zakk9

Lives in Thailand Samut Prakan, Thailand
Works as a Graphic designer
Has a website at http://epixx.wordpress.com/
Joined on Sep 18, 2004
About me:

Some Fujis, Nikons and a Panasonic,
and a few Nikkor, Zuiko, Tamron, Panasonic and Zeiss lenses

Comments

Total: 218, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article A fully loaded iMac Pro will cost you $13,200 (474 comments in total)
In reply to:

kobakokh: 14000 USD, but by other side, its a not desktop computer, its a true mainframe, extraordinary powerful machine for do anything and very fast. Yes, not cheap, but like dream...

... a dream that cannot be changed or upgraded.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 06:15 UTC
In reply to:

zakk9: There's nothing "pro" about an iMac Pro. A computer for professionals can be upgraded and is easy to service. A stationary computer for professionals doesn't need to be slim or particularly lightweight. It needs to be flexible and reliable. Bring us back the real Mac Pro, the one where you can change disks by pulling out a drawer and where the side panel comes of when you lift a lever. That's what a tool for professionals looks like. Apple used to know this. Apparently, their memory's gone bad.

@DarnGoodPhotos Not monitors that are identical to the one already built into the iMac.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2017 at 08:19 UTC
In reply to:

zakk9: There's nothing "pro" about an iMac Pro. A computer for professionals can be upgraded and is easy to service. A stationary computer for professionals doesn't need to be slim or particularly lightweight. It needs to be flexible and reliable. Bring us back the real Mac Pro, the one where you can change disks by pulling out a drawer and where the side panel comes of when you lift a lever. That's what a tool for professionals looks like. Apple used to know this. Apparently, their memory's gone bad.

I would say: multiple identical monitors, particularly when editing photos and/or video.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2017 at 02:19 UTC

There's nothing "pro" about an iMac Pro. A computer for professionals can be upgraded and is easy to service. A stationary computer for professionals doesn't need to be slim or particularly lightweight. It needs to be flexible and reliable. Bring us back the real Mac Pro, the one where you can change disks by pulling out a drawer and where the side panel comes of when you lift a lever. That's what a tool for professionals looks like. Apple used to know this. Apparently, their memory's gone bad.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 23:15 UTC as 22nd comment | 11 replies
In reply to:

biggercountry: Same old crap... If you think it’s overpriced, it’s not for you. If you think it’s proprietary and restrictive, then it’s not for you. If you’re saying to yourself, “Finally!” then it’s for you.

If you’re all about Windows and love putting together your own hardware, obsessing over configurations, and/or spending your thousands on a benchmark score, then by all means go in peace and enjoy your manifold choices in the Windows world. Apple is by no means infringing on your ability to do that with the iMac Pro.

The problem is for those of us who miss the flexibility of the old style, heavy as lead, big as a house Mac Pro with all its flexibility and expandability. I really don't understand the need to make a professional grade stationary computer small and lightweight, but thereby also harder to service and impossible to upgrade. If I want to move around, I have a MacBook Pro. Guess I'm a dinosaur.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 23:03 UTC

No no no... it's the Russians. They said so on the news!

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2017 at 08:58 UTC as 28th comment
In reply to:

maksa: These photos were available almost a month ago, I’ve downloaded them on 24 October.
Guys, this is not a news.

Oh... terrible! Will my Mac explode if I download them?

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2017 at 00:12 UTC

The next thing will obviously be photo-like 3D renderings of old paintings. Those Rembrandt images are so hopelessly low-res. What on earth was he thinking?

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 09:58 UTC as 50th comment | 3 replies

If you're not clever enough to make a profit, sue those who are. That seems to be a rather safe business model these days.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 21:04 UTC as 28th comment
In reply to:

skanter: "Relatively small"? Compared to what?

The whole point of APS-C mirrorless is small and light. This lens is bigger and heavier than my a6300. No thanks.

For m4/3, compared to the half stop slower PL 15mm f/1.7 which is 115 gram, 36mm long and 57.5mm in diameter. Image quality of the PL is very, very good.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2017 at 00:03 UTC
In reply to:

Rooru S: Why haven't they made this lens available for Sony mount? At 800USD, I can see plenty of A68, A77II and A99II users getting one of these.

Has Sony sold their shares at Tamron?

I doubt that the 3 Sony users you are talking about would make it profitable for Tamron to make such a mount... lol

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 14:37 UTC
In reply to:

zakk9: Nice lenses for sure, but large, heavy and expensive. Although I'm mostly an m4/3 user, I recently bought a lightly used D610 with vertical grip. I'm adding the 35 and 85mm f/1.8, both of which I buy new, and the total bill for all of this is $1,600. Weight of the combo (without the grip) is 1,500 gram, while the two new Zuiko lenses would be 1,300 gram if I add my GX8.

Horses for courses. I prefer the Nikon for low light and portrait work and m4/3 for travel. It is possible to like two systems, something that seems to be a totally alien thought to some of the more vocal full frame worshipers and m4/3 loyalists on this forum.

There are several "two-in-one" options available when carrying two systems. I often use the excellent and cheap Samyang 135mm f/2 for portraits with Nikon bodies, film and digital. On m4/3, it becomes a 270mm equivalent, 192mm equivalent with a speed booster. I sold the Zuiko 40-150mm f/2.8 as a result of this, and replaced it with the much more compact Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8. That way, I can go very lightweight with the Panasonic lenses when I want. I do wish there was a native m4/3 mount 180 or 200mm prime available though, sharp and compact like the Zuiko 75mm.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 01:40 UTC
On article Video: Sony a7R III first look (155 comments in total)
In reply to:

Phyltre: I'm curious how they crammed in that double-size battery, and more ports, and extra card slot--but the thing's still lighter. Was there a block of lead somewhere in the A7RII?

My planned "Anti Sony Rant (ASR)" would have included something like "Big battery and two slots, what the mark I version should've/could've been", but I'm kind of in a good mood today and didn't fall for the temptation to waste monies on the two first versions anyway, so I'll let it rest...

Looks like a very fine camera too!

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 01:09 UTC
On article Video: Sony a7R III first look (155 comments in total)
In reply to:

Indohydra: Rumors had been that there would be a 60MP sensor. Is that coming?

A9R?

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 01:02 UTC

Nice lenses for sure, but large, heavy and expensive. Although I'm mostly an m4/3 user, I recently bought a lightly used D610 with vertical grip. I'm adding the 35 and 85mm f/1.8, both of which I buy new, and the total bill for all of this is $1,600. Weight of the combo (without the grip) is 1,500 gram, while the two new Zuiko lenses would be 1,300 gram if I add my GX8.

Horses for courses. I prefer the Nikon for low light and portrait work and m4/3 for travel. It is possible to like two systems, something that seems to be a totally alien thought to some of the more vocal full frame worshipers and m4/3 loyalists on this forum.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 21:30 UTC as 45th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

Tapper123: These f1.2 pro primes are undoubtedly superb, but it's becoming hard to ignore larger sensored systems when MFT is becoming larger, heavier and costlier.

I shoot both Nikon and m4/3, and the D610 argument is very valid. The Nikon f/1.8 series offers a range of very good lenses, and interestingly many of them are lighter and/or smaller than the pro Olympus offerings. For those of us who still use film on occasions, they are rather obvious options.

m4/3 for me is about compact size and telephoto reach. For those who only want one system, it's different of course, and these new Zuiko lenses look excellent indeed. Personally, I would rather buy the PL 15mm f/1.7 and 42.5mm f/1.2 though, since, at least so far, I've preferred the micro contrast rendering of the PL lenses.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 20:22 UTC
In reply to:

zakk9: No, it won't recreate "the old analogue feeling". Part of that feeling is living with the constraints of film, the limited number of frames, the inherent imperfections, the personality of each film without the option of changing it by pushing a few buttons, getting to see the results days or even weeks after the photos were taken...

After 12 years with digital, I missed all that so much that I'm back to film for a lot of my "hobby" photography. Film cameras are so cheap now that I can buy more or less any camera that I could hardly dream of 20 years ago. The results? I love them. I love not having the plastic look of digital that is increasingly the same for every new camera on the market as they all aim for the same perfect target.

If you want a p&s, I'd buy an Olympus XA. You'll find them from around $150. Avoid the XA 1/2/3/4. They are cheaper varieties with inferior specs.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 19:56 UTC
In reply to:

zakk9: No, it won't recreate "the old analogue feeling". Part of that feeling is living with the constraints of film, the limited number of frames, the inherent imperfections, the personality of each film without the option of changing it by pushing a few buttons, getting to see the results days or even weeks after the photos were taken...

After 12 years with digital, I missed all that so much that I'm back to film for a lot of my "hobby" photography. Film cameras are so cheap now that I can buy more or less any camera that I could hardly dream of 20 years ago. The results? I love them. I love not having the plastic look of digital that is increasingly the same for every new camera on the market as they all aim for the same perfect target.

If you want your computer to do your hobby, I guess this is called progress, if it's your work, you're making it simpler, but also saying goodbye to skill.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 04:28 UTC

I don't know about E-mount, but it will be very difficult to find a reason to buy this one instead of the excellent PL 15mm f/1.7 for m4/3. The PL is 72% lighter, 61% shorter, 19% narrower and uses 46mm filters vs. 67mm. Even if the Sigma might be less expensive, buying a polaroid filter for the larger filter thread would eat strongly into those savings. The PL also shares filters with a number of other Panasonic lenses, like the 14mm f/2.5, 20mm f/1.7, 25mm f/1.7, PL 25mm f/1.4, 30mm f/2.8 Macro, PL 45mm f/2.8 Macro and 35-100mm f/4-5.6.

The Zuiko 12mm f/2, 17mm f/1.8, 25mm f/1.8, 30mm f/3.5 Macro and 60mm f/2.8 Macro also share the 46mm filters.

Most of those Panasonic and Zuiko lenses are of very good or excellent quality even if they're mostly very small and light, and while Panalympus have been thinking system uniformity, quality and compactness, it seems as if Sigma has been thinking "let's smack an m4/3 mount on that E-System lens and make an extra buck.

Nope, won't buy it.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2017 at 22:44 UTC as 20th comment | 2 replies

No, it won't recreate "the old analogue feeling". Part of that feeling is living with the constraints of film, the limited number of frames, the inherent imperfections, the personality of each film without the option of changing it by pushing a few buttons, getting to see the results days or even weeks after the photos were taken...

After 12 years with digital, I missed all that so much that I'm back to film for a lot of my "hobby" photography. Film cameras are so cheap now that I can buy more or less any camera that I could hardly dream of 20 years ago. The results? I love them. I love not having the plastic look of digital that is increasingly the same for every new camera on the market as they all aim for the same perfect target.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2017 at 16:04 UTC as 7th comment | 5 replies
Total: 218, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »