Aaron MC

Aaron MC

Lives in United States AK, United States
Works as a Stock trader
Has a website at http://www.fo-to-gra-fe.com
Joined on Oct 7, 2010

Comments

Total: 57, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Martin.au: Love the equivalence moron's logic.

The 150f2.8 is equivalent to a 300f5.6 and should therefore cost the same.

Ok, lets continue with that logic. (I'm only guessing prices here, but that won't be an issue for a little logical fun)

A m4/3 lens 150mm f2.8 is $1500
Is equivalent to a FF300 f 5.6, worth $500
Therefore, the price of the m4/3 lens should be $500.

Correct?

However, the lens is still a 150mm f2.8, with similar design, glass cost, etc to a FF 150mm f2.8. Therefore, the FF150mm f2.8 should also only cost $500

What you clowns are saying is that the lens design, etc doesn't matter and that the camera that the lens is mounted on should determine the price.

A 150mm f2.8 lens is a 150mm f2.8 lens and should cost around the same, regardless of format. It just has different results depending on which camera it's mounted on.

The lenses are the same size? Olympus and Panasonic marketing will be shocked to discover this.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2013 at 04:22 UTC
In reply to:

Aaron MC: To everyone defending Panasonic's pricing, the reason why this is a legitimate complaint is because everything on the smaller sensor is cheaper. Panasonic cannot claim manufacturing cost as a reason for the price.

Moreover, the markup on Nikon, Canon, and Zeiss lenses is very large, because they have gigantic extant systems with millions of fans. Essentially, they can afford to extract some profit from the value of their brand. Panasonic has no such freedom.

@Naveed: Yes, every size has some unique challenges, but some challenges are more easily (and cheaply) overcome than others.

@Revio: Yes, but the mere act of moving the optical design closer to the sensor achieves much of this. Moreover, it has as much to do with the density of the sensor as its size.

Also, I know very well that the markup on the retail end is low. Camera resellers get kinda' screwed in this regard. The high mark-up comes from the companies themselves.

@Digifan: At a certain point. But that situation only applies on VERY small lenses. Also, old 35mm lens designs are frequently awful. They have character, certainly, but technically they are very poor. I own a whole fleet of old Olympus lenses (go-go-gadget Ebay!), and even on the small 4/3 sensor, I get some vignetting on a couple.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 3, 2012 at 17:34 UTC
In reply to:

Aaron MC: To everyone defending Panasonic's pricing, the reason why this is a legitimate complaint is because everything on the smaller sensor is cheaper. Panasonic cannot claim manufacturing cost as a reason for the price.

Moreover, the markup on Nikon, Canon, and Zeiss lenses is very large, because they have gigantic extant systems with millions of fans. Essentially, they can afford to extract some profit from the value of their brand. Panasonic has no such freedom.

Blohum: That's certainly true. But complex lens assemblies can only go so far in this regard. A company can only grow crystal so quickly, for example.

Micahmedia: Actually, about video, the 12-35mm lens has a non-constant aperture that's causing many pros to abandon the lens. They're willing to pay, but they demand things. And while people rarely pay list for many things, the list price affects the market. That was stupid of Panasonic.

Ptox: No, but that's common knowledge. The larger the sensor, the harder and more expensive it is to design lenses for it. Thus, the reverse is true.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2012 at 21:19 UTC

To everyone defending Panasonic's pricing, the reason why this is a legitimate complaint is because everything on the smaller sensor is cheaper. Panasonic cannot claim manufacturing cost as a reason for the price.

Moreover, the markup on Nikon, Canon, and Zeiss lenses is very large, because they have gigantic extant systems with millions of fans. Essentially, they can afford to extract some profit from the value of their brand. Panasonic has no such freedom.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2012 at 19:16 UTC as 27th comment | 9 replies
On Coming soon: Lens Reviews to return to dpreview.com article (272 comments in total)

Awesome.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2012 at 18:57 UTC as 90th comment
On The New Pictorialism II in the The New Pictorialism II challenge (25 comments in total)

Magnificent. It perfectly captures the look and feel of old pictorialist photos while also adding muted color that they didn't have. This is easily my favorite.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 26, 2012 at 23:11 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
On Hasselblad responds to Lunar criticisms article (628 comments in total)

I find this kind of amazing. For a company rep to actually come out in defense of products means that the market reaction was wildly negative. Because if the reaction was even mostly negative, it's always best from a PR perspective to not recognize the criticisms in public and instead internally decide what course to take.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 19, 2012 at 22:14 UTC as 254th comment | 2 replies
On Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Preview preview (213 comments in total)

To those hatin' on the lens, y'all be crazy. I'm totally happy to plunk down the cash on a lens like this. Olympus is finally giving me what I've been wanting for THREE YEARS. Good lenses FTW!

I am upset by the lack of a lens hood, though. That's pretty cheap on Olympus' part.

Direct link | Posted on May 25, 2012 at 19:45 UTC as 24th comment | 5 replies
On Leica M-Monochrom preview (449 comments in total)

Detail is suitably good. Good on Leica for trying something unique. Bad on Leica for charging even more than they usually do for it.

The ISO performance is at least noticeably better than the M9. That's a plus.

I guess that all I can say is that I'm not interested enough to warrant such a premium.

Direct link | Posted on May 11, 2012 at 01:03 UTC as 132nd comment
On Just Posted: Nikon D3200 preview samples gallery article (497 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aaron MC: Very competitive. Definitely better than Canon's offerings at the same price.

It could be worse, the camera that you want could be insanely expensive. For the IQ, this is pretty damned cheap. Think of it like you aren't SPENDING money, you are, in fact, saving money over an NEX-7 of A77.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2012 at 00:31 UTC
In reply to:

Aaron MC: I hope that Fuji keeps these updates coming. The ONLY thing keeping me from buying an X Pro 1 are the focus issues.

I have used one. At Hunt's Camera (plug alert: If you live in New England, you should go there. They're great.).

I loved everything about the camera, but in just ten minutes of playing around, the AF was a noticeable downgrade even from my old GF1. I have no idea what you are talking about when you say that you have had no problems. I found the AF to be unacceptable at the price.

I think that it will be fixable with software, which I await. Until then, though, I can't see through to paying over $2k for a camera that falls on its face in demanding situations.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2012 at 00:15 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon D3200 preview samples gallery article (497 comments in total)

Very competitive. Definitely better than Canon's offerings at the same price.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2012 at 00:08 UTC as 158th comment | 2 replies

I hope that Fuji keeps these updates coming. The ONLY thing keeping me from buying an X Pro 1 are the focus issues.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2012 at 19:00 UTC as 39th comment | 10 replies
On Elegance in the Black & White Flowers challenge (4 comments in total)

Very Georgia O'Keeffe. Excellent.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 6, 2012 at 15:14 UTC as 1st comment
On Samsung doesn't deny Android-based camera article (108 comments in total)

FINALLY! I have been saying for some time that whichever camera company does this first owns the future. Because this IS the future. I knew that it wouldn't be Canon or Nikon, but Samsung is a bit of a surprise.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 15, 2012 at 04:11 UTC as 41st comment

I am happy with this camera. I didn't much like the A77 because of noticeable degredation in sharpness and ISO quality in comparison to the same sensor in the NEX-7. I don't know what they have done, but they appear to have licked the sharpness issue, and the ISO problem is small enough to not matter.

I run the risk of sounding like a Sony fanboy, which is funny since I don't own any of their gear, but bravo, Sony. Bravo.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2012 at 19:24 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

BeanyPic: What an average camera. If your serious about IQ at this type of price stay away from this new Sony Camera. All they seem to have done is push spec out without considering IQ. What a complete waist of their time.

Yeah, I'm confused. The images appear very good to me. The light loss from the ST mirror appears to barely effect the IQ, which is great.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2012 at 19:18 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 low light high ISO sample series article (283 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aaron MC: I am tentatively optimistic about this camera. I think that this is undoubtedly the G3 sensor, but it appears that Olympus has squeezed a lot of performance from the pipeline. It's still an old sensor, though, and I fear that it enters the market obsolete and will be made only more so with the release of the GH3.

@ T3: If you already have that equipment, then essentially, you already own the competition. You have no choice but to buy m4/3. If I were you, I would be even more annoyed than I am, now, since I would feel trapped, forced to accept whatever they gave me.

Everything that Olympus has provided with this camera should have been provided a year or more ago. It is not innovation, it is standard equipment for serious enthusiasts and long overdue.

Instead, both Panasonic and Olympus gave us iteration after iteration of the same camera, and six different versions of the 14-4xmm lens.

And Sony has shown immediate and forceful interest in expanding their lens selection. The success of the NEX-7/5n caused them to completely alter and expand their future lens line-up. Equivalents to all of your listed lenses will come soon enough.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2012 at 03:24 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 low light high ISO sample series article (283 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aaron MC: I am tentatively optimistic about this camera. I think that this is undoubtedly the G3 sensor, but it appears that Olympus has squeezed a lot of performance from the pipeline. It's still an old sensor, though, and I fear that it enters the market obsolete and will be made only more so with the release of the GH3.

@OneGuy: What?

@Michael_13: I certainly hope that Olympus does just that.

@T3: That is true, but I want a system in which I can grow. I feel that Micro 4/3 has become stagnant.

Moreover, I am willing and ready to spend that much. I plunked down similar amounts for the Oly 12-60mm and even more for the 50-200mm. I WANT to spend more, but I won't further invest in a system that is being helmed by two companies that have shown little interest in innovating.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 10, 2012 at 19:47 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 low light high ISO sample series article (283 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aaron MC: I am tentatively optimistic about this camera. I think that this is undoubtedly the G3 sensor, but it appears that Olympus has squeezed a lot of performance from the pipeline. It's still an old sensor, though, and I fear that it enters the market obsolete and will be made only more so with the release of the GH3.

@T3: All I can say is that I disagree. I think that both the NEX-5n and the NEX-7 either match or beat m4/3 on everything except lens selection, and that will be rectified in the future.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 10, 2012 at 03:27 UTC
Total: 57, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »