semorg: WOW...Dpreview finally discovered ETTR?
Some people have been "using ETTR all along" and have no idea how to do it correctly. e.g. I recently saw someone claim that bumping up their ISO to get a brighter image qualified as ETTR and resulted in cleaner images than using a lower ISO.
As for posting it. It is necessary. I still see way too many people say "my camera is crap at ISO X compared to this other camera" citing 2 completely differently exposed images. And no, that does not mean just different shutter speed/aperture but also different lighting conditions.
First sentence made me want to clap. However, I get the impression some of the rest of the article was a bit rushed?
ZeneticX: Incoming "need more CHEAP lenses SONY!" comments
Does "we need more affordable lenses everyone" count? :P
ThePhilips: "The only exception to the excellent ergonomics are the four buttons on top of the dial that control ISO, WB, AF, and metering, which feel a bit Nikon-esque."
The condescension is truly Canon-esque.
Usually, I would suggest that ergonomics are very subjective. However, placing commonly accessed buttons on the opposite side of the body to the shutter, necessitating the operator remove their left hand from below the lens in order to change them, is arguably less than ideal. And yes, it is a consistent feature of higher end Nikon bodies.
Pritzl: It's sad that a law is required to enforce people's right to document/report police activity. It's sadder still that the latter is even needed.
What distance is safe was not my point at all. I'm sorry you missed it. I was just lamenting the human condition that prompts these complex, often unenforceable, laws. Why do we need a law to clarify that recording police activity is not illegal and another one to keep the recorder out of the way? Last but not least why do we need to record it in the first place? It's all just very sad.
It's sad that a law is required to enforce people's right to document/report police activity. It's sadder still that the latter is even needed.
RaghavBaijal: Is that an APSC lens?? It looks Huge! I though it would be much smaller (Diameter) considering Full Frame lenses are about that big...
That diameter of the front element (f ratio) is the main thing that governs the size/weight of the lens. 450 f/4.2 or 300 f/2.8 doesn't matter much. Both will have a ~110mm front element. Full frame or APS-C is not as relevant when it comes to the size of a similar spec lens.
I'm a big fan of equivalence usually. However, when it comes to lens size, the sensor size does not affect the physical properties of the lens. i.e., this is one of the cases when a 300mm f/2.8 is a 300mm f/2.8.
The only difference between one designed for FF versus APSC would be the geometry of the light projection at the focal plane. A lens made for APSC will have a smaller projection circle than one designed for FF but if both are 300mm (real not equivalent) f/2.8 then they should have roughly the same amount of glass.
Even mirrorless vs DSLR matters little for telephotos. To get the same performance of course as a FF 300mm f/2.8 lens on APSC you would need a 200mm f/1.9 lens which, again, would roughly be the same size and weight.
QuarryCat: Nice story...but in the end, the used camera body good be the problem to archive ART quality - and for that reason it is still better for a lot of lenses to use them from the camera maker.I have had a lot of Sigma lenses the last 20 years, from 15 mm to 300-800 mm super zoom, but I hat problems with most of them, and AF problems with the fast lenses are very common.So most of the Sigma lenses are for bargain hunters and will lose their worth very fast.And when I see by testing that Tamron can do better and cheaper...
Hate to be the one to burst your bubble, but you're the one in the minority on this issue. Just check the forums here or the reviews all over the web. Even the article you are replying to is singing their praises.
Just because you have a problem doesn't mean an entire brand is bad. Heck that's not even enough to condemn a single production run of a single lens model. I feel sorry for you if that's your conclusion-making process.
Test one of the new Art/Sport Global Vision series lenses and prepare to be amazed. Sigma is no longer playing the price game exclusively. They are delivering premium quality and setting the bar pretty high while still remaining far more affordable than most other manufacturers. This article explains how they are achieving that masterful feat.
Am I the only one who is dreaming of working in such a company? A place where the actual producers (engineers in this case) outweigh the spin doctors?
I really love this guy. Throw in his sense of responsibility toward his employees (from a previous interview) and it's hard not to.
So thank you Mr. Yamaki. Thank you for being you and most definitely thank you for your amazing lenses.
sneakyracer: Man, Fuji is such a great company and this interview exemplifies that. Toshihisa Iida was open, candid and forthcoming. Huge contrast compared to the Canon (Chuck Westfall) interview which seemed staged and where he basically was walking on eggshells.
The flipside of that argument is that not mentioning equivalence (except when it suits them, i.e., focal length) allows manufacturers to essentially con prospective buyers.
PeaceKeeper, no one is saying f/2.8 is not f/2.8. They are just pointing out that an f/2.8 lens on a smaller sensor does not perform as well as an f/2.8 lens on a larger sensor; neither in DoF terms nor in light gathering ability. The only equal factor is that the exposure parameters, all else being equal, should be the same for the same brightness image.
Pritzl: I think a couple of images could have used IS. I'm seeing what looks like motion blur at 100% on some of them.
Agreed. Given the size of the lens, I was quite surprised they opted out of IS. I think any lens longer than 60mm equiv. needs IS as standard.
I think a couple of images could have used IS. I'm seeing what looks like motion blur at 100% on some of them.
12345ccr: the cut in half joke gets a tad repetitive after the 4th time...
I suspect they're taking a shot at how repetitive the cut-in-half theme was at CP+.
Ooooh! Look how small my camera is... and yet it is full frame! WOW! I can have my cake and eat it too... Huh... Why are the lenses so large? Physics? What's that?
Pritzl: It seems Canon, more than any other manufacturer, is constantly second-guessed by everyone and their dog. This either means they really suck at what they do, or, being top-of-the-hill really does rub people the wrong way; even their customers.
Like I said, maybe Canon really suck at camera development - at least recently. They are criticized regardless of what they do and only sell cameras because people are sheep. Then again, maybe not...
It seems Canon, more than any other manufacturer, is constantly second-guessed by everyone and their dog. This either means they really suck at what they do, or, being top-of-the-hill really does rub people the wrong way; even their customers.