digifan

Lives in Netherlands Netherlands
Joined on Nov 12, 2002

Comments

Total: 207, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM sample gallery (142 comments in total)
In reply to:

digifan: A formidable example of why m43 is/would be perfectly capable for this kind of photography.

were they taken in low light? I think not!!! And besides it's not impossible either.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2017 at 11:29 UTC
In reply to:

ramonjsantiago: "85mm F1.2 is equivalent to 67mm F0.95"
How is that? Maybe its equivalent to to a 67mm F1.2.

@ Richard Butler, the equivalence debate is very stale.
The point IS as you suggest that people choosing m43 or aps-c or even smaller as professional tools are perfectly capable of keeping both concepts in their heads. But on top of that the ones adopted to one system don't NEED the comparison between 35mm and the other formats anymore.
Only when I shot 35mm and m43 side by side, I sometimes needed to adapt the workflow of capture and take the 35mm parameters in to account.
But mostly I didn't bother to do that and just stuck with the one system that I thought would be most suitable for the job.
As a sidenote:Before digital the very same existed between shooting 6x4 and bigger formats compared to 35mm.
In those days a DOF preview possibility, and a big bright OVF was even more important since there was no way of checking the result then after developpement.
So due to that I've learned to adapt quickly and envision the result before taking that comparison is of 2ndary to no importance.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2017 at 11:12 UTC
On article Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM sample gallery (142 comments in total)
In reply to:

MarcoKoehlermkh: if they only made it in emount...

or m43 would even be better. But then again it would be too big and too slow for both.
That's why the 300mm F4 and 40-150mm F2.8(+ telecon) exist.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2017 at 10:57 UTC
On article Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM sample gallery (142 comments in total)

A formidable example of why m43 is/would be perfectly capable for this kind of photography.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2017 at 10:54 UTC as 47th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

ramonjsantiago: "85mm F1.2 is equivalent to 67mm F0.95"
How is that? Maybe its equivalent to to a 67mm F1.2.

I guess now 35mm zealots begin to see the idiocy of equivolence.
As a photographer I should use my eyes to see the desired result through the viewfinder.
That's why pro machines have DOF preview if you don't want or can't use manual.
But you know F1.2 = F1.2 and get same exposure across formats.
And if I so desire a specific result, just use a DOF meter to figure what lens can be used.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 11:03 UTC
In reply to:

panchorancho: Now this is what mirrorless is all about! Better than Sony's A9 which is a half-baked attempt at making a sports camera! Go Fuji!

@Internet Enzyme, Like E-M1mk2 has >800 AF but 121 selectable points and 60fps, maybe that's why.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 08:05 UTC
In reply to:

jl_smith: So here's my take on the whole "but MF at f/1.4 is out of focus!" etc.

Sure, shot UP CLOSE, all formats (even down to m43) are going to have issues with a short DOF under the right conditions.

Thin DOF **IS NOT A PROBLEM** shooting things closely (either with a telephoto or a shorter lens closer) with fast aperture.

The benefit of APS-C over m43, and the benefit of FF over APS-C, and now the benefit of MF over FF (ad nauseum) is a great thin-DOF look with medium-distance subjects, especially with wider-angled lenses.

It's trivial to get myself a 35-100/2.8 in m43 and shoot at 100mm f/2.8 and get a good looking background with a close subject. It's much harder to do this with a 14mm (28mm FOV) f/2.5 lens with m43.

But, this is easier to do with say a Fuji 16/1.4 at f/1.4, and even easier with say a FF 24mm f/1.4 -- You still have enough DOF to get your subject in focus, but you get a great dropoff quickly because it's still a fairly thin DOF.

Out of characters - GOodbye !

The problem with you lot is that you don't get that thin DOF is really a trade of.
You generally don't want too shallow DOF since it'll ruin the subject.
Only in specific situations you would want to have more background seperation but they normally are less than 10% of the photography oppertunities.
At Sports it's a drag to have too shallow DOF with 35mm lenses.
I.m.o. m43 it's perfectly fine. Enough background seperation but subject in focus!

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 08:02 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (766 comments in total)
In reply to:

ottonis: "...short zoom, long zoom, super telephoto. Essentially a 16-35, 70-200 and 400 mm F2.8,' explains Seattle Times photographer..."

To my knowledge, many sports photographers carry a couple of camera bodies with different lenses attached.
As of now, I do see the A9 as a "second body" with a short zoom attached ti it, alongside a D5 or 1Dxii with a long zoom.
The weight and size advantage if the A9 would make it the ideal "tiny" companion to a big camera with a gigantic lens.
That's exactly how I envision the A9 to make its way into the pro sports photography segment.
If the pro's like its performance they will ultimately upgrade to longer lenses once they become available.

@gianstam, correct and Olympus has been a great help. Though I think I am a little more drastic I'm m43 full in.
No more dragging those heavy 400's and up, now only have a single backpack, no trolleys anymore. 2-3 body's and the long lenses, the weight is a fraction of before.
And I've got similar results CAF on the Olympus, it's a dream come true.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 09:19 UTC
On article CP+ 2017: Olympus interview: 'We chose to be bold' (350 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eric00: Just got rid of all my Nikon gear and went Olympus with the new OM-D E-M1 Mark II. My reasons were simply portability and technology innovations, not to mention the great PRO line of lenses the company is putting out. The new M.Zuiko ED 12-100mm f/4 is simply stunning, as is the new M.Zuiko ED 25mm f/1.2. Even my Nikon friends seem perplexed with the great quality that's coming out of the new camera/lens combo and several have begun questioning their blind loyalty to the big boys in the camera world. Took me many years, but Olympus finally convinced me.

@halfwaythere, no clue what to you is a fanboy. If you look at my posts it's not a big secret what I owned (Fuji, Canon, Pentax) and own right now (Panasonic & Olympus plus ...), and also that I sometimes rent equippement.
Yes today I own m43 equippement of al sorts of brands, at most it makes me a m43 "fan". I do however also rent equippements of various brands so I DO know what I'm talking about, so how does that make me a "fanboy".
I make a living with photography as such, not of selling camera's!!!
It's a fact that in journalism and many magazine's it's not about the sensor used, but about the pictures.
Getting out to get those with at least half to even a quarter the bulk IS a real bonus.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2017 at 09:53 UTC
On article CP+ 2017: Olympus interview: 'We chose to be bold' (350 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eric00: Just got rid of all my Nikon gear and went Olympus with the new OM-D E-M1 Mark II. My reasons were simply portability and technology innovations, not to mention the great PRO line of lenses the company is putting out. The new M.Zuiko ED 12-100mm f/4 is simply stunning, as is the new M.Zuiko ED 25mm f/1.2. Even my Nikon friends seem perplexed with the great quality that's coming out of the new camera/lens combo and several have begun questioning their blind loyalty to the big boys in the camera world. Took me many years, but Olympus finally convinced me.

@halfwaythere, you must be a total wannabe.
Although I agree DxO is totally irrelevant since imo the sensors used in m43 are up to pro work since the original E-M5 they have improved still, so I disagree with you.
APS-C, and to a degree 35mm IQ, is total irrelevant if you shoot for magazines or do photojournalism.
IQ becomes an issue for specialist area's where in the early days one needed MF and REAL "Full Frame" camera's not 35mm.
Even the so called need for shallow DOF is an excuse to buy bigger sensors for mostly amateurs.
In many area's shallow DOF is even a hindrance iso an advantage.
And you couldn't be more wrong with your remark about IBIS. It's not only for non-moving objects, but then again you're an amateur without imagination and sufficient experience.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 11:53 UTC
On article CP+ 2017: Olympus interview: 'We chose to be bold' (350 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eric00: Just got rid of all my Nikon gear and went Olympus with the new OM-D E-M1 Mark II. My reasons were simply portability and technology innovations, not to mention the great PRO line of lenses the company is putting out. The new M.Zuiko ED 12-100mm f/4 is simply stunning, as is the new M.Zuiko ED 25mm f/1.2. Even my Nikon friends seem perplexed with the great quality that's coming out of the new camera/lens combo and several have begun questioning their blind loyalty to the big boys in the camera world. Took me many years, but Olympus finally convinced me.

Been convinced (m)43 user for over 12 years now changed from being a pro Canon user.
Ever since I used and rented different systems for the demanding stuff (Nikon Canon so mostly 35mm) but that's totally replaced by the m43 system.
There's no need for me to use 35mm equippement anymore.
The only other area outside the m43 range is MF where sensational new camera's and technology has arrived as well. I used the new Pentax system and will work with the new Fuji in the near future.
To me APS-C is the real loser in this game, nothing new being brought top the table with no significant advantages over m43.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 09:34 UTC
On article CP+ 2017: Olympus interview: 'We chose to be bold' (350 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: 'We chose to be bold", so we priced EM1.M2 to $2000,

That's a very stupid remark if you've really read the interview.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 09:21 UTC
On article CP+ 2017: Olympus interview: 'We chose to be bold' (350 comments in total)
In reply to:

christiankoehler: Cameras for "boys" and "girls" (PEN vs. OM-D)? Seriously?

It's PL and P differentiated not PEN vs OM-D.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 09:19 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 Review (1194 comments in total)
In reply to:

QuarryCat: I hoped for a real step forward for the viewfinder...
it is a lot better then GH3 and GH4
but...
it is not as bright and as sharp that I wished for, it has more resolution, but it doesn't show as bright and clear as my Fujifilm X-T2 or Olympus E-M1II
and...
it is strongly effected by sunshine or light from the side...

What Panasonic engineered best, is the AF-selector! Far better then Canon, Nikon, Fujifilm etc.
It is unfair, that the IBIS doesn't work with Olympus-lenses.

IBIS works fine with Olympus lenses, only Dual IS and Dual IS/2 don't work.
Have 45mm F1.8, which is fine but also the standard kit 12-50mm is fine with the Pana IBIS, at least s good as the original E-M5 with 5-axis IS.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2017 at 17:13 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 Review (1194 comments in total)
In reply to:

eno2: I enjoyed reading your review but I have to disagree in regards to image processing: I consider the GH5 JPG engine the best out there, much better in fact compared with the rest of the cameras.
I'm not implying the GH5 has the best image quality, but relative to it's RAW quality, the JPG's look fantastic and much better than the competition for the same RAW noise characteristics.

Sorry but I disagree. Having had Olympus in various forms like E-M5, E-M1mk1 and E-M1mk2(currently) but also a Panasonic G2, GM1( both sold), and currently also owning the GM5 and G80 I can safely say the Olympus engine is the best still. Olympus also have better control over the jpeg quality settings, compared to that the Panasonics are simplistic.
The results are that current Panasonic camera's have increased a lot since I owned the G2 and are better than GM5, but they still can't hold a candle to the output of the Olympus camera's.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2017 at 17:09 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85/G80 Review (688 comments in total)
In reply to:

juha1000: Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85 (Called also: Lumix G80, G81, G8)

1. When this product came to sell there were two problems:
- panning problem (jerkiness/stickiness) in video.
- strong humming (whirring) ibis noise in video audio.

Did the later firmware update solved completely these two problems?

2. How good is the image stabilation, ibis (especially in video use) compared to
- Olympus OM-D E-M5 II?
- Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II?

3. Audio quality?
- Will ibis sound or kit lens 12-60mm F3.5-5.6 sound hear in video recording (when using internal microphone)?
- How good is audio quality of the Lumix G80 preamp (when you connect external microphone example Rode VideoMicro)?

4. Miscellaneous
- Will the Lumix G85 5-axis IBIS work well with all Olympus MFT -lenses (still and video)?
- Will autofocus also work with all Olympus MFT -lenses (still and video)?
- How do i find the shutter count info, is it in the normal menu (If buy used camera)?

This is my first post here. Thank you for helping!

1. Solved with FW 1.2
2. Oly better still
3. Don't use internal mic/ so no idea.
4. a. Oly lenses work well with IBIS on the Pana but no DUAL IS available so I'd say a little better to Single IS with E-M5mk1 maybe almost same as E-M1mk1. But it's difficult to asses.
4. b. AF is very fast with Oly lenses only no DFD so for CAF there's a difference.
The Oly Pro lenses are sublime on Pana as well.
4. c. Haven't dug into this, so can't answer on it yet.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 13:22 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85/G80 Review (688 comments in total)
In reply to:

great Javier: Well, after thinking a lot, really a lot. Im getting the g80 instead of the x-t20. I hope the image quality doesnt dissapoint me.

Preferrably use RAW + JPEG, turn the NR down.
Then do NR and sharpen in post!
Compared to my E-M1(mk1 /mk 2) it takes a bit more work to get the ultimate out of the files (already had GM5 so I have some experience with the Pana's).
The last time I had a G series Panasonic before that was with G2 and between it and the G80 there's a world of difference.
Olympus still have the edge on JPEG's but the gap is closing.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 13:06 UTC
In reply to:

chim91: Panasonic has been producing a variety of very well designed, attractive and easy to use cameras, delivering excellent picture quality. But Panasonic after sales service/customer approach - at least here in Switzerland - has been a nightmare to put it mildly. After repeated experience with several cameras I switched the brand... I am not surprised about this news

And still people comment here as "headless chickens" on a piece of copy cat journalism which hold no truth.
Clearly majority of people shutdown their brains very easily, when so called authoritative institutions write down these things.
Yeah it's much easier to follow then to inform yourself thoroughly and draw you own conclusions.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 11:35 UTC

In general I'd say the majority of reactions on the demise of Panasonic are plain idiotic.
Clearly amateur reactions of layman on business.
True interrested commenters know what's been said by Panasonic on CES which indicates the opposite of what the majority here fear for, namely strenghtening their Position and stepping up to be even more capable to deliver the products as quickly as posible they intend to increase sales of the flagship GH by 50%.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2017 at 10:13 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

digifan: Mirrorless is the future, but many don't realise.
Declining compact camera sales and stagnant mirrorless market require actions before it's too late.
Actions that prob Canon and Nikon are going to take too, judging the declining DSLR sales.
So getting rid of the right overhead (management and middle management and staff) normally needed to run seperate divisions is not bad at all.

Canon have seperate divisions (printing and imaging, Medical, Optical, Broadcasting etc) but Nikon would definately be in trouble.
Like said below somewhere .. Fake News.. the dutch would say: "van een mug een olifant maken" translated it's blown out of proportion.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2017 at 09:06 UTC
Total: 207, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »