jhinkey

jhinkey

Lives in United States Seattle, WA, United States
Works as a Aerospace Engineering Consultant
Has a website at www.hinkey.zenfolio.com
Joined on Dec 27, 2005

Comments

Total: 221, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

jhinkey: OK Nikon, now you just have to make a 24/1.8 and then you can get on to more important matters:
16/2.8 AFS fisheye
20/2.8 AFS
45/2.8 AFS (compact please)
135/1.8AFS
400/5.6AFS VR
and then you'll get some of my cash.

Well, I would like some f/2.8 primes IF they are far more compact than the current f/1.8 primes. With the high ISO capability of today's FX cameras f/2.8 will do in many situations.
For what I do I don't like having a 16-35/4 or a 17-35/2.8 hanging on the camera while out and about (hiking, climbing, skiing, etc.) and I nearly always used them stopped down anyways.
Oh, and the Nikon patent for the 135mm is for f/1.8 so I assume that is what they will eventually release.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 7, 2014 at 16:19 UTC

OK Nikon, now you just have to make a 24/1.8 and then you can get on to more important matters:
16/2.8 AFS fisheye
20/2.8 AFS
45/2.8 AFS (compact please)
135/1.8AFS
400/5.6AFS VR
and then you'll get some of my cash.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 7, 2014 at 08:07 UTC as 17th comment | 11 replies
In reply to:

Dimit: Will you be suprised telling you that this lens needn't exist??
Sure it'll be excellent but on an Oly or Pana body with an in-body stabilization,why not simply get the Voigt o.95 without ois????
I guess

Its called auto focus . . .

Direct link | Posted on Jan 7, 2014 at 03:13 UTC

Lenses like this (assuming it's excellent) are making it harder and harder to not buy into the Fuji X system . . .

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2014 at 18:47 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Naveed Akhtar: I was about to buy GX7 ..

Now You are confusing the hell outta me, Fuji!!
So many great lenses in such a short time ..

Well, the 42.5/1.2 Pan-Leica is coming out soon . . . .
http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-official-panasonic-nocticron-specs-hope-it-gets-like-the-new-fuji-f1-2-lens/

I've been very happy with my GX7 - sure it doesn't have the DR of the XE-2, but it's very snappy for AF and pairs excellently with the 20/1.7II and the 75/1.8 Oly. It's IBIS is also pretty good (~2 stops or better for the most part).

It's good we have very competing choices . . .

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2014 at 18:41 UTC
On Nikon AF-S Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G review preview (412 comments in total)

As a night shooter the coma wide open is simply too much to justify the cost of this lens - was expecting better for the price.

I also wonder why Nikon chose to release this lens now when not that many will be sold and there are so many other primes that need updating that a lot more people will buy.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 30, 2013 at 22:31 UTC as 139th comment | 3 replies
On Fujifilm announces XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS wideangle zoom article (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

jhinkey: It's lenses like this one that really makes me think twice about having both a FX and m43 system - If I only had one system Fuji would be it.

So, yes, the continuing equivalence talk.
Yes the FF will have less DOF and will be a stop better in noise for the same aperture and shutter speed.
But with a super wide angle used at base ISO that difference will be a very happy trade for many.
Plus for the equivalent DOF (if that's what you are after) the APS-C will be one f-stop wider, thus enabling a lower ISO (if not already at base ISO) for the same shutter speed.
There are no clear winners in every situation, but this lens is much smaller and lighter than the FX "equivalent" taken on whole.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2013 at 23:32 UTC
On Fujifilm announces XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS wideangle zoom article (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

jhinkey: It's lenses like this one that really makes me think twice about having both a FX and m43 system - If I only had one system Fuji would be it.

Exactly as Naveed says - I understand it, but joejack951 does not.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2013 at 21:36 UTC
On Fujifilm announces XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS wideangle zoom article (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

jhinkey: It's lenses like this one that really makes me think twice about having both a FX and m43 system - If I only had one system Fuji would be it.

The only thing I'd be giving up going from FX to APS-C is shallow DOF at f/4 - something I'm not worried about with an ultra-wide.
Exposure is the same at the same ISO.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2013 at 20:20 UTC
On Fujifilm announces XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS wideangle zoom article (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

jhinkey: It's lenses like this one that really makes me think twice about having both a FX and m43 system - If I only had one system Fuji would be it.

You mean to replace the Nikon 16-35/4 that is
82.5mm in diameter
125mm in length
and weighs 680 grams?

You bet I would.

AND the IQ (mostly dynamic range) of the Fuji sensors is a whole lot better than m43.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2013 at 18:01 UTC
On Fujifilm announces XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS wideangle zoom article (172 comments in total)

It's lenses like this one that really makes me think twice about having both a FX and m43 system - If I only had one system Fuji would be it.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2013 at 16:25 UTC as 7th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

jhinkey: Why not just make a high quality Samyang extender with all the pass-through electronics (if there are any) so that the user doesn't have to carry around an extender with each lens?
I know there is data that shows extenders/adapters can cause problems, but there's no reason a high quality extender can't be made that mitigates or minimizes these problems. After all people are putting speed boosters and tele-extenders between their lenses and bodies all the time . . .

I just don't get the logic I guess . . .

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2013 at 22:02 UTC

Why not just make a high quality Samyang extender with all the pass-through electronics (if there are any) so that the user doesn't have to carry around an extender with each lens?
I know there is data that shows extenders/adapters can cause problems, but there's no reason a high quality extender can't be made that mitigates or minimizes these problems. After all people are putting speed boosters and tele-extenders between their lenses and bodies all the time . . .

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2013 at 16:22 UTC as 12th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Cane: This thread is like a bunch of whining toddlers that haven't been feed breakfast yet. My God people, look at yourselves! It's embarrassing. I truly think this entire website exists to give old people an outlet to complain about everything, because that's what they do best.

First you say we are toddlers , then you say we are old. Which category of whiner do you fall into since you are whining about whining posts?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2013 at 15:53 UTC
On Nikon Df real-world samples gallery article (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

jhinkey: Is there a 135/2.5 Nikkor? Perhaps it really is a 105/2.5 . . .

Thought so.
Sometimes I mess up the non-CPU lens registers in my D800 and I end up with non-existing lens combinations.
Good to see some classic (and very very good) non-AF Nikon glass in the images.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2013 at 18:15 UTC
On Nikon Df real-world samples gallery article (224 comments in total)

Is there a 135/2.5 Nikkor? Perhaps it really is a 105/2.5 . . .

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2013 at 07:10 UTC as 47th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I want a native m4/3s version of this lens. I don't want an APS-C sized lens.

Native with a CPU chip.
Too heavy/big for my m43 system.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2013 at 23:05 UTC
In reply to:

jhinkey: Why do I have to lug a 580g lens around to get a 20mm FX equivalent FOV on my m43 lens? It had better be stellar wide open on m43. Plus it won't take filters.

AND - they use 6 aperture blades which makes ugly sun stars in my opinion.

Well, to get f/2.8 at 10mm there are no m43 options. It would be nice if they made a m43-specific version so that one doesn't have to lug the extra weight and size around to get a fast ultra-wide.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2013 at 18:29 UTC

I bet for m43 use you could figure out how to put a filter on the front.
Also, since they likely have one hood design for APS-C and m43, the m43 version won't have optimal hood coverage.

Hopefully someone (Oly, Pana, Sigma?) will come out with a 10mm/2.8 prime specifically for m43 so that it doesn't have to weigh 580gms to cover the APS-C image circle.

EDIT: It appears that the m43 version weighs 620 gms - even heavier!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2013 at 16:23 UTC as 24th comment
In reply to:

io_bg: No filter thread and 6 diaphragm blades? Too bad...

io_bg is right.
6 aperture blades create not very good looking point light sources when the sun is in the frame, lights in a night time city scape, etc.
Lack of filter thread is problematic for landscape photographers who want to increase saturation of foliage or who do want to use it for sky images - it's only 20mm FX equivalent on m43 and I use a polarizer on my 20mm all the time.

Samyang uses 6 blades on their m43 fisheye and it produces odd looking sun stars . . .

Also, why can't the m43 version be chipped?

Though the optics of Samyang are really good, why can't they go the slight extra mile and put things like 7 aperture blades, CPU chips, etc. in all their lenses (I know I know - cost, but I'd be willing to pay more).

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2013 at 16:19 UTC
Total: 221, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »