filipe brandao

Lives in Portugal Porto, Portugal
Works as a Architect
Joined on Dec 15, 2011

Comments

Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

photominion: Perfect walkaround lens for street..

Wait, 3kg with my Canon?!?!

I need to start to work out ^.^

With this bat of metal who needs a bodyguard?

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2015 at 22:44 UTC
In reply to:

LukeDuciel: It's near-sight for Zeiss. They should have provided reliable and easy-to-use solution for using these lenses on FE-mount.

I understand that adapters can introduce all sorts of planarity issues, which for someone willing to invest in a lens such as this might be a problem. This small group of people, as your example points out, is both made of a small group of professionals or highly affluent amateurs with very specific purposes. Maybe for the affluent amateur the investment in a lens is trifle, but for a professional it must be seen as an investment. Investing in such a lens for a mount that is recent and with such a small flange distance is bad business. Perhaps Zeiss could have offered a switchable mount solution like its cine lens line. While they don't buying nikon mount seems the best business solution, in my view.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2015 at 09:25 UTC
In reply to:

LukeDuciel: It's near-sight for Zeiss. They should have provided reliable and easy-to-use solution for using these lenses on FE-mount.

What about an adapter?

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 14:32 UTC
In reply to:

darinb: >>Zeiss says it has made focusing rings with particularly long action to make precise focusing easier,<<

The rotation angles appear to be the same as the ZF.2 line.

--Darin

The 35 is different too, couldn't confirm the others.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2015 at 22:32 UTC
In reply to:

mikeodial: Interesting. I have just invested in the 135/2 APO and the 85/1.4 Planar. Love both lenses. There is bound to be some overlap with the existing line up. Perhaps we make for some bargains in the existing ZF.2 line. That could be good for us.
Working on the manual focus is certainly a challenge for those doing sports or wildlife pictures, but it just slows you down for everything else. For the most part, or for me at least, that's a good thing.
I think an auto-focus line would be great but Canon/Nikon won't give them permission to do so on their line. Protecting their own lens market share. More Zeiss lenses is always a good thing from my perspective, and even if the price drops of my current lenses, I don't plan to sell them anyway, so no big deal.

There won't be an overlap. They have already renamed the original line to "Classic" and descontinued the equivalent classic models.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2015 at 22:30 UTC

622x324x219mm is the same size of my ageing Epson R1800!

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2015 at 13:11 UTC as 27th comment
On article Zeiss announces Compact Zoom CZ.2 15-30mm T2.9 lens (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

AndreSJ: Compact??

Yes, compact. A Master Zoom is twice the size.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2014 at 22:25 UTC
In reply to:

white shadow: Sony is finally getting there.

Now, they will have to produce a few wide angle lenses, namely 21mm, 24mm and a 28mm and a portrait lens like an 85mm to complete the set.

A 100mm macro lens would be great.

Later, they can produce a 70-200 f/2.8 zoom lens for general use.

Will we see this in the next 2 years before we can seriously consider the Sony A series over Canon or Nikon?

Zeiss has done it for their ZE and ZF mounts. Will Sony go on the fast track to catch up?

Sadly that is true! I have been let down by sony and their twists too many times (not in photography products), so I'm very distrustful about their commitment to this product line. I might be wrong, but in the meantime I wait...

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2014 at 19:22 UTC
In reply to:

UnChatNoir: I hope the quality - surely at full open aperture, that's why we buy these primes- gets finalmy beyond the level of quite a few high-end mirrorless lenses nowadays. An important diifferentiator. It is so disappointing how most Nikon primes are still coping with artifacts, chromatic abberation, coma, distortion... Don't misunderstand me, I like my Nikon D800 a lot, but f.i. my Fujifilm X has far better lenses, sharper & almost no artifacts or distortion. Many Nikon lenses offer an optical quality that didn't evolve too much since the 80's.

So what?? You were the one complaining about the quality of the nikon lenses. I never said that there is a problem with software correction, I just said that there is software correction that you don't see on Fuji X cameras because it is performed either in-camera on JPGs or embedded in RAW files.
I agree that there are many "weak" lenses in Nikon line-up, but Nikon lineup caters for so many different audiences that is unfair to make that comparison. And I don't see any problem in having to resort to third party lenses, I actually see it as an advantage.
So in the end I disagree with you, I know of many lenses in for Nikon FF that are far better than Fuji equivalents for X-mount. Yes, they are more expensive.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2014 at 19:15 UTC
In reply to:

UnChatNoir: I hope the quality - surely at full open aperture, that's why we buy these primes- gets finalmy beyond the level of quite a few high-end mirrorless lenses nowadays. An important diifferentiator. It is so disappointing how most Nikon primes are still coping with artifacts, chromatic abberation, coma, distortion... Don't misunderstand me, I like my Nikon D800 a lot, but f.i. my Fujifilm X has far better lenses, sharper & almost no artifacts or distortion. Many Nikon lenses offer an optical quality that didn't evolve too much since the 80's.

It's well know that Fuji does software correction of its lens. With the notable exception of the 23 and 14, which are better optically corrected.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2014 at 22:33 UTC
In reply to:

itsastickup: I don't understand this lens at all.

At that price it should be fully corrected with beautiful bokeh.

I get that with the Fuji 35/1.4. (Granted it isn''t FF, but it's 50mm equiv in APS-C).

The fuji 35 1.4 is not fully corrected! It's software corrected, if you doubt it just open one image on CS3 and compare it with the same image opened on Lightroom5. It has geometric distortion that is corrected behind the scenes by the camera's JPG engine. And it isn't an Apochromatic lens at all so definitely is not fully corrected.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2013 at 16:48 UTC
On article Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows (1392 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mirrorless Crusader: Pure photography? What a joke. This is a digital camera. Nikon should get over itself and start making cameras people will actually buy, not some overzealous hipster fashion accessory that doesn't even have a proper LCD.

where have you gathered the information that it doesn't have an LCD!?

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2013 at 18:06 UTC
On article Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows (1392 comments in total)
In reply to:

SeeRoy: These videos are puke-inducing. I've owned and used Nikon gear for decades (not exclusively) but this campaign and this me-too retro-cam are evidence of a company that's lost its bearings completely. Or are the consumers out there really that dumb?

the videos are just meant to grab your attention, and they seem to have been successful at it...your commenting that video

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2013 at 18:03 UTC
On article Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows (1392 comments in total)

Sweet!

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2013 at 17:58 UTC as 418th comment
On article Nikon video hints at long-desired 'digital FM' (551 comments in total)
In reply to:

Liviu Namolovan: Lack of video is a bonus. But 3000 price tag is outrageous. And this when a 24Mp FF A7 Sony (similar style camera) is only $1700! It's an insult from Nikon after the D600/D610 insult (not to mention the not acknowledged D800 left AF problem)! If it will prove to be true that insulting $3000 price, then I'll sell all my Nikon gear and I'll never look back. Similar cameras will be launched. Thanks to Fuji's brilliant initiative to launch their successful X100 we are now in position to choose because the other companies now realized that classic/retro style is selling. And Fuji just demonstrated once again by introducing the new firmware for their discontinued X100 that they are respecting their customers. Nikon learned nothing from this if 3000 $ price tag proves to be true. I'll wait for another offer from a more serious companiy and will go with a decent one.

How can a camera that hasn't been announced have a price tag? Unless DPreview knows better, Nikonrumors already acknowledged the 3000 "price tag" was a fake rumor.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2013 at 21:16 UTC
On article Nikon video hints at long-desired 'digital FM' (551 comments in total)
In reply to:

brudy: This is exactly what I want. A pure FF, small camera with OVF and manual controls, including aperture rings on lenses. Literally a digital FE2.

The price is fake. It's a rumor remember? And Nikonrumors has already said its fake.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2013 at 21:00 UTC
On article Leica teases 'Mini M' for 11th June release (304 comments in total)
In reply to:

peterwr: Please let it be a reboot of the Digilux 2. With a Micro Four Thirds sensor.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/leicadigilux2

It isn't probably that far away:
http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/big-rumor-panasonic-revives-the-l1-and-makes-a-hell-of-a-mft-camera-out-of-it/

Link | Posted on May 23, 2013 at 17:21 UTC
On article Leica teases 'Mini M' for 11th June release (304 comments in total)

Considering its placement, between Micro M (X2) and the Leica M (Typ 240), it will likely cost over 3000€...too expensive!

Link | Posted on May 23, 2013 at 16:51 UTC as 118th comment
On article Mirrorless Roundup 2011 (426 comments in total)
In reply to:

filipe brandao: I really don't understand why dpreview is clinging on to a marketing catch word ("mirrorless") instead of promoting a more clear classification of cameras.
Classifying these cameras as "mirrorless" is the same as saying a pencil is a inkless pen. Its confusing and forsakes a hole history of photography in which most of the cameras didn't have mirrors in their system. One should ask why isn't leica m9 included in this group.
Cameras have always been classified by how they allow the photographer to view/focus on the subject and their format. Any effort in this direction would help to clear the marketing confusion in which we roam.

Mr Richard, I have also voted in the pool and independently of what I have voted there I think pools are interesting to have an idea of what a group believes. Anything other than that is forcing conclusions. I could better explain what I'm saying with an image: if biologists had based their classification of bats on the opinion of a vast majority then most likely they would be birds and not mammals.
With this I'm not saying people are stupid, I'm just saying that people tend to make classifications on what is made obvious.
But dpreview is not just anyone, I have followed your reviews for over 6 years and you have always been to my understanding pretty analytical in your opinions. This "mirror-less" thing differs. Basing you classification in what people think is following your followers.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2011 at 18:26 UTC
On article Mirrorless Roundup 2011 (426 comments in total)
In reply to:

filipe brandao: I really don't understand why dpreview is clinging on to a marketing catch word ("mirrorless") instead of promoting a more clear classification of cameras.
Classifying these cameras as "mirrorless" is the same as saying a pencil is a inkless pen. Its confusing and forsakes a hole history of photography in which most of the cameras didn't have mirrors in their system. One should ask why isn't leica m9 included in this group.
Cameras have always been classified by how they allow the photographer to view/focus on the subject and their format. Any effort in this direction would help to clear the marketing confusion in which we roam.

There is no lack of finder, there is a screen to do that job (as in a view camera) or a electronic viewfinder (as in an SLR).
If better suggestions is what it takes: Electronic Finder Cameras or Electronic View Cameras is better suited IMHO.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2011 at 19:04 UTC
Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »