FodgeandDurn

Joined on Feb 13, 2014

Comments

Total: 303, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Tony Northrup: Awesome article, Rishi. Brave, too; nobody knows better than I how mathing crop factor and equivalence enrages people (yet accurately predicts performance).

The recent medium-format craze is reminiscent of the micro-four thirds craze almost a decade ago. Remember when everyone was excited to see tiny MFT 12-35 f/2.8 lenses that produced the same results as huge FF 24-70 f/2.8 lenses? That misconception launched an entire industry, and buyers spent millions assuming they'd get results that were simply impossible.

I do think the new medium format system cameras are compelling for reasons like the Fuji's interchangeable viewfinder, which is useful and needed. But most people seem to be buying into it for "separation" and "compression" and "that medium format look"... reasons that just don't exist.

The guy has been one of the web's most popular sources for camera tech info for years, I'm sure he's had ample chance to get a huge sample snapshot of 'why people buy stuff'. If you watch Tony's stuff, you'll notice that he's very meticulous, and strives to justify almost everything he says with evidence. I also didn't read his statement as 'all M43 buyers are dumb', just that a great many in the early days ignored/flamed the equivalence question, or simply weren't aware of it, and bought something which didn't get the results they'd been led to believe. I don't really know why I bothered summarising that, I thought the original statement was perfectly clear enough.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 12:43 UTC
In reply to:

yomasa: Nice write up, But you are comparing the GFX 50S to the strengths of Three other cameras, Where the GFX 50S encompasses those strengths in one body. The lenses will come with time.

There might be some room to grow, Fuji seem to have focused on making the lenses small to match the body, whereas plenty of the optically most impressive FF lenses are quite a bit larger.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 12:16 UTC
In reply to:

User6972787751: dpreview used to be such a great site, now, it's the last site I visit.....

Ephotozine doesn't do reviews as well but seems to highlight user photo content more. To be honest DPreview is my only stop for tech, unless I'm actively looking to buy something. For photography I prefer not to read about it, but places like http://www.sidetracked.com/ have photos that often get me feeling inspired to take pictures.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 12:15 UTC
In reply to:

rbach44: There isn’t anything wrong in this article, but it is so far down the theoretical rabbit hole, I’m not sure how relevant it is. It only describes shooting at the longest handheld shutter speed in minimal light and thats about it. Most MF users will be using them on a tripod and with lights, anyway.

We’re not all using Otuses, lenses almost never perform optimally wide open, DOF at 1.4 is insufficient for many scenes, and we’re not all shooting handheld. There a few theoretical situations where 35mm CAN equal medium format, but there are many real world situations where it won’t.

Real pros with real needs who shell out a lot of real money for these things say there is something intangibly better about the big pixels/medium format rendering that goes beyond measurement. Given my personal experience moving up through the formats, I’m inclined to think its true. Though the armchair photo crowd may disagree, I’m sure there is a good reason that pros spend 5 figures on these cameras.

Yes this is an awesome idea, let people view full res and tick a survey box. Better yet let them decide by looking at a 640x480 compressed embedded JPEG the way, to be honest, absolutely everyone views 99% of images these days.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 17:35 UTC
In reply to:

User6972787751: dpreview used to be such a great site, now, it's the last site I visit.....

User6972787751 perhaps you could explain why this article upset you so much. I can't for the life of me understand why any of this was so controversial to so many commenters.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 17:26 UTC

I'm disappointing by all the harsh remarks on here. I think people have read it as put-down of Fuji by a pixel peeper who 'doesn't get it'. Others have poked small holes in the technical logic.

I'd like to thank Rishi for this article. This camera system costs far more than other well-respected solutions on the market, and needs to be held to a high standard. Of course some people will make an emotional judgement and love it, which is fine, but for others we are talking about an outlay that might otherwise pay for a down-payment on a mortgage or a decent used car.

I didn't interpret any of this as Rishi saying that cheaper systems are hands-down better, merely that Fuji's decision to release MF without either particularly bright lenses or the very most cutting edge sensor technology makes it a system you should approach aware of it's caveats. MF, just like FF, is vulnerable to the class below when any aspect of the package doesn't come together. The article was entirely legitimate.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 17:23 UTC as 95th comment
In reply to:

Zdman: You forgot the main advantage which is lens design. To achieve the same depth of field and light gathering you can design a lens one stop higher than you would for full frame. So instead of making design trade offs with a F2 design you can go to F2.8 with less spherical aberration and chromatic abberations etc. Go to large format and you can design crazy good F5.6 lenses and still get the depth of field of a full frame at f1.4. Why do you think large format hasn't got lenses much faster than F5.6? Because they don't need it (the DOF would be too small) and the results at F5,6 are spectacular. Its not just about the silicon its the lenses. Extrapolate the MF F2.8 (which would probably only need 6 elements) and light gathering to M43 and you'd need an F1 lens which is just not feasible to design.

You say 'the main advantage', but it seems to me that if you're paying triple the price for the system to avoid a bit of barrel distortion you're in competition for the dictionary definition 'diminishing returns'. Happy to be proved wrong.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 17:10 UTC
In reply to:

yomasa: Nice write up, But you are comparing the GFX 50S to the strengths of Three other cameras, Where the GFX 50S encompasses those strengths in one body. The lenses will come with time.

I think you ought to caveat that last sentence. Lenses 'might' come with time. I own a Fuji and would call myself a Fuji fan, but was surprised that they didn't release more ambitious lenses, since those would have made a better case for the system. This article can only be written for now, and should not be expected to cater for some nebulous future eventuality which hasn't even been confirmed by Fuji yet.

I also don't think the GFX could be said to "encompass those strengths in one body", I think Rishi quite explicitly says that current FF can better the GFX as a package when you take lenses into account, depending on what your imaging priorities are.

When those mythical f1.8 MF lenses come out I'll be as ecstatic as the next person, but until then I think it's fair game to wonder what advantage the system delivers over others half (or less) the price.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 17:01 UTC
In reply to:

Nireas: Dear Rishi Sanyal....I have been reading dpreview for 12 years and taking photos 35 years. I respect your scientific education but I think you were carried away by numbers, bits , photons and charts. This kind of article is more appropriate for a techno-electronics site that compares electronic parts.
I feel that the passion you have for photography is for the specs and pixels. Not for the image quality and the "experience of the moment" that a photo conveys to the viewer.

Nireas, DPReview caters to the love of photography, and also provides detailed technical information on cameras. There are plenty of other sites that skew the other way. I come to DPReview first and foremost for the best technical information on cameras, as I am sure many others do. Fuji and other MF manufacturers are charging huge amounts of money for their cameras, and so I applaud Rishi for writing such a concise yet immensely detailed piece aimed at educating consumers on the pro's and con's of the latest MF offering.

Many people are happy to put £5000+ down based on 'experience' with a system - see any happy Leica owner, and that is absolutely fine with me. But for others that is a huge sum of money, and needs to be justified both technically and emotionally. If I am cash-strapped, but still want to take the best photos possible, this article informs me that I might be able to 'make do' with a D810 and some technical know-how.

I think you are off-base, sorry.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 16:56 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1080 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: Does the camera have a way to turn up Saturation and/or Contrast and sharpening? (picture profiles?)

Some brutal criticism: (The good is plenty about it)

As a Canon 5DIV user these colours look aweful to me. I can get this look by going to Neutral Picture Style and turning Saturation and contrast to -4, and over-sharpening by +7. You get that exact look. Try it. I think it's a big downside perhaps the biggest. I don't edit each photograph. You just set the 5D to Standard and print.

And video, something I care about, is not far from the 5DIV crop (1.64x vs. 1.52x in DCI wide 4K) and I expected a Leica going for video to do full readout. The 5D offers a less compressed codec, and DPAF plus SOOC colours, yet the Leica does have an EVF with peaking and 10bit vs 8bit HDMI out.

And leica users speak as if all the other manufacturers make pinhole lenses. For my 30mp 5DIV or the 50mp 5DSR, there's an enormous host of optical wonders, just remember Canon's 35mm f/1.4 L II, Canon 11-24mm f/4 L, 16-35mm f/2.8 L III, 135mm f/2 L, Sigma 20mm f/1.4 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.4, Otus 35, 50, 85 line, etc. You do have optically outstanding lenses for a Canon, from Canon, Sigma, Tamron, you even have Zeiss. ALL of which are much cheaper than the leicas. And you can even adapt leicas. So what's with the lenses argument of Leica being superior to all these? Any proof?

Leicas are supposed to be special. Feel special. Shoot special imagery. Slow you down. Give a mechanical touch, a vintage feel, be handy, ergonomic wonder, and so on. All of which are present in Leica's rangefinders like an M9 line or a Monochrome (love these cameras), but this is just another modern mirrorless camera with nothing over the rivals aside from a viewfinder. Not image quality, not AF, not size, not ergonomics, not feel, not video, not menus, and I argue not even lenses which is the only argument leica shooters have but they should try 2017 DSLR lenses. Is it a good camera, yes. Does it offer something better than a 5DIV, a D810, an A7rII, a Fuji Gfx, a pentax 645z, I just can't see where it does.

(Btw I did shoot the camera briefly in our store next to my 5D and the 5D felt seemed similar/superior but the SL had a more impressive VF and that's it. The Canon embraces your hand grip with every finger while the SL is just a flat awkward chunk.)

I'd LOVE to see side by side lens shots between leicas and the new DSLR top-end lenses. Best if both adapted to the SL with an EF adapter. This is practically the only argument one could buy this camera for, and thus needs confirmation ASAP. Don't judge by comparing the lenses fron the m9 vs 5D II days!

HowaboutRAW your style in these comments threads is sometimes combative, I replied originally because I hate the absolutist attitude of 'everyone worth their salt should shoot RAW'.
I don't understand your point about time in a dark room. It is 2017, we shouldn't be in a dark room/Lightroom if we don't absolutely have to be.
I already stated that I shoot JPEG + RAW. I also often tweak white balance in the camera so I don't feel the need to change it in post. JPEGs are flexible enough for me in this regard 99% of the time, after all how drastically are you routinely changing white balance? Older Sony users = an exception.
It is important to remember why you shoot. I can take a photo, edit it on my tablet in great software like Snapseed, and share it with thousands of people on Instagram all in the space of a few minutes. A camera with a bad JPEG engine is useless to me. On the other hand I can take a RAW and print it large to go on a wall. Both are valid uses.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2017 at 15:10 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1080 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: Does the camera have a way to turn up Saturation and/or Contrast and sharpening? (picture profiles?)

Some brutal criticism: (The good is plenty about it)

As a Canon 5DIV user these colours look aweful to me. I can get this look by going to Neutral Picture Style and turning Saturation and contrast to -4, and over-sharpening by +7. You get that exact look. Try it. I think it's a big downside perhaps the biggest. I don't edit each photograph. You just set the 5D to Standard and print.

And video, something I care about, is not far from the 5DIV crop (1.64x vs. 1.52x in DCI wide 4K) and I expected a Leica going for video to do full readout. The 5D offers a less compressed codec, and DPAF plus SOOC colours, yet the Leica does have an EVF with peaking and 10bit vs 8bit HDMI out.

And leica users speak as if all the other manufacturers make pinhole lenses. For my 30mp 5DIV or the 50mp 5DSR, there's an enormous host of optical wonders, just remember Canon's 35mm f/1.4 L II, Canon 11-24mm f/4 L, 16-35mm f/2.8 L III, 135mm f/2 L, Sigma 20mm f/1.4 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.4, Otus 35, 50, 85 line, etc. You do have optically outstanding lenses for a Canon, from Canon, Sigma, Tamron, you even have Zeiss. ALL of which are much cheaper than the leicas. And you can even adapt leicas. So what's with the lenses argument of Leica being superior to all these? Any proof?

Leicas are supposed to be special. Feel special. Shoot special imagery. Slow you down. Give a mechanical touch, a vintage feel, be handy, ergonomic wonder, and so on. All of which are present in Leica's rangefinders like an M9 line or a Monochrome (love these cameras), but this is just another modern mirrorless camera with nothing over the rivals aside from a viewfinder. Not image quality, not AF, not size, not ergonomics, not feel, not video, not menus, and I argue not even lenses which is the only argument leica shooters have but they should try 2017 DSLR lenses. Is it a good camera, yes. Does it offer something better than a 5DIV, a D810, an A7rII, a Fuji Gfx, a pentax 645z, I just can't see where it does.

(Btw I did shoot the camera briefly in our store next to my 5D and the 5D felt seemed similar/superior but the SL had a more impressive VF and that's it. The Canon embraces your hand grip with every finger while the SL is just a flat awkward chunk.)

I'd LOVE to see side by side lens shots between leicas and the new DSLR top-end lenses. Best if both adapted to the SL with an EF adapter. This is practically the only argument one could buy this camera for, and thus needs confirmation ASAP. Don't judge by comparing the lenses fron the m9 vs 5D II days!

Honestly I think all these RAW warriors are becoming more and more of an anachronism. There is no reason cameras nowadays shouldn't be producing nearly print-ready JPEG's. The idea that you spend a fortune on a camera to then have to post-process every single keeper is farcical. I shoot RAW + JPEG and I only touch the RAW if I want to tweak more than the JPEG compression will allow. I am guessing 95% of advanced amateurs do exactly the same.

"For jpeg's? Who cares. All5DIV, a D810, an A7rII, a Fuji Gfx, a pentax 645z ,Sl's etc are meant to shoot RAW."

Perfectly mainstream in 2013, ridiculous in 2017.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 14:13 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1080 comments in total)
In reply to:

FodgeandDurn: I think the Fuji GFX ate the SL's lunch.

Hey lets have a conversation about equivalence and medium format vs 35mm!

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 15:56 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1080 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: Does the camera have a way to turn up Saturation and/or Contrast and sharpening? (picture profiles?)

Some brutal criticism: (The good is plenty about it)

As a Canon 5DIV user these colours look aweful to me. I can get this look by going to Neutral Picture Style and turning Saturation and contrast to -4, and over-sharpening by +7. You get that exact look. Try it. I think it's a big downside perhaps the biggest. I don't edit each photograph. You just set the 5D to Standard and print.

And video, something I care about, is not far from the 5DIV crop (1.64x vs. 1.52x in DCI wide 4K) and I expected a Leica going for video to do full readout. The 5D offers a less compressed codec, and DPAF plus SOOC colours, yet the Leica does have an EVF with peaking and 10bit vs 8bit HDMI out.

And leica users speak as if all the other manufacturers make pinhole lenses. For my 30mp 5DIV or the 50mp 5DSR, there's an enormous host of optical wonders, just remember Canon's 35mm f/1.4 L II, Canon 11-24mm f/4 L, 16-35mm f/2.8 L III, 135mm f/2 L, Sigma 20mm f/1.4 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.4, Otus 35, 50, 85 line, etc. You do have optically outstanding lenses for a Canon, from Canon, Sigma, Tamron, you even have Zeiss. ALL of which are much cheaper than the leicas. And you can even adapt leicas. So what's with the lenses argument of Leica being superior to all these? Any proof?

Leicas are supposed to be special. Feel special. Shoot special imagery. Slow you down. Give a mechanical touch, a vintage feel, be handy, ergonomic wonder, and so on. All of which are present in Leica's rangefinders like an M9 line or a Monochrome (love these cameras), but this is just another modern mirrorless camera with nothing over the rivals aside from a viewfinder. Not image quality, not AF, not size, not ergonomics, not feel, not video, not menus, and I argue not even lenses which is the only argument leica shooters have but they should try 2017 DSLR lenses. Is it a good camera, yes. Does it offer something better than a 5DIV, a D810, an A7rII, a Fuji Gfx, a pentax 645z, I just can't see where it does.

(Btw I did shoot the camera briefly in our store next to my 5D and the 5D felt seemed similar/superior but the SL had a more impressive VF and that's it. The Canon embraces your hand grip with every finger while the SL is just a flat awkward chunk.)

I'd LOVE to see side by side lens shots between leicas and the new DSLR top-end lenses. Best if both adapted to the SL with an EF adapter. This is practically the only argument one could buy this camera for, and thus needs confirmation ASAP. Don't judge by comparing the lenses fron the m9 vs 5D II days!

A few people have made the point that JPEG engines are a large part of the R&D you pay for in your camera. You shouldn't spend $xxxx on a camera only to have to painstakingly edit and process every single image before you use it. That idea is horrendously elitist and out-dated.

Were I to ever own a Nikon D5, I'd spend my time taking photos, maybe sometimes tweaking the JPEG's. Perfectly possible in most cases where low light / solid blocks of colour aren't present to produce banding, and because the JPEG's themselves are very pleasing.

Honestly the 'you should always shoot RAW' argument ought to have died several years ago. RAW is for low light, critical work, and where banding is likely to be a risk if you want to edit much.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 10:43 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1080 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: If I didn't know better, I would swear that the Leica SL was designed to make the Sony A7RII look good by comparison. It even makes those Sony FE G Master lenses look like bargains....

When browsing the internets I can always spot a photo not taken with Leica glass because it causes me to spontaneously vomit and drop my monocle.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 10:36 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1080 comments in total)

I think the Fuji GFX ate the SL's lunch.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 10:24 UTC as 79th comment | 5 replies
On article Canon debuts EOS M6 mirrorless with optional EVF (659 comments in total)
In reply to:

NYCman530: Canon appears to be stingy about including viewfinders with their cameras recently. First with the $699 G1X Markll and now with a $779 EOS M6. Seems like a deal breaker. At least they inclused one with my G5X, which I love as my compact camera.

rrccad
You have almost perfectly described a camera which does exist, the Sony RX series. Admittedly they are expensive. Panasonic also have the GM5. Also if you do a size comparrison the A6000 is hardly much bigger, is far cheaper, and has a similar feature set (albeit missing a few things). http://camerasize.com/compare/#709,535

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 23:47 UTC
On article Canon debuts EOS M6 mirrorless with optional EVF (659 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donnie G: Does Toyota sell a convertible? Well, so does Canon. Canon calls it the EOS M6. The M6 is the convertible version of Canon's M5, and just like Toyota, Canon will sell customers their convertible or their hardtop model or both if that's what they want. It's called choice, and their customers love having it, even if you don't.

Happy 30th Birthday EOS! 😎

Not going to speculate on total interchangeable lens camera sales, since I only really pay attention to mirrorless, but wow I think you will turn out to be spectacularly wrong. Canon needs another 2 or 3 mirrorless bodies and a bunch more lenses just to be in contention for the top spot. The EOS M2 helped them get ahead of the M43 manufacturers, but it's success was largely based on a knock-down price. That is not something you can say about their latest cameras.

Maybe in several years if they keep trying, keep at least one body on permanent fire-sale (enough to beat the $400 A6000?), and innovate a bit more.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 10:43 UTC
On article Canon debuts EOS M6 mirrorless with optional EVF (659 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donnie G: Does Toyota sell a convertible? Well, so does Canon. Canon calls it the EOS M6. The M6 is the convertible version of Canon's M5, and just like Toyota, Canon will sell customers their convertible or their hardtop model or both if that's what they want. It's called choice, and their customers love having it, even if you don't.

Happy 30th Birthday EOS! 😎

Donnie G, I respect the sweep of your point, but I also think you're stretching the principle. In practice optional EVF's would appear to have been a sales failure. Users tend to fit into two buckets - those who need an EVF and those who do not care. It was not just Sony, Olympus also gave this optional EVF method extensive testing.

Canon are perfectly welcome to try it, of course, but there is precedent for it not doing well in the market.

Another Toyota analogy would be if they decided to copy the AMC Gremlin for their next Corolla.

I am not saying I expect Canon to go bust overnight, but I also doubt they will sell very many EVF's, or for that matter M6's.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 03:10 UTC
On article Canon debuts EOS M6 mirrorless with optional EVF (659 comments in total)
In reply to:

NYCman530: Canon appears to be stingy about including viewfinders with their cameras recently. First with the $699 G1X Markll and now with a $779 EOS M6. Seems like a deal breaker. At least they inclused one with my G5X, which I love as my compact camera.

I guess not having even an optional evf was the death of the Samsung NX-500, a camera that but for some tweaks could have been class leading. I guess part of Canon's calculation is that only 10% of users will buy one, but they'll avoid 90% of the negative press of not having one at all.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 03:03 UTC
On article Canon debuts EOS M6 mirrorless with optional EVF (659 comments in total)

Did Olympus sell many of their optional EVF's? I don't want to rag on Canon, because it seems like they are finally trying, but a lot of the more superficial elements of this package feel very 2012. I realise Canon are conservative and that is not necessarily a bad thing, but I do wonder why when playing catch-up they seem to want to repeat all the mistakes the Mirrorless trailblazers already corrected years ago.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 03:00 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
Total: 303, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »