jbuzzinco

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Oct 11, 2002

Comments

Total: 107, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

MCLV: What's going on in images 5 and 6? Was there a blurring of areas outside of main subject applied during postprocessing?

Depends on focal length and idiosyncrasies of the lens plus the degree of movement. I think you are mistaking "grain" for the texture of the asphalt.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2022 at 16:58 UTC
In reply to:

MCLV: What's going on in images 5 and 6? Was there a blurring of areas outside of main subject applied during postprocessing?

#5 is simply panning. In #6 it appears the photographer used the tilt/swing functionality of the camera to extend the plane of focus along the raceway directly in front of him. Brilliantly done especially if handheld.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2022 at 16:46 UTC
In reply to:

azinheira: I will prefer my Fuji 100-400MM 5.6, Very Sharp lens

If only we could all be as omniscient as yourself. I have to actually experience something before knowing whether or not I like it. So glad you don't have to waste valuable time actually doing something before drawing solid conclusions.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2022 at 18:13 UTC
In reply to:

azinheira: I will prefer my Fuji 100-400MM 5.6, Very Sharp lens

You might consider actually trying this lens before drawing a conclusion. I owned 2 copies of the Fuji 100-400 and my Tamron 150-500 on Sony performs better in every regard.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2022 at 19:35 UTC

I am always puzzled by who thinks of things like this. Did a large format photographer call Pagani and ask them to design him a camera? Did someone at Pagani think an 8x10 camera would be a cool accessory to upsell car buyers with? I understand there are people with so much money they can't find enough things to spend it all on. But who is this for?

Seems like a partnership with Sony to build a 800mm f/1.4 uber lens would make more marketing sense. They could dwarf all the commoners at the F1 races with the pedestrian 600mm f/4 lenses. Heck, I might even buy one.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2022 at 19:39 UTC as 15th comment | 9 replies
On article OMDS developing OM System M.Zuiko 90mm F3.5 Macro IS (143 comments in total)
In reply to:

zakk9: Very interesting lens. I hope the AF speed is fast enough to use it as a general telephoto lens as well, and that the price is low enough to fit my wallet.

And to all the children discussing "equivalence": Can you please go to your room and take your theories with you? I've been using FT and MFT since the E-1. The cameras and lenses work. You can take beautiful photos with them. You can even get shallow depth of field, at least as much as I'll ever need.

The children have to use "equivalence" terms because the "grown-ups" don't understand the actual meaning of focal length and field-of-view.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2022 at 15:40 UTC
In reply to:

jbuzzinco: Kudos to Viltrox for being open about this. Samyang obviously had the same problem. But instead of admitting it Samyang quietly disappeared all the RF mount information from their websites. As I already owned two of their RF mount lenses I was not impressed. No more firmware updates. No more support. Samyang gave me the runaround after multiple inquiries never admitting if their RF lenses were abandoned or not. The Rokinon US site still shows the AF lenses but has shown "sold out" for a year. Obviously Samyang didn't want to hinder sales of remaining retailer inventory. Sadly those people are buying expensive paperweights since there will likely be no parts, service or firmware support in the future.

Clearly Samyang did not have appropriate licensing when they starting selling their RF lenses. Canon simply enforced their IP rights as is their prerogative. So I supposed it is my fault for not demanding proof of a licensing agreement from Samyang before I bought their lenses from a retailer? Of course it is Samyang's fault. They knowingly violated Canon's patents without proper licensing. Now I'm being penalized for Sanyang's actions.

Should we blame Canon for defending their property?

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2022 at 23:38 UTC

Kudos to Viltrox for being open about this. Samyang obviously had the same problem. But instead of admitting it Samyang quietly disappeared all the RF mount information from their websites. As I already owned two of their RF mount lenses I was not impressed. No more firmware updates. No more support. Samyang gave me the runaround after multiple inquiries never admitting if their RF lenses were abandoned or not. The Rokinon US site still shows the AF lenses but has shown "sold out" for a year. Obviously Samyang didn't want to hinder sales of remaining retailer inventory. Sadly those people are buying expensive paperweights since there will likely be no parts, service or firmware support in the future.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2022 at 16:21 UTC as 87th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

jbuzzinco: I use PC lenses a lot and any new offering peaks my interest. One thing to note here is the lack of any shift functionality. Especially for macro work, tilt movements will drastically alter the framing area. I normally use the lens shift to compensate for this and keep the subject framing consistent. Without lens shifting, you would need to physically move the entire camera position which will alter plane of focus. This sends you into a never ending cycle of readjustments.

If this lens is optically OK it may be a good deal at ~$300 for casual use. You will be very frustrated without shift movements with tightly framed subjects.

That's a totally different level of confusion. Those are ball heads with geared pano clamps on top. Two separate pieces combined. That wording is confusing at best. It's like pointing at a person sitting on a horse and calling it a "centaur". I'm actually surprised Leofoto didn't use that name.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2022 at 22:30 UTC
In reply to:

jbuzzinco: I use PC lenses a lot and any new offering peaks my interest. One thing to note here is the lack of any shift functionality. Especially for macro work, tilt movements will drastically alter the framing area. I normally use the lens shift to compensate for this and keep the subject framing consistent. Without lens shifting, you would need to physically move the entire camera position which will alter plane of focus. This sends you into a never ending cycle of readjustments.

If this lens is optically OK it may be a good deal at ~$300 for casual use. You will be very frustrated without shift movements with tightly framed subjects.

If you google that ridiculous phrase you can see it is frequently (mis)used by ebay sellers to describe geared 3-way and pano heads. Either it is simply a chinese to english translation issue or the sellers are keyword spamming to get people looking for "ball" heads to view their items listings. There most certainly is no such thing as a "geared ball head". If it has gears, it ain't a ball.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2022 at 16:44 UTC

I use PC lenses a lot and any new offering peaks my interest. One thing to note here is the lack of any shift functionality. Especially for macro work, tilt movements will drastically alter the framing area. I normally use the lens shift to compensate for this and keep the subject framing consistent. Without lens shifting, you would need to physically move the entire camera position which will alter plane of focus. This sends you into a never ending cycle of readjustments.

If this lens is optically OK it may be a good deal at ~$300 for casual use. You will be very frustrated without shift movements with tightly framed subjects.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2022 at 15:51 UTC as 9th comment | 20 replies
In reply to:

jbuzzinco: New cameras are exciting and all. But lens selection, or lack thereof, defines what is possible within a given system. Fujifilm has failed to provide any compelling lenses beyond a very limited set of primes. Their standard "trinity" zooms are weak performers compared to other mounts. Cool new sensors are useless without exceptional glass to put in front of them.

I did not say the whole selection was limited. I said the selection of really excellent lenses is limited. Many of the primes are nearly if not totally duplicative. The 16-55 is very weak compared to virtually all 24-70 equivalent options in other mounts. Further, Fuji has only produced a single lens with true optical equivalence to a comparable full frame lens: the XF 200mm f/2. The 16-55 is optically a 24-70 f/4 and the 50-135 is equivalent to a 70-200 f/4. Neither gives exciting results when compared to actual 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 results from full frame sensors.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2022 at 01:06 UTC

New cameras are exciting and all. But lens selection, or lack thereof, defines what is possible within a given system. Fujifilm has failed to provide any compelling lenses beyond a very limited set of primes. Their standard "trinity" zooms are weak performers compared to other mounts. Cool new sensors are useless without exceptional glass to put in front of them.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2022 at 23:34 UTC as 18th comment | 8 replies

All parts to create same result available at local hardware store for $25 total.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2022 at 03:59 UTC as 20th comment
On article Making sensor sizes less misleading (679 comments in total)

The antiquated TV tube nomenclature never made sense at the consumer level. Manufacturers like it because they can use deceptively bigger numbers to describe smaller products. Anything other than a direct and simple length x width measurement is confusing. I don't even like the use of "full frame". If anything, so-called "full frame" sensors should be called "Type 1" with everything else some fractional variant of that. "Crop factor" is worse. Please stop using that term.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2022 at 14:56 UTC as 260th comment | 1 reply

So...long...overdue...
The Zony 16-35 f4 has been in need of an update for a long while. Just like Chris says, I poo-pooed this when I saw it was "PZ". But his assurance that this lens is totally different than earlier PZ variants was enough for me to get one.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2022 at 19:42 UTC as 3rd comment

The X-H2 (in whatever variations we end up with) and X-T5 (if there is one) are going to be hamstrung by Fujifilm's lack of long fast glass. The sophistication and pricing of the flagship X bodies only makes sense if there are lens choices capable of taking full advantage of the performance. There is still only the 200 f2 lens in the pro sports category. Fujifilm still has nothing to offer serious wildlife shooters.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2022 at 22:18 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply

Happy April 1st everyone! Oh wait, it's June. What the . . . ?

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2022 at 22:18 UTC as 107th comment
In reply to:

Craig from Nevada: Two questions:

1. Does this lens represent an upgrade over the 100-400mm with 1.4 TC to justify the expenditure for an existing X-System user?

2. Would the lens with the new camera body cause someone to choose Fuji over another system, such as Canon, Sony, Nikon or OM?

1. If you are shooting at 560 f/8 (400mm+1.4x TC) most of the time then this lens may be a better choice. It isn't much of an upgrade if you want the option to shoot at 400mm f/5.6 since this new one cannot do that.

2. For slow moving subjects in daylight this Fujifilm lens might be compelling to those already in the system. Fujifilm is a hard sell when comparing it to a Sony a7M4 and 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3. If you do the "real" equivalence math the Fujifilm is slower vs Sony both in absolute (600mm f/8 vs f/6.3) and relative (900mm f/11 vs 840mm f/9) terms. Considering the MSRP of both lenses is the same, you're getting more for your money in Sony. Considering the MSRP of a Sony a7M4 and the announced Fujifilm X-H2S are also the same, I could not recommend Fujifilm over Sony.

This in not the lens I was hoping Fujifilm would make. An actual 400mm f/4 would be exciting. An XF 135-400mm f/4-4.5 would be truly equivalent to the Sony lens.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2022 at 22:56 UTC

The Pana-Leica mFT lenses are some of the best I have used. Too bad the Lumix cameras continue to hobble themselves with the ridiculous DfD autofocus. Leica isn't exactly renowned for their autofocus technology either. Seems like they need to bring in a strategic partner to help in that area.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2022 at 17:26 UTC as 52nd comment
Total: 107, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »