tkbslc

Lives in United States Salt Lake City, UT, United States
Joined on May 30, 2008

Comments

Total: 3632, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

left eye: Changing lenses on a mirror-less camera without a focal-place shutter, in my experience introduces dust to the sensor with alarming regularity.

With a sensor this big, dust will be 'a subject', as will the safe regular perfect cleaning of such an expensive sensor - without damaging it. I'm getting nervous just thinking about it!

One would assume that for deep DOF, all systems would be equalized to infinty.

I would surmise that the reason it affects smaller sensor more greatly is that the spec of dust represents a larger portion of the frame.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2016 at 21:10 UTC
In reply to:

djanrd01: My question is who is the target audience for this camera and what real innovation have they done? It seems to me that they've developed a camera for deep pocketed enthusiasts who want to claim that they have a small mirrorless camera with the biggest sensor in the industry. They tried to sell rebranded Sony cameras with with the only innovation being a new body and their name for thousands of dollars above what the cameras originally cost and were rightly crucified in the market place.

Sean65 - I'm most certainly not upset. I am just trying to tone down the hyperbole.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2016 at 21:04 UTC
In reply to:

djanrd01: My question is who is the target audience for this camera and what real innovation have they done? It seems to me that they've developed a camera for deep pocketed enthusiasts who want to claim that they have a small mirrorless camera with the biggest sensor in the industry. They tried to sell rebranded Sony cameras with with the only innovation being a new body and their name for thousands of dollars above what the cameras originally cost and were rightly crucified in the market place.

"BIG prints" as in 5% larger than the A7R II at the same DPI (26.5 vs 27.5 inches on the long edge at 300DPI)

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2016 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

Matsu: 8-10 years ago any digital photo discussion was littered with traffic about how 135 format would never be as affordable as film. Today, fully featured, new, 135 format DSLRs can be purchased for about $1500, with AF/metering and image quality fully up to the task of professional work. In a decade 135 format cameras/sensors have dropped dramatically in price. Not so long ago, 135 format sensors were being packaged in DMFBs for over $15,000+ In a couple more years you will see $1000 dollar "full-frame" 135 format cameras...

If anything Medium format is on a similar trajectory. sub-645 sensors/backs and systems were $35-50,000 propositions only a few years ago. In the last 4-5 years they have dropped into the sub $10,000 range. About where 135 format lived just before it started to descend from the stratosphere.

This battle happened in the 70s and 35mm film already won. What makes you think it will be different now that it is digital?

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2016 at 18:38 UTC
In reply to:

PanoMax: It will be interesting to compare images created with this Hasselblad vs. those from the yet-to-be released Sigma sd Quattro H, considering both have the about same sized sensor. The Quattro I think might have the edge.

Sigma's f1.4 primes and f1.8 zooms vs Hasselblad at f3.5 tells us a lot, though!

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2016 at 18:33 UTC
In reply to:

AKH: "Much bigger sensor" ...hmm, it is 8 mm wider and 9 mm taller than an FF sensor. So it is 1.7 times bigger than an FF sensor.

In comparison an FF sensor is 2.25 times bigger than an APS-C sensor and 3.8 times bigger than a Micro 4/3 sensor.

only 1.27x larger on the diagonal.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2016 at 16:59 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

vbuhay: Does any body have the Flange Focal Distance of the new Lens mount - XCD? How sensitive is the AF sensor? - 2 to + 19 EV? Any Pancake lenses availability in the future?

Considering most medium format lenses have a flange distance of about 3 inches, I doubt you will have trouble adapting anything that will cover the sensor.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 23:18 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

alcaher: 8k dollars?????!?????

$11,000 with a lens, really.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 23:17 UTC
On article All about that lens: Sony Cyber-shot RX10 III review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

villagranvicent: Excellent review, down-to-earth without the recent over the top claims and headlines, seems like a solid performer but at a hefty price. I would love to see a real life comparison vs the FZ1000 or even vs m43 systems considering the cost is in the same ball park to see if paying twice the money is worthy.

Most of the functionality, but certainly not the image quality.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 23:14 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)

How many rolls could you have developed and scanned for the $9500 price difference between this and a Fuji GF670?

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 23:09 UTC as 48th comment | 5 replies
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

tkbslc: Is this really medium format? The frame size is 44x33mm. Common medium format film sizes are 60x45mm, 60x60mm and 60x70mm. Compared to those, this sensor has about a 1.4, 1.5 or 1.7x crop factor (based on the diagonal).

This is like APS-C Medium format and only a 1.27x larger diagonal than FF digital.

@DigiMatt - that's the problem. m4/3 to FF is a HUGE 2x diagonal and 4x by area difference. That's definitely noticeable.

This is 1.27x crop and 1.7x by area change. It's even less than going from m4/3 to APS-C. And you really need some careful side-by-sides to tell the difference there. That's more of a shoulder shrug than running home to mom.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 23:06 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

57even: Landscape and location photographer's dream camera.

If you like the 35 or 70mm equiv. FL.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 23:00 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

jacek2008: Wonder if Pentax K-1 Pixel Shift can beat this not quite medium format Hassy;)

"Somebody wondered - let's get him!"

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 22:51 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

capanikon: Looks great. Finally we can start moving away from the teensy so-called "full frame" format.

Meanwhile plenty of people are enjoying their 7x crop factor smartphones.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 22:50 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: Wow indeed. Even the price seems reasonable compared to that Leica SL.

That's like saying rhinos look small next to elephants.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 22:49 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

blurredvision: Why exactly is the price increase so dramatic for such small increase in sensor size?

No, 1.27x crop factor increase. Less than the difference between m4/3 and APS-C.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 22:48 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

tkbslc: Where are the 700 posts complaining that the lenses are only f2.8 and f3.5 equivalent?

They changed the specs on me. The 90mm is actually an f3.2, not 4.5 as originally reported by dpreview. So I guess we are at f2.5 equiv on the 90mm.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 17:52 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

tkbslc: Is this really medium format? The frame size is 44x33mm. Common medium format film sizes are 60x45mm, 60x60mm and 60x70mm. Compared to those, this sensor has about a 1.4, 1.5 or 1.7x crop factor (based on the diagonal).

This is like APS-C Medium format and only a 1.27x larger diagonal than FF digital.

If it doesn't matter, why do we have 900 post arguments about whether m4/3 12mm f1.4 is really an overpriced 24mm f2.8? Let's just ignore it and call them both 35mm format?

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 16:51 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

caver3d: No thanks. I'll just have to carry on with my meager Sony A7RII. Or maybe I can stick a Hasselblad label over my lookalike Pentax K-01. Pentax, you're ahead of your time.

Here's hoping it comes in mustard yellow like the Pentax.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 16:29 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

jaygeephoto: I always hoped that my old Mamiya 7 would be reincarnated some day as a digital camera. Nice!

1.7x crop factor from 6x7 though. Might as well drop all the way to 2.1x crop and get an A7.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 16:28 UTC
Total: 3632, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »