ogl

ogl

Joined on Jan 28, 2010

Comments

Total: 393, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

PhotoHop: This looks interesting, but pricey I'm sure.
Maybe they can finally get rid of that "Tokina Glow".
I had the 11-16mm f/2.8...lens for me was too big and I had problems, surprisingly with it's focus speed. Sold it.
I am currently thrilled with my Sigma 15mm f/2.8 on my D90...easy distortion correction when you want it and cool effects when you don't. Little teeny thing to.

focus speed for ultra-wide lens...you really care about it?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2013 at 07:26 UTC
In reply to:

iudex: How about Pentax? Sigma used to make lenses for K-mount and this one looks like a perfect prime I would possibly buy for my K-30, so why not Pentax?

Sigma had already produced 30/1.4 for K-mount. Your answer is wrong.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 8, 2013 at 18:53 UTC

How to use new lenses 19/2.8, 30/2.8 and 60/2.8 mm in manual focus mode?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 8, 2013 at 18:51 UTC as 19th comment | 1 reply

I see only one BIG plus - size and weight. With 28 mm and 16 MP APS-C without AA filter - it's VERY cool, inconspicuous tool for street photography. But it's all.
The lenses must be f2 for street.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2013 at 18:51 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

IrishhAndy: What a stupid camera. Overpriced and just one useless focal length.

They will produce A2 later with 36 mm and A3 with 50 mm. :) It's business.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2013 at 15:48 UTC
In reply to:

Osvaldo Cristo: It looks the camera a lot of posters are looking for according their critics for the previous models I read exactly here, in the front page of dpreview:

DX sensor, macro capabilities, reasonable WA, fast lens, crazy high ISO, raw capabilities,... oh surprise: I found again lots of complains!!!

Where is the crowd that asked that??

No any interesting thing at all. Not bad, but mediocrity. No any spices. It doesn't attract.
You list things that it's standart for photo camera. The lens is not fast, by the way.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2013 at 15:47 UTC
In reply to:

Ulfric M Douglas: That optical viewfinder is beautiful.

very expensive

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2013 at 14:47 UTC

My GXR+A12 28/2,5 is smaller.

Coolpix A could be much interesting if it would be 24/1.8-2 and WR.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2013 at 14:46 UTC as 30th comment | 1 reply
On Just posted: Fujifilm X-E1 Review article (527 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shunda77: Fuji are finally really pulling it all together, they've had some pretty big teething problems with their x series in the past few years, but now it is maturing very well indeed.
Fuji are looking like they will finally become a very serious player in the digital era, they have done what Kodak couldn't do.

Fuji is dwarf who want to survive in digital era.
Marginal system, low sales, strange techonlogy.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:26 UTC
On Just posted: Fujifilm X-E1 Review article (527 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: Relax, guys!
DPREVIEW is not independent reviewer for many years already.
They just help to sell camera of their owners. It's business and nothing else.
Dpreview is sold to Amazon on 2007.

"He who pays the piper calls the tune".

I'm not fanboy and never was. I don't care about DPREVIEW's reviews at all. I tell the truth. DPReview is the faithful dog of AMAZON.
Fujifilm advances X system and X-trans with lavish hand.
If they can't sell this marginal system, they will fail.

I'm sorry that ET2, dengx and MJJSevilla are the victims of marketing and consumer society.

DR's tests of DP are ridiculous, by the way.

K-01 - I don't care about K-01 and DPR's awards. It's the game for silly fans.

I've used Ricoh GXR for a last year.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:04 UTC
On Just posted: Fujifilm X-E1 Review article (527 comments in total)

Relax, guys!
DPREVIEW is not independent reviewer for many years already.
They just help to sell camera of their owners. It's business and nothing else.
Dpreview is sold to Amazon on 2007.

"He who pays the piper calls the tune".

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2013 at 09:59 UTC as 67th comment | 8 replies
On Just posted: Fujifilm X-E1 Review article (527 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: The IQ from ACR is really junk. Compare with the best cameras in terms of IQ - K-5IIs, NEX-7 in RAW.
Gold award - funny....Rather slow camera with very mediocre IQ.

Sensors are different, but Fuji trick is the same...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2013 at 18:09 UTC
On Just posted: Fujifilm X-E1 Review article (527 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nikonworks: Give me a break. Gold for troublsome AF? In 2013?

Good IQ in JPEG only. It's all.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2013 at 18:03 UTC
On Just posted: Fujifilm X-E1 Review article (527 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: The IQ from ACR is really junk. Compare with the best cameras in terms of IQ - K-5IIs, NEX-7 in RAW.
Gold award - funny....Rather slow camera with very mediocre IQ.

Wait DXO test. X100, for example, has manufacture ISO1600, real 1000, ISO3200 = real 1012, ISO6400 = 1076....:)
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Database/Fujifilm/FinePix-X100

I'm sure that the real ISO of X-E1's 6400 is MUCH lower. :) No doubt.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2013 at 07:36 UTC
On Just posted: Fujifilm X-E1 Review article (527 comments in total)

The IQ from ACR is really junk. Compare with the best cameras in terms of IQ - K-5IIs, NEX-7 in RAW.
Gold award - funny....Rather slow camera with very mediocre IQ.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2013 at 04:27 UTC as 139th comment | 8 replies
On Adobe's Fujifilm X-Trans sensor processing tested article (144 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: X-Trans sensor is 5-6 year late. New cameras 16-36 MP with Bayer sensors without AA filter have very weak level of moire. It's not a problem at all.
X-Trans is invention of new bicycle without technical support. Deadborn.
Fuji can't make the best software for X-Trans sensor and can't solve the problem of their sensor. We get false colours and other types of artifacts instead of moire of Bayer . Adobe and other software developers try to offer anything, but no any serious results.
I can't see any advantages of this marginal technology.

Sigma offers the best software to develop RAW from their specific Foveon.
Why can't Fuji offer RAW converter?

Is it superior? Is it the best to convert RAW from Fuji?
Is it better than C1Pro, ACR or DXO...?

I don't talk about ANY RAW converter. I talk about X-Trans sensors problems and that there is no high effective RAW converter from Fuji.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2013 at 13:48 UTC
On Adobe's Fujifilm X-Trans sensor processing tested article (144 comments in total)

X-Trans sensor is 5-6 year late. New cameras 16-36 MP with Bayer sensors without AA filter have very weak level of moire. It's not a problem at all.
X-Trans is invention of new bicycle without technical support. Deadborn.
Fuji can't make the best software for X-Trans sensor and can't solve the problem of their sensor. We get false colours and other types of artifacts instead of moire of Bayer . Adobe and other software developers try to offer anything, but no any serious results.
I can't see any advantages of this marginal technology.

Sigma offers the best software to develop RAW from their specific Foveon.
Why can't Fuji offer RAW converter?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2013 at 12:19 UTC as 14th comment | 4 replies
On Adobe's Fujifilm X-Trans sensor processing tested article (144 comments in total)

I don't see that the problem is solved. I see just the try to solve.
Some problems are tried to be solved and solved a bit, the rest problems are unreal to solve. Corrected colours, lost resolution.
The problem of X-trans sensor is not the software. The main problem is color filter array pattern of Fuji sensor.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2013 at 06:52 UTC as 17th comment | 1 reply

Buffer Size (RAW, Lossless 14-bit) - 6
Buffer Size (RAW, Compressed 12-bit) - 9

not big at all

Direct link | Posted on Feb 22, 2013 at 17:50 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply

Crop 2 mode is for JPEG only? Or in RAW too?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 22, 2013 at 17:49 UTC as 10th comment
Total: 393, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »