iudex

iudex

Lives in Slovak Republic Slovak Republic
Joined on Dec 16, 2011

Comments

Total: 849, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

It looks really a nice all-round camera, maybe really one of the best for hiking. However I don´t think it is considerably smaller than a (APSC) DSLR with some zoom. Of course there is no 16-400mm lens for APSC DSLR (Tamron 16-300 is the closest), however I think a crop from APSC sensor might look similar to this 1" full picture, especially concidering the quality downgrade of long distance shots (haze, atmospheric influences). For me personally my 16-85mm lens does 90% of the shots (and it really did on my trip to Iceland last week, the only time I used longer lens was during whale watching).
P.S. Good looking "hiking partner". ;-)

Link | Posted on May 11, 2016 at 08:32 UTC as 52nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

grcolts: I don't want it as it does not come in my camera mount. :)

@dansclic: congratulations, you have just made a fool of yourself publicly. Next time study a bit before you write. ;-)

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 06:19 UTC
In reply to:

grcolts: I don't want it as it does not come in my camera mount. :)

For us Pentaxians it is pointless anyway, since Pentax has fantastic DFA 100mm f2,8 Macro lens for less money (so the whole point of buying third-party alternative is gone).

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 14:03 UTC

Back in times when I thought I needed every gear I bought square filters. I had hard as well as soft ND grad. But on one phototrip to Athens I realized it is highly unpractical. You have to be very cautious, the filters are fragile, they protrude a lot, collect every fingerprint and dust, framing with a hard ND grad is complicated, you mess the horizin alignment and the photo is rubbish. Since that time they rest in my photo shelf.

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2016 at 06:38 UTC as 14th comment
On article Huawei launches P9 and P9 Plus with Leica dual-camera (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

Serious Sam: So Leica works together with Huawei to create a fake Leica picture feel. Now that's low......

Interesting phone but Huawei still don't get it . Do what your do best. Anyone spend that much money on a China brand electronic device is crazy.

You guys sell your used phones? And anybody buys them? In my opinion smartphones has some 2-3 years life span, both material- and technology-wise. If I don´t break it in the meantime, I just dump it after that time.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2016 at 11:29 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony RX10 III (308 comments in total)
In reply to:

iudex: Good upgrade. I praise the lens improvement, the difference between 200mm end and 600mm is huge. F4 at long end is still respectable, making Canon G3x obsolete (which it was anyway due to lack of EVF) and Nikon DL24-500 uninteresting shortly after launch; also increasing the wide-end luminosity is nice (although 0,5EV is not much, it still counts). If only the price was more reasonable (but I guess it cannot stay there for long and I see a street price around 1000 USD very soon).
Anyhow a nice camera and if I was in the market of premium ultrazooms this one would be my choice.

Yeah, you are right, RX10 Mk II is still a lot above 1000 USD so maybe I was too optimistic about Mk III price falling down soon.
But as regards the "cheap" G3X (it´s still 900 USD at B&H) no matter how cheap it is, an ultrazoom with 600mm eq. lens without an EVF is a no-go.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 10:53 UTC
In reply to:

iudex: Respect where it´s due. Both lenses are very useful and a welcome adition to (still relatively poor) E-mount lineup. Especially the cheap fifty is nice and I guess it will end in many users´ backpack. The telezoom is not that great, especially the speed does not rapture me at all, combined with relatively high price (I know it´s a G lens, but Pentax´s premium DA* 60-250mm f4 costs 900 USD and the variable aperture 55-300/4-5,8 costs some 270 USD). But I guess it will fall down in couple of months and it´s a nice companion to pro-grade fast telezoom.
Anyhow I feel that Sony forgot somehow about E mount (APSC) lenses. I showed blatantly upon introduction of a6300, when journalists had to shoot with FE lenses since there was actually only one decent E-mount lens (16-70 f4). I think Sony APSC mirrorless deserve some decent, relatively fast, but moderately priced zooms like the 17-50/2,8 or 17-70/2,8-4.

I know, and Pentax makes 50mm f1,8 which is 89 USD at B&H. Anyhow the launch price was 219 USD, so 249 is not that different. Whether the Sony 50mm price falls down to Pentax 50mm level is questionable however.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 09:31 UTC

Respect where it´s due. Both lenses are very useful and a welcome adition to (still relatively poor) E-mount lineup. Especially the cheap fifty is nice and I guess it will end in many users´ backpack. The telezoom is not that great, especially the speed does not rapture me at all, combined with relatively high price (I know it´s a G lens, but Pentax´s premium DA* 60-250mm f4 costs 900 USD and the variable aperture 55-300/4-5,8 costs some 270 USD). But I guess it will fall down in couple of months and it´s a nice companion to pro-grade fast telezoom.
Anyhow I feel that Sony forgot somehow about E mount (APSC) lenses. I showed blatantly upon introduction of a6300, when journalists had to shoot with FE lenses since there was actually only one decent E-mount lens (16-70 f4). I think Sony APSC mirrorless deserve some decent, relatively fast, but moderately priced zooms like the 17-50/2,8 or 17-70/2,8-4.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 06:57 UTC as 18th comment | 4 replies
On article Hands-on with the Sony RX10 III (308 comments in total)

Good upgrade. I praise the lens improvement, the difference between 200mm end and 600mm is huge. F4 at long end is still respectable, making Canon G3x obsolete (which it was anyway due to lack of EVF) and Nikon DL24-500 uninteresting shortly after launch; also increasing the wide-end luminosity is nice (although 0,5EV is not much, it still counts). If only the price was more reasonable (but I guess it cannot stay there for long and I see a street price around 1000 USD very soon).
Anyhow a nice camera and if I was in the market of premium ultrazooms this one would be my choice.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 06:47 UTC as 53rd comment | 3 replies
On article Hands-on with the Sony RX10 III (308 comments in total)
In reply to:

johnsmith404: Wow, it's hard to believe that the telescoping part in pic 4 does actually fit into the body.

Exactly my thought; it looks longer than the body itself.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 06:41 UTC

I have seen only one photographer with a Leica SL. Most of the time he was showing it to the people that were with him and actually didn´t shoot. That´s how I expect most SLs will be used: more for showing off than for real work.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2016 at 07:17 UTC as 53rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

StevenE: This lens weighs more than my Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II ... but I doubt it will deliver as good an image on crop as the 70-200 does on FF.
Not seeing the point, unless it's for a pro video camera like Cx00 or Sony FS series. Just move to a FF camera .

@StevenE: "but I doubt it will deliver as good an image on crop as the 70-200 does on FF."
Comparing apples and oranges. The outcome would be mostly made by the camera and sensor. And with all respect no Canon crop camera can compete with FF, even if the best lens attached.
Look at it in a different way: you have APSC camera and want the best available lens. Then you go and buy Sigma, since Canon has nothing similar. And as regards the DoF you even get better results with APSC and f1,8 zoom (f2,7 eq. - applies for 1,5 crop, so Nikon, Pentax, Sony) than with FF + f2,8 zoom.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 08:22 UTC
In reply to:

StevenE: This lens weighs more than my Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II ... but I doubt it will deliver as good an image on crop as the 70-200 does on FF.
Not seeing the point, unless it's for a pro video camera like Cx00 or Sony FS series. Just move to a FF camera .

Biological Vievfinder: ad "It's also 3rd party, which means it will never be on my cameras." Very narrow and limiting attitude.
"but I've never seen an off-brand zoom lens that delivers better quality than the real deal." How can you tell when your previous sentence is true? ;-)

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 08:17 UTC
In reply to:

ozturert: So I guess this is the CA version, will there be a version which eliminates CA? I can see CA at f5.6 even in resized photos!!!

I wouldn´t judge the lens based on this pics. Actually the weather and light is the worst scenario for CA and image quality generally. Let´s wait for some usual sample gallery made in different environments and light conditions.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 08:13 UTC
In reply to:

Hugo808: Puny focal range, too heavy and no IS! It's hardly a winner from my perspective but the speed will have people running for it in droves.

As the differences in reach is so feeble surely we'd all be much better off with a 75mm?

I wonder what is the problem with focal range. Of course 2x zoom is not universal, but a typical telezoom is 2,8x (70-200mm) which is not that different and I have never heard that 70-200 is "puny focal range" and you are better off with 135mm prime.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 08:10 UTC
In reply to:

halfwaythere: Lack of stabilization is still baffling.

For C and N users at least. For Pentax owners with IBIS it would be a perfect match... if only Sigma made it for K-mount. :-(

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 08:06 UTC
In reply to:

fatdeeman: Strange that they call it contemporary when the F/2.8 E mount lenses (while excellent) are clearly of a lower spec but badged as Art lenses.

Good point with the weather sealing. I wonder why e.g. the 18-35mm is not weather-sealed, since it zooms and focuses internally, so there is not much to seal. For example Pentax can make weather sealed zooms that extend quite a lot when zooming (which is much more complicated to seal). And I believe it is even less complicated to weather-seal a prime (with less moving parts).

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2016 at 13:02 UTC
In reply to:

fatdeeman: Strange that they call it contemporary when the F/2.8 E mount lenses (while excellent) are clearly of a lower spec but badged as Art lenses.

Yes, from the pics it is obvious why Sigma didn´t give it the Art badge. However it surprises me that barrel distortion affects also standard focal length; I thought it was typical for wideangle lenses like 18mm and wider. As far as I remember the cheap 35mm prime I had (Pentax 35mm/2,4) made lines as straight as a ruler.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2016 at 07:59 UTC
In reply to:

johnsmith404: Looks like a very nice general purpose lens, albeit one can say the same about the 30 2.8 that I already own. And probably the f2.8 is better for landscapes because it distorts less. For me personally, this lens is hard to justify.

I'm still hoping for an Art series standard zoom lens for APS-C but I guess that won't happen because such a lens would be awkward to use on m43.

Good point, I forgot the 24-105. And also this mirrorless prime shows taht fast aperture does not necessarily mean Art lens. So I hope a successor to the 17-50/2,8 will be an Art series lens (although a 16-50 would be even better).

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2016 at 07:56 UTC
Total: 849, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »