Robgo2

Lives in United States NM, United States
Has a website at rgoldsteinphotography.com
Joined on Dec 3, 2002

Comments

Total: 105, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Leica TL2 first impressions (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: If you cut the price of the Leica TL2 by $500, add a built in EVF, add a tilt screen, add around 400 more focus points, add a built in flash, add a microphone port, almost double the battery life, make it smaller and lighter, and then weather seal it.... you end up with a Sony a6500.

This camera lays to rest the theory that the a6500 "costs too much."

Sony should use it in their ad campaigns.

I was always aware that I was speculating. No harm in that. But you did some of your own when you said that the TL2 would be the same as the A6500, only with fewer features. That may not turn out to be true.

Speaking of features, I doubt that I will get a TL2, because it lacks image stabilization, which is very important to me. Rather, I will wait for the A7iii.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 22:26 UTC
On article Leica TL2 first impressions (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: If you cut the price of the Leica TL2 by $500, add a built in EVF, add a tilt screen, add around 400 more focus points, add a built in flash, add a microphone port, almost double the battery life, make it smaller and lighter, and then weather seal it.... you end up with a Sony a6500.

This camera lays to rest the theory that the a6500 "costs too much."

Sony should use it in their ad campaigns.

@Marty4650...No, I am not confused. My point was that the TL2 may deliver better IQ than the A6500, based on my experience with the Leica Q vs the RX1 and A7ii. Leica may have discovered the secret sauce, not to mention incredible lenses.

At this point, it's all speculation. Let's wait for actual user reports before jumping to conclusions.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 22:04 UTC
On article Leica TL2 first impressions (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: If you cut the price of the Leica TL2 by $500, add a built in EVF, add a tilt screen, add around 400 more focus points, add a built in flash, add a microphone port, almost double the battery life, make it smaller and lighter, and then weather seal it.... you end up with a Sony a6500.

This camera lays to rest the theory that the a6500 "costs too much."

Sony should use it in their ad campaigns.

I often use Zeiss and Leica lenses on my A7ii, but the IQ, though excellent, is still not up to the Q's. BTW, there are many users who consider the RX1's lens to be the best 35mm in the world, not because of sharpness but because of beautiful 3D rendering. And lossy raw compression produces artifacts only rarely. The RX1 and A7ii have the same sensor.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 21:41 UTC
On article Leica TL2 first impressions (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

yahoo2u: APSC sensor...fine.
Body only $2695 AUS...No.
There are plenty of APSC cameras on the market with same MP for way less with lenses attached and still way cheaper.
.....and here's the secret...they all have the ability to take nice images.

You completely misunderstood the point I was making. Of course people can spend their money as they please. But being rich does not equate with being smart. That is so obvious that it needs no explanation.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2017 at 05:24 UTC
On article Leica TL2 first impressions (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: If you cut the price of the Leica TL2 by $500, add a built in EVF, add a tilt screen, add around 400 more focus points, add a built in flash, add a microphone port, almost double the battery life, make it smaller and lighter, and then weather seal it.... you end up with a Sony a6500.

This camera lays to rest the theory that the a6500 "costs too much."

Sony should use it in their ad campaigns.

You know, 4 months ago, I might have agreed with your assessment, but then I made the totally illogical decision to buy a Leica Q (used). What I discovered is that the Q absolutely smokes my RX1 and A7ii, both in terms of usability and image quality. Partly that is attributable to the unbelievable Summilux 28/1.7 lens, but also to the sensor delivering superior colors and overall rendering. Ergonomics are a quantum leap better as well.

So what does that have to do with the TL2? Well, I have the feeling that Leica has finally figured out how to produce great digital images, as evidenced by their most recent cameras--the SL, M10 and Q. And that makes me think that the TL2 mounted with outstanding T and TL lenses, may actually be a better camera than the A6500, despite lacking some of its features. (I'm not claiming that it is better. We will need real world experience to tell us.) Is it worth the added cost? That depends on one's budget and photographic requirements.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2017 at 03:18 UTC
On article Leica TL2 first impressions (366 comments in total)

I just watched Thorsten Overgaard's Field Test Review of the TL2, in which he states repeatedly that the image quality is as good as M10's. That's quite a statement, almost unbelievable, but Thorsten knows Leica as well as anyone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QUJWT7KAoM

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2017 at 19:59 UTC as 10th comment
On article Leica TL2 first impressions (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

yahoo2u: APSC sensor...fine.
Body only $2695 AUS...No.
There are plenty of APSC cameras on the market with same MP for way less with lenses attached and still way cheaper.
.....and here's the secret...they all have the ability to take nice images.

@AndersSJ and T3, being rich does not necessarily mean that one is smart. There are millions of examples to the contrary. A lot of wealth is either inherited or derived from personal connections. Without a doubt, there are many times more smart people who are not rich.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2017 at 19:41 UTC
On article Leica TL2 first impressions (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

vesa1tahti: Nikon D500 = Leica without the red dot. And even more...

You're comparing SLR to mirrorless. Each has advantages, but it does appear that the market is moving towards the latter. As far as lenses go, Nikon has some excellent ones, but no one beats Leica (except for some Zeiss lenses). I would seriously consider the TL2, but it would require investing in some fairly expensive lenses in order to gain the benefits of autofocus.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2017 at 19:30 UTC

Is this the equivalent of an aristocratic family, having fallen on hard times, auctioning off the furniture from their mansion? ; > )

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2016 at 15:43 UTC as 7th comment

I just purchased Aurora HDR last week, and I am quite pleased with it. I hope that I won't have to pay for an upgrade.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2016 at 19:35 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply
On article Leica Q In-depth Review (1166 comments in total)
In reply to:

iShootWideOpen: This would be my camera if it came with a 35mm Summicron. Come on Leica, 28mm????

28mm is definitely harder to use than 35mm, because you have so much more in the frame and you have to be more cognizant of the foreground. Also, for portraits, 35mm is generally preferable, though great environmental portraits can be gotten with 28mm. I have been practicing with a 28/2.8, and the results are getting better, so it's not as though I hate that focal length.

I would still bet that Leica chose to make the Q 28mm in an effort to distinguish it from the RX1 series. Or to put it differently, if the RX1s did not exist, the Q probably would have gotten a 35mm lens.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2016 at 16:20 UTC
On article Leica Q In-depth Review (1166 comments in total)
In reply to:

iShootWideOpen: This would be my camera if it came with a 35mm Summicron. Come on Leica, 28mm????

It seems likely that Leica settled on the 28mm focal length to create separation from the Sony RX1/II. But it's true that most people would choose 35mm for general purpose shooting. 28mm can work fine, but you have to get used to it.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2016 at 03:35 UTC
On article Vote now for Best Product of 2015! (130 comments in total)

I made the A7RII my top choice, and I wanted to make the Leica Q number 2, but it was not one of the options. BTW, I own neither of them.

Rob

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 20:10 UTC as 13th comment
On article ZEISS goes wide with Loxia 21mm F2.8 for Sony E-mount (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

acidic: F2.8? Why so slooow? That's F1.4 equivalent in m4/3 terms.

@armandino: Can you use the 21/1.8 Voigtlander on an A7 series camera? No soft edges or color smearing? Just asking. In any event, life is full of compromises. If you can find a lens that suits your style of shooting, then go for it. If not, then find a good compromise.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 18:38 UTC
On article ZEISS goes wide with Loxia 21mm F2.8 for Sony E-mount (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

Temporel: one more reason to stay away from Sony's cameras.

What? I don't get it. But that's OK. You don't have to bother trying to explain.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 15:45 UTC
On article ZEISS goes wide with Loxia 21mm F2.8 for Sony E-mount (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boss of Sony: What is the point of a lens without AF in this day and age? AF is one of the functions most photographers need more than any other.

This is a common reaction from people who have never used MF on a mirrorless camera with modern focusing aids (i.e. peaking and magnification.) It is really easy, fun and fast--not as fast as AF, but fast enough for most situations that don't involve rapid action. However, mirrorless MF is more precise than AF can ever hope to be, and it's very different from MF on a DSLR, which is almost an act of faith.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 05:02 UTC
On article ZEISS goes wide with Loxia 21mm F2.8 for Sony E-mount (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

noflashplease: Nikon leads the wide angle market with the 20mm F/1.8, which costs almost half as much as this Zeiss, or should I say, "Zeiss-badged Sony lens?" The pricing of this lens demonstrates why so many Sony A7 users go with adapted Canon and legacy glass? For 1/3 the price, how much worse is Canon's EF 20 F/2.8?

"The pricing of this lens demonstrates why so many Sony A7 users go with adapted Canon and legacy glass? For 1/3 the price, how much worse is Canon's EF 20 F/2.8?"

I would be willing to bet that at least 75% of A7 series owners who use Canon glass are current or former Canon users who already own Canon lenses. But as the selection of FE lenses continues to expand, we will see more of those people choosing native FE lenses from Sony, Zeiss and others. It's natural to prefer shooting without an adapter, especially when the quality is so high.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 04:51 UTC
On article ZEISS goes wide with Loxia 21mm F2.8 for Sony E-mount (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

acidic: F2.8? Why so slooow? That's F1.4 equivalent in m4/3 terms.

@dcolak: No, I mean that at 21mm on a FF camera, DOF is deep, even with faster lenses, unless you are right up against the subject. To rephrase my previous question, how often does one need ultra-shallow DOF when shooting this wide? I won't say that it would never be needed, but it would certainly be very infrequent. For the Loxia 21 to be f2 or f1.4, it would have to be much larger and more expensive. Zeiss made a very practical decision in choosing f2.8. It's fast enough for 98% of real world shooting. If you need something faster, good luck finding it and paying for it.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 04:38 UTC
On article ZEISS goes wide with Loxia 21mm F2.8 for Sony E-mount (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rod McD: I always wondered why Zeiss offered the 35mm and 50mm first when those FLs were already catered for by Sony. I would have bought into the A7 series IF there had been a decent WA (20-24mm) available from the start. This is the first one that appeals to me - solid, aperture ring, and has focusing and DOF scales - far better to me than the gimmicky AF Batis 25mm design. And far smaller than an adapted SLR Distagon 21/2.8. Let's hope the IQ lives up to it.

35 and 50mm are the most popular focal lengths for prime lenses. That's all there is to it. Also, Zeiss already had the basic designs in their ZM lineup. They just updated and optimized them for the A7 series. Both are great lenses, especially the Loxia 50.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 01:22 UTC
On article ZEISS goes wide with Loxia 21mm F2.8 for Sony E-mount (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: You get a really good zoom, and the primes don't offer much more in-terms of image quality these days, so really all they have or might have going for them is speed and this one is only f/2.8.

True, but IQ will be inferior at all focal lengths between 16 and 35mm except for 21mm. Look, I use prime lenses almost exclusively, but I am very impressed by the IQ from the FE16-35. It gives the Batis 25 fairly stiff competition at 25/f4.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 01:17 UTC
Total: 105, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »