands-on with Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 article (434 comments in total)

The LX100 might well be a contender for my next compact. My G12 is aging and the lens cover is slowly scratching the lens. My G1X produces great IQ but its between-shot time is glacial and I'd prefer an accurate wysiwyg EVF over its poor OVF. One unresolved question is the AF speed - I haven't seen a report on that yet but I hope it's better. The only downer for me is the fact that the camera uses a power zoom and not manual.
I'm hoping there's a decent separate lens cap instead of that plastic 3 door auto device they keep showing. I've had it with things that risk touching the front element.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 04:34 UTC as 57th comment | 2 replies
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (328 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rod McD: I'm a Fuji APSC user and understand exactly what you're saying about the portability of the 50-135/140/150 f2.8 zooms compared to a FF 70-200 f2.8 lens. OTOH, that doesn't exactly make them small and light in absolute terms either.
I'm going to make another observation. While all the higher grade zooms have headed for f2.8, what we've also seen is a reduction in quality and still slower apertures in the more affordable range of zooms. Many are f5.6, 6.3 or 6.7 at the long end - too slow for me. The middle ground has disappeared. Gone are the small 60-120 f2.8 and 75-150 f3.5 and f4 constant aperture lenses that Nikon, Pentax and others used to offer. I personally would have found these more useful than either of the f2.8 or f6.7 options. If Fuji or a third party brought out a small light high grade 50-135/3.5 or 4, I'd buy it before either. Portability for hiking and travel is very important to me and I don't care too much about shallow DOF equivalences.

Sorry Lassoni, but how do any of the lenses you've cited relate to my post above about small short-mid tele zooms?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2014 at 23:20 UTC
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (328 comments in total)

I'm a Fuji APSC user and understand exactly what you're saying about the portability of the 50-135/140/150 f2.8 zooms compared to a FF 70-200 f2.8 lens. OTOH, that doesn't exactly make them small and light in absolute terms either.
I'm going to make another observation. While all the higher grade zooms have headed for f2.8, what we've also seen is a reduction in quality and still slower apertures in the more affordable range of zooms. Many are f5.6, 6.3 or 6.7 at the long end - too slow for me. The middle ground has disappeared. Gone are the small 60-120 f2.8 and 75-150 f3.5 and f4 constant aperture lenses that Nikon, Pentax and others used to offer. I personally would have found these more useful than either of the f2.8 or f6.7 options. If Fuji or a third party brought out a small light high grade 50-135/3.5 or 4, I'd buy it before either. Portability for hiking and travel is very important to me and I don't care too much about shallow DOF equivalences.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2014 at 14:05 UTC as 95th comment | 3 replies

Agree with your thoughts. It's a good time to be a photographer. Choice is good and there's more of it than we've ever had before.
These small cameras with sensors larger than earlier P&S models are very capable. They may be more expensive, but in a reduced market that's an inherent problem of economies of scale.
These cameras are a luxury item. I don't think a good quality, highly controllable camera has ever been cheap. People have accepted the modern digital camera as more or less routine, but they over look what an incredible technical achievement it embodies. There have indeed been cheap cameras, but they didn't offer what these do.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2014 at 00:12 UTC as 37th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Miki Nemeth: 72mm filter size on a lens (90mm/f2) designed/dedicated specifically for APS-C mirrorless cameras is really interesting. My full-frame FD 135mm/f2.8 has only 52mm filter. The full frame FD 135mm/f2 has 72mm filter size. The FD 100mm/f2 has 52mm filter size, too.

Hi Miki, yes I had one for my Pentax system. A really excellent small light 1:1 macro lens. Also has great bokeh. The only problem adapted to Fuji is its lack of an aperture ring. You have to use an adapter with an aperture control ring and they adjust from wide open to fully stopped down in a very small movement. It's a bit hard to control. Cheers, Rod

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 13:32 UTC
In reply to:

Miki Nemeth: 72mm filter size on a lens (90mm/f2) designed/dedicated specifically for APS-C mirrorless cameras is really interesting. My full-frame FD 135mm/f2.8 has only 52mm filter. The full frame FD 135mm/f2 has 72mm filter size. The FD 100mm/f2 has 52mm filter size, too.

Agreed Miki - my post above. It's even bigger than AF FF lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 12:46 UTC

These lenses have been discussed in the last couple of days in the Fuji Forum. There's a fair bit of interest in them.
One unresolved question is why the 90mm f2 is as big as it is. SLR 90-100mm f2 lenses from the film era had filter diameters of around 52-55mm. The AF Nikon 85mm f1.8 covers FF and still only has a 62mm filter. The Fuji 90mm will also be AF, but only has to cover APSC, yet it appears to be a monster of a lens with a filter size of 72mm. Unless there's some hidden technical reason within, it appears to be a bit over the top. Where's the APSC advantage? Certainly too big for me.

And no 1:1 macro lens with a FL longer than the current 60mm?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 12:28 UTC as 15th comment | 11 replies

I'm into hiking and landscape photography, but chose not to buy into the A7r six months back. The lack of a convincing WA lens was one reason. This zoom might remedy that problem but it's much larger than I'd like. I'd really prefer to see Sony issue a top small light 24mm f2.8 prime that's sharp from corner to corner - a sibling to the FE 35mm 2.8 - before I could rekindle interest in the system.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 23:52 UTC as 6th comment
On Samsung NX1 First Impressions Review preview (892 comments in total)

A new sensor, and a very ambitious camera and lens system. Kudos Samsung. If the great specs are borne out by performance and reliability, it should sell for them. One thing I've never understood about Samsung's camera products is their almost total lack of marketing. It stands in stark contrast to their TVs and other electronic goods (- at least as far as I can see in Australia).

I know already that it's not for me. It's aimed at a different sector of the mirror-less market. I'm in the 'small and light' mirror-less camp. With it's 16-50/2-2.8 attached, this camera isn't.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 12:09 UTC as 178th comment | 1 reply
On Zeiss introduces 'no distortion' Otus 1.4/85mm article (338 comments in total)

I know this is principally a gear driven site, but I think products like these very exclusive and expensive lenses must lead us to ask whether the gear is more important than who's behind it and what's in front of it. Adams, HCB, Capa - none of them had lenses as good as we have today. Did it matter? An image is more about moment and content than technology.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 9, 2014 at 11:46 UTC as 53rd comment | 4 replies
Total: 146, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »