Summi Luchs

Joined on Nov 9, 2012

Comments

Total: 102, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article A second glance: two takes on the Leica X (403 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: nothing bad meant - but the two first woman pictures could have been made with any other camera, too..there's no special "Leica" Feeling from it, either way - also, these compositions are in nothing short any kind of something special, no offence...the 2nd picture also looks like blown out highlights into the hairs of the model, too.

I understood the picture with blown-out highlights as an illustration for the text (whe the author complains about blown out highlights). It is not meant as a "good" photo.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2014 at 14:28 UTC
In reply to:

Everlast66: I think it is laughable to call anything associated with the M4/3 system "PRO"!!

Surely there would be one or two enthusiasts, but no normal professional will rely on a M4/3 sensor for their professional work.

@maxnimo: So all professional sports photographers are amateurs as they don't use 8x10" ?

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2014 at 10:36 UTC

Your article suggests it's good news that you no longer have to buy a GX7 and a 2.8 12-35mm lens if 12-35mm is all you need and want a m4/3 sensor + built-in EVF. But, honestly, I doubt that this ILC-body-lens combo would have been taken as a serious alternative to a premium compact.

OTOH, for photographer needing the full flexibility of an ILC a fixed lens 24-70 equiv. camera makes no sense. You can easily get equivalents for 14-600mm focal lengths (and more with adapters) using the ILC. The only point is, that before large sensor compacts became available you HAD to buy a DSLR or (later) an ILC if the image quality of a small sensor compact wasn't enough. But this problem has gone - at least since the first RX100.

So, this comparison looks somewhat anachronistic to me, even if these cameras share some of their guts.

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2014 at 22:06 UTC as 90th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

ZhanMInG12: People here complaining about the F4 should note that no other major mirrorless system has a UW zoom faster than F4 in equivalent DOF. The Fuji 10-24mm is F4 and also rather big and heavy.

If you absolutely need F2.8 there is the much revered Zeiss 15mm Distagon ZM. True German optics at the lowly price of $4600...

And don't forget the size and weight penalty for f 2.8. With the comparatively small A7 series cameras the smaller f4 lens makes much more sense. Fast and small FF UWA lenses are only available as primes.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 16:04 UTC
On article Nikon announces AF-S Nikkor 20mm f/1.8G ED (67 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bjorn_L: Sounds interesting and very reasonably priced. I hope that it is sealed. My Sigma 20mm f1.8 is not, but optically the Sigma is much better than I expected (see the DXO review). I look forward to reviews on the Nikon version to see how it is optically.

I expect it will be sealed, at least with the same gasket around the lens mount as every new f 1.8 Nikkor. It is a gold ring lens like the 28mm, so mechanics and coatings most likely will be at the higher end of the plastic Nikkors.

I too hope it will be optically as good as the other 1.8 Nikkors but will keep the flare resistance of the older (2.8) model. My 2.8 20mm AF Nikkor calls for retirement after 18 years. Its AF sounds like a coffee grinder...

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2014 at 17:28 UTC
On article Fujifilm announces weather-resistant XF 50-140mm F2.8 (226 comments in total)
In reply to:

KGP: Lets face it... mirrorless size/weight advantage applies only when prime lenses combined with these bodies. There is no way to skip the law of physic & optics... the larger the sensor the biggest the optical elements, the fastest the aperture the heavier the glass. So simple. This lens is a nice addition to Fuji's line up, im pretty sure its gonna kick ass !

To make it clear, my reply is in response to KGP's "rhetorical question" and has nothing to do with the real Fuji lens presented in this article.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 14:09 UTC
On article Fujifilm announces weather-resistant XF 50-140mm F2.8 (226 comments in total)
In reply to:

fakuryu: If this lens is as good as the Pentax DA* 50-135 f2.8 but has a faster AF, Fuji useers will be in for a treat! I love the IQ of the DA* on my K5II but that AF because of the SDM is a let down.

Was the Pentax 50-135 really that good ? I had its sister lens, the Tokina 50-135 (same optical formula, same company at that time, maybe different coatings and QC) and wasn't too happy with it. Lots of CA. Spoiling portraits against white bachgrounds. Difficult to correct with the tools available years ago.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 14:02 UTC
On article Fujifilm announces weather-resistant XF 50-140mm F2.8 (226 comments in total)
In reply to:

KGP: Lets face it... mirrorless size/weight advantage applies only when prime lenses combined with these bodies. There is no way to skip the law of physic & optics... the larger the sensor the biggest the optical elements, the fastest the aperture the heavier the glass. So simple. This lens is a nice addition to Fuji's line up, im pretty sure its gonna kick ass !

@KGP: Some will, some will not. For cinematographers using a huge rig where the GH4 is just only a small part, the bulk and wight of such a lens might be acceptable. For still photographers, who bought a m4/3 because of its size it hardly would make sense.A small m4/3 gives no balance for such a lens. And don't forget - such a lens would become ridiculosly expensive and have no practical advantages over a 2.8 70-200 on a FF Camera. Similar DOF and no better motion stop capabilities as you can go higher in ISO with FF.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 13:46 UTC
On article Zeiss introduces 'no distortion' Otus 1.4/85mm (340 comments in total)

So much negative buzz for a lens not yet released...

Zeiss has a lot of experience with high end cine and scientific lenses. They promised perfection and it's quite safe to assume that they will deliver.

For those photographers whose customers will pay for the difference between photos shot with the Otus or another good 85mm lens its selling price will be probably a bargain. For everyone else, it might be, in best case, a 'nice to have' item. Only very few people will look for some residual aberrations if the picture is good artwork. If the picture is esthetically bad, a perfect lens won't help. IQ is more than appropriate with Canon/Nikon 85mm lenses or their Fuji, PanaLeica etc equivalents for smaller sensors. So don't complain about the price, lack of AF etc of lenses you don't really need.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2014 at 22:06 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply
On article Zeiss launches Loxia full frame lenses for Sony E-mount (269 comments in total)
In reply to:

Summi Luchs: Nice lenses - I had a few Zeiss ZM lenses and was very happy with their optical quality. I guess the Loxias will be very good. But why do they duplicate the 35 and 50mm focal lengths already available as genuine FF E-mount lenses ? A wider lens (24, or better 21mm) or a portrait (85-100mm) would have made more sense to most A7 users.

@Mescalamba. Possibly you are right that 35 and 50mm lenses are most the used primes. OTOH the 1.8 55mm Sonnar received splendid reviews and the 2.8 35mm is no slouch either. You gain one stop of lens speed and loose AF with the Loxia. I personally would not like to sacrfice in a more or less "normal" prime.

I could, however, very well live with an ultrawide or a lens mainly used for head-and- shoulders portraits without AF. I agree, the Leica WATE with adapter is currently the best ultrawide option for A7/r but a liitle bit too pricey for me.

I have already tried my 20mm and 85 mm Nikkors with adapter. The 20mm has to be stopped down to f/8 for acceptable edges, the 85mm balances ridiculously on this small camera.

So I still hope for some new E-mount lenses before I can leave my big'n heavy Nikon at home.

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2014 at 09:48 UTC
On article Zeiss launches Loxia full frame lenses for Sony E-mount (269 comments in total)

Nice lenses - I had a few Zeiss ZM lenses and was very happy with their optical quality. I guess the Loxias will be very good. But why do they duplicate the 35 and 50mm focal lengths already available as genuine FF E-mount lenses ? A wider lens (24, or better 21mm) or a portrait (85-100mm) would have made more sense to most A7 users.

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2014 at 20:01 UTC as 69th comment | 2 replies
On article Hands-on with the Pentax K-S1 (350 comments in total)

The ideal camera for shooting young children. Toys attract children...

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2014 at 07:52 UTC as 87th comment
In reply to:

pew pew: sorry m4/3 fans but a7s everyday any day.

I agree. My 4/3 camera always failed when taking a movie of my black cat in the darkroom.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2014 at 12:04 UTC
On article Opinion: Do we really need the Fuji X30? (326 comments in total)

I had much fun reading this thread during my lunch break. If I had no camera I would likely consider the X30 among the competition mentioned here. But I guess I would have preferred an interchangeable lens system close to that size or the Sony RX100-II if size was highest priority. Finally only sales numbers will answer if we really need the Fuji X30.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2014 at 11:54 UTC as 39th comment

Nice device, if it should work as promised...

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2014 at 08:41 UTC as 32nd comment
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2469 comments in total)

Good article, but it does not clarify a common misunderstanding of "equivalent aperture", seen in many postings. The article nicely shows the equivalence regarding focal length, DOF, gathered light etc.. But what is frequently misunderstood is that f/1.8 leads to the same exposure time regardless of sensor size for the same scence, light and ISO setting. Some people assume that an "equivalent" aperture of f3.6 (in this example for a f/1.8 MFT vs. full frame) also would lead to a longer exposure and so is not usable in low light. You can extrapolate this from the article, but for beginners it would be nice to add a simple summary that clarifies the practical aspects.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 11:56 UTC as 502nd comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Retzius: The fact that this is still $300 cheaper than the Nikon 1 V3 really shows how insanely priced the V3 is with its 1 inch sensor...

The Nikon 1 is made by DSLR Gurus, just to show that DSLRs sell better than mirrorless. Its pricing helps to prove that concept.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 09:21 UTC
In reply to:

Lassoni: This looks good. Hope it can compete with sigmas out there

Sigma ? I don't know any Sigma long range zoom that could be regarded as a benchmark. Sigmas Art lenses like the 1.4 35mm or the 1.8 18-35mm are fantastic, but these are completely different lens types. You can be quite sure that a 18-135mm never will reach these optiical heights. As many others already mentioned, a 18-135mm is made for convenience. It may well be a solid performer, but such a zoom range requires many optical compromises. So don't expect wonders.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 14:40 UTC
On article Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Lab Test Review (83 comments in total)
In reply to:

nerd2: Funny fact: you can just use DX version of 35mm 1.8G lens that costs less than 1/3. Yes you'll get bad corners (with non-removable vignetting) though.

Funny, yes. But it makes no sense to shell out the money for a FF camera an then accept bad corners.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2014 at 21:10 UTC
On article Sony a6000 Review (902 comments in total)
In reply to:

msolea: For me, the major con is that it does not have a microphone jack for higher end microphones. I actually like the fact that it does not have a touch screen. I have used touch screens before and I always found them irritating. While, I have only handled this camera briefly, it seems to be a solid camera. If Sony were to offer an A7000, I would like to see a MIC jack added and possibly internal 4HD. But, I am not that big into making videos, so the latter point is that that crucial to me. Perhaps, they can take out the AA filter too.

That said, there are a couple of lenses I would like to see for the E-system or FE system, like a 70-300mm G or Zeiss OSS variable aperture lens as well as a wider angle lens that would at least incorporate 12mm or 18mm equivalent in the DX format that is also of high quality ~ G or Zeiss quality.... But, with the 55mm filter size. After all, 24-70mm f/4 FE lens is a bit too wide for this body, but manageable. Hence, my dilemma based on initial impressions.

A 70-300mm lens for APS-C sized sensors will inevitably become big. Even more an FE version. The size advantage of the shorter flange distance doesn't play a significant role at 300mm. So I doubt that it is meaningful to put such big lenses on such small camera bodies.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 13:17 UTC
Total: 102, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »