audiobomber

audiobomber

Lives in Canada Sudbury, ON, Canada
Joined on Jan 27, 2008

Comments

Total: 101, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review preview (633 comments in total)
In reply to:

spontaneousservices: I lusted for a Fuji, but the LX100 was one of the contenders. Alas, the fiddly manual AF-point selection was a deal-breaker for me. Also, when the lens is extended to 'operational' position it feels quite fragile.

Came home instead with a Sony a6000, in many respects a great little camera. The shutter lag bothers me though, not yet sure whether I'll be able to live with it.

There's new firmware available to speed up the a6000 start times.
http://esupport.sony.com/US/p/swu-download.pl?mdl=ILCE6000&upd_id=10073&os_group_id=5

Re Nikonguy's rant, some people love overly punch jpegs. I quite like the a6000 jpegs but I shoot raw because I can always do better. Of course anyone who's not a total newbie would know to adjust jpeg output in the menu.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 20:18 UTC
In reply to:

audiobomber: You can't tell IQ or build quality from a photo. Ricoh says this lens is intended for people who want higher IQ than a kit lens. It's safe to say it will outperform the 18-55, 18-135 and the various superzooms.

The DA 18-135mm feels like a pro lens; it is tight, no creep, no rattles or looseness anywhere. It makes a Tamron superzoom feel like junk. I expect the 16-85mm will be the same build, and hopefully IQ will match my 16-45mm. If so, I'll sell the others and get this.

Most of us who actually own the lens think the Photozone review is a hatchet job. There are plenty of more balanced reviews.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52109191
http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2011/06/lens-test-pentax-da-18-135mm-f35-56-dc-wr
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/smc-pentax-da-18-135mm-f-3-5-5-6-ed-al--if--dc-wr-lens-review-16544
http://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/da-18-135mm-f35-56-ed-al-if-dc-wr/introduction.html
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-DA-18-135mm-F3.5-5.6-ED-AL-IF-DC-WR.html

Direct link | Posted on Nov 2, 2014 at 01:28 UTC
In reply to:

abortabort: Genuine question, but why are Sony the only brand to offer constant aperture or near constant in these kinds of crop lenses? They have the 16-80mm f3.5-4.5, 16-70mm f4 and 18-105mm f4... yet everyone else seems to be f3.5-5.6 (or not offer one at all)?

No, it is a Pentax lens, not available from Tokina.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 1, 2014 at 14:36 UTC

You can't tell IQ or build quality from a photo. Ricoh says this lens is intended for people who want higher IQ than a kit lens. It's safe to say it will outperform the 18-55, 18-135 and the various superzooms.

The DA 18-135mm feels like a pro lens; it is tight, no creep, no rattles or looseness anywhere. It makes a Tamron superzoom feel like junk. I expect the 16-85mm will be the same build, and hopefully IQ will match my 16-45mm. If so, I'll sell the others and get this.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2014 at 13:20 UTC as 5th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

abortabort: Genuine question, but why are Sony the only brand to offer constant aperture or near constant in these kinds of crop lenses? They have the 16-80mm f3.5-4.5, 16-70mm f4 and 18-105mm f4... yet everyone else seems to be f3.5-5.6 (or not offer one at all)?

Pentax has a DA 17-70mm f/4.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 30, 2014 at 22:21 UTC
In reply to:

Joe Mayer: I guess it makes a great headline and it's clever referring to the mk2 as twice as good? But sadly, no, it's not. I doubt it could ever have been and really, at the price point, does anyone realistically expect it to be so? If you'd like it to be better, it existed before it's announcement. It's called the 1DX. Oh, but no one wants to pay for it. They want a 7D that does what the 1DX does for the price of an SL1. Never gonna happen (though it does a lot of what the 1DX does). So, it's a little better in some ways (iso over 800 wasn't very good at all), a lot better in others (the 7D AF could be flaky) so the mk2 is what it is. Twice as good it isn't but better it is. Another thing's for sure is that the price isn't twice of the 7D. In fact, it's debuting for less than the mk1. Not a bad deal at all.

You're looking at the manufacturer's default jpeg settings at IR. It's a useful comparison only for noobs who never shoot raw, and don't know enough to adjust jpeg settings in camera. Plus manufacturers diddle with ISO settings. The only realistic ISO comparisons are done by DXOMark.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 19:08 UTC
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (328 comments in total)
In reply to:

quezra: "But any cost benefit of buying a 70-200mm F4 rather than an equivalent zoom is lost if you have to buy a full frame camera to gain access to that capability."

... unless there's an A7 in that mix, which you completely forgot about. The 70-200/4 is $100 less than the Fuji and Samsungs, both the A7 body and the FE70-200/4 weighs less than the APS-C versions, so the total system cost is very close against their flagships (X-T1 and NX1), and overall weight is less. And is FF, so for other things is much better. But that would spoil your prose wouldn't it...

I believe the point of the article quezra, is that Sony, Canon and Nikon should offer a 50-135mm or 50-150mm f2.8, as Pentax, Fuji and Samsung have done for their APS--C bodies.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 12:19 UTC
In reply to:

Rooru S: Excellent range. Hopefully it will perform great. Now I'm questioning myself why buy again E-mount APS-C cameras...

ISO doesn't matter, DOF, shutter speed and noise matter. Just bump up the ISO with a larger sensor, noise will balance out.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 04:05 UTC
In reply to:

Rooru S: Excellent range. Hopefully it will perform great. Now I'm questioning myself why buy again E-mount APS-C cameras...

> But it's F4

Yes, f/4 on FF, f/6 equivalent on APS-C. The Oly is f/5.6 equivalent. No significant difference.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 16:46 UTC
In reply to:

qwertyasdf: This might be the first and last time that I say this to a M43 lens:

It's priced reasonably.
Given it's longer range than 70-200 FF lens, it is way way more versatile, and I have confidence in the IQ of a Oly HG lens. Oh....also, the 0.21x magnification, taking into account of the crop factor of M43 sensor, is class-leading.

@bobjob

Pentax Q lenses are significantly smaller and more pixel dense than m4/3 if that's your criteria.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 16:42 UTC
On Ricoh surfs into action camera market with WG-M1 article (106 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: By looking the products being released recently, Ricoh is fading away as a brand, as well as Pentax.

Ricoh projected a profit last year for the camera division. I don't have the link any more, but it was in the third quarter, so most likely they made it.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 14:15 UTC
In reply to:

qwertyasdf: This might be the first and last time that I say this to a M43 lens:

It's priced reasonably.
Given it's longer range than 70-200 FF lens, it is way way more versatile, and I have confidence in the IQ of a Oly HG lens. Oh....also, the 0.21x magnification, taking into account of the crop factor of M43 sensor, is class-leading.

> focal length divided by diameter of the maximum aperture is indeed 2.8

Undeniably correct. And its effective focal length divided by diameter of the maximum aperture is indeed f5.6 equivalent.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 12:13 UTC
In reply to:

Rooru S: Excellent range. Hopefully it will perform great. Now I'm questioning myself why buy again E-mount APS-C cameras...

I don't understand this complaint. The Sony 70-200mm f4 on 1.5 crop is directly comparable to the Oly 40-150mm, in cost, size and features. If you really are looking for a lens like this, don't hold back. http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=olympus_m_40-150_2p8_pro&products=sony_zeiss_fe_70_200_4_oss

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 12:07 UTC
On Ricoh surfs into action camera market with WG-M1 article (106 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: By looking the products being released recently, Ricoh is fading away as a brand, as well as Pentax.

> Their pro products are having a hard time keeping up with Nikon, Canon, Sony and Samsung.

Horse manure. The GR, K-3 and 645Z are as good or better than any of the above in their categories. On second thought, excepting the 645Z, because the others you mention don't have a MF presence.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2014 at 18:28 UTC
On Ricoh surfs into action camera market with WG-M1 article (106 comments in total)
In reply to:

AngryCorgi: Why does everything that Pentax/Ricoh puts out looks like it was made for a child? Seriously. Bright colors. Unnecessarily large in a g-shock type style. I don't get it.

> Why does everything that Pentax/Ricoh puts out looks like it was made for a child? Seriously.

Seriously? So you've never heard of a GR, K-5 II, K-5 IIs, K-3 or 645Z? Or maybe you've seen coloured versions somewhere. LOL!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 11, 2014 at 02:11 UTC
On Fujifilm announces weather-resistant XF 50-140mm F2.8 article (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

TangoMan: This lens could have been 400g easily. Yep, less than a pound. And it could be small too! If only they had used a three lens element design in a sliding cardboard tube, all the weight savings they could have made!
Alas! They decided to weight down each and every past and future Fuji X camera owner by releasing on all of them that epic optic.

Just because 10mp was the norm when a lens was designed doesn't mean it can't stand up to 24mp. That's just FUD. EPhotoZine tested the DA*50-135 on a K-5 IIs, 16mp, no blur filter and said "This lens has been around a while now, but it still manages to hold its own well against the very latest lenses available from other manufacturers."

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 17:02 UTC
On Fujifilm announces weather-resistant XF 50-140mm F2.8 article (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

TangoMan: This lens could have been 400g easily. Yep, less than a pound. And it could be small too! If only they had used a three lens element design in a sliding cardboard tube, all the weight savings they could have made!
Alas! They decided to weight down each and every past and future Fuji X camera owner by releasing on all of them that epic optic.

The Pentax is rated at 3.5 stars, half a star higher than the Tokina at Photozone, likely due to Pentax SMC coatings. Yes, it has some CA, easily corrected in camera or in post. Ask users what they think of the DA*50-135mm. This Fuji lens will maintain its idealized perfection until it is tested and found to have flaws, just like every other lens.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 14:29 UTC
On Fujifilm announces weather-resistant XF 50-140mm F2.8 article (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

iudex: From the dawn of mirrorless cameras we have been told their advantage over big heavy DSLRs is the smaller size and weight: smaller bodies that do not need mirror and mirror box and smaller lenses that have smaller flange distance. So let´s take two examples:
Fujinon 50-140/2,8: 995 g, 72mm filter thread
Pentax DA 50-135/2,8: same speed, similar FL, but 685 g and 67mm filter thread (just adding that it is a DA* lens, i.e. Pentax´s top and optically perfect, plus iit´s weather sealed).
So where is now the advantage of CSC/CSC lenses?
The point is: if CSC manufacturers want to build a fast lens, especially zoom with longer FL, the laws of physics are the same as for DSLR lenses and mirrorless lenses will be the same size and weight as DSLR lenses. The only difference is that the combo CSC + telezoom will handle worse than DSLR (with big comfortable grip) + telezoom. ;-)
P.S. I like Fuji lenses and I could imagine having some (e.g. 56mm/1,2). But on a DSLR. ;-)

> "So if I ever switched to mirrorless, it would be something like Oly E-M10"

Make sure you handle one first. I cannot tolerate a camera with no grip. The EM10 was uncomfortable to hold and the buttons were annoyingly tiny. I bought a Sony a6000, better AF, better sensor, better controls, superior ergonomics. But I'm keeping my K-3, that's for sure.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 14:20 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-S1 article (332 comments in total)
In reply to:

drummercam: Comparing the Pentax K-S1 to the Pentax K-50 is definitely a good way to avoid having to compare it to Canon's 2014 entry-level DSLR, the EOS 1200D (Rebel T5). I don't think the pentamirror, mono-microphone, 3fps, 0.8mag viewfinder, 460K-dot LCD EOS 1200D compares favorably at all, and the price difference is buying solid features, including build, no doubt.

And since "looks" get most of the troll action here, that black blob of a Canon lacks all distinction. Also obvious just by looking -- since looking is all that the complainers about the K-S1 have done as of yet -- is that if Pentax intended to present a less intimidating user interface, comparing K-S1 to the EOS 1200D wins the point easily.

DPR also again shows some anti-Pentax bias by listing (according to the "side-by-side" feature) the EOS as a "Compact SLR" and the Pentax as a "Mid-size SLR." The Canon is apparently 130 x 100 x 78mm, while the Pentax is 121 x 93 x 70mm. I guess compact is bigger than mid-size now?

Sony a3000 and a5000 both use a 20mp sensor.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2014 at 17:20 UTC
On Consumer SLR Camera Roundup (2014) article (41 comments in total)

As a Pentax shooter, it is hard not to be cynical about these roundups.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2014 at 04:40 UTC as 7th comment
Total: 101, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »