33 min ago
 |
Bruce Edwards
Lives in
United States
Joined on
May 29, 2001
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
BJN: Wondering why the cropped performance is featured first on a full frame lens review?
And to potential buyers: why would you buy this zoom range for APS-C?
Because I almost NEVER shoot in the 18-24 range (I have an 18-105 lens), and the Nikon 24-120 F4 is too slow for that much $$$. Vast majority of my shots using the 18-105, are 24mm and above.
And for the umpteen times that blogs, reviews, and message board folk state "but APS-C users should buy the 17-50 instead!" I say BULLHOCKEY! :) If I shot wide very often, I would use a dedicated WA lens like a 10-22 or something. And 50mm is just way too limiting on the long end IMO. If I were shooting around 50, I would just use my 50mm prime and get a sharpness and speed boost.
The 24-70 puts me in a range that I personally shoot almost all the time. I would even prefer 24-85 or 90, just for a little more reach, but hey, just glad we have this option!
stelioskritikakis: i think tokina commited suicide creating a lens which is
- not wide enough
- not bright enough
- dx?
why choose this over the canon 10-22 or the nikon 10-24?
nahhh..
i'd accept though some lenses such as
- 10-20 f/4 dx
- or 24-24 f/4 fx even
or 12-24 DX like sigma created.
Sounds reasonable. By producing a wide angle lens that doesn't fit your needs, they have destroyed the entire company.
"Suicide" no less! Sheesh. Dramatic, much?
mpgxsvcd: The LX7 is now a $270 camera from Panasonic Direct. It wins hands down.
No FB silliness. Just a coupon code, which put it at $275 shipped. incredible! If I didn't already have the LX-5, that would have been a no brainer.
Absolutely spectacular. Esp. composition and angle for visual interest...love it.
zakk9: The property/model release term indicates strongly that this is not really a photo competition, but a competition for photos specifically to be used for commercial marketing purposes.
Oh, and my Burmese friend can't participate. Not that she cares, but she does like to take photos. Can she be in the photo, I wonder...
Why don't you like people from Burma, dpr? Haven't they been through enough problems already? How is it OK that you discriminate upon them as well?
"So US foreign policies decide who can participate in a dpreview contest."
Of course! But it's not "just" foreign policy, it's the law. Just like the laws in whatever country you are in apply to you as well. Until Amazon or DPR makes the laws, any blame needs to be directed elsewhere, to the policymakers.
Transferring funds (of this amount) to the mentioned countries is illegal. Now it can be argued whether it should be legal or not, but I don't think this is the place to discuss that.
nosnoop: Richard Butler:
Could it be that the reason that you did not fall in love with RX100 is because you have no need for a *pocketable* camera in the first place?
I don't think enough credits has been given to RX100 as a break-through camera, and a very impressive technological piece. If you want a pocketable camera, then very few other cameras can touch the RX100.
But if you don't see the need for a pocketable camera, then obviously, there are a lot more choices out there; and little reason to like this camera.
Or maybe you should rename the Gold award to "I Love it" reward, and Silver reward to "I like it but I don't love it" reward; then there would be much less arguments.... :)
Nope, Sony's first gen enthusiast compact was the venerable (but awesome) Sony V3. I should know, I owned two! (one was stolen, and even well after it was discontinued, I liked it so much I bought a used one off eBay to replace it)
SammyToronto: It'll be interesting what dpreview will think of the Panny LX7. Both that camera and the RX100 are very close in terms of features and image quality (per reviews I've read), but the LX7 is substantially cheaper (and I prefer its size/control layout). As for low light ability; dcresource test results indicate that the RX100 is just one stop better than the LX7 (max ISO recommended in low light is ISO 800 for the former and 400 for the latter. In good light it's ISO 3200 and 1600, respectively). This is not a huge difference and is more than made up for by the much faster LX7 lens. I'm leaning towards the LX7, but I'm waiting for more reviews of those two cameras, especially on dpreview. So one is done and one to go; come on dpreview and light a fire under that LX7 review :)
I can't believe LX5 or 7 was not even mentioned in the review, as a comparable model to the Sony! Not sure there is a more direct competitor in the space?
I expected to scroll down to read 9/10 comments complaining about the fact that this upgrade is focused on the book creation module, but nary a word! I guess I am the only one disappointed that book creation was the big highlight for this version?
Peter 13: Adobe should offer a "lighter" version of LR. Many people do not want, and actually find it annoying and resource consuming to have a RAW converter with cataloging functions. I would pay a premium to free my computer of all those modules. Let us have a RAW converter/editor without even the need to "import" the files and without all those gimmicks, and offer a bloated version of LR for those who want it. Such a lean product is going the photoshop way, sad.
I expected to scroll down to read 9/10 comments complaining about the fact that this upgrade is focused on the book creation module, but nary a word! I guess I am the only one disappointed that book creation was the big highlight for this version?
Herman Roote: Nice lens for the price, I thinks it's too long for indoor portrait shooting, unless you have a large studio.
I'm only speaking for the DX users like myself, I find the 50mm 1.8 in plenty long enough.
+1, and I would even go so far as to say that my 50mm is often too long indoors. I have an older house with lots of smallish rooms, instead of the more modern style of less rooms, but bigger, and I am constantly against a wall with my 50mm. 35mm is the sweet spot indoors on DX IMO. This 85 would be great outside though! Or for small indoor gyms or events where you have a good close seat.
bigdaddave: Looks very interesting, it seems the lens has the same (or very similar) max aperture at a 105mm (S90/S95) equivalent, so it hasn't lost any actual speed there, just gained some length
But the only important question we need answering is what's the IQ like? That's all that really matters
@Redfox: The S100 is slower (albeit slightly) across its range than the already slow S95. I was saying because of this fact, I (personally) would have preferred a model that at least maintains the S95's range (and speed) over one that gives us a slightly wider and longer capability, at the expense of stops.
bigdaddave: Looks very interesting, it seems the lens has the same (or very similar) max aperture at a 105mm (S90/S95) equivalent, so it hasn't lost any actual speed there, just gained some length
But the only important question we need answering is what's the IQ like? That's all that really matters
Right, sorry...LX-5 is f/2.0-3.3. My bad.
MaikeruN: Interesting to see how the DIGIC5 performs. They made it way ugly compared to S95 though... sadface.
Ugly compared to the S95? It looks almost EXACTLY the same except for the tiny additional grip in front (which most users of previous models will most likely agree that it was needed)
What in the world, man...they look almost identical.
bigdaddave: Looks very interesting, it seems the lens has the same (or very similar) max aperture at a 105mm (S90/S95) equivalent, so it hasn't lost any actual speed there, just gained some length
But the only important question we need answering is what's the IQ like? That's all that really matters
Boooo! Personally I would rather have less range for more speed...S95 gets slow VERY quickly as is...(as opposed to say the LX5 which maintains 2.0 throughout its (small) range)
Awesome...great to see support from Panasonic this far into the product cycle. Makes me feel better about the purchase (my first Panasonic).