toxinoz

toxinoz

Lives in Australia Adelaide, Australia
Works as a Medical practitioner
Has a website at www.toxinology.com
Joined on Mar 15, 2007

Comments

Total: 6, showing: 1 – 6

The potential value of this extends beyond the MFT mainly still camera market. Canon EF lenses are of some interest in the video area and a number of dedicated video cameras use the EF mount. The BlackMagic Pocket Cinema Camera uses the MFT mount, so it is now easier to consider using a mix of standard MFT lenses and Canon EF lenses, plus if buying into video lenses such as those from Rokinon, it is possible to buy these in EF mount and be able to use them on the BMPCC and the larger BM and other brand cameras, not to mention the GH3 & GH4. So for those seriously involved in video production this new adaptor may be most welcome (though the high price, not so welcome). Since in serious video it is often preferable to manually control focus & f-stop, lack of full auto capability is not such an important issue.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 31, 2014 at 23:41 UTC as 3rd comment | 4 replies
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2071 comments in total)
In reply to:

rfsIII: So, Mr. Butler, now that you have spent your day off posting answers to the comments for this story you know first-hand what people mean when they say "no good deed goes unpunished."

Sad but true. Well said, sir.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 03:19 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2071 comments in total)

So much argument and defense of format A versus format B! In the days of 35mm film, the issue was film type; do you use Kodachrome 25 or Ektachrome 400? The former gave the "best" colours and detail, but the latter allowed capture of photos in lower light. So, the savvy photographer used the most appropriate film for the shooting situation.
While I don't know for sure, I expect that neither of these film emulsions have the detail capture potential of most modern digital sensors. If I am right (would make an interesting topic, Richard) then a modern "full frame" camera would actually be producing images equivalent to a larger format film camera. Most of us were quite happy with 35mm film quality and it was OK for publications etc, even some posters. So, if, for instance, current M4/3 camera sensors perform at least as well (do they?) as Kodachrome 25 (or 64?) then surely it could be argued that is OK for most photographers? If you need more detail, go for a larger format by all means.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 8, 2014 at 23:47 UTC as 204th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

ThePhilips: Despite my enduring lust for the GM1, I stoically voted for the GX7. I also voted for it with my wallet :)

This year was really amazing for the mirrorless, with more barriers broken for good: size (GM1/12-32 kit), working on-sensor-PDAF (E-M1), sensor size (A7). (Honorary mention for "the most ridiculous price" goes to Olympus E-P5.)

Were I still mirrorless-less this year, I would have probably voted for the Nikon AW1: to promote the idea of more and more affordable weather-sealed cameras/lenses.

I have the EM-1 & very happy with it, but agree with you that the GX7 is a really interesting camera. If I could afford both, I would have one alongside my EM-1. I bought the GM1 for my wife as a travel camera and she absolutely loved it. It is superb as a small competent travel camera that can take good lenses if you wish. Well done Panasonic!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 2, 2014 at 00:36 UTC

I have the EM-1 & really like it (so voted for it), but I almost voted for the Pany GM-1 which my wife has - it is a wonderful little travel camera and a shame it got so few votes. Though I don't have it (yet) I think the Pany GX-7 is a a very interesting camera worthy of a strong vote. So, while the EM-1 appears the winner at present, both of these Panys deserve consideration for winner.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 26, 2013 at 04:40 UTC as 13th comment
On Mirrorless Roundup 2011 article (429 comments in total)

bgbs (and others here) suggest mirrorless cameras cannot be considered seriously by photographers because they are not part of a system. In my experience, this is a complete misconception. In the m4/3 area alone (Panasonic & Olympus bodies, so far; lenses from Panasonic, Olympus, Leica, Sigma etc) there is now a diverse, comprehensive and growing range of lenses, from ultra wide-angle, to powerful telephoto, from zooms to primes, from very fast (f0.95) to not so fast, plus a range of flashes, cordless off-camera multi-flash, and even the ability to use lenses from almost every other camera/lens maker, albeit in manual mode. You can even use bellows and specialist macros from the old Olympus film system, macro lenses which no other system ever had (as far as I know), plus ring flashes, twin flashes etc from the Olympus 4/3 range. It is entirely practical for a serious photographer to travel with a range of these lenses + bodies to shoot a wide array of subjects; I regularly do so.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2011 at 22:03 UTC as 58th comment | 2 replies
Total: 6, showing: 1 – 6