deep7

deep7

Lives in New Zealand (Aotearoa) New Zealand (Aotearoa)
Works as a writer/photographer/ecologist
Has a website at deeppics.com
Joined on May 10, 2008
About me:

God makes it, I see it and photograph it. Sometimes that works well!

Comments

Total: 435, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

This could be a good lens. I wonder what the equivalence nerds would make of it? Looking forward to seeing reviews.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2015 at 20:34 UTC as 9th comment | 16 replies
On Mono a mono: Leica M Monochrom (Typ 246) hands-on article (614 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mssimo: Does it use the new or old style Olympus EVF?

The EVF allows use of Leica R lenses. A good enough reason to have one.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 1, 2015 at 21:04 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T10 First Impressions Review preview (501 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bhima78: Nice camera with a nice featureset/size and build for the money. I still have no idea why Fuji doesn't have touchscreens though. I guess they want it to feel more like a standard camera, but honestly, once you use a touchscreen for setting focus points or even having it focus and fire on one press, you'll never go back to a camera without one.

Maybe for some people. I've had that feature available on my EM1 for well over a year and only used it to see if it works. (It does). There never seems to be a time when it's a good solution, in practice.

Direct link | Posted on May 18, 2015 at 06:34 UTC
In reply to:

steve_hoge: Will Aperture digest these invalid DNGs?

I read that Aperture and iPhoto had the same problem.

Direct link | Posted on May 15, 2015 at 20:57 UTC
On Hands-on with new Olympus PRO 8mm and 7-14mm lenses article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

WarrenKK: The minimum focus distance of the 8mm FE is 2.5 cm, not 7.5 cm as stated in the caption for picture no. 4. For the 7-14mm the close focus distance is 7.5 cm, at least according to the Olympus website.

That 2.5cm is the working distance (to front lens element), not the focal distance (to sensor plane).

Direct link | Posted on May 14, 2015 at 09:28 UTC
On Canon EOS 5DS R real world sample gallery posted article (444 comments in total)
In reply to:

DStudio: My first thought was the Sigma 50/1.4 doesn't compliment the camera well. They may measure great, but they don't look great.

But then as I looked at the shots with the Canon lenses, they don't look much better. Not 3D, flat, no life, no character or feeling that you could touch or identify with the objects, or that the images would touch you. I can pixel peep at the detail, and the detail's flat too.

It's not the subject matter or the weather - it's something else - je ne sais quoi.

That is such a true observation!

Direct link | Posted on May 14, 2015 at 03:43 UTC
On Hands-on with new Olympus PRO 8mm and 7-14mm lenses article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

King Penguin: So this Fisheye is larger and heavier than my FULL FRAME Nikkor 16mm AF 2.8D......mmmmm, the benefits of M43....LOL.

Sorry M43 guys, but facts are facts!

That would be a heck of a telephoto on most phones!

Direct link | Posted on May 13, 2015 at 11:26 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: The Pro line of Olympus lenses are a good example that large mm aperture-diameter lenses for smaller sensors are expensive to make.

The 7-14mm is probably meant to match the Nikon, but in equivalent terms, it is 14-28/5.6 for Olympus vs. 14-28/2.8 for Nikon. I wonder if Olympus couldn't have made it F2.0 to match F4 lenses at least. OTH, the Olympus already at that aperture isn't much cheaper than the Nikon (which is expensive indeed).

The 16mm F3.6 equivalent prime is nice but expensive too.

There most certainly is.

Direct link | Posted on May 13, 2015 at 05:04 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: The Pro line of Olympus lenses are a good example that large mm aperture-diameter lenses for smaller sensors are expensive to make.

The 7-14mm is probably meant to match the Nikon, but in equivalent terms, it is 14-28/5.6 for Olympus vs. 14-28/2.8 for Nikon. I wonder if Olympus couldn't have made it F2.0 to match F4 lenses at least. OTH, the Olympus already at that aperture isn't much cheaper than the Nikon (which is expensive indeed).

The 16mm F3.6 equivalent prime is nice but expensive too.

nerd2: It's not a million dollar question. People either buy what they know is best or they buy what is trendy. Sometimes there is an overlap. This "Pro" line of Olympus lenses is for some the first lot of photographers (because m4/3 is not as trendy for the well-heeled as the 35mm format).

These lenses are for people who see depth of field as an ADVANTAGE to a smaller format. I'm in that camp - after years of struggling to get enough depth of field with 35mm and medium format, it's wonderful to get that slight advantage with a smaller sensor. It's not like I have any trouble getting subject isolation, for goodness sake. Check out the Olympus official samples if you need to. We still like a higher shutter speed, like anyone else, so f2.8 is more attractive than f4, but the real reason to buy a lens like this, that is heavier and more expensive than something else, is that we appreciate quality.

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 18:32 UTC
On Hands-on with new Olympus PRO 8mm and 7-14mm lenses article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

sans culotte: "Although F1.8 is actually more like F3.5 in full-frame terms, the extra brightness compared to most wideangle M43 lenses is welcome and increases the utility of this lens in low light."
So silly, maybe it is more like f/5.6 on medium format or something else on other format. You are seeking for tiny DOF with fisheye lens?
F-number is about light, not DOF. If you want to specualte about DOF create your own DOF-number & use it. Same f-stop give same exposure on every format. That's it. Very simple.

I was going to comment on that too. The wording made it sound like the Olympus lens had some sort of disadvantage compared to some other random format when, in this case, the opposite is true! Shame on the writer for even bringing the subject up.

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 18:20 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: The Pro line of Olympus lenses are a good example that large mm aperture-diameter lenses for smaller sensors are expensive to make.

The 7-14mm is probably meant to match the Nikon, but in equivalent terms, it is 14-28/5.6 for Olympus vs. 14-28/2.8 for Nikon. I wonder if Olympus couldn't have made it F2.0 to match F4 lenses at least. OTH, the Olympus already at that aperture isn't much cheaper than the Nikon (which is expensive indeed).

The 16mm F3.6 equivalent prime is nice but expensive too.

Falconeyes, what on earth are you on about? Sure, you have to stop your Nikon lens down to f5.6 to match the Olympus' wide open depth of field but that's a disadvantage to Nikon, not Olympus! Check out the test shots and you'll see this is a seriously decent lens coming in at an appropriate release price.

If your first sentence was true, many cellphone manufacturers would have gone our of business. You are confusing size with quality.

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 08:55 UTC

Based on those few pictures, the 7-14 could be truly excellent. I have come to expect that from the more expensive Olympus glass but ultra-wide zooms seem to be fickle things to make well.

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 08:42 UTC as 20th comment | 2 replies
On Hands-on with new Olympus PRO 8mm and 7-14mm lenses article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

King Penguin: So this Fisheye is larger and heavier than my FULL FRAME Nikkor 16mm AF 2.8D......mmmmm, the benefits of M43....LOL.

Sorry M43 guys, but facts are facts!

That was a bit hard to interpret but I'd say you are describing an uncommon situation.

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 08:39 UTC
On Oly-EM5_II_7-14-F2.8_ISO200_p5110040 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Flip, that's really crisp! Nice.

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 08:27 UTC as 1st comment
On Hands-on with new Olympus PRO 8mm and 7-14mm lenses article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

King Penguin: So this Fisheye is larger and heavier than my FULL FRAME Nikkor 16mm AF 2.8D......mmmmm, the benefits of M43....LOL.

Sorry M43 guys, but facts are facts!

I go down to read comments on this article and immediately find yet another Nikon fan putting down the product for no good reason.

I can't be bothered looking up the specs for that Nikon lens but I can't imagine it would have the same close focus ability and I can see it is over a stop slower. To get the same depth of field, you would actually lose two stops of shutter speed too. Not a direct comparison at all.

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 08:19 UTC
On Canon EOS 5DS / SR First Impressions Review preview (3352 comments in total)
In reply to:

sandy b: Beautiful shot. While it may not push the envelope on DR, 3 stops of latitude with 50 mp will make some very impressive shots, like the one posted. Careful exposure will mitigate most issues with the DR. I think users with this camera are going to have a great time shooting.

Me too. Regardless of what dynamic range the "opposition" boasts, this will surely be a very capable, if slightly niche, camera and those who have the lenses and computer power it needs will have a lot of fun going "Wow!".

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 05:03 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donnie G: Someone commented here that the Canon XC10 is a prosumer PowerShot camera, and I agree. The camera is everything that a PowerShot built for pros on a budget should be. I won't try to comment on its image quality or even on whether it will be accepted by the target user base until I can get my hands on one and check it out for myself. What impresses me the most at this time are the design and ergonomics. I think Canon has made a very user friendly camera that, like all PowerShots, can be picked up and used by anyone regardless of their skill level. If all of this proves to be true in practice, then I will definitely buy one for myself by next spring. It would be the first small sensor camera that I would consider to be a compliment to my DSLR system and the way I work. As first impressions go, I really like what I see in the XC10. :))

Donnie G, you make a lot of sense. Good on ya.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 29, 2015 at 10:07 UTC
In reply to:

Rex1227: Does that mean the a shot at a specific ISO cannot get any cleaner up to a point since the amount of photon noise cannot be reduced?

Eric Calabros: The trouble with using a faster lens/bigger aperture is that you lose depth of field. That's limits the advantages of a larger sensor, in a practical sense, if you want to control your depth of field (rather than just having it as shallow as your lens allows).

Direct link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 21:23 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: finally! Canon is listening!
XC10 is like a prosumer Powershot G, albeit with:
1) 4k (built-in cooling for normal everyday 4k length recordings)
2) Tilt/Flip Screen; can operate as a Tilt-Angle EVF (Eye-Loupe included) like pro cine/video cams
3) 1" 12mp sensor pixels sized for low-light rather than higher-res best only in better light
4) Tilt-Grip; like prosumer compact video cams
5) Canon ES-LV (Powershot Exposure Simulation Live View)
6) Built-In sealed integrated compact wide-long zoom lens with ff.fov.eq 24-240mm (eliminates changing lenses for different focal lengths)

Misc: IBIS ... has been around in Powershots since Pro90IS

Missing:
Modular VASS (Vari-Angle Swivel Screen)*
Modular VA-EVF (Vari-Angle EVF)*

*no ... smartphones make for poor ergonomics if serving remote vari-angle swivel viewers (they all lack proper built-in hand controls)

A bargain to some people, not worth it to others. Just like any other bit of specialised equipment, it will seem very expensive to someone who doesn't need or appreciate what it can do. Come back in a year and see how well it did (and if the release price actually stuck - most camera gear goes down after a few months).

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 21:34 UTC
On Sony SLT-A77 II Review preview (508 comments in total)
In reply to:

iAPX: Compared to the Nikon D610 & D750, that seems to share a similar sensor, the Sony STL-A77 II seems to be incredibly noisy, with at least 2EV difference when putting it on ISO 1600 and D610 or D750 at ISO 6400!

Totally deceptive!

tbcass: I actually was defending another Sony model which had, unnecessarily, been brought into the discussion. I'd be less inclined to defend the A77II but wouldn't attack it either - it's just not for me, though I admire Sony for building it. I don't blame Sony owners for being defensive here, nor Canon owners on other pages, because there is a lot of tripe spread around here! I sometimes bite when I'm too tired to restrain myself but it's usually a waste of time (see above for a good example).

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 21:25 UTC
Total: 435, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »