qwertyasdf

Joined on Sep 29, 2011

Comments

Total: 632, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Ilia Snopchenko: "It's got 32 elements in 18 groups." (slide 7)
Looks like someone was a little bit too excited while typing. :) Looks more like 23 to me (which is the same as the similar Canon lens).

Though I wonder what lens could have 32 elements - I think 23-24 is as much as we're getting in consumer products now. :)

I can only count 22 elements in 17 groups lolll

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2016 at 16:00 UTC
In reply to:

qwertyasdf: The sensor size between the APSC and APSH body is very small!
23.5×15.5mm vs 26.6×17.9mm

The sensor size of Canon 1D is 27.9 x 18.6. So the Quattro H would probably give a crop factor larger than 1.3x

Interested to see if this is deliberate, if it might be that a lot of APSC lenses have an image circle around the size of the sensor inside the Quattro H.

By larger...1.4 is larger than 1.3....and so on

The spec does list it as 1.3x, but precisely, it's 1.349x....so marginally correct to be rounded to 1.3x lollll
The APSC model's crop factor is 1.536x, so the difference is only 0.187x

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 21:11 UTC

The sensor size between the APSC and APSH body is very small!
23.5×15.5mm vs 26.6×17.9mm

The sensor size of Canon 1D is 27.9 x 18.6. So the Quattro H would probably give a crop factor larger than 1.3x

Interested to see if this is deliberate, if it might be that a lot of APSC lenses have an image circle around the size of the sensor inside the Quattro H.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 10:58 UTC as 63rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Nick Spiker: It's too bad really, you've taken a SLR flange distance, but not given us the benefit of a mirror. So now we have to use the screen and have to use Sigma lenses. It's a sub frame camera, with a full frame size mount, so now we've wasted the extra area with a crop factor.
Good job :(
Don't get me wrong, I love the Foveon design, I even have a SD-14, but can we please get a full frame with a short flange distance?

"The further flange distance however makes it easier to create lenses"

This is totally untrue, for shorter flange distances, a lens manufacture can always add in extra distance by extending the lens tube. But it can't be done the other way.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 03:48 UTC
In reply to:

MikeF4Black: 700 grs for a 1.8 85...

To put it into perceptive, the canon 85/1.8 USM is 425g, and nobody complained about its build quality, adding to that it's by no means a bad performer.

85mm is not a typical walk around lens....true. This make things even worse lol....if I were to bring a secondary lens, I'd think twice before taking a 700g lens that I may or may not use.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 00:18 UTC
In reply to:

qwertyasdf: And I thought the previous Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro VC was very good already...I doubt the need for an update...

As a very experienced macro shooter, I'd much rather see something like a 150mm f4 Macro IS lens, that is light. I shoot 99% of my macro pictures at f8 or above anyways. (I think all serious macro shooters do too)

But anyways, such a lens would be too niche....

Yea....hope it's just a cosmetic makeover, really don't want Tamron to waste R&D resources.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2016 at 12:46 UTC
In reply to:

Daft Punk: Come on Tamron - Pentax K fit please.

I want to get a K1. So hurry up, make some K fit primes and take my money.

They would probably add a Pentax label together with a nice price premium.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2016 at 12:18 UTC
In reply to:

bakhtyar kurdi: What is wrong with their (now old) Tamron 90 2.8 VC?
it is still the king of Macro lenses at 90-105 range, smallest and lightest and most affordable.
The only thing I think of is for some reason it is not selling very well, marketing problem, probably people mix it with older versions.

I don't think a macro lens would ever be a hot seller....
Tamron's 60mm f2 macro was also very good, and could replace a 50mm f1.8....it was potentially a good seller, but I think the marketing flopped for that lens though.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2016 at 11:49 UTC

And I thought the previous Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro VC was very good already...I doubt the need for an update...

As a very experienced macro shooter, I'd much rather see something like a 150mm f4 Macro IS lens, that is light. I shoot 99% of my macro pictures at f8 or above anyways. (I think all serious macro shooters do too)

But anyways, such a lens would be too niche....

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2016 at 11:31 UTC as 37th comment | 5 replies
On article The long, difficult road to Pentax full-frame (609 comments in total)

Congratulations to all Pentax users!
Still i think pentax should go mirrorless, judging the strengths, they are THE BEST in making small and high quality primes. Small prime +mirrorless FF would attract crowds of photographers. On the other hand, lets be honest, their AF is lagging behind the competition for decades literally, so their DSLR has little advantage over a mirrorless with decent EVF.

P.s. I absolutely hate my A7r, I rly want an alternative other than Sony :(

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2016 at 05:47 UTC as 56th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

greypixelz: Bad Sigma!
Build the 16-300/1.2!
Stop kidding us around, Sigma!

Ain't good enough, I would still need to bag an extra 8mm fisheye in case I need it.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2016 at 04:08 UTC

This lens is exquisite yet impractical.
One can bag a Canon 50/1.8 STM + 85/1.8 USM at 160g + 425g = 585g
Both decent performers, fast focusing and cover FF.

If the convenience of a zoom is necessary, which usually means sports, the 100mm FL is lacking.

I do own the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8, and I've found a sweet spot of using it on a 1D APSH body, 1.3x crop. Usable from ~20mm giving me a 23-45mm, with F2.3 DOF equiv. giving me better subject separation than even a zoom on FF.
I would never us it on an APSC body though, I'd rather bring a 6D + 24-70mm f2.8.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2016 at 04:06 UTC as 54th comment | 2 replies
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

qwertyasdf: "And because we picked the APS-C format, also SIZE and operability"

I cannot agree with this. I have a X-A1 and the 18-55 f2.8-4, and stopped buying Fuji lenses, they are huge, esp. the 10-24mm f4.

Canon EF-M 11-22mm / EF-S 10-18mm is ~ 220g, vs Fuji's 10-24mm's 410g.
Ok, not exactly the same FL and aperture, but that's 80% weight premium.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 10:38 UTC
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (354 comments in total)

"And because we picked the APS-C format, also SIZE and operability"

I cannot agree with this. I have a X-A1 and the 18-55 f2.8-4, and stopped buying Fuji lenses, they are huge, esp. the 10-24mm f4.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 03:32 UTC as 78th comment | 5 replies
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tom_A: I have a Fuji GA645 medium format AF rangefinder.
Compact, light, stellar results. Same approach in digital would be awesome...

Awesome camera indeed, many digital cameras come and go, but it's the GA645 that traveled around the globe with me.

I'm happy sticking with film for MF, and one of the biggest strength of GA645 is price, which would not be the case if it's digital.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 03:28 UTC

In shot #13, the grain doesn't look organic at all.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2016 at 11:24 UTC as 27th comment

One really nice thing about Oly lenses is the very high magnification, 0.24x physically (0.48x FF equiv. as they say). This is very handy in capturing small birds, animals and larger insects, which would add a healthy variety for a wildlife trip.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 08:29 UTC as 29th comment | 1 reply

Happy to see such a lens, but I'm always surprised the M43 camp is so slow to realize their crop sensor's advantage in reach.

Now, please release a 150/200mm f2.8 prime, which is priced around the range of FF 150/200mm f2.8 primes (read: moderately priced).

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 01:51 UTC as 22nd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

qwertyasdf: 9xx comments?! WTH
Nobody use to care about Samsung, and now so many people caring for them loll

justmeMN, that's an excellent metaphor!!!

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2015 at 02:33 UTC

9xx comments?! WTH
Nobody use to care about Samsung, and now so many people caring for them loll

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2015 at 16:11 UTC as 155th comment | 5 replies
Total: 632, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »