okanb

Joined on Nov 24, 2014

Comments

Total: 21, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Full-frame mirrorless lens guide 2021 (1519 comments in total)

You neglected the fact that nikon z has the shortest focal flange distance. As much as I love Zeiss glass and Tamrons , sony ergonomics are far from ideal. I prefer to use them on my Z6. I am happy with the focus speed and accuracy. Focusing with loxias is even better compared to sony.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2020 at 16:22 UTC as 137th comment
On article Fujifilm GF 30mm F3.5 R WR sample gallery (55 comments in total)

It is great that we finally have a 24mm equivalent lens, now all I need is a 21mm. For a landscape lens though, sunstars are dissappointing. It won't be easy to let loxia go.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2020 at 09:47 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

okanb: I used all Sony A7 series up until mark iv. I especially loved the fact that I could adapt any lens, but always envied the way mft cameras operated and handled. When I bought z6, it was all I ever wanted in one package, and a wise decision from Nikon making the shortest flange distance, so that I could even adapt great sony lenses with af. I can use almost any lens ever made which is great. For me this is the best mirrorless camera in the market, would only upgrade if I wanted more resolution.

@VincentMike, I am using techart adapter

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2020 at 07:49 UTC
On article Full-frame mirrorless lens guide 2021 (1519 comments in total)

If it wasn't for Sony FE lenses that I had, I would probably never switch to Nikon Z6 (DSLR lenses are big and heavy, z mount lenses are unnecessarily expensive and I buy second hand anyways). Immediately after I saw a blog post about loxia 21mm working extremely well on Z6, which is my all time favorite lens, I decided to buy the Z6 with 24-70f4 and ftz. 2470 proved to be an excellent all rounder lens too. In the end I had a system that I could adapt Nikon lenses, Canon lenses with sigma mc-11 and Sony lenses all with very good AF. Best part is that the Sony adapter is only couple of mms.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2020 at 07:57 UTC as 231st comment

I used all Sony A7 series up until mark iv. I especially loved the fact that I could adapt any lens, but always envied the way mft cameras operated and handled. When I bought z6, it was all I ever wanted in one package, and a wise decision from Nikon making the shortest flange distance, so that I could even adapt great sony lenses with af. I can use almost any lens ever made which is great. For me this is the best mirrorless camera in the market, would only upgrade if I wanted more resolution.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2020 at 22:06 UTC as 35th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Mateus1: For this price & these dissapointing drawbacks I would rather take Z6 (now $1,696)

in europe even black xpro3 costs around 2000 euros, titanium even more. I bought Z6, FTZ and 2470f4 for 2000 euros. And Z6 is a lot of camera for it's price. I think Z series will be a great disturbance for the market especially to Sony's. Which Fuji could have done as well.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2019 at 11:12 UTC
In reply to:

okanb: This is a market research exercise for Fuji. For the first time xpro line has no single improvement in terms of technology over xt series. They just want to see if they can get more of our money by just making it 'hipster'. If it works we have an official poor man's leica, and Fujifilm will presumably start adding lizzard skin, choping off lcds, removing buttons, crippling functionality and obviously making special ten year editions, bundling it with titanium fujicrons for thousands of kuwaiti dinars and whatnot.

@stevo23, how Fuji can be poor man's Leica? If you mean Leica's weird models like tl/cl and digilux lines then you are right. If you mean m series, then Fuji has nothing to do with Leica with their non existing rangefinder, electronic aperture control, focus by wire etc..Fuji can be poor man's contax g2 though, considering their increase in value.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2019 at 22:20 UTC
In reply to:

ChrisFB: I know many people find it sexy, or hip. And I agree that Fuji makes mighty fine cameras. But am I the only one who thinks this is rather ugly, especially the black one? I don't like retro style at all, but if you want to do, look at e.g. a Pen-F, very nice. This is just...ugly. And that small lcd.. useless gadget. I would pick an X-T3 or X-T30 any time over this.

I always found xpro series very ugly. I bought xpro2 just because it came before xt2. Build quality is fantastic though. When it comes to looks, silver penf is jist georgous. I still have it and love everything about it. I mean Penf would suit George Clooney, xpro rather Johnny Depp?

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2019 at 22:05 UTC
In reply to:

okanb: This is a market research exercise for Fuji. For the first time xpro line has no single improvement in terms of technology over xt series. They just want to see if they can get more of our money by just making it 'hipster'. If it works we have an official poor man's leica, and Fujifilm will presumably start adding lizzard skin, choping off lcds, removing buttons, crippling functionality and obviously making special ten year editions, bundling it with titanium fujicrons for thousands of kuwaiti dinars and whatnot.

@darngoodphotos, people paid premium at least for xpro2 mostly to have access to latest tech before xt2 arrived I think it helped selling it more. Hdr stacking, saving tiff, focus limiter are not technology. I bet even cpu and 99 percent of the hardware is same...which might be available soon for xt3 as well. Xpro3 offers almost nothing of an added value considering its hefty price tag. Z6, A7 3 price for 200fps evf and focus limiter? Thank you.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2019 at 17:25 UTC

Looks like great lenses, I wish at least 35 was f2 though.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2019 at 09:47 UTC as 9th comment

This is a market research exercise for Fuji. For the first time xpro line has no single improvement in terms of technology over xt series. They just want to see if they can get more of our money by just making it 'hipster'. If it works we have an official poor man's leica, and Fujifilm will presumably start adding lizzard skin, choping off lcds, removing buttons, crippling functionality and obviously making special ten year editions, bundling it with titanium fujicrons for thousands of kuwaiti dinars and whatnot.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2019 at 09:31 UTC as 215th comment | 13 replies

The only company which makes me laugh when they release a 'new model'. Leica is the joke of photo industry. Keep us laughing though..

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 08:33 UTC as 6th comment
On article 2017 Roundup: Fixed Prime Lens Cameras (472 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jim Evidon: I used to have an X100 and loved it for its IQ and features but found it too bulky for a backup camera. I now have the X70 and with an optical VF attached, and it is still small enough to slip in my pants pocket, although for the sake of the camera I prefer to carry it in a small LowePro belt loop case. I considered the highly praised Ricoh GRII, but I felt that the sensor is now a little long in the tooth, the excellent Ricoh lens is a little too slow and the FujiX sensor simply performs better at medium high ISO's (400 to 1600) and in low light.

I remember when I first bought my XM1 after seeing the comparison tool in dpreview. I was blown away by the high iso performance. Amazing, clean pictures even at iso6400. After couple of months of usage, and comparing it to other cameras reality hit hard. Fuji's baked raw files, soft mushy details, less light sensitivity at same settings compared to even MFT was a slap on my face. So, i think yes, it is cheating! especially if they use it to their marketing advantage. Xtrans magic, great high iso performance as good as FF bla bla are all a result of this and part of a Fuji dream. @Jim, if you actually owned Ricoh and X70, you would know their ISO performance is identical as long as you shoot RAW. So, this is why people say Fuji cheats..to make you think that they are better...

Link | Posted on May 19, 2017 at 08:42 UTC
In reply to:

Greg7579: Banh,
I was shocked to read your post. Fuji lenses are the best built lenses in the world. Rugged and metal -- praised by all. Besides being superbly built, they are perhaps the best glass in the world, surpassing my Canon Ls in all regards. The Fuji bodies, like the XT-1, are of similar rugged stock, and are some of the best photography tools on Earth. What in the world are you talking about? That post was utter and total nonsense, even if for some reason you don't like Fuji. I won't make fun of your English. I'm sure it is not your first language and that you speak your language quite well.

my experience with fujis: xpro2 lost eyecap, scratch from factory, 27mm eyelash in the lens, 35mm and 23mm f1.4 dust in lens, 56mm f1.2 dust in lens within a week. No, I don't live in Dubai. 14mm f2.8 loose focus ring, I also hear many people had to service their 56mm due to focus problems. Fuji also have a lot of dead pixel or hot pixel problems. Fuji is good enough, not superb not the best not the cheapest, not the smallest, not the best built, not the fastest, not easiest to use etc. It certainly does offer the best lens lineup in apsc, for the rest it performs good enough (only new 24mp series though)..

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2016 at 03:12 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85 / G80 Review (698 comments in total)

Panasonic JPEGS are meh compared to XT10? I doubt that. I find they are better in standard profile compared to my X100T. Camerastore TV also proved that Panasonic jpegs can be more desirable. I would never imagine that I'd say this but Panasonic can produce very pleasing sooc jpegs. Also the technology put into tiny Panasonic G&GX bodies are probably couple of years ahead of Fuji.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2016 at 02:59 UTC as 30th comment | 1 reply
On article Field Test: Wedding Photography with the Fujifilm X-T2 (232 comments in total)
In reply to:

mmcfine: Errr... The big dilemma. To move from the Canon 6D to Fuji or not. Seems like a much more capable camera, but does it worth the money? I don't mind loosing FF for better dynamic range and looks like better file information and lenses. I need to stop visiting this website....;-)

X-T2 while offering a great system does not worth the money IMHO. If you want to use Canon glass you can use A7 series with an adapter (sigma etc) without investing much in lenses at least initially. Also if you are planning to use zoom lenses Fuji will be far from a compact system. Even 16-55 f2.8 is a beast, I would rather have a real f2.8 in terms of FF dof for that size, weight and price... In this case MFT is much better. Fuji's AF speed will also heavily rely on glass speed too. If you are planning to use f1.4 primes; only 16mm, which is a superb lens btw can keep up with the speed and in good light. And one more thing, FF's capabilities is not a marketing hype, it is physics. When I look at my pictures at ISO1600 from my A6300 (loxia 21mm) and A7 Mark II (Canon 35mm f2), the advantage of FF is very clear (in very poorly lit conditions). If the scene is well lit, the difference would obviously be less.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2016 at 01:47 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85 / G80 Review (698 comments in total)

I own a GX80, I just love this camera. I think with touch screen and great menu system and all the advanced features this is easily one of the best cameras in the market. To my surprise Panasonic's JPEGs in standard profile are much more pleasing, colorful with better AWB than my X100T's JPEGs especially for landscapes. Due to same resolution sensor detailis are same if not better in some cases.

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2016 at 11:13 UTC as 45th comment
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2497 comments in total)
In reply to:

okanb: I ended up selling my X-Pro2 and keeping A7. Eventhough it is a leap forward compared to previous x-trans sensor, fine detail, less color smearing etc it is still not comparable to FF by any means (DR, Low ISO, Fine Details..). I also found no advantage of having OVF. This camera should not cost for than 800 dollars as it is not leading the industry but just lagging behind (compared to A6300, D5500 etc) except probably build quality. I am fully invested in Fuji and like it, but for landscape XP2 is not enough, for anything else 16MP xtrans sensor will not make much difference. For 1700 USD I now have a Sony A7 and a Zeiss 16-35 f4. Is it also better than XP2 and 10-24 combined? Yes it is.

PaulDavis, Xpro2 high iso files look cleaner but lack sharpness and detail even compared to an old FF sensor as in Sony A7. In studio comparison tool the difference is too obvious. Also dpreview compensates the exposure difference, I am not sure what they do but in real life at same ISO Sony is able to gather 2/3 stops more light. So you get the same light at ISO4000ish on Sony and ISO6400 on Fuji. Fuji is still great because of controls and great choice of lenses and good enough sensor. For example at the moment I am really struggling to find a proper prime for my A6300 (14mm, 16mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2 equivalent of lenses). I will definitely buy an XT2, and luckily I have a huge shopping list for lenses.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2016 at 13:02 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2497 comments in total)

I ended up selling my X-Pro2 and keeping A7. Eventhough it is a leap forward compared to previous x-trans sensor, fine detail, less color smearing etc it is still not comparable to FF by any means (DR, Low ISO, Fine Details..). I also found no advantage of having OVF. This camera should not cost for than 800 dollars as it is not leading the industry but just lagging behind (compared to A6300, D5500 etc) except probably build quality. I am fully invested in Fuji and like it, but for landscape XP2 is not enough, for anything else 16MP xtrans sensor will not make much difference. For 1700 USD I now have a Sony A7 and a Zeiss 16-35 f4. Is it also better than XP2 and 10-24 combined? Yes it is.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2016 at 16:47 UTC as 40th comment | 7 replies
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (370 comments in total)
In reply to:

PaulDavis: Looking at the Ricoh and X70 next to each other I can't help but think I would want the pick up the X70 instead of the GR. Logically the GR seems like the better choice but it is one of the most unexciting cameras I have seen. Some cameras just get you more excited to go take pictures.

I used to think the same until I bought Ricoh GR. Despite I am a Fuji shooter, I sold my X70. I suggest to give Ricoh GR a chance, ┼čt does not look like it but it is much more fun to use.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 08:20 UTC
Total: 21, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »