Togglebolt: 7 blades, sharpened properly can produce a sharp image but the difficulty in disassembling this lens and then to remove the aperture blades to sharpen would be a deal breaker for me. Never mind trying to put them all back together!! Of course if they come pre-sharpened like Nikon's aperture blades, then you can get at least 5K shots before needing sharpening. It's a shame these apertures get dull so easy. I have a closet full of disassembled lenses with dull apertures, such a shame to see all that nice glass not being used. I guess thats how Canon gets everyone to buy new lenses, ship them dull, make them difficult to sharpen and people just toss them & buy a new one, just like a shaving razor!
really? blades can only be used to take 5K shots
keeponkeepingon: I got the 19mm for my A6000 and it's totally meh. After using it as a walkaround lens for a week it now mostly collects dust on my lens shelf.
1. It's not much faster than the kit lens at 19mm2. The IQ of the kit lens improves quite a bit once you leave the extreme wide end so your not getting tons more resolution if any. 3. AF is only on the center. I thought this wouldn't be an issue as on my canons I use center point AF but once you get used to the A6000's wonderful tracking AF a lens without it feels really lacking.
The reviewer is gaga about the cost but is it really that great? Canon has the terrific 24mm F2.8 and 40mm F2.8 for $150, both fully functional with canon's AF and with wonderful IQ and if you are saying "but but mirrorless" there's the EF-M 22mm/F2 that outperforms the sigma 19mm in every way imagineable and sells for $100ish.
Yes, there are other bargains. 19mm is still a good lens for the money .
Karl Summers: Manual focus...but can I assume there is a focus confirmation chip?
focus peaking .
Mssimo: Almost the same price as the lens baby velvet. What one would you pick?
$500 vs $800, almost the same price ? That is how Math works ?
marcio_napoli: Red knows their market better than me, but as far as I'm concerned, I can't see Hollywood ready for 35mp footage.
Not even Hollywood can handle it. It's just too extra costly for IQ gains that exactly who cares?
35mp moving images, even for the masters at Hollywood, is not a walk in the park.
You get more expensive CG, make up, special make up, props, sets, wardrobe, deadlines, etc.
Blockbusters' budget are average at 100 - 200 million, at 2k.
For 35mp footage, you can bet it will increase another 100 million for extra technical requirements.
PS: if you wonder what I'm talking about, it's possible that you've never made a CG visual effect.
Going from DV resolution, to 1080p is massive in terms of technical skills required.
Jumping to 4k is another massive leap, and then there's this 35mp thing...
Not worthy the extra cost. Not even for Hollywood.
They can shoot it at 8K. Down sample to 4K for current use. Save the 8K as archive for the future release.
Peter Del: Years ago, in my film days, I would smear a tiny amount of Vaseline on the filter in a circular motion, leaving a small central clear aperture. Or place a stocking in front of the lens; if shooting in colour, fine muslin. They could also be placed under the enlarging lens, for a similar effect.Peter Del
Jcradford: Yep, the vaseline works fine, as does solutions in post ... ie Topaz's lens effects plug in ... lots of control, or PS. or many other methods of layering. Sometimes better to shoot it straight and adapt it to tastes later, experimenting. The lens approach is one and done ... 1970s.
Zoron: Can't they make a 24-35mm F2.0 zoom....50-85mm F2.0.....kinda 2 prime lenses in one....a 1.45X zoom & a 1.7X zoom
Pros will buy f2 zoom, they are getting paid
i like it
Turlututu: My Rokkor 50mm f/1.7 produces the same kind of uncontrasty and soft images wide open. I like it, but 500$ for it ? no way...
There are plenty of legacy lenses that produces that kind of rendering, and as an experiment/fun lens, I prefer to buy it in a garage sale, that's way more funny !
Can't compare prices of 20-30 years old lenses to new ones. If they have to make all metal legacy lenses again, they will cost several hundreds of dollars. Not 20, 50 bucks.
Just a Photographer: This 'velvet' effect basically comes down to using an 'old fashioned' soft filter. If you are after that effect its cheaper to buy a soft filter for your largest lens and step-up rings so you can use this effect on all of your lenses.
Just for the look. If you don't like the look, don't buy. People buy it looking for character of the lens, not sharpness. I like glowing lenses, they make shadows less dark, really nice for video (can add a bit contrast in the post if needed). It gives a flat look.Otherwise, if you try to lift shadow in the post processing, the shadow gets noisy.
Jun2: Yeah, Samsung offers f/2-2.8 lens slight more expensive than Sony f/4 lens. I am thinking about switch. Samsung should sell NX1 around $1000 though.
They should out perform. You are comparing to NEX 7 old cameras. EM1 and GH4 are released for a while, likely to be replaced soon. NX1 is almost at A7II price, which has IS body and FF.
Yeah, Samsung offers f/2-2.8 lens slight more expensive than Sony f/4 lens. I am thinking about switch. Samsung should sell NX1 around $1000 though.
Wye Photography: Pity, I was hoping for an Aperture replacement and a direct challenger to Lightroom and Capture One. I rather liked some features of Aperture, C1 is OK, DXO clunky and Lightroom superb. That's a personal opine. LR works great for me.
I was hoping for Aperture X. I don't think any criticism of Apple is warranted. No matter how brilliant the new app may be they would be competing with two or three (depending on your opinion) other very well established, brilliant professional level apps.
I can understand why Apple has pulled out of this area. I would still like to have Aperture X or Photos X firmly aimed at the professional market though.
single digit market share was the result of Apple not putting resource into it. Aperture was introduced as the first in the category, probably had 80-90% market share. Lightroom was introduced half a year later. But Apple makes so much money selling phones. Top software engineers at Apple focus on developing iOS . They don't really care about Aperture.
different situation. FCP X was announced to replace FCP. But, nothing has been announced to replace Aperture, beside saying there will be more update for Aperture.
ozturert: It will sell like hot cakes. Some people who say "DR is bad" have no idea what DR is. In a normal print or on a regular IPS monitor, it's extremely difficult if not impossible to see the difference in DR between 5DMarkIII and D800. You need to apply +3EV or more to both RAWs or brighten shadows a lot to see the difference.Canon's 5DMarkIII, 7D MII and 1D's are very intuitive and simple to use. Menus are logical, buttons are well placed, operation is smooth, bodies are solid, AF systems are one of the best, just like D810 and D4s are.Get 5DsR, some primes, 11-24mm f4, 24-70mm f2.8LII, 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II, and you wil get excellent 50MP files and this set is much more mobile than medium formats. Now try to find an equivalent set in medium format. Although Hasselblad would give you better files, the difference would not be huge when you attach an Otus to 5DsR. Or mount a Sigma 50mm f1.4 A and be done.Before jumping and screaming, note that I say "medium format files would be better".
shadow lift of 3+EV is not unusual during post processing.
Jun2: 750D has no servo AF. Really, $750 camera doesn't have that.
still this feature is intentionally disable.
750D has no servo AF. Really, $750 camera doesn't have that.
no VF ?
MJ jumped. The Photographer clicked a button. He owns image of the jump. It was Jordan created the image, photographer recorded image. Plus the photo and logo are quite different.