nzmacro

nzmacro

Lives in New Zealand (Aotearoa) New Zealand (Aotearoa)
Has a website at www.birdsinaction.com
Joined on Oct 17, 2000

Comments

Total: 89, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

matthew saville: This, for $1K? I might finally be able to get into wildlife photography. Oh wait, there are no FE "big gun" wildlife lenses... Drat. I wonder how well this AF system works with a Canon super-tele... If the A7R II's adapter EF-FE performance is any indicator, it won't be too shabby...

Matthew, looking at your website and DPR gallery, you don't need long tele lenses or fast AF, so don't worry about it ;-) I use Canon super tele lenses on a Sony NEX and AF still doesn't interest me, but this camera does for other reasons.

You seem to be all worked up over something you don't need for some reason :-)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 07:22 UTC
On photo Great Blue Heron with "Fish take out". in the My Best Photo of the Week challenge (14 comments in total)

That is the type of shot we live for !!. Superb shot and oh how I wish that was mine. Fantastic work from behind it as well. What a shot !!. Danny < in awe..

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2016 at 03:51 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply
On article Nikon's New D5 and D500 Push the Boundaries of DSLR (733 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fri13: Nikon really has dropped the ball. The have given strong signals about their incapability use latest technology to improve their users capabilities get the shot.

1) The EVF lag they mention is in good EVF negligent to even best reaction times. The only real "limitation" is the missing live view but with 10-15fps you don't really need one unless subject is moving from frame side to side like in mogul skiing, but then you can always use tracking and problem is solved totally. The OVF is huge limitation in low lit scenery or bright lit scenery and EVF wins, until you hit to -20C and EVF slows down!

2) The incapability call digital stabilization as is, instead they fool their customers to think that "electronic stabilization" is somewhat lossless. OIS and IBIS are electronical stabilization, but not digital ones.

3) D5 and D500 are not going to be updated for years, strong signal that mirrorless variant isn't coming. That means Nikon users need to wait 3-5 years to get better changes.

Fri. You are far better off keeping away from these sorts of topics IMO. Danny.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 20:08 UTC
In reply to:

aramgrg: Sounds like there was no other name left for optical image stabilization for Olympus :-)

@aramgrg. Yes, there already are professionals using m4/3.

As said in another post, you don't need to be scared of this lens, looking at your gallery you don't need it and not on the Nikon anyway. It's an m4/3 lens, not Nikon.

BTW, I use Canon lenses so don't try .... fanboy. I'm probably a lot older than you are and not a boy ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 20:34 UTC
In reply to:

Suhas Sudhakar Kulkarni: As a one time m43 user, I feel that the lens is a bit heavy for the original promise of compact system of m43. Given the small camera bodies it seems to be challenging to balance this big lens. The price is also higher than expected.
I do not have any doubt about sharpness and focusing ability of the lens though.

@vscd. What happens when you mount a Canon 300 F/2.8L, 500 F/4.5L or the 800 F/5.6L on m4/3 then ?? ;)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 11:28 UTC

Well done Oly, congrats on a superb sharp lens looking at the reviews so far. A few using m4/3 will certainly be able to use it and some I can think of deserve it. I couldn't justify it, but heck its a nice lens for m4/3 !!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 11:17 UTC as 24th comment
In reply to:

aramgrg: Sounds like a good lens, until one sees the price.
How comes a lens covering 4 times smaller area is more expensive than canon and nikon ones?
Well, they know the market better. Not for me for sure.

So its ignorance then in that case. Come back when you know what you are looking at ;-) You don't need one.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 07:53 UTC
In reply to:

aramgrg: Sounds like a good lens, until one sees the price.
How comes a lens covering 4 times smaller area is more expensive than canon and nikon ones?
Well, they know the market better. Not for me for sure.

zxaar. Post up some shots from both thanks. Show us your knowledge or your arrogance, or should that be ignorance. All I see is .....

http://www.dpreview.com/members/1551042800/galleries

So please show us what you get from your club :-)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 07:35 UTC
In reply to:

aramgrg: Sounds like a good lens, until one sees the price.
How comes a lens covering 4 times smaller area is more expensive than canon and nikon ones?
Well, they know the market better. Not for me for sure.

aramgrg.

You obviously don't know much about m4/3 and you seem to be guessing all the way through this. You are tripping up over your own feet.

I use 300 F/2.8, 500 F/4.5 and 800 F/5.6 lenses on both APS-C and m4/3. I'll often put on a 1.4x TC and you want to go on about an FZ-1000 and an SX50 !!

You have no idea what a 300mm can do on an m4/3 sensor, so leave that to those that actually do. There's a few members in here that have responded to you that actually know what they are talking about and do own long tele lenses. Stop guessing ;-)

I checked your gallery at DPR, don't worry about it ok, you don't need to.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 05:54 UTC
In reply to:

matthew saville: Too bad this "sharpest lens ever" is probably sharpest at its wide-open aperture and maybe ~1 stop down, thanks to diffraction on the 2x crop sensor.

Pentax is finally making a full-frame camera, will Olympus seriously spend the rest of its days dedicated to the 2x crop sensor size? Seems a shame... But then again there's a whole new generation coming that has never stopped down their lenses more than one stop, since they're obsessed with bokeh. Too bad 2x crop is counterproductive to that as well. 'Round in circles the debate goes...

Matthew, I checked your web site. You don't need one, so don't sweat it :-) The last thing you need is a fast tele lens. Your lenses are small and the last thing you need to worry yourself over, is a wildlife or sports lens ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 05:27 UTC
On photo Concerned in the Macro - Black & White image(s) only challenge (4 comments in total)

Impressive details. Amazingly so and congrats on a very well deserved win !!. Danny.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 30, 2015 at 06:46 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Adapted Lens Talk: Readers' Showcase and new forum! (195 comments in total)
In reply to:

forpetessake: You can find a lot of interest in adapted lenses in Sony forums, but you can find very little interest in Fuji forums.
The explanation is obvious, the only reason for that interest is due to the fact that manufacturer isn't able to produce a useful range of good quality, reasonably sized and priced lenses.

Yes but Neil, you have no right buying a camera because it suits YOU. For Pete sake ;-) did you ask permission before you bought it. gees. :-)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 29, 2015 at 03:40 UTC
On photo Perfect beauty in the Something beautiful (no people portraits) challenge (2 comments in total)

It's ..... GORGEOUS !!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 28, 2015 at 10:40 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Adapted Lens Talk: Readers' Showcase and new forum! (195 comments in total)
In reply to:

forpetessake: You can find a lot of interest in adapted lenses in Sony forums, but you can find very little interest in Fuji forums.
The explanation is obvious, the only reason for that interest is due to the fact that manufacturer isn't able to produce a useful range of good quality, reasonably sized and priced lenses.

Sony, Fuji and m4/3 don't have any lenses that I would want. Its not just Sony you know ;-) The lenses are just far too wide for me. M4/3 is getting really close with the new announced long lenses. Trust me, Fuji doesn't have what I want in lenses either.

I bought the Sony and the Oly to use the MF lenses on, not because of the native lens line up. Fuji didn't offer what I wanted in a body. Samsung NX1 is looking really good for an APS-C body for MF lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 27, 2015 at 20:40 UTC
On article Happy Holidays from dpreview! (119 comments in total)

Back at you Simon and staff. Everyone at DPR, have a good one.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 25, 2015 at 04:09 UTC as 76th comment
On article Gear of the Year Part 4: Dale's pick - Samsung NX1 (407 comments in total)

Its certainly one camera body I have my eye on. Very interesting read thanks. Would love to mount Canon MF legacy lenses on one. When the cost comes down, i'll grab it.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2015 at 06:03 UTC as 28th comment
On photo The Grand Canyon in the national parks challenge (9 comments in total)

Spectacular shot with high impact. Superb result.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2015 at 05:30 UTC as 6th comment
On photo A lightning storm, under a starlit sky in the Lightning strike challenge (7 comments in total)

Staggering shot !! Seen a lot of lightning shots in my life, but nothing ...... nothing like this !!. Spectacular work and shot Martin.

Danny.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 07:07 UTC as 6th comment
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (551 comments in total)
In reply to:

nzmacro: Hello, my name is Danny and I need help !!

I feel embarrassed when I shoot my mirrorless cameras while others seem cheerful, relaxed and confident using their DSLR's. My pitiful EVF is like looking at a blurry TV screen, while others are shooting through a bright clear window.

My mirrorless cameras fail in comparison to those gorgeous DSLR's I so want, but can't afford. I feel daunted to say the least.

I got sucked into mirroless by those that said you could fit them in a pocket because they are so small, but when I mount the 800 F/5.6 on it, I find I need much larger pockets.

I want my money back and DPR should pay for it, its here I got talked into it !!

So come on DPR, replace my mirrorless with a Canon 1Dx and 600 F/4 .... PLEASE.

Danny.

:-) ;-) At least someone got it ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 17:47 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (551 comments in total)

Hello, my name is Danny and I need help !!

I feel embarrassed when I shoot my mirrorless cameras while others seem cheerful, relaxed and confident using their DSLR's. My pitiful EVF is like looking at a blurry TV screen, while others are shooting through a bright clear window.

My mirrorless cameras fail in comparison to those gorgeous DSLR's I so want, but can't afford. I feel daunted to say the least.

I got sucked into mirroless by those that said you could fit them in a pocket because they are so small, but when I mount the 800 F/5.6 on it, I find I need much larger pockets.

I want my money back and DPR should pay for it, its here I got talked into it !!

So come on DPR, replace my mirrorless with a Canon 1Dx and 600 F/4 .... PLEASE.

Danny.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 05:59 UTC as 35th comment | 7 replies
Total: 89, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »