PIX 2015
ecka84

ecka84

Lives in Lithuania Lithuania
Joined on Sep 18, 2009

Comments

Total: 116, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

PVCdroid: Excellent! Canons answer to Sony.

That's because Canon is deaf, short-sighted and cannot read english.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2015 at 13:33 UTC
In reply to:

Photato: Less features, more money, no deal.
Canon looks like is underestimating the competition and the current market reality.
Unofficially the older M1 has more features when using Magic Lantern.
And... my PHONE videos are sharper than this CAMERA videos.
Why I am supposed to buy this again?

Cripple the camera, cripple the market , fire sale, lose revenue.

Perhaps Canon should take a page from Apple. They have no problem selling iPhones at near MRP for the life of the product.
Maybe because they don't cripple their products?
or is it perhaps that their products are enhanced, with better software and features year after year including the older models and people keep buying them.

Oh well, at least the M3 is available in the US market now and that is good thing.
Good luck.

Apple don't cripple their products?
You must be kidding.
Apple have no problem selling apple-products, because no one else is making apple-products for apple-people in the apple-world. And if someone starts doing that, Apple sues him out into reality.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2015 at 13:27 UTC
In reply to:

adengappasami: Oh Sigma...you are getting more lens sold now :)

Yeap, 3 years too late, twice as expensive, bigger/heavier than ever :).

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2015 at 12:40 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

John Breedy Jr: I do think that many people are failing to place this lens in the appropriate category. This lens is an XT-1 Lens and future body lens. The camera can shoot 3200 iso easily - we are not talking overwhelming noise at 6400 either - there are very rare situations I guess where f 2 with IS would be needed considering it is a portrait lens. But know the tool you are getting. I often come across complaints where people don't really know there tools. This is a weather sealed - 2 feet minimum focusing - portrait lens with incredible sharpness. I have used it in lower light and it may take a little longer to get focus. I have had it a couple days after it came out and have had no issue with shooting. But I switched gear to go lighter so when it came to decide between the 50-140 OIS and this - I remembered that and knew I would be sacrificing IS for it.
Get the 4.0 upgrade it makes a tremendous difference. Consider that yes it is $1,000 - But what Camera & Lens for 2200 can match?

Well, that's another reason not to mess with Fuji till they get their s#i% together. Same with Sigma Merrill and Quattro. I don't know about the new firmware, but from what I've experienced before, there was no big difference between ACR and Fuji RAW processing. I guess that different software has different defaults, that's all. I do have Fuji (Silkypix) installed and there is no substantial difference when I sharpen up the image in Lightroom to the same level of crazy, but the details are still not there.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 11, 2015 at 12:36 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

John Breedy Jr: I do think that many people are failing to place this lens in the appropriate category. This lens is an XT-1 Lens and future body lens. The camera can shoot 3200 iso easily - we are not talking overwhelming noise at 6400 either - there are very rare situations I guess where f 2 with IS would be needed considering it is a portrait lens. But know the tool you are getting. I often come across complaints where people don't really know there tools. This is a weather sealed - 2 feet minimum focusing - portrait lens with incredible sharpness. I have used it in lower light and it may take a little longer to get focus. I have had it a couple days after it came out and have had no issue with shooting. But I switched gear to go lighter so when it came to decide between the 50-140 OIS and this - I remembered that and knew I would be sacrificing IS for it.
Get the 4.0 upgrade it makes a tremendous difference. Consider that yes it is $1,000 - But what Camera & Lens for 2200 can match?

Unless you are shooting JPEG only, all the Fuji "magic" is pretty much BS. And if you do, then get serious and try some RAWs :). Right now I'm looking at ISO 1600 samples downloaded from dpreview comparison tool. XT1 vs a6000 - Fuji looks precooked with NR (and who knows what else), much softer with less details and 0.6EV darker than Sony, despite all exposure settings being the same. It's not all that perfect and you need f/1.4 to compete with FF, so there is no competition really.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 10, 2015 at 23:52 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: So, why would I choose this over FF 135L or my 150/2.8 APO Macro?

@57even
Do you have a problem with that? You print all of your photos? I don't care about small prints. Are you suggesting me to make thousands of 20"-30" prints? That's crazy and crazy expensive.

@bovverwonder
It works perfectly on my 6D, just like it did on my 5D2.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 7, 2015 at 21:59 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: So, why would I choose this over FF 135L or my 150/2.8 APO Macro?

Brendon - XE2+18-55 is fine, but it doesn't cost as much as 5D3+24-70/2.8 :) and it cannot replace it. They are very different cameras. There are no 24-70/2.8 equivalent lenses for crop cameras and if there were any they would weight the same and cost even more (specially Fuji branded). 85/1.8USM is much better in IQ/$ + it is very light and compact ... and you hate it for that :).

57even - I don't own a medium format camera because I cannot afford it. But, I would not carry it everywhere, because it is a wrong tool for that. I don't print much, so I care more about how it looks on a big UHD screen, where the difference is obvious and clear. Your gear forums definition makes no sense.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2015 at 12:32 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: So, why would I choose this over FF 135L or my 150/2.8 APO Macro?

@photominion
Good advice. I still regret that I didn't start with a 2nd-hand FF and a fast fifty. All those cheap body+expensive lens advices are BS. You have to keep the balance. Maybe that is the reason lens manufacturers are asking too much for their glass, because it's kind of ... OK ... everyone wants an expensive lens, even if it's really nothing special (like $800 for Sony 35/2.8).

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 18:31 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: So, why would I choose this over FF 135L or my 150/2.8 APO Macro?

Sure, new handy tech adds more fun to it. But, advocating for trading quality for bells'n'whistles isn't serious. FF doesn't make you shoot better pictures, it helps you shoot pictures of better quality. Maybe those bells'n'whistles are distracting you from taking better pictures so you are just playing with your camera? XF90/2 is an expensive (overpriced) toy, while 135L is a better tool, just admit it :). I still don't get it how people cannot justify buying expensive FF body, but they can easily spend more on each of the lenses while trying to compensate for the smaller sensor. All that big and overpriced glass on small mirrorless bodies just to imitate the f/1.8-f/2.8 of a real camera... Makes no sense to me.
If all this ignorance continues to prosper at current rates, soon they'll start selling us some kind of APS film+digital hybrids with "real film colors from Fuji" :)).

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 17:40 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: So, why would I choose this over FF 135L or my 150/2.8 APO Macro?

Dear Brendon, there is nothing wrong with good old tech. Some things are just better. Larger sensor is better. Faster AF is better. Longer battery life is better. Reasonable price is better. Better lighting makes better picture. Smaller size is better, but it is compromising many other "betters".

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 12:54 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: So, why would I choose this over FF 135L or my 150/2.8 APO Macro?

:) You people give up on your ignorance and fanboyism. Start being reasonable and critical about things you pay $1000 (or more) each.
I chose to compare it to 6D just because I own it and know its potential. + All that bragging about XT1 being as good as FF ... blah blah blah (Zack Arias style :)). Every camera has "goods and bads" and you should accept both. Ignoring all the nasty stuff won't make it less of a problem.
... and that antique focusing system still works :).

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 18:28 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: So, why would I choose this over FF 135L or my 150/2.8 APO Macro?

Compare these two:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/download-image?s3Key=9c954c5a904e4776a01eac553a68a4e6.raf
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/download-image?s3Key=93af97c0e97d4b8493d71a81acfbd338.cr2
Same scene, same settings, both @f/5.6 - Fuji 0.9EV darker

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 15:44 UTC
On Sony reportedly shifting focus to full-frame cameras article (453 comments in total)
In reply to:

FuhTeng: I'm curious just how big the market is for people to buy a $1000 a7 and then a whole bunch of $1000+ lenses.

There's the kit zoom and used/grey marketZony f4 standard zoom, the 28 mm + adapters, the slow (and tiny) 35 mm f2.8, and then used/grey market 55. That's it for less than $1000 lenses.

Is their goal to have a high profit margin in ILCs? Sure, the a7 family will give them that. Largest market-share? I'm skeptical. They need more <$1000 lenses to keep their impressive market share if they're going to completely abandon the APS-C line.

If they're going after well-to-do enthusaists "pro" market, and they're happy with high margins, sure, keep the $1000+ line coming - MF Loxia, AF Batis, G Macro, 70-200 f4, Zony 16-35.

It doesn't have to be "a whole bunch" of $1000 lenses. Could be just one or two. E mount Samyang 135/2 costs only $550.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 11:03 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

mgm2: These images are indeed nice, but quite frankly I am not sure they are better that what I get with my Pentax K3 and the Tamron 90mm 2.8 Macro.

@pannumon
Fuji is not better because of cheating. If you were shooting same scene with both cameras, you would get something like K3>90mm@f/5.6, 1/250s, ISO200 vs. X-T1>90mm@f/5.6, 1/250s, ISO 400 while both having the same exact EV (exposure value). We do not get anything extra from "cheaters", they are actually fooling us into thinking that their camera has 1 stop better ISO performance. That's all. Their ISO 200-6400 is actually ISO 100-3200.
Sure you can underexpose every shot and then crank it up in post, but don't tell me it won't hurt anything.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 00:01 UTC
On Sony reportedly shifting focus to full-frame cameras article (453 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: How many times have you heard someone say, I want to upgrade to APSC? LoL

A lot, actually :))

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2015 at 20:55 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: So, why would I choose this over FF 135L or my 150/2.8 APO Macro?

@brendon1000
"Shutter speed wise the Fuji will have double the shutter speed at f2.8 compared to the 135mm at f4."
- No, it won't have double the SS while the ISO numbers are the same. Fuji cheats on ISO.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2015 at 16:29 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

maxnimo: These Fujinon lenses never fail to amaze me. The images they produce put Nikon and Canon to shame. I was thinking of migrating to Samsung or Sony, but I may just stay with Fuji forever.

@Lassoni
No worries :). It is a "like or not" poll, not really scientific one. But isn't that what matters the most? The visual satisfaction?
I played with 200/2 for an hour or two (or three, the time flies so fast when having fun), and then after I looked at my new 7D, my 17-50/2.8 and thought - "cr@p" :) "I want 5D2 (which back then was THE CAMERA) and some real optics".

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2015 at 16:24 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

maxnimo: These Fujinon lenses never fail to amaze me. The images they produce put Nikon and Canon to shame. I was thinking of migrating to Samsung or Sony, but I may just stay with Fuji forever.

@Lassoni
I've used 50/1.4EX and yes it is very creamy and beautiful. However, 85/1.8 on FF is just amazing. Maybe you should try 200/2 and then we talk :)?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2015 at 15:53 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

maxnimo: These Fujinon lenses never fail to amaze me. The images they produce put Nikon and Canon to shame. I was thinking of migrating to Samsung or Sony, but I may just stay with Fuji forever.

@Lassoni
OK, why don't you join the poll and see for yourself. Then you'll know your own top favorites. :)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2015 at 15:35 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples article (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

John Breedy Jr: I do think that many people are failing to place this lens in the appropriate category. This lens is an XT-1 Lens and future body lens. The camera can shoot 3200 iso easily - we are not talking overwhelming noise at 6400 either - there are very rare situations I guess where f 2 with IS would be needed considering it is a portrait lens. But know the tool you are getting. I often come across complaints where people don't really know there tools. This is a weather sealed - 2 feet minimum focusing - portrait lens with incredible sharpness. I have used it in lower light and it may take a little longer to get focus. I have had it a couple days after it came out and have had no issue with shooting. But I switched gear to go lighter so when it came to decide between the 50-140 OIS and this - I remembered that and knew I would be sacrificing IS for it.
Get the 4.0 upgrade it makes a tremendous difference. Consider that yes it is $1,000 - But what Camera & Lens for 2200 can match?

Sony a6000 with Ziss Batis 85/1.8 ~ $1800
Olympus OM-D E-M1 with 75/1.8 ~ $1900
Panasonic DMC-G7 with 75/1.8 ~ $1400
Canon EOS 70D with EF 85/1.8 ~ $1400
Nikon D7200 with 85/1.8G ~ $1600
Canon 5D2 with 135/2L ~ $2000
...
..
.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2015 at 15:20 UTC
Total: 116, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »