kpaddler: The concept is not new. Nikon had a converter that did this, and it sucked. This idea provides neither AF nor MF properly. But it is excellent for entertaining your 6yr old in the backyard
Not sure if you were replying to me or someone else. Yes, what you say is correct.
I was pointing out that you can't grab the lens barrel that the AF is trying to move, given that the whole thing has to move.
"What does any of that you said mean ? So if it didn't work before it couldn't work now ? .. Do you ever get tired of talking S .."
This mechanism functions exactly based on the same trial and error combination principal of MF-AF effort.
Also, has it crossed your brain yet where you are going to hold that lens given the whole lens mass has to needs to move freely??
The concept is not new. Nikon had a converter that did this, and it sucked. This idea provides neither AF nor MF properly. But it is excellent for entertaining your 6yr old in the backyard
tex: So, um, it would be kinda cool if DPR finally did reviews of the current crop of digital medium format cameras, starting with the Pentax 645Z....the one that is the most "affordable" (actually, after just recently dropping the price down to $6,999.00, getting even closer...). It's pretty pertinent now especially, with the current crop of high mp FF cameras , with more undoubtedly coming. I hope DPR doesn't wait until it's all irrelevant...
" Shooting nearly wide open with a client in front of a huge glass pane at a cafe'?- 1/800 doesn't always cut it; ND filters can be a drag. 1/800 is slow for stoping action (action portraits) with or without flash on location; 1/2000, or as close as you can get to it, is the sweet spot."
So you are looking for flash sync speed of 1/2000 in MF. I guess the mechanics is not your strongest suit.
Back in the day, when competence was built into people not cameras, people used Linhof Technika's for action shots. How do you think the posters and billboard shots were made in 60-70s?
But of course, you may wish for your tool of choice, but that is a personal wish not universal necessity.
NickyB66: I'm new to photography, so this might be a stupid question. Are these light meters really needed in the age of modern DLSRs etc with all the advance metering the claim to have, i.e the new Nikon D5 etc?
Sorry, but have to ask.
The point of a handheld lightmeter is to be deliberate in what you do with the light. You can do that with any spot metering technique, on or off camera. It has nothing to do with how modern you gear is.
What's the point of such a review? DP is gonna give it to some digi reviewer whose skills barely match those who these cameras are intended for.
i.e this reviewer here doesn't understand that a camera like this is used 99.9% of the time with flash, whether inside or outside. And a 1/800sec is all is needed. Now, what is the fast shutter speed of Sony, your very beloved camera for flash photography???
kpaddler: And of course no one has any problem with that radio active orange sweater
" much more advanced understanding of colour than is generally known"
well, Iguess I just use lenses that let me take photographs then. To everyone his own
C1, ever since it colour editing module have had this function. You pick the given colour and it gives you a colour wheel for it, and you can do whatever you like with it. Silkpix does it too. You can pretty much do this anywhere if you can turn all other colours off.
But regardless, I don't want to have the problem in the first place. A lens must be balanced. I'm old school and don't care about whiz bangs, and their problems that I have to have to put up with.
" Photoshop--specifically Selective Colour is really only available"
Capture One does it too, as well as gimp
I shoot with about 10-15 lenses. If I allow each one of them its own tricks that I have to track and correct that is a lot of extra overhead. I expose the shot to perfection with spotmeter, raw conversion may include some dodging/burning, cropping, and nearly every other setting uses a template.
So, on a good day, I don't do anything other than importing raw, and export right out to jpg as doom's day back up and slide shows. I don't spend a lot of time in front of computer. I primarily print my stuff. Watching things just on the screen doesn't need a camera more than $300 these days.
No, I exclusively shoot raw. But that is not a license to have lousy performance from the lens. Now, I don't know what condition these were shot but they are over the top as far as contrast and saturation goes. There was another time when manufacturers paid attention to balanced contrast and colour.
I kind of expect not having to "solve" problems if I spend that kind of money.
And of course no one has any problem with that radio active orange sweater
I wonder if DPR can arrange with the principal of school mr Motoyuki Ohtake attended. It should be a fascinating read....
princecody: Sony is WINNING!
Does that make you live longer?
TheWhiteDog: I posted this on another story but this is the more active one and I just wanted to see if anyone else thinks this is a good idea.We know the weakness of this SONY system is lenses, we also know that Fuji(with their brand new 400 million dollar lens making plant) has lots of lens making capacity and, more important, a line of highly regarded lenses. So Fuji should make their lenses available in the SONY mount also, can you imagine how many a6300 users would buy the 56mm f1.2 lens?! I know what you are thinking, this would be suicide for Fuji's cameras, but I don't think so. Those interested in the XPro2 or forthcoming XT-2 I doubt would be interested in the a6300 or vice versa.The handling, menus, controls, looks etc are totally different and they are aimed at very different buyers- very doubtful that either company would lose any camera sales. In fact, I could see people owning both a XPro2 & an a6300 for their different strenghts. And both companies would have a new revenue stream.
"... can you imagine how many a6300 users would buy the 56mm f1.2 lens?!..."
Yes I can imagine, all those who wouldn't buy the Fuji's bodies.
"why have companies like Olympus and Fujifilm gone to great lengths to create such undeniably attractive cameras"
Because they are aiming the consumer market. It is not the rocket science that you portray it as
Richard Franiec: Sony sits on the top of the game with their sensor technology and sales.Advanced RX compacts makes the biggest dent in compact cam sales for years now.Their A7 series are enjoying gain in popularity and recognition from experts and casual users alike.So, why not to be happy about? Any other camera gear manufacturers can show similar achievements in recent years when the whole market seems to be in trouble? If Sony stays the course, they'll be happy in coming years for being persistent and, especially, innovative.Just my 2 cents as an observer, not Sony photo gear user.R
" ...they'll be happy in coming years for being persistent and, especially, innovative..."
In capitalism there is no such a thing as persistence or patience out of affection. Money is put in and that money has to deliver in the time frame it is expected. Otherwise, all options are on the table.
Angrymagpie: Personally I don't find this camera to be overpriced for what it is. Functionally speaking, it pales in comparison with its peers (GX8, EM5ii..etc). But I think Olympus never meant to position this as a performance-oriented camera. Instead, this camera is as much about performance as it is about aesthetics. This camera is about recreating the romanticism of its film-era original. In a way, PEN-F is a bargain. If you think about other cameras that pay a lot of attention to aesthetics, something like the X100T and Leica's digital rangefinders, PEN-F is not too bad. It looks amazing, offers retro-shooting experience via the manual control & the physical layout/handling, and performs well in modern standard.
"... not to value the artistry that this camera is capable of..."
Sorry, keep repeating that four times maybe that comes true.
Artistry comes out of any particular camera? really???
No mic socket??? no weather sealing???
A hardware dial for gimmicky filters???
The designers(and their off springs) should be hung upside down until they repent.