Mescalamba

Mescalamba

Lives in Czech Republic Czech Republic
Works as a wnb photographer :D
Joined on Sep 21, 2009

Comments

Total: 786, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Leica issues T (Typ 701) firmware update article (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

Retzius: "a system which the company has positioned as one of its more affordable offerings"

lolz

Nikon has native Zeiss lens, if you dont mind being stuck with manual focus (its the right mount, its native.. even with automatic f-stop).

Otherwise, yea.. Nikon can squeeze much more from Sony sensors than Sony themselves. Which is sad kinda.. their variant used in D810 is much better than anything from Sony.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2014 at 12:54 UTC
On Leica issues T (Typ 701) firmware update article (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: The early Leica T I tried wouldn't allow 1/3 stop ISO settings, so no ISO 1250 for example, I thought this a mistake.

I had hoped Leica would add the 1/3 ISO step option in a firmware update.

Why? ISO steps in 1/3 are software thing. No current camera has native steps other than full in case of ISO. Only thing 1/3 steps are good for is lowering quality of output due noise or highlights lost (depending how it is set).

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2014 at 12:47 UTC
On Leica issues T (Typ 701) firmware update article (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

Retzius: "a system which the company has positioned as one of its more affordable offerings"

lolz

It is affordable. And its way different than anything else..

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2014 at 12:45 UTC
On Leica issues T (Typ 701) firmware update article (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ben O Connor: I would understand all the comprimises, if it woupd be an M mouth camera. No need to be full rame, but the pyscal size of the lens should be M size! It feels so fake to me (even the design looks better than ordinary)

It is M-mount camera if you use adapter? :D Actually one of few with pretty much best M-lens support (apart from Ricoh M kit).

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2014 at 12:44 UTC
On Leica issues T (Typ 701) firmware update article (47 comments in total)

Yep, this is how you should do firmware update. :)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2014 at 12:43 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

Paul Guba: Comparing two cameras with similar sensors is like comparing two cars with V8 engines. The 645Z and the Alpa are two completely different machines. I won't justify the huge price difference but at the same time you can't compare the two as tools. Phase also has better software and years of experience getting the best data from a sensor. There both great cameras but the similarity ends at MP.

Scientific? :D

Guess you never saw RawTherapee, Photivo or at least Iridient. :) CaptureOne is pretty normal piece of RAW conversion software, not much tweaks possible. A bit like LR. Tho they have sometimes pretty nice color profiles. But unless you like that SW for some reason, there isnt much point in using it.. there are either great free alternatives, or less great payed ones.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2014 at 21:48 UTC
In reply to:

ogl: 645z is 8500 USD.

They cant beat Leica S, nothing so far can.. but also you cant beat their pricing. :D

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2014 at 18:19 UTC
In reply to:

sneakyracer: Pentax 645z is $13500 with the Excellent 28-40mm lens.

Its also case of any MFDB, all need to use color correction in corners (sometimes its quite a bit more than just "corners") in order to produce something usable.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2014 at 18:18 UTC
In reply to:

sneakyracer: Phase should price the IQ150 back at around $18,000 and the IQ250 at about $24,000 MAX. The Phase One IQ backs are superb but are priced way to high new. Specially the IQ250 and the IQ150 which have IDENTICAL sensors to the 645z and the Hasselblad 50c's.

645D can produce usable pictures at ISO 1000. No problem.. Leica S2 is about same. Both are CCD.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2014 at 18:17 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Guba: Comparing two cameras with similar sensors is like comparing two cars with V8 engines. The 645Z and the Alpa are two completely different machines. I won't justify the huge price difference but at the same time you can't compare the two as tools. Phase also has better software and years of experience getting the best data from a sensor. There both great cameras but the similarity ends at MP.

World has some Schneider lens in stock, for almost any MFDB camera, if you dont mind manual focus. :)

Whats interesting is, that 645Z has fully functional AF, while apart Leica S, all other competition can at best say "we do have AF.. which works.. sorta, sometimes, if its not too dark.. or too fast".

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2014 at 18:16 UTC
In reply to:

Flashback: A wooden grip? Hmm...

Any of you guys remember the days, when a decent Hi-Fi unit, had to have wooden side cheeks!

Wood is rather stupid, at least when its used with that CMOS from Sony. These cameras due usable ISO 6400 should be made as light as possible..

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2014 at 18:14 UTC
On Have your say: Best Lens of 2014 article (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

smafdy: Pentax SMC-FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited

Still fine lens in 2014 btw.

So is 180/3.4 :D And thats much much older..

There are many lenses and if one can give up AF, one might buy some proper wonders. Even tho lately for not-so-low prices anymore. :D

Otherwise Sigma deserves that win.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 15, 2014 at 22:02 UTC
On Have your say: Best Lens of 2014 article (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

jpig: If it had been an option, I would have voted for the Samyang 12mm f/2 for m43

Actually pretty nice lens..

Direct link | Posted on Dec 15, 2014 at 22:00 UTC
On Have your say: Best High-end ILC of 2014 article (38 comments in total)

My take..

1) NX1 - cause its first and apparently very good "pro" mirrorless from Samsung, also with some edge in various things, some are future stuff even

2) 645Z - "affordable" Sony based MF camera, could be better, but its very good as it is

3) D810 - cause Nikon finally made what they should do instead D800/e .. proper replacement for D700 too

Rest is sometimes interesting, sometimes not at all. Not sure why those votes for D750. Its "cheap" and? And nothing..

Direct link | Posted on Dec 15, 2014 at 21:58 UTC as 19th comment
On ACDSee Ultimate 8 introduces layer-based editing article (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I have used ACDSee as my editing program since 1999. I think their software is the simplest software to learn that can still get the job done in a heavy editing environment.

That being said their RAW support is abysmal. There is list of cameras below that are supported by most other editing software programs but ACDSee does not support them despite the fact that they were given samples for some of these cameras months ago.

Adding new features does you no good if your camera’s RAW format is not supported. They will tell you that you can just use DNG Converter to convert all of your files before you bring them in for editing. That is a time consuming process that makes ACDSee unusable.

http://www.acdsee.com/en/support/raw-formats

These cameras are not supported. They typically add support for a camera within 1 year of it being released. That is not acceptable.

Canon 7D MKII
Panasonic LX100
Panasonic GH4
Canon G7X
Nikon D750

"Photivo" .. Photovivo is something else. :D

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2014 at 21:20 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

tom sugnet: I'm keeping my 70d :)

I guess many will, apart AF, not much to gain (well build quality, but thats probably all).

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 08:29 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1118 comments in total)

Those "cons" in review sound a bit like..

"You should get Magic Lantern and remove AA filter." :D

Otherwise, its Canon, as always.. nothing amazing, just small evolution (very small this time).

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 08:29 UTC as 177th comment | 3 replies
On ACDSee Ultimate 8 introduces layer-based editing article (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I have used ACDSee as my editing program since 1999. I think their software is the simplest software to learn that can still get the job done in a heavy editing environment.

That being said their RAW support is abysmal. There is list of cameras below that are supported by most other editing software programs but ACDSee does not support them despite the fact that they were given samples for some of these cameras months ago.

Adding new features does you no good if your camera’s RAW format is not supported. They will tell you that you can just use DNG Converter to convert all of your files before you bring them in for editing. That is a time consuming process that makes ACDSee unusable.

http://www.acdsee.com/en/support/raw-formats

These cameras are not supported. They typically add support for a camera within 1 year of it being released. That is not acceptable.

Canon 7D MKII
Panasonic LX100
Panasonic GH4
Canon G7X
Nikon D750

Yea EXIF tool injection should work, as base is just DCraw. I wonder why GH4 isnt supported tho, cause it is in DCraw, they are probably just slow to re-compile it into ACDSee.. sad, with good workflow, it should be matter of few hours top. :/

Well I dont use it for RAW (better stuff for that) so I dont care that much. If you want something "alt" I suggest RawTherapee, can do pretty amazing things.

Otherwise my personal fav is unknown Photivo. Possible to recompile by yourself, which means it supports usually everything as long as there is next DCraw with support of that camera. :D

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 08:25 UTC
On Leica M9 users report sensor corrosion issue article (371 comments in total)
In reply to:

Diego Sevilla: I just bought an M9. I sent it to leica to be adjusted and returned me the bill with an €800 payment because of this. The original owner has been kindly enough to allow me to return him the camera as-is, but this is not serious. The camera has a little bit more than 3 years so... oops, you have to pay.

I hope, for him, and for all M9/M-E owners, that this gets fixed at no cost. Still, they will be waiting for a new sensor FOR MONTHS. Now that it was a normal random procedure of sending the cameras to leica, when you noticed something, it has a waiting line of three months... Imagine when this goes widespread and more and more people want their sensors checked or changed... What a nightmare.

For me, the M9 is finished. I bought it, I'm passionate about photography and was saving for one, with great efforts. But now, I see that an A7/r/s is a FAR better option. Who can live with the uneasiness of buying a €3000+ piece of equipment that can broke any day?

@Steve_

Heh, not really. Small batches of cameras (and thats what Leica makes) are very expensive to make. Also almost everything in Leica M isnt something thats inside another camera.

Even RF mechanism itself is ridiculously expensive, also you cant put it together other way than by hand and tune it also by hand.

Plus those cameras are also put together by hand, each is tuned by some real person. Which costs money. A lot of them (at least that part made in Germany, they dont work for average Chinese/Indian worker wage).

Also thats reason why they used Kodak sensors and now they use new ex-Kodak sensors in their cameras. Cause they simply cant afford buying large quantities from Sony for their M cameras.

Profit on each M camera is pretty low. If they should live out of these, they would be dead long time ago..

All of thats is most likely reason why they chose "wrong" cover glass. I guess they bought it in large quantity and couldnt get rid of it without significant loss.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 11, 2014 at 14:26 UTC
On ACDSee Ultimate 8 introduces layer-based editing article (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I have used ACDSee as my editing program since 1999. I think their software is the simplest software to learn that can still get the job done in a heavy editing environment.

That being said their RAW support is abysmal. There is list of cameras below that are supported by most other editing software programs but ACDSee does not support them despite the fact that they were given samples for some of these cameras months ago.

Adding new features does you no good if your camera’s RAW format is not supported. They will tell you that you can just use DNG Converter to convert all of your files before you bring them in for editing. That is a time consuming process that makes ACDSee unusable.

http://www.acdsee.com/en/support/raw-formats

These cameras are not supported. They typically add support for a camera within 1 year of it being released. That is not acceptable.

Canon 7D MKII
Panasonic LX100
Panasonic GH4
Canon G7X
Nikon D750

All of these are new and also D850 doesnt exist, which makes it hard to add support to.

Btw. ACDSee is based on DCraw. :) So most RAW support depends on that..

Otherwise ACDSee is one of very good pieces of SW. Using it for long time, tho mainly just to browse and delete pics (but it can do that really fast and easily, which is main point).

Direct link | Posted on Dec 11, 2014 at 14:18 UTC
Total: 786, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »