Frank_BR: The Kowa 8.5mm F2.8 is an ultra-wide angle lens with a distortion of only 0.12%. Remarkable!
However, many m43 cameras, Panasonic in particular, use distortion correction by software, so that quality of the Kowa 8.5mm is not very relevant in practice.
These seem aimed at the Blackmagic, or GHn video users, does distortion correction apply to video?
Ron A 19: This is the perfect lens for image generation. Still, even if I could afford it, I don't see myself walking around town with a massive 50 hanging off the camera. But the makro planar 50 compares quite well at f/2, so, if anything, makes that lens more desireable
Based on DXO's measurement the Otus is as sharp at f/1.4 in the corners as the 50 MP is at the center of the frame!
mr_landscape: Good. But where is focus peaking?
An outline of high contrast borders that indicates what's in focus (on an electronic finder/live view)
rrccad: I'm wondering if this misses the mark really.
While superior performance is required with today's sensors (and tomorrows) it's rarely required for a full frame corner to corner wide open approach at this focal and also this aperture. most treasured lenses in this focal length were anything but treasured for their sharpness - but more for their rendering and bokah.
to placate the masses that are measurabators this certainly will do well. it will probably also be the "new standard" for sensor resolution testing,etc.
that all being said, i'll certainly look forward to the APO 35/21/24 that Zeiss may create for this line - because if the performance is matched, then the ultimate landscape lenses are certainly with this line.
I suspect the mark is closer to 80mm f/2.8 lenses.
SeeRoy: Now and again, whatever you think about Krockwell, he speaketh the truth.
"Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 ZF2 für Nikon... Normal lenses for the truly crazy.For $4,000 instead of one-tenth the price or less, you get a much heavier lens with no autofocussing. Wow! Chart shooters will love these giant lenses. Zeiss makes the lenses we use to read newspapers from space, but we don't need that much performance for creating art — but don't let me stop you!I'll bet you there's no visible differnce between these and the Nikon 55mm f/2.8, which is an extraordinary lens, and autofocuses, for about $175 used..."
It takes all kinds: Lloyd Chambers is swooning with pleasure and breaking out his charts. Just the lens you've always needed for shooting that decaying mountain cabin.
Stacey, does that mean this (and other manual focus) lenses or the focusing screen is the real problem?
zdechlypes: I cannot imagine how some can manually focus below f2 on a distance up to 2 meters on my 5dm2.... Still have one old (a bit radioactive) 50mm @1.4 manual lens, where the rate of sharp pictures was below 10%.
Most of us get a split prism/microprism for our body. The rest use live view. There's one user who claims to use neither, I have no idea how he does it.
I have a real issue with government sponsored monuments not being owned by the people from the date of commission.
Looks like it could just about work on a 1.3x crop. Might be fun to try.
Abrak: I love the way people say that it is a rubbish camera even at US$400 because it has a 230k LCD.
It wasnt as though people were complaining about the US$6k plus Leica M8 5 years ago when it had a 230k LCD.
The difference is the Leica didn't use a 230k viewfinder as the primary way of seeing the image you were taking (for their target market the LCD was likely something most buyers planned to ignore except when necessary).
kadardr: The best is to read the original post of Roger before concluding anything. The original post is not as strong in conclusions as this one. Why?
Because inflammatory headlines are clickbait.
utihomes: So,does this price reduction come about due to the 5D Mark iii now being able to shoot RAW?
I suspect it's because their S35 (35mm film but the frame goes the short way) sensor camera was only going to be priced at $3999 (so the BMCC was overpriced).
ManuelVilardeMacedo: Does anyone bother reading Amazon's reviews? Does anyone make up one's mind about buying a product or not based on those reviews?
I usually read them with the goal of reading the best and worst ones but reading them in ignorance of the rating. I'm looking for details that come up in use that wouldn't be easy to spot from the spec sheet (like the menus aren't organized well for people who try to do X).
Juck: A slow, manual focus 300mm mirror lens? That on anyone's shopping list?
They're also apochromatic, unless you really something up in the design.
Sakura Sakura: Seems to me Nikon are misjudging & overpricing the Nikon 1 system. I just don't get it, the 4/3 system just as compact, cheaper & probably better image quality. In case you think I have a downer on Nikon I have a Nikon DSLR & love it.
I got one because they're very compatible with cheap, fast ENG/16mm film lenses. Also, if the goal is 2k resolution output, moire is reduced the lower the resolution of your sensor.
nelsonal: I picked GIMP in expectation of just such a concern, so I'm just fine with this, might have to buy some Adobe stock.
What's unacceptable about UFRaw? It's worked well for me.
I picked GIMP in expectation of just such a concern, so I'm just fine with this, might have to buy some Adobe stock.
forpetessake: Hm, not sure what is this lens for. On m4/3, it's equivalent to 120mm/5.6, hard to think of a useful application. On APS-C, it's equivalent to 90mm/4.2 --good FL for portraits, but too slow for that; the existing SEL 50mm/1.8 though slightly short is much better in the other respect. Sigma for some reason releasing lenses, which add little to existing native lenses, how are they going to sell them?
135 f/5.6 is right in the sweet spot of headshots where the whole head is in focus.
Mssimo: This would work great with the metabones speed booster.
With a Super 16mm sensor, most easily adapted C mount lenses will come with their own speed booster designed for that lens. 6x or 10x f/2 zooms are fairly common on C mount many will cover a Super 16 or 1" sensor.
slerman: Sobel is only partially correct that, "The commercial value of art is scarcity." The image itself also holds value. The issue is whether the artist can/should retain some of the core value inherent in the image. I think they should.
We're going to explore these ideas and more in an exhibit--Fugitivart/Made to Fade-- at the Soho Photo Gallery in September. www.fugitivart.com
Perhaps William Eggleston would agree to display a Fugitivart print!
This is why traditionally art doesn't begin to rise in value until the artist dies.
Francis Carver: "Australian company Blackmagic Design, which already offers a movie camera with a passive Micro Four Thirds mount and is rumored to be working on a fully compliant version, also joins."
Considering that the company has no camera, compliant or non-compliant Micro 4/3 or anything else otherwise, that is good news indeed. But personally, I am waiting for a decent M4/3rd SDI capture car from them.
Francis seems to be one either a die hard fan of something else, or really upset that the BMCC didn't ship as promised back at announcement.