sportyaccordy

sportyaccordy

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Aug 1, 2010

Comments

Total: 293, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

How is the dynamic range....

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2015 at 19:45 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV First Impressions Review preview (1321 comments in total)

All the studio pics look a little out of focus.......

Direct link | Posted on Jul 28, 2015 at 20:26 UTC as 121st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Wedding photographer: DPreview, you are reviewing F0.95 lens, the main feature of this lens is ultra wide aperture 0,95.
and people spending their dollars for this kind of products primarily for this feature.
And they are ready to use heavy lens with manual focus primarily for this feature.

1) How much 0,95 images this sample gallery has?
2) How much Examples of bokeh with F0,95 - only one ?
3) Where Portraits of people with shallow depth of field?

Why your short on F8? it can be done with cheaper autofocus/kit lenses with similar quality and without visible differences.

How much is the fish?

I would hope at $1100 this would be better than a kit zoom at 10.5mm@F/8. Pictures at stopped down f stops would help show this thing's value at other f-stops.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2015 at 19:56 UTC
In reply to:

Henrik Herranen: "The lens is neither especially small nor light, though for the specification it is a good deal more compact than a similar lens for a full-frame or even APS-C system."

Hmmh... 10.5mm f/0.95 lets in as much total light and has the same DoF as a FF 21mm f/1.9 lens. Canon's EF 24/1.4L II is both lighter and shorter, and lets in more than double the amount of total light. So what are the "similar lenses" that is won by this lens being "a good deal more compact"?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the Voigtlander isn't a useful lens. But I do believe that this article begins with an incorrect statement.

No, Androle said both field of view and aperture diameter determine the amount of light hitting the sensor. How much light can you gather from a sliver of a scene? Doesn't matter how big your aperture diameter is when you are zoomed in super far.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 14, 2015 at 14:19 UTC
In reply to:

Henrik Herranen: "The lens is neither especially small nor light, though for the specification it is a good deal more compact than a similar lens for a full-frame or even APS-C system."

Hmmh... 10.5mm f/0.95 lets in as much total light and has the same DoF as a FF 21mm f/1.9 lens. Canon's EF 24/1.4L II is both lighter and shorter, and lets in more than double the amount of total light. So what are the "similar lenses" that is won by this lens being "a good deal more compact"?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the Voigtlander isn't a useful lens. But I do believe that this article begins with an incorrect statement.

Good call out.

Physics are physics. It seems smaller format lenses at best maintain weight and size parity with larger lenses of the same max aperture diameter and field of view.... but they almost always cost more. Samyang 24/1.4 FF manual focus lens costs $350-500 new and is one of the best 24s out there.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 14, 2015 at 12:39 UTC
On Nikon D750 service advisory warns of shutter issue article (341 comments in total)

Oh Nikon. Another month another recall.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 10, 2015 at 20:38 UTC as 73rd comment | 2 replies
On Nikon offers AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm F2.8-4E ED VR article (329 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: They should have

- updated the 17-50 2.8 with VR and weight reducing tech
- made this F/4 through the FL range and made it cheaper

or my favorite

- used these resources to make some wide fast DX primes. No way am I gonna pay $700 for an FX prime to use on a DX body when the 35 1.8 DX is $200. They need an 11 2.8, 16 2.0 and 24 1.8 in DX to go with that.

Sorry, I meant on the long end and through the range. I could see this being a big deal years ago when shooting past ISO1600 was iffy but 1 stop is hardly worth paying a 2-3x premium for. 2 stops maybe.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 5, 2015 at 19:22 UTC
On Nikon offers AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm F2.8-4E ED VR article (329 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: They should have

- updated the 17-50 2.8 with VR and weight reducing tech
- made this F/4 through the FL range and made it cheaper

or my favorite

- used these resources to make some wide fast DX primes. No way am I gonna pay $700 for an FX prime to use on a DX body when the 35 1.8 DX is $200. They need an 11 2.8, 16 2.0 and 24 1.8 in DX to go with that.

Opening to F/2.8 on the wide end requires additional + better elements to control aberrations, vignetting yadda yadda. That is why this lens is smaller + lighter + cheaper than the 17-50/2.8

Direct link | Posted on Jul 4, 2015 at 13:13 UTC
On Nikon offers AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm F2.8-4E ED VR article (329 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: They should have

- updated the 17-50 2.8 with VR and weight reducing tech
- made this F/4 through the FL range and made it cheaper

or my favorite

- used these resources to make some wide fast DX primes. No way am I gonna pay $700 for an FX prime to use on a DX body when the 35 1.8 DX is $200. They need an 11 2.8, 16 2.0 and 24 1.8 in DX to go with that.

F/4 to F/2.8 is only one stop. And that would make the lens smaller and cheaper.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2015 at 13:04 UTC
On Sony: An eye on focus article (758 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotonCanvas: I am sure I am in the minority and will get a bath but... I still prefer Canon images to Sony's and I have both cameras. As far as focusing... action photographers need all the help they can get, others not so much.

Even though it's clear you are scared/jealous, you do make a good point. Different companies have different JPEG engines, and Sony's is not the best. Their RAW is also compressed which is the worst. However, both can be helped or fixed in firmware. Your Canon cannot get IBIS, mount and use AF on lenses from other mounts, increase its AF coverage or eliminate its front/back focus inaccuracies with a firmware update. I would rather have the camera with software issues than hardware issues.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2015 at 19:36 UTC
On Sony: An eye on focus article (758 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wild Light: OK so you get useless pics of sharp noses and mouths but with soft eyes with 3rd party lenses and I bet the eye detect focusses on the eye you don't want too as well.

I'll take manual focus please.

Lmao sour grapes much?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2015 at 19:33 UTC
On Nikon offers AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm F2.8-4E ED VR article (329 comments in total)

They should have

- updated the 17-50 2.8 with VR and weight reducing tech
- made this F/4 through the FL range and made it cheaper

or my favorite

- used these resources to make some wide fast DX primes. No way am I gonna pay $700 for an FX prime to use on a DX body when the 35 1.8 DX is $200. They need an 11 2.8, 16 2.0 and 24 1.8 in DX to go with that.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2015 at 19:16 UTC as 34th comment | 8 replies
On Canon EOS 5DS / SR First Impressions Review preview (3412 comments in total)

I don't see what the problem is. It looks competitive at the minimum and slightly more saturated RAW (which is a plus IMO). Can't see EXIF values here- how do the exposures compare? What lens did they use?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 17:28 UTC as 117th comment | 1 reply

My big question is if the third party AF speed can be updated through firmware to older A7 bodies. Obviously they won't have the OSPDAF, but if they can get CDAF up to native body speed that could be a game changer.

I'm also curious about third party EF lenses through adapters... will that new Yongnuo 35/2 work? What about Sigma's zooms and primes? This can be a real gamechanger.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 22, 2015 at 12:41 UTC as 131st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: FE MOUNT PLEASE!!!!!

No it wouldn't. They could keep the lens as is and just change the mount and connections.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 18:06 UTC

FE MOUNT PLEASE!!!!!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 11:40 UTC as 92nd comment | 3 replies
On Week in Review: Sony FTW article (302 comments in total)
In reply to:

exapixel: Mirrorless, schmirrorless. I don't care if it has mirrors or not. Can you look at a large fine art print and tell me the price of the camera, its weight, and whether or not there were mirrors involved?

The image is all that matters. If I put an A7Rii on a solid tripod and shoot a landscape through a good lens with proper technique, process the raw output, and print carefully, will I get better results than I would with any other small format camera? That's really the only question in my mind when I read a review. If it turns out to be true, then it's upgrade time.

So I don't care about 4K video or the design points, like back-side illumination, that enable it. I don't care about weight, boxiness, price, image stabilization, or autofocus speed. I do care about bit depth, losslessness, dynamic range, shutter shock, "raw" artifacts, sensor reflections, and the "star eater" bug. I'm eager to read a real review for actual photography.

@exapixel I don't know man. As awful as it was in low light, the more I look at old pics, the more I see... my old D40 pretty much washed my NEX-C3 in good light... especially with a nice prime. I kind of miss it.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 15, 2015 at 12:04 UTC
On Sony a7R II has 42.4MP on full frame BSI CMOS sensor article (1268 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark Alan Thomas: Battery Life (CIPA): 290

Ouch.

Then go buy a Nikon or Pentax. I'd personally rather just buy a grip or carry some extra batteries. All the battery life in the world can't make up for IBIS, 4K and PDAF with third party adapters.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 17:05 UTC
On Sony a7R II has 42.4MP on full frame BSI CMOS sensor article (1268 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark Alan Thomas: Battery Life (CIPA): 290

Ouch.

Get a grip ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 12:03 UTC
On Sony a7R II has 42.4MP on full frame BSI CMOS sensor article (1268 comments in total)

This almost reads like an April Fools joke. Spec wise, aside from teh goofy USB 2.0 ports they pretty much nailed everything. No matter for me, this will hopefully just push A7Rs down through the $1K floor.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 18:16 UTC as 291st comment
Total: 293, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »