Clint Dunn

Lives in Canada Vancouver, Canada
Joined on Dec 2, 2008

Comments

Total: 636, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Fotodiox Pro launches five GFX lens adapters (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): Wouldn't adapt lesser lenses to such a camera. It's like someone who buys a $100,000 car that's diesel powered. False economy and stupid.

Olypent - Take a nap

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 00:36 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1093 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): Say what you want about Leica but their cameras just work. They don't have the most impressive technology ipor spec sheet but they do just what they are advertised to do. You don't have to worry about thousands of settings, lens compatibility, special AF modes and so on. Just use it and it does the job, remarkably well for people who bought one

@villagranvicent - I owned a Canon 5D like 8 years ago and I preferred even Leica's M8 to that camera. It was fine for what it was but like most Canon cameras it was the melba toast of the camera world. Boring.

Also...the image quality of my M8 was far superior to the Canon 5D...at least up to iso400.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 00:23 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1093 comments in total)
In reply to:

electrophoto: duh?
What am I missing here...?
It costs almost 8k$ and offers less than my D800 in most regards...
will be beat in size and IQ (and price) by every FF Sony has to offer...
It has less direct control as it looks than most pro DSLRs I've seen.
And it has the worst DR of the FF Options out there...
and all that for just shy of 8k$...

I read an article that compared images between an A7R2 and the SL at base ISO and the results were VERY close. So...I would hardly say that 'every' Sony FF would beat it in quality.

Yes, $8k is a lot of money for an SL we get it. News flash, $100k is a lot of money for a Porsche 911 when a Corvette is faster for $50k. $15k for a Panerai is a lot of money for a watch when a $100 Casio keeps better time. I could go on...

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 00:20 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1093 comments in total)
In reply to:

villagranvicent: Based solely on specs & price, the score should be significantly lower.

What would be the score of a Canon/Nikon/Pentax full frame camera with the exact same specs and price than this? Yes, the lenses could be amazing, but the review is about the camera alone.

A Canon/Nikon/Pentax is not a Leica. Simply pick up an SL and compare it to say a Canon 5D. Build quality and fit/finish is miles apart. Some people care about this and some people don't.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 00:14 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1093 comments in total)
In reply to:

onemoreguy: So, which group of people would want to buy this camera more? The really-rich people or the wanna-be/ pretend-to-be rich people?

Such useless comments. I own a Leica M240 and various lenses and I'm neither 'rich' nor 'wannabe-rich'. People make purchasing decisions every day. For example, do you drive a Hyundai or do you drive a BMW??? What is a waste of money to one person is worth every penny to someone else.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 00:10 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1093 comments in total)
In reply to:

Abel89er: I don't get why on the comparison, the A7 didn't get green squares on resolution, weight, price and stabilization. Maybe then one would notice that A7rII has more green boxes than leica SL?

I don't need to read the review to know the A7Rii would have 'more green boxes then the Leica'. I didn't buy my M240 because it was the highest spec'd camera. I bought it for a lot of other reasons....but mostly because I enjoy using my Leica more then any other camera I've owned (and I've owned a lot).

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 00:07 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1093 comments in total)
In reply to:

ClassicPhotoLearner: The Leca M10 is USD 800 cheaper. Of the two I would buy the M10 without any hesitation even id it is the same price.

Ok, for M10 cost of ownership you have to add the EVF, but for the SL you would need ti add the cost of the adapter.

Alas, the M10 is out of my price range. But that is my issue. The M10, is absolutely worth it, and it can usr all those Leica lenses.

I disagree with you that the M10 is 'absolutely worth it'. You get a lot more camera from the SL then you do with the M10 (for reference I'm an M240 owner).
If a rangefinder is your thing my opinion is the best bang for your buck is picking up a 'like new' M240 for $4k. The M10 is only marginally better IMO.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 00:01 UTC
On article Fotodiox Pro launches five GFX lens adapters (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

villagranvicent: What would be the point to use FF lenses with a medium format body? The same thing as when using APS lenses in FF cameras, you have to crop.

Well...if you dropped a pile of money on a GFX and say one lens.....this would give you the option to use some of your existing FF glass. Yes, it isn't ideal but a cropped image from the GFX would still be higher resolution then say a FF 24MP camera. It's a stop gap until you can A) afford more Fuji glass and/or B) Fuji releases more lenses.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2017 at 23:30 UTC
On article Fujifilm XF 23mm F2 R WR sample gallery (285 comments in total)
In reply to:

Contra Mundum: It's not a bad lens, just soft, suffers from spherical and chromatic aberrations. But why is it priced so high? An optically better Canon EF-M 22/2 retails for $249, and was often available for $100 grey market.

A Canon M camera...hahahahahahahahahahaha. Sorry, what were you saying??

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 23:55 UTC
On article Fujifilm XF 23mm F2 R WR sample gallery (285 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: I'll just stick to my 18-55mm "kit" lens. Perfect size, build, OIS, good optics (if you get a good copy).

Yes, all of those things and 'slow'.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 23:52 UTC

...and I have a bridge for sale.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2017 at 23:36 UTC as 23rd comment
In reply to:

Raptor117: The original X100 was still the best with its Bayer sensor. I loved it!
After that I bought the X-E1 and X-E2 with a bunch of Fuji's great lenses.
However the X-Trans sensor brought so many issues for me I couldn't cope with. I tried other sharpening settings in Lightroom and other RAW converters but it was futile.
My landscape photos with foliage, grass and anything that was green with fine details were either mushy, had that infamous water colour effect or worm shaped artefacts.
My hope is that Fuji will drop X-Trans in the near future and introduce back the Bayer sensors.
Perhaps with the GFX and its Bayer sensor gaining traction in the industry they will rethink their strategy and get back to Bayer sensor... *fingers crossed*

I would like to see one photo where XTrans 'ruined' the shot. I owned an X-Pro1 for 3 years and the output was great. The whole XTrans RAW conversion thing was completely exaggerated in my opinion.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2017 at 18:22 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F pre-production sample gallery (235 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mateus1: All f/2 portraits shows how soft this Fuji lens is, useless if you print large.
This has been the only reason I resigned from buying X-100x because I shot a lot using f2. Bigest dissapointmet for me Fuji has not improved the lens in X-100F...

It's a $1300 camera with an APS-C sized sensor.....how much performance do you expect from the lens?? Put another way....it sounds like you expect Leica Summicron performance tossed in with the bigger sensor and camera all for $1300. A Leica Summicron sells for $3000. Even the Zeiss Biogon 35mm f/2 (just as good as the Summicron IMO) sells for $1100.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2017 at 00:17 UTC
In reply to:

Josh Leavitt: Looks awesome. But with an entry level full frame like the D610 retailing for $1100 brand new right now - it's kind of difficult to justify paying $5k more for a one stop advantage. I know, I know, they're in different leagues; but I can't help but get the feeling that Nikon, Canon, and Sony are going to respond aggressively with price cuts for current full frames. Not that I'm complaining, the consumer always wins with intense manufacturer competition :)

If you think medium format is just about a 'one stop advantage' then you don't understand medium format.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 16:25 UTC
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: I tell you hwut.... I'd rather drop $6500 on this than a 1DX2 or D5. Different strokes for different folks guys

Sure...if you shoot sports or you're a birder. Others will spend $6500 on the new Leica M10. However.....those of us that want the ultimate in image quality for $6500 will buy a GFX.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 16:13 UTC
In reply to:

brycesteiner: It looks interesting but to me it seems there would be real problems with soft corners and vignetting with how close the corners are to the mount. The rear element would have to cover it mostly and I'm not sure how it would if the lens is built fairly heavy.

Flange distance is only an issue if you are using lenses and a sensor that aren't designed for it. My Leica M240 as an example gives me amazing results with my Leica 21mm and Voigtlander 15mm....better then I ever got when I shot Canon with L series glass.

Besides...didn't you read Fuji's advertising:)
'Taking advantage of the mirrorless system’s structure, the G Mount has a short flange back distance of just 26.7mm that reduces the back focus distance as much as possible. This prevents vignetting and achieves edge-to-edge sharpness. All FUJINON GF Lenses have been designed to support sensors of over 100MP.'

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 16:10 UTC
In reply to:

WookieLala: No DOF equivalence debate for this camera? Oh yeah, this is reserved for MFT gear only, not APS-C (for obscure reasons).

Let me start: this camera + the 63mm f/2.8 gives the same angle of view and DOF as FF + 50mm f/2.2 (0.79 crop factor). I can buy a 5dsr + 50mm f/1.2 for much less money, similar pixel count and more DOF. The Canon combination will necessarily be better as photography is only about pixel count and DOF.

I'm sure Fuji will release faster lenses down the road...they did with the X series. Anyway...I know your post was tongue in cheek but I would take the increased DR and pixel quality of the GFX over a Canon 5DS any day of the week.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 16:05 UTC
In reply to:

User3397642960: Flash sync at 1/125? Disappointing.

They are selling an adapter for $600 that will allow you to use Hasselblad HC leaf shutter lenses.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 16:03 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: Lack aperture ring on lenses for best Fuji cam?

Big suprice.

What are you talking about they have aperture rings on the lenses.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 16:03 UTC
In reply to:

Petroglyph: I like what releasing cameras such as this does to the rest of the industry. Though I never expect to own such a camera, I could benefit from trickle down camera-nomics. Now Pentax might respond by releasing the rumored Z II with the 54X40 100MP crop-1.0 medium format sensor (at the old Z price) and a bunch of faster DFA645 lenses. The new Z price should fall 1 or 2 grand. K1 MkII gets released with 42MP BSI sensor and advanced motion pixel shift high-rez mode. Sony responds by cutting the price of A6500 by 1/2. Now we're getting closer to my territory. :^) Dream on.

I agree...a $6500 medium format Fuji HAS top effect pricing on other cameras. Put it this way...if you're a wealthy amateur that isn't invested in a system yet and you saw the announcement for the Leica M10 yesterday for $6500 or this medium format Fuji for the same amount of money....which way would you go???

I own an M240 but if this Fuji would have been available (2) years ago I would have bought the GFX in a heartbeat.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 16:01 UTC
Total: 636, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »