Dennis

Dennis

Lives in United States CT, United States
Works as a Software
Joined on Oct 25, 2002

Comments

Total: 161, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

It would be better to just say "we can't disclose plans". Instead, "we're studying that"; "it's hard to commit to a strategy" ... sounds like they're floundering. And their top two priorities are responsiveness and image quality; things that are already excellent., but no plans to do anything about usability, convenience, connectivity. Oh well; at least they're still competitive while everyone else flounders to varying degrees.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 20:29 UTC as 34th comment
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (296 comments in total)
In reply to:

rrccad: if the 50-150's are 70-200 equivalents, then the 70-200's are 105 to 300mm.

it's a 50-150mm lens. with a cropped field of view of a 75 to 225mm.

it's still missing the characteristics that make the 70-200 desirable such as DOF control, bokeh, field flatting,etc.

the 70-200/4's offer a similar range, more reach than the 50-150's. they can also be used if the customer decides to augment their kit with a full frame camera down the road.

a 70-200/4 with both a copped body and a full frame body of varying pixel densities can offer additional advantages to the photographer as well, by having a varied actual per pixel reach with attached onto the cropped camera versus the full frame.

then again, for Fuji,etc .. this is moot since they don't have full frame. however for a Sony, Canon or Nikon user - I'm not sure this really makes a lot of sense.

I'm not sure what doesn't make sense about it. Regardless of what it is or isn't equivalent to, the point is that a lot of APS-C users would like 50-135/140/150mm f/2.8 lenses; mirrorless systems are exploiting this hole in Canon & Nikon lineups.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2014 at 19:50 UTC
In reply to:

gbvalli: It is not "The Essence of Photography": only "The Essence of Luxury", and, to me, fairly aimless .

The thing is, I think Leica understands its user base far better than most camera companies.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 12:56 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (441 comments in total)
In reply to:

Serious Sam: I am a Fuji lover but.... with this price, I can get an A6000 body + Zeiss 24 F1.8 and I am almost certain that the focusing will be much better but lose out on the OVF and the JPEG engine. Oh you will have a Zeiss lens too.

I think Fuji is getting more and more expensive with every release, while Sony is giving use a lot of value in mirrorless cameras.

Nope - the e-mount version that's sold as the kit lens for the VG series e-mount camcorders. It's quite decent for a super zoom. Also the first super zoom I've ever owned (I bought it specifically for video, but turns out it's better than I expected for stills).

Direct link | Posted on Sep 11, 2014 at 00:56 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (441 comments in total)
In reply to:

Serious Sam: I am a Fuji lover but.... with this price, I can get an A6000 body + Zeiss 24 F1.8 and I am almost certain that the focusing will be much better but lose out on the OVF and the JPEG engine. Oh you will have a Zeiss lens too.

I think Fuji is getting more and more expensive with every release, while Sony is giving use a lot of value in mirrorless cameras.

The f/4 zooms for FE get mixed reviews and the primes don't make for a system yet. (Never mind that I'm not in the market for that big & expensive a system). On the APS-C side, the 16-70/4 also seems kind of mediocre for a high priced lens and there's nothing else in the way of a zoom that's very good (I own the original 18-200 and it's an exceptional lens of that type). But compared to the Fuji 18-55 or even the 16-50 or the Olympus 12-40 or Panasonic 12-35 ... I don't see a quality midrange zoom from Sony that represents a good value. And I don't see primes that I'd particularly want. No portrait prime 4 years in. You can cherry pick and cobble together something, but there are too many other choices in the market to have to settle for that.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 15:17 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (441 comments in total)
In reply to:

Serious Sam: I am a Fuji lover but.... with this price, I can get an A6000 body + Zeiss 24 F1.8 and I am almost certain that the focusing will be much better but lose out on the OVF and the JPEG engine. Oh you will have a Zeiss lens too.

I think Fuji is getting more and more expensive with every release, while Sony is giving use a lot of value in mirrorless cameras.

It's frustrating ... I've read the posts over on X talk that claim the noise about the XTrans sensor is overrated, etc. but I'm just not enamored with the idea of buying into a system with that sensor technology. I love almost everything else about it, including the great lens lineup. Sony packs great technology into affordable bodies, but try as I might, I just can't get remotely excited about the lenses. Fuji knows how to build a system. Sony knows how to build tech products.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 13:55 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (441 comments in total)
In reply to:

Serious Sam: I am a Fuji lover but.... with this price, I can get an A6000 body + Zeiss 24 F1.8 and I am almost certain that the focusing will be much better but lose out on the OVF and the JPEG engine. Oh you will have a Zeiss lens too.

I think Fuji is getting more and more expensive with every release, while Sony is giving use a lot of value in mirrorless cameras.

Yes, a lot of value in mirrorless cameras, but not much value in lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 13:07 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-S1 article (317 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael Piziak: Yet again, a new Pentax camera that sticks with the same k-mount that they've been making since 1975 [film cameras].

Kudos to Pentax !

Unlike Canon & Nikon that changed their lens mount when they went digital - making them basically proprietary as the old lens wouldn't work on the new Canon or Nikon dslr.

Also Kudos to Pentax for keeping the image stabilization in the camera - so all those old lens, since 1975, which still fit on the camera and allow the user to still have shake reduction as they shoot !

Sorry if the intent of my comment wasn't clear. I think it's great that Pentax stuck with its mount. But that's old news and probably a nearly-100% given that they were going to do that with another camera release. I mean, they introduced KAF lenses when ? At least a couple decades ago ? So applauding Pentax for that struck me as failing to find anything else good to say about it :)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 28, 2014 at 19:42 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-S1 article (317 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael Piziak: Yet again, a new Pentax camera that sticks with the same k-mount that they've been making since 1975 [film cameras].

Kudos to Pentax !

Unlike Canon & Nikon that changed their lens mount when they went digital - making them basically proprietary as the old lens wouldn't work on the new Canon or Nikon dslr.

Also Kudos to Pentax for keeping the image stabilization in the camera - so all those old lens, since 1975, which still fit on the camera and allow the user to still have shake reduction as they shoot !

Applauding Pentax for sticking with the same k-mount is kind of like applauding the makers of the Pontiac Aztek for putting round tires on the car.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 28, 2014 at 13:09 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-S1 article (317 comments in total)
In reply to:

HS Wells: K-S1 is a replacement of K-01 ?

Only in spirit

Direct link | Posted on Aug 28, 2014 at 13:03 UTC
On Very flashy: Ricoh unveils Pentax K-S1 DSLR article (206 comments in total)
In reply to:

chiane: Remember old folks, if it doesn't look like every other dslr, it's ugly.

$350 fire sale within a year.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 28, 2014 at 03:05 UTC
On Sony a5100 First Impressions Review preview (575 comments in total)
In reply to:

raay: This camera just has a larger MP sensor and AF , not better than 5n . No way to attach evf or flash , even a radio trigger could be used if it had Hotshoe , THIS IS NOT A 5series camera.

My NEX-5 has no way to attach an EVF. Or remote trigger option.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2014 at 12:49 UTC
On Sony a5100 First Impressions Review preview (575 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tom Hoots: No electronic level = no sale for me. I cannot comprehend why Sony "decided" to remove that feature. After having one in a number of cameras by now, I won't buy a camera without one. "Simple as that."

I'm with you. I've been debating on & off picking up a newer e-mount body to 'revive' my NEX system which has been collecting dust. (I have a NEX-5 and the excellent 18-200). Thought about the NEX-6 at bargain prices, but seeing new models, it's hard to settle for the same old menu system that I hate on the NEX-5, lack of Auto ISO in M, and lack of focus lock control. But then the A6000 tosses out one of my favorite features on Sony cameras since I first tried out an A33 - the level. (I use it on my RX100 all the time).

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2014 at 12:46 UTC
On Rare Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM goes on sale in UK article (218 comments in total)

Ken Rockwell says the FZ70 is just as good.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2014 at 17:36 UTC as 74th comment | 2 replies
On Fujifilm updates X-mount lens roadmap to end of 2015 article (171 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: For wedding photographers, that should have been a 16-55 F2 lens.

"Haven't you been taking notes from Sigma's recent zoom f1.8?"

Haven't you ? It's only 18-35.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 24, 2014 at 16:30 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2032 comments in total)
In reply to:

LTZ470: Question: SO you are telling me that shooting an m43 at f/8 I get an f/16 DOF with double the shutter speed and can shoot at a lower ISO as well?

Read the article. Several examples answer your questions precisely. (Although I think you want to decide whether you're really interested in doubling the shutter speed or halving it).

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 13:09 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2032 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fygaren: As you probably never frame your photos using diagonal AOV, to get the equivalent of FF 3:2 with mFT 4:3 or the other way around, you need to do some cropping.

FF 100mm f4 = mFT 48mm f1.9 and then crop vertical AOV to get a 3:2

mFT 50mm f2 = FF 92mm f3.7 and then crop horizontal AOV to get 4:3

Horizontal crop factor of mFT is about 2.1 while vertical is about 1.85

Cheers!

So you think people who switch from m43 to 3:2 or from 3:2 to m43 start regularly cropping their photos instead of adapting to the new format ? It's possible, I guess ... but I wouldn't jump to that conclusion. When I pick up a p&s I just work with its 4:3 sensor; I don't crop my photos to 3:2 because that's what I'm used to with my DSLR.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 13:03 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2032 comments in total)
In reply to:

LTZ470: f/1.2 = f/1.2 = f/1.2 = Shutter Speed...f/1.2 w/ f/2.4 DOF gives faster Shutter Speed which is THE critical factor...I'll say it again faster shutter speed with increased DOF which is advantageous in many applications... ;-)

And why can't you get the same shutter speed at f/2.4 on a larger sensor ?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 12:59 UTC
On Beyond the ordinary: Tim Dodd's Everyday Astronaut article (102 comments in total)

Wonder if he got the idea from Scott Listfields paintings:

http://astronautdinosaur.com/

Direct link | Posted on Jul 5, 2014 at 16:47 UTC as 40th comment | 1 reply
On Step into Edgar Martins' Time Machine article (34 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roadrunnerdeluxe: Great photos, but No. 10 is the standout for me. What a shot!

http://500px.com/Autobahn66

Yup - definitely #10. I'll have to search for more of his work.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2014 at 14:29 UTC
Total: 161, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »