Archiver

Archiver

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Feb 24, 2005

Comments

Total: 172, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Wow that looks like a stunner. However, I can't help but think that a Panasonic GH4 in capable hands with the right lenses could probably come close to matching it.

$28,000 to spend on lenses goes a really long way towards making the playing field even for the GH4.

@Francis Carver - for the folks who don't know you are speaking sarcastically:

"So, you definitely do not want to waste your money on it by buying it. And it is probably too pricey to rent as well. So, where will that leave most folks, I wonder?"

'Most folks' have no reason to look at this. This is a PROFESSIONAL CINEMA CAMERA, not a Sony handycam that shoots kids parties, and Team Doofus in the peanut gallery isn't understanding this. Rental price, when supply levels out, is likely to be in Red Epic territory, well in the budget of a production that would even contemplate using it.

The Alexa Mini delivers the same image quality as the full fledged $60,000 Alexa, at just over half the price, and much less than half the size and weight. This can be very, very useful to the people who want and need such a thing.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 23:39 UTC
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Wow that looks like a stunner. However, I can't help but think that a Panasonic GH4 in capable hands with the right lenses could probably come close to matching it.

$28,000 to spend on lenses goes a really long way towards making the playing field even for the GH4.

"$28,000 to spend on lenses goes a really long way towards making the playing field even for the GH4."

Given that the usual lenses attached to an Alexa are in the realm of $30k each, this is really an apples and oranges statement. Not to mention that if you have the budget to shoot with an Alexa rig and all that it entails, you won't be using a GH4 as a primary camera, nor would you be buying the gear, anyway. A rental house would supply the gear.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 08:05 UTC
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Wow that looks like a stunner. However, I can't help but think that a Panasonic GH4 in capable hands with the right lenses could probably come close to matching it.

$28,000 to spend on lenses goes a really long way towards making the playing field even for the GH4.

The GH4 is lucky to crack 11 stops of dynamic range, particularly in highlights. The Alexa mini will have 14 stops, which is a vast, vast jump. And even if you hook the GH4 to a Atomos Shogun and record in ProRes, the Alexa Mini still records in a raw format. Arri colour science is still way ahead of almost every other cinema camera out there, and their ProRes footage is still very robust when graded. GH4 footage has quirky colour science and many colourists say that it takes a lot of work to get 'right'. Then there's the Super-35 size sensor vs m43 issues.

Don't get me wrong. I love the GH3 and GH4 for the image quality and usefulness in a very small and inexpensive package. But comparing the GH4 to a dedicated $30k professional cinema camera is like comparing a Subaru with a Porsche. The Alexa is THE industry standard for high end cinema, and just about every big budget movie you have watched lately was shot either with an Arri Alexa, a Red Epic, or Sony CineAlta. Not a GH.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 07:53 UTC
In reply to:

AshMills: Other than body size and lens size, can someone explain why a FF mirrorless should not have DSLR flange depth? That's all I want- an om4- sized full frame, silent, G mount, Nikon mirrorless.

Full frame mirrorless cameras don't have DSLR flange depth. Just see the Leica M and Sony A series. Or are you saying that a full frame mirrorless camera SHOULD have DSLR flange depth?

Putting a legacy SLR lens on a mirrorless camera with low flange depth always means a long and chunky adapter. The shorter the flange depth, the more possible legacy lenses can be adapted. The mirrorless companies are well aware of this, releasing their own legacy adapters, like Panasonic creating Leica M lens adapters.

A Nikon G mount mirrorless is either going to have a flange barrel like a OM, or a chunky body, or a long adapter.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 01:42 UTC
In reply to:

Horshack: They priced the 24mm lower than I expected. Sigma may be taking advantage of the current exchange rate to price the lens aggressively. Canikon is taking advantage of the current exchange rate by aggressively pocketing extra profit :)

No one can fault Canon and Nikon for making hay while the sun shines. :)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 01:05 UTC
On Sigma goes wide with 24mm F1.4 DG HSM Art lens article (184 comments in total)
In reply to:

dwill23: SWEET! ANOTHER AWESOME LENS THAT CAN'T FOCUS!

Unless you have live-view focusing, these lenses are junk, for shooters like me who don't want to fuss with manual focus. Sure it's higher priced and blah blah blah so more pros would buy it and not whine about manual focusing, but also, if pros can't get the thing to focus, even with maxing out the focus adjustments with the USB dock AND CAMERA since it's so far off, then these lenses are really junk.

I've own the 35mm f1.4 and it was awesome, in hard-to-hold live-view focusing.
Then I made the mistake of buying the zoom for my non full frame camera (canon 70d) and what a mistake! Zoomed backward to canon lenses, horrible AF performance, etc. Zoom so slow you can't whip it zoom around for special effects. Terrible.

At least this one doesn't zoom (backward). Can't Sigma spend a tad more on the canon mount, of which they sell 3x more than the nikon mounts?
(According to the amount of reviews at such places at BHPhoto).

It's times like this that a Dislike button would come in handy. What on earth is the OP talking about???

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 02:59 UTC
On Sigma dp0 Quattro announced with 14mm F4 lens article (138 comments in total)

I wish Sigma had introduced a model like this in the Merrill days. The new Quattro doesn't feel right in my hands at all, but I'd love to shoot a 21/4 lens matched to the Foveon sensor. Very cool idea, though. Very cool.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 01:37 UTC as 5th comment
In reply to:

Peiasdf: OMG OMG, the 15 years wait is almost over. I went from film compact to digital compact to DSLR to EVIL/mirrorless to X-Trans to large sensor compact all within this 15 years.

I know that K-mount was for 35mm. My point is that if they stick with K-mount then there are a range of native lenses that will work, rather than developing a new mount and new lens system.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 07:56 UTC

FINALLY it looks like Olympus is starting to get serious about video features. Time will tell if the quality is good enough to match with the Panasonic GH3. If it does, it would make a great b-cam, or perhaps even an a-cam for handheld work. Fingers crossed, Olympus!!!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 07:33 UTC as 44th comment
In reply to:

Peiasdf: OMG OMG, the 15 years wait is almost over. I went from film compact to digital compact to DSLR to EVIL/mirrorless to X-Trans to large sensor compact all within this 15 years.

You may have longer to wait. Who knows what kind of full frame native lens system they have in mind. If it uses K-mount lenses, it would be rather good, admittedly. I have a wonderful little Pentax ME and a few lenses that would be great to use on full frame digital.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 06:45 UTC
On Fujifilm releases XQ2 premium compact article (60 comments in total)

Is the cost of releasing such a minimal upgrade financially balanced by the need to seem current? I guess it might not cost much more to produce essentially the same camera with tiny cosmetic tweaks and firmware upgrade, but then there's the marketing push that comes with it.

It's understandable that not every new release can be a big jump from the last, but if the changes are so small, is it really worth it to the company?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2015 at 02:09 UTC as 9th comment
On A second glance: two takes on the Leica X article (397 comments in total)
In reply to:

caspia: I am "old school", being 71.
I owned many cameras (Exakta Varex to a Nikon F4S) and took thousands of photographs.
Photography has changed enormously over the last fifteen years. I bought a Leica Digilux 2 (part exchanging the Nikon 4 S + lenses. Wow! Five Megapixels!
It took remarkable photos despite the mongers who claimed that digital would never beat film quality...
The nub, is that with a slow camera and an even slower person handling it, one can still take great photos. Today, speed appears to be of the essence. Photos taken at arm´s length over a crowd....catching movement.... etc.
What´s the hurry? Cartier-Bresson´s photos are masterpieces of timing but in the artistic sense. Granted we are not geniuses like he was, but so what?
If you want to just take photos, use your mobile. If you want to record photos for posterity, buy a decent camera. If you want to savour the pleasure of taking photographs, buy a Leica. I envy all that can afford one but relish in their enjoyment.

"If you want to savour the pleasure of taking photographs, buy a Leica."

^^^^^^

This.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2014 at 05:29 UTC
In reply to:

Gesture: Kardashian family just made a bulk order!

They would need a bulk order to be able to fit in the size of their egos and rear ends.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 5, 2014 at 09:12 UTC

From a gear perspective, I understand how he would have used his 5D Mark II's, as he is a stills photographer first.

But for someone wanting a DSLR style package for video, a couple of Panasonic GH3s, the Panasonic 12-35 and 35-100, and either a Voigtlander Nokton or the Panasonic Nocticron, would give far better image quality and usability, at about half the price, and one third the weight and size.

You wouldn't even need the Z-Finder under most circumstances. I used to use a loupe with the 5D Mark II, but its completely unnecessary with the EVF of the GH3 and the swivel LCD.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 2, 2014 at 22:01 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

Ben O Connor: ─░ts like rolex watch. Surely there are multi functional army watches by far better priced from Casio
Or there are thousand other car brands. No need the drive Rolls-Royce ...

IT - IS - A -UNIQUE - LUXURY- ITEM !!!

I also don't see ANY logic to buy something exact same than Panasonic models. But this one is UNIQUE !

@Ben O Connor - you do realize that the Leica X 113 is a completely Leica-designed camera, and not a rebadge of an existing Panasonic? Perhaps you are thinking of the D Lux 109, which is a rebadge of the Panasonic LX100.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 1, 2014 at 01:08 UTC
In reply to:

MattiKJ: It is kind of sad, these special Hasselblad cameras include the most ergonomic grips available from any manufacturer. The rest of the hardware just doesn't add anything to the value.

You mean... you actually handled one??? How could you? I hope you washed your hands afterwards!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 02:49 UTC
In reply to:

Pritzl: Like a bad movie, the reruns keep coming...

No, this is worse. It's like Van Damme's classic Kickboxer, followed by Kickboxer II, III, IV and V, with increasingly dodgy acting and direction. But unlike the b-grade awesomeness of the Kickboxer series, Hasselblad's compacts pretend to be of far higher quality than they actually are. At least the Kickboxer movies knew what they were.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 02:47 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review preview (894 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photard: I'd like to know the image quality compared to the Fuji x1oot.

That is top of my wishlist right now. How does the LX100 compare as far as stills and overall image quality?

thanks.

A way to compare might be to check Fuji X100S images against images from the Panasonic GX7 or GM1. Those are the nearest equivalents. I'd expect the X100S/T to have better image quality.

Something to consider, though, is how much image quality you consider to be desirable and acceptable. I'm often surprised at how much I like the images from my GM1 and tiny Olympus primes, even though I have an original X100, a Leica M9, and many other cameras.

Another thing to consider is how you'll deal with your images. Do you want in-camera jpegs and no postprocessing? Do you want to process raws? Fuji X-Trans raws can still be tricky to process in Lightroom and Photoshop. The alternatives are things like Photo Ninja and Raw Therapee, which don't have the same functionality as LR.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 09:29 UTC

Some years ago, there was a photo of a Sony sensor with a large 'cage' around it, ostensibly to show the size of the stabilization system in relation to the working sensor. It illustrated how big the entire set of components was, and served to affirm why their DSLR bodies were not smaller.

How times have changed! In-body five axis stabilization for a full frame mirrorless camera that is positively (relatively) tiny.

This suggests that a RX2 may be on its way. And that the new grip and control layout will be in the S and R variants in the future. Exciting times ahead!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 09:14 UTC as 267th comment
In reply to:

MayaTlab0: Do we have any technical information explaining why, with FE OSS lenses, the lens will take care of pitch and yaw instead of the sensor ? Is it related to the range of correction possible in lens vs. in body or to the sensor heating up, for example ?
Because, to me, although I can only congratulate Sony for adding IBIS on a FF mirrorless camera (and continue to despise their designers for not realising that their auto ISO implementation is subpar), it seems that it's again an example of Sony's "every six months, I want to do something new". Indeed, what's the point of developing stabilised lenses (which might possibly be a little more expensive, heavier, and harder to manufacture to a certain tolerance), if they already knew that they were going to release a stabilised body ? As far as I understand, but I may be mistaken, stabilised lenses still have an advantage in terms of correction range for certain axes, but that's mostly at the telephoto end, not the wide end.

Perhaps the in-body stabilization will not be extended to the A7S upgrade, or a significant number of other models, for whatever technical reason. It would justify having optically stabilized lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 09:09 UTC
Total: 172, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »