Another anlge: Another angle at the aperture. Non-professional. (Part 2 of 2)
What aperture shows, actually, is how much of incoming light (illuminance, light “quantity” per unit of area) is passed to the sensor. Same aperture in different systems (with similar properties of lenses – refraction, transparency etc.) will provide roughly the same illuminance. And now is the sensor, its physical properties, which is important.
How about if you set your nick straight to start with?
J A C S: Lenses?
@ JDThomas: Cheap weird Russian and European lenses, you say? There's a lot of bias in your diction. When I was a kid, the only good quality, affordable cameras around were either made in the USSR or East Germany, like the M42 lens mount Prakticas and Zenits. Yet I would often look into the shopping window to check out the then modern Japanese AF point-and-shoot cameras, far beyond what I could ever afford, and I was thinking: How exotic, how lofty... But weird? Just because you don't know it doesn't mean it's weird.
Now how about a sequel called something like "Ten Things They Don't Want You To Know About The Sony Alpha 7 II"?
Looks like the Chinese copied the design of Leica Summarit 50. Even the font, though not exactly the same, bears conspicuous resemblance to the original. As I've just checked, this Chinese company has their Chinese language website under construction(!) I wonder if anyone has US$360 to spend on a lens like this with dubious origin and optical quality.
Superka: Epson V750 true optical resolution on film is 2300dpi. Too poor for film scanning. I doubt v850 will be better. It is not a film scanner.Used Nikon Coolscan, Imacon, Minolta, Plustek - that are film scanners.6400dpi on Epson is a bad joke.Can you compare it to Imacon 6300dpi? Here is what Imacon can at 6300 (24x65mm Xpan frame)
Neither Epson user have ever saw this resolution on 135 film.
The image "..." cannot be displayed because it contains errors.
Boss of Sony: I'd prefer an article explaining the point of photography. So far, I can't see a point. It's just people playing with high-tech toys that do nothing useful. The world is here for me to see in all its glory. I don't want reduce the time I can spend enjoying the real world just to produce and view small, 2-D representations of it on a computer screen or a piece of paper.
The very meaning of photography? I wonder what you are doing at a digital photography review site in the first place. You can't expect knowledge to be ready-made, well-cooked and served right in front of you. Well, anyway - some do it for work, some for art, but most of those who visit this site are enthusiasts who take photos for fun and esthetic pleasure, to document their travels and life moments. I, for example, am preparing my first photography exhibition in my hometown in January to share a part of my life with the community.
rondom: This camera is excellent looking until you start shooting with it, and then it looks like a dog with an erection. The built in cap makes it even worse.One other point: I don't think anyone would be jumping up and down if they saw the lens performance before the built in digital lens correction kicks in.(Having said that I can understand the enthusiasm over this)
Just a footnote: dog with an erection = hot dog. Americans surely have a gift of observation!
Still no time-lapse recording? Sony, you're not listening!
Some time ago I bought a Pix-Star frame for my mom with the same idea in mind - help her keep in touch with her sons and daughters spread around the world via photo sharing. Except for resolution it seems to me a better product than this Famatic, esp. with much better remote control via the internet: https://www.pix-star.com/products/
Donnie G: 2015 will be the "death" year for at least one of the current crop of camera manufacturers. Who will be the one to quit the camera business? Hint! It won't be any of the DSLR makers. Heh Heh Heh
"The fact that... will have to... in the not too distant future has been known..." Just FYI, before something has really happened it's not a fact but a mere conjecture or an educated guess if you please.
I voted with my wallet. Sony RX100 II. That says is it all.
DVT80111: F4F4F4what's the excitement?
... unless you meant Nikon F4, a camera that makes me excited even today, 25 years after it first saw the light of the day :P
Well, it surely did take a while! Now I can start thinking seriously about my next camera body as ultra-wide is my favorite angle.
Joseph Petzval (1807 - 1891) a mathematician, inventor, and physicist best known for his work in optics. Born in the town of Spišská Belá in Slovakia (the then Zipser Bela in the Kingdom of Hungary). The Petzval lens was developed in 1840 and became an ideal lens for portrait photography. It is highly intriguing that this simple concept of two doublet lenses with an aperture stop in between would get revived some 170 years later. I can't stop laughing at the audacity of the project managers!
This is just so funny :))) I loved your comments as much as the photo processing itself. God bless humor and creativity!
GeraldW: I dearly loved my FE2 from the film era. And I built a maple and aluminum front grip for it to have something to hand onto. Later, I got an N80 to get AF and a number of other modern features. Much as I wax nostalgic about the FE2, I did better with the N80.
OK, keeping that in perspective, the DF has gone too far back, and the result is a sort of confusion as to what it is. A photographic Chimera.
I've picked up a used F80s recently - not an easy task since these bodies developed a nasty habit to get sticky over the time - but I find it a little too plasticky for serious use. So unless it's an all-day outing, I will rather grab my F4s since it feels so solid.
Denis of Whidbey Island: Well, I own a D800 and am contemplating adding a second body. I just don't see why I would choose the Df over another D800 or D800E. And I'm probably the target audience, having owned the F, F2, F3, F5 when they were new.
I wonder why you skipped the F4...
Leiduowen: "The A7 and A7R are the world's lightest full-frame interchangeable lens cameras - and smaller by a considerable margin if you ignore the Leica M series." I think you meant to say "the world's lightest full-frame DIGITAL interchangeable lens cameras other than Leica M series". Nikon themselves produced a number of lighter SLR film bodies like F65, F75 or FM-10.
@ hubreid: These are no full-frame cameras either, "just" 35 mm film-frame equivalent size sensor digital cameras. Full frame technically means large format like 4x5" and larger, compared to the medium format. So strictly speaking, yes, there have been full-frames around from the very beginning of photography but now for the sake of convenience, given the change of perception and general shortness of human memory, the term has been mostly used for the 35mm equivalent.
"The A7 and A7R are the world's lightest full-frame interchangeable lens cameras - and smaller by a considerable margin if you ignore the Leica M series." I think you meant to say "the world's lightest full-frame DIGITAL interchangeable lens cameras other than Leica M series". Nikon themselves produced a number of lighter SLR film bodies like F65, F75 or FM-10.
I always wear a condom in a secret little pocket of my bag. Just in case...