lem12: This is not a wash, this is an enormous waste of water! This shows how far the camera equipment outruns other current technologies. We should invest our money in to something more important!
I am not even sure if he used the machine in it's complete form: All the machines i ever saw had a big revolving arm to spread the water efficiently!In any case, the major problem is the wast of OUR time and since you want to be ecological (which I AGREE 100%!!!) the amount of electricity WASTED a few thousands of times on every single time someone sees this!
What a royal CRAP!!!To think i come to dpreview thinking about learning something about a camera (like for instance... let's say... Oh! a REVIEW!) or at least some (INTERESTING!) article about photography! and i almost lost 4minutes of my life watching this...I cannot help but feel a bit sorry for whoever thought that «the resulting video is surprisingly entertaining»?!?!Man, maybe you need to start thinking about better uses of your time, but FOR SURE YOU CAN start right now thinking better about better things to show on dpreview, last time i checked, it was (still) not just one more personal blog in the vast Internet!!
petemod: Nikon lost me after the D600 debacle. First denying the problem and then releasing then D610 to cover it up. D600 owners that were selling their cameras were forced to eat the steep depreciation in value. Then after selling their cameras they find out that Nikon would have indeed fixed their cameras or even replaced them with a D610.
That equates to 2 slaps in the face, followed by a kick to the nuts.
perfect and poetic!
Before this news will turn into a never.ending open discussion about sensor size Vs DOF Vs even simple "mine is bigger or better than urs" let me just say it rigth from the start:Why do people in the net think it is all about making things out-of-focus?!?Do they realise that eventualy one day they will want to have something actually represented in the picture?
Can't stand anymore the SILLY obssesion with the friging size of the sensor and the suposed bokeh!You REALLY REALLY want extremely small DOF? Get the pentax 6x7 and the 105 f2.4!For those who will excuse themselves that they want digital: Get any FF camera and SIGMA 200-500f2.8!!!HAPPY?!? NOW, PLEASE WITH SUGAR ON TOP: LET IT GO!!!!
goshigoo: Can anyone tell me the reason for getting these lenses?Is 40-80 mm f/4.0-5.6 @ 645 equivalent to 25-50mm f/2.8-4 @ 135 FF ?
Why don't you just get a Canon 5D III + 24-70 f/2.8L??
Why do people in the net think it is all about making things out-of-focus?!?Do they realise that eventualy one day they will want to have something actually represented in the picture?
Can't stand anymore the stupid obssesion with the friging size of the sensor and the suposed bokeh!You want extremely small DOF? Get the pentax 6x7 and the 105 f2.4!For those who will excuse themselves that they want digital: Get any FF camera and SIGMA 200-500f2.8!!!HAPPY?!? NOW LET IT GO PLEASE!
Mirrorless Crusader: This is not image theft, you are transforming an image with a watermark into an image without a watermark.
Jnd: i am truly glad you made the last post! Because i simply cannot agree with the one before: if people cannot have some benefit from what they invent &or create, in the long run it will be EXTREMELY bad for the WHOLE WORLD IN GENERAL(I MEAN IT AS A PLANET!) Just look at what happened in countries with strict Communist policies(yes, i know it is NOT the same principle!)
Nacho M Castejn: No matter how loud they shout copyright infringement, photographers at graduations and similar events are just ripping off people. If the university don't want hundreds of people taking photos, OK, pay a professional a reasonable fee for the days work, and release the photos freely. If you want to abuse a monopoly and charge me for a photo you devoted exactly 3 seconds to as if it were the work of Ansel Adams, you're not getting my sympathy.
I think it makes a great disservice to the real-photographers community to treat these people as artists. If they have any business is just because grads have no other option.
Suave: The person in charge is the faculty! NOT the photographer! So instead of robing HIM, contact YOUR univercity to change that!!!
kimvette: He deleted the blog entry but you can find it cached.
NICE to see the net turning on HIM!!! :DExcuse my ignorance but i am just an digital Immigrant so i do not know much about these technologies: how did u find that so called cached?
vFunct: If you're a photographer, and rely on watermarks to protect your business, then you have a terrible business model and you shouldn't be in the photography business.
Real photographers don't use watermarks, and protect their works via the usual legal rights.
A real photographer would get the event organizer to pay for the usage rights for all the images of the event, instead of having to chase the pennies of each individual attendee.
vfunct: feel free to explain in an article here how you have a wonderful and successful model of selling photos!!! Or maybe you can even make an online course and make some Money of it! OH WAIT! then those same guys would just make copies of it!!!
jnd: so u agree with china making copies of Occidental cars and calling them xptoyzdte-350-efo? (not to speak of everything else!). I guess when the company you are working will go bankrupt because the investments it made to produce something new backfired when everyone else in cheaper-labour countries start producing the same! Maybe the you will understand? Or only when you cannot pay the rent? -_-
mrc4nl: there id no substitute creating high ref pictures from low res files. t hink thats the best way of stopping commercial use of your picture
if a picture needs to be sold, i would not post the full size version but a 800 times x00 version.
I am not calling them artists, nor ANYONE else for that matter! you seem to be deliberately avoiding the truth: Someone ELSE did the fotos that YOU crave, it is reasonable that you pay for it! If u buy a cake in the beach, u also pay for it! Also, i am pretty sure if you want "what is urs" you can very well take the iphone someone payed for you and make them YOURSELF!!! :)
huyzer: Awesome technology!
I could not agree more with you Huyzer!!! :DHopefully in a far far distant but nice future the trolls will go to their greener pastures if there will be enough of us TRULY interested in facts and not EGOS or "my brand is better then urs»! ;)
Ralf B: This lens definitely needs controlled backgrounds for its bokeh characterhttps://s3.amazonaws.com/masters.galleries.dpreview.com/2897503.jpg?X-Amz-Expires=3600&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAJ7ICBHXPIPPMTNCQ/20140529/us-east-1/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20140529T115209Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=a835a6936ab75fd16bb32e0232442f2daeee86d8a132a904c164540ac3e80dc5The Sony FE 55/1.8 appears as having much smoother bokeh. I prefer the CZ 135/1.8 for my Sony Alpha A mount FF for its combination of sharpness matching this lens a n d silky smooth bokeh. It appears as much more forgiving if you cannot avoid a busy fore/background.http://kurtmunger.com/sony_135mm_f_1_8_carl_zeissid266.html
The Zeiss 135mm looks like maybe the best 135f1.8 untill now, but we are talking about 50mm here, otherwise, you could also speak about the canon 135L or even better: the 200mm f2.0L!!! And that one most likely completely puts the Zeiss to chame in Bokeh!!! ;D
Reilly Diefenbach: I guess I just don't get the point of an expensive, heavy, bulky 1.4 lens if the bokeh is as hideous as what I'm seeing on these DPR sample shots. The chap with the bridge behind him is a truly ugly, discombobulated looking shot, to single out one.
Yes indeed Badi! Zeiss even mentioned already LOOOONG time ago that one of it's 50mm was NOT as Sharp wide open PRECISELY to get a better rendering of the out of focus áreas!It is information available on the net for those who prefer to find it instead of looking for some bad photos! But i have already understood what is the reality of 60% of all the coments in here :/
Absolutic: so Andy you are concluding it is the best AF 50mm lens currently on the market. Are you saying it is better than Sony Zeiss 55 FE lens for E mount, that is half the weight, and the price is the same? You mention the 55FE but does not talk about it in your conclusion. I know it is comparing F/1.8 to F/1.4 which is half-stop in difference but nevertheless, which one is better? DXO said at the time that 55FE is the best AF lens they have ever tested.
Andy, my respect for you just got bigger!
EXTREMELY well said Andy Westlake! :)
Most welcome Huyzer! :)One day it will be you helping someone with FACTS and the information in Dpreview will be higher then the Disinformation that its now sometimes´:)
Michael Piziak: So a firmware update upon release of the camera? Doesn't sound too assuring.
haha! Thank you! :D
cmantx: Congratulations. Well deserved.It is one of the few times I have voted a 5. I would like to know how it worked out.
Like a true Gentleman!!! :)