pannumon

pannumon

Lives in Helsinki
Joined on Dec 12, 2009

Comments

Total: 41, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

disraeli demon: Glad to see the μ4/3 lens stable continuing to expand. Before switching to mirrorless, I was using Nikon APS-C and was constantly disappointed by the lack of compact fast primes for that format. Four years on from switching, Nikon does have a 40mm macro for APS-C, but neither they nor Canon offer a 60mm f2 (i know there are "nifty fifties," but that extra 10mm does make a difference). Neither company has anything to match the range of fast wide-angle primes offered by μ4/3... Or Fuji...

That 25mm f/1.4 PanaLeica is not a compact µ4/3 lens. However, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 is:

http://camerasize.com/compact/#472.30,509.353,509.333,ha,t

In conclusion, "normal" µ4/3 lenses are as large as Nikon "compact" lenses, when equivalence is taken into account. But if compactness is important, Nikon has not much to offer (except Nikon 1).

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 15:41 UTC
In reply to:

Snikt228: Has anyone ever seen a Samsung ILC camera in the wild?

HowaboutRAW: I know the NX lens lineup is pretty complete. The problem with the system is that there is no proof that it will be supported in the future. I don't think Samsung is making profit on it. Samsung might strategically quit NX R&D any day without asking the camera division. That would be stupid, though, because the time for ILC's will come. But, you never know what the big bosses think.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2015 at 21:57 UTC
In reply to:

Snikt228: Has anyone ever seen a Samsung ILC camera in the wild?

Samsung ILC are probably very popular in Korea. Anyway, I have seen two or three Samsung ILC's.

Samsung does not need to sell much at the moment. They just need to extend their lens lineup and improve their already excellent cameras and wait that the mirrorless market booms. They will get their market share then. At that time they will have a very competitive and 'safe to invest' system.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2015 at 20:56 UTC
On Samyang launches 135mm f/2.0 lens for stills and video article (150 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rod McD: This is a fast lens, and may well offer excellent IQ, but 830gm and 15.5cm long in mirror-less mounts? Heck, it's not that far off Fuji's new 50-140/2.8 zoom! It might suit some photographers but not me...... just too big.

The problem is that these lenses produce full frame image that cannot be fully used on smaller sensors. Similar µ4/3 lens with the same FL and aperture would be much smaller and lighter. This is why focal reducers makes a lot of sense.

Many people use FD glass on mirrorless. Focus aids, IBIS, great video capabilities makes MF lenses a very attractive option. FD 135 f/2.5 will be 96mm f/1.8 (comparable to FF 192mm f/3.5 ) when using Metabones Speed booster on µ4/3.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2015 at 11:09 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1406 comments in total)
In reply to:

pannumon: Description of the article: "Full frame cameras have never been more accessible but what does that mean for owners of cropped-sensor cameras?"

Please pay attention on the terminology and please stop talking about cropped sensors. Cropping is not a property of the sensor, it is a property of the system (lens + sensor).

Cropping is not a bad term as such, it is totally fine to use it when referring to a situation where the sensor cannot cover the full image circle produced by the lens. However, as such, sensors smaller than 35mm are not crippled in any way. Also, systems using a different sensor size than 35mm are not crippled. They are full systems, not "cropped" technology.

Edit: Thanks for the article, I like it a lot! :)

You have a good argument there, Richard. However, I still have to disagree, at least partly.

Attaching a "full frame lens to a cropped sensor camera" suggests that the camera has too small sensor for the lens. From another perspective it is the image projected by the lens that is oversized.

Why do people think that they need to upgrade?

I think that the reason is partly the terminology used. Repeatedly calling "anything" by something that it is not creates an impression that there is something wrong with this "anything". For example repeatedly calling a car "not-blue" makes one think that blue is something special and probably better than the other colors.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 04:44 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1406 comments in total)

Description of the article: "Full frame cameras have never been more accessible but what does that mean for owners of cropped-sensor cameras?"

Please pay attention on the terminology and please stop talking about cropped sensors. Cropping is not a property of the sensor, it is a property of the system (lens + sensor).

Cropping is not a bad term as such, it is totally fine to use it when referring to a situation where the sensor cannot cover the full image circle produced by the lens. However, as such, sensors smaller than 35mm are not crippled in any way. Also, systems using a different sensor size than 35mm are not crippled. They are full systems, not "cropped" technology.

Edit: Thanks for the article, I like it a lot! :)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2015 at 23:30 UTC as 271st comment | 2 replies
On Nikon D750 Review preview (1874 comments in total)
In reply to:

pannumon: Wow, only positive things mentioned about the video features, seems like a perfect video camera!

Except... Not a word mentioned about auto focus in video mode. Does this mean that this camera does support it? Or is it so bad that it has been deliberately left out from the review?

Thanks Rishi! It would be interesting to see how the CDAF in video performs compared to e.g. CDAF on Panasonig GH4. GH4 AF in video is totally usable, although it's not the best option for all the situations and I think it is slow on 4K mode. My understanding is that CDAF on DSLR's is so bad mainly because of the bad algorhythms used by Nikon/Canon, but also because DSLR lenses use focus motors that are not at all optimal for CDAF.

I think reliable AF (it does not necessary need to be fast) in video is very important, especially with cameras that are used to produce shallow depths of fields. The need of accurate AF in video is highlighted by low resolutions of camera LCD's and limited MF aids.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 1, 2015 at 00:14 UTC
On Nikon D750 Review preview (1874 comments in total)

Wow, only positive things mentioned about the video features, seems like a perfect video camera!

Except... Not a word mentioned about auto focus in video mode. Does this mean that this camera does support it? Or is it so bad that it has been deliberately left out from the review?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2014 at 13:22 UTC as 377th comment | 3 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review preview (895 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: this is to much camera to make and then not have basic controls like postioning af points be easy and something you can do on the fly. this is the problem with a lot of mirrorless cams too. My iphone has this figured out.why cant cameras made for enthusiasts realize that this is important

It takes exactly two button presses (left and down) to access the AF positioning/resizing. It takes more button presses if you want to change AF type (eg. from face detection) to single point AF and in addition change the AF positioning.

I do not understand this complaint in the handling-video at all!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 22:22 UTC

To put it simple, it is by far the smallest camera that can be taken seriously by photographers. As a bonus, you don't need a separate smartphone.

The physical ring for adjusting aperture / shutter speed / exposure compensation is very welcome for those who have used to traditional cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 06:56 UTC as 52nd comment | 1 reply
On Sony a7S used to shoot Chevrolet commercial article (278 comments in total)

If you don't care a **** about the production costs, this system may be fine. In controverse, this system might be useful if you want to save money and don't give a **** about light setup, because you can shoo at ISO*****. But that's very controversial. So, what's the point?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 23:38 UTC as 12th comment
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2087 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lee Jay: "Any two lenses 25mm diameter apertures will give the same depth-of-field of shot at the same shooting distance."

This sentence is still incorrect, Richard.

Also referring to GH1 or GH2 instead of EM5 solves the problem, as they have multi-aspect-ratio sensors. Another option is to talk about image circle.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 8, 2014 at 07:53 UTC

Really?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 13, 2014 at 19:24 UTC as 32nd comment | 1 reply
On Never forget a Photoshop or Lightroom shortcut again article (70 comments in total)

This application demonstrates the problem that on many keyboards (including danish) there is STILL no shortcut for some basic functions, such as rotating images.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2014 at 08:50 UTC as 37th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

StevenE: How is it in low light? Compared to 5DIII
Also... is it just as good in 1080p as 4K... no moire etc?

Short comparison about low light performance vs. 5D mkIII can be seen from this video: http://vimeo.com/93500786 from 2:55 onwards. There is also some 1080p footage from GH4 in this review.

Direct link | Posted on May 14, 2014 at 08:25 UTC
On A travel-sized large-format 4x5 camera? article (219 comments in total)
In reply to:

joe6pack: And the cost of the film and to develop the film are?

Even at a price of 0.5$/€/£ shot, film is the cheapest way to go when shooting only a couple of hundred shots a year on FF or medium format.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 21, 2014 at 18:54 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (626 comments in total)

I think Nikon sees only small market in mirrorless segment, and they invest only small money on that. The potential they see is what they have introduced in their cameras. The same goes with Canon. At the moment, many DSLR users seems to think the same way: mirrorless cameras are not real cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 09:38 UTC as 187th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

webrunner5: I was thinking about buying this but with the announced price not so sure now. That is a LOT of money with the 14-140 which you would need for video. And WAY too much for a person to buy if they are not going to use the video much.

Like has been stated below, the Sony A7 or D610 would be a better bet for the same money for pictures.

I am sure for people just into video it is probably a good deal. And worth upgrading to. But I am not going to make any money with it so hard to justify. FF cameras have gotten really cheap as of late. Some of the high end Semi Pro DSLRC cameras look overpriced to me lately.

I think my Visa card will stay in my wallet for this one.

Yep, this camera is not only about video, and the video of this camera is not only about 4k... In fact, most customer camera manufacturers have still a long way to go to catch the video quality and the manual controls of the long ago discontinued GH1 (hacked or not).

Direct link | Posted on Mar 10, 2014 at 14:44 UTC
On Two photographers re-imagine city potholes article (147 comments in total)

1. Is this really an original idea?
and/or
2. Are these photographs great?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2014 at 02:41 UTC as 39th comment
In reply to:

Peter Del: I am looking forward to seeing pictures taken with the 9mm, to see how much distortion there is. The angle of view is 140 degrees as opposed to the 7.5mm Samyang, which is 180 degrees! My 9-18 is 100 at the wide end.
Peter Del

Naveed, yes it is possible to correct the distortion:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3373069
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3150131

Direct link | Posted on Jan 30, 2014 at 09:46 UTC
Total: 41, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »