Goodmeme

Joined on Dec 15, 2009

Comments

Total: 596, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Relaxed: I wonder how well those Canon and Nikon memory cards are performing?

It's not an accolade to be making something badly and certainly not embarassing for Canon or Nikon not to be in the market. Specialisation is the foundation of trade.

I'm not clear why people would choose Sony over Sandisk or another specialist personally. Any savings are a false economy if something goes wrong...

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2020 at 04:11 UTC

"5G? Of course you can trust us...we don't lie about everything" The marketing director at Huawei should resign over this if the company were seeking to change public and official perceptions. Or at least vow never to do this again. This is just embarassing.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2020 at 13:51 UTC as 28th comment

I had similar problem (front focusing in my case) with my EF 24-70 f2.8. Sent both to Canon with no fix. Eventually they sent the camera to a third party called Lehmans in Stoke who claimed they knew how to fix it properly and in a different way to what Canon was doing. Sure enough, I collected a perfectly focusing 10D from Lehmans several days later. That was a game changer for me, as the responsibility for getting a good shot shifted almost solely to me.

I wouldn't want to go back to the sensor or viewfinder these days, but it worked.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2020 at 09:31 UTC as 32nd comment
In reply to:

Peetz: Ansel Adams and Brett Weston used to say that (I paraphrase): a cheap junk lens on a tripod gives better images that a superb lens with camera shake. In 2020, stabilization goes part of the way of delivering an electronic "tripod" when you don't have a real tripod with you.

Fuji argues that adding stabilization will add bulk to the lens. But I have personally owned the Leica/Lumix LX5, and Sony RX100 series that have stablization in the lenses. Sure, these are smaller sensors, but I think it can be done.

Fuji said IBIS could not be done in their X-Mount. Fuji said they could not make IBIS smaller than in the X-H1. All these, with time, they did it. So Fuji should not say it cannot be done, but just say it'll take time to figure out.

The X100 series is not just used for street photography. It is also used by people in a wide range, e.g. travel, portraits etc that could benefit from lens stabilization. No need for IBIS in a fixed lens camera. Just in-lens stabilization.

@mcshan it already has an evf?! Can't you just press a button and switch between evf and ovf or have I misunderstood/misremembered?

Personally I only like OVF and the Fuji can overlay info on top of the ovf...

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2020 at 12:53 UTC
In reply to:

NotAPhotog: So you could say he took that picture with a...zoom lens?

I'll see myself out.

Brilliant!

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2020 at 07:25 UTC
In reply to:

Peetz: Ansel Adams and Brett Weston used to say that (I paraphrase): a cheap junk lens on a tripod gives better images that a superb lens with camera shake. In 2020, stabilization goes part of the way of delivering an electronic "tripod" when you don't have a real tripod with you.

Fuji argues that adding stabilization will add bulk to the lens. But I have personally owned the Leica/Lumix LX5, and Sony RX100 series that have stablization in the lenses. Sure, these are smaller sensors, but I think it can be done.

Fuji said IBIS could not be done in their X-Mount. Fuji said they could not make IBIS smaller than in the X-H1. All these, with time, they did it. So Fuji should not say it cannot be done, but just say it'll take time to figure out.

The X100 series is not just used for street photography. It is also used by people in a wide range, e.g. travel, portraits etc that could benefit from lens stabilization. No need for IBIS in a fixed lens camera. Just in-lens stabilization.

To be fair, iso 1600 does the same thing unless you must have less grain and / or a long shutter on purpose, e.g. movement blur, water etc. OIS is nice to have, but neither it nor tripods are necessary to the same extent they once were...

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2020 at 08:18 UTC
On article Sigma shows EF-M mount primes for Canon cameras at WPPI (204 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kiril Karaatanasov: Canon will shutdown EF-M. May be not this year but certainly before too long.

Now they will need all their might to sustain R and EF in the face of slowing sales.

@Woke. I agree. It all depends on the price of the full frame offerings. They're still not cheap enough to make APS-C completely pointless. But they are arguably small enough.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2020 at 09:03 UTC
On article Sigma shows EF-M mount primes for Canon cameras at WPPI (204 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mr Bolton: I'd sure be hyped on that 16mm lens if it would fit my X-H1. I hope they start doing Fuji X in addition to their other APS-C offerings.

@ Kiril, I don't think Canon grant licenses for EF or M lenses. The mount tech is reverse-engineered.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2020 at 09:01 UTC
In reply to:

Goodmeme: I was agreeing with the author's arguments until the part about there being a 3.5mm jack on the portrait grip.

Just get a portrait grip if you need a reliable jack for professional work redundancy. Problem solved. No, it's not just another adapter, as (if it's anything like Canon's) it's much harder to misplace or break.

I feel like I was click-baited!

Except not really. Because you can just bring usb-c headphones.

If you want more redundancy, then buy/ bring a grip. In this situation, you will likely / should already be bringing another body anyway, so what's the big deal? How many people use this thing professionally anyway?

If you want something Fuji doesn't give you, buy Canikon or Sony. It is perhaps the nature of this smaller format to streamline features and I suspect Fuji made appropriate decisions.

Link | Posted on Feb 29, 2020 at 14:32 UTC

I was agreeing with the author's arguments until the part about there being a 3.5mm jack on the portrait grip.

Just get a portrait grip if you need a reliable jack for professional work redundancy. Problem solved. No, it's not just another adapter, as (if it's anything like Canon's) it's much harder to misplace or break.

I feel like I was click-baited!

Link | Posted on Feb 29, 2020 at 07:46 UTC as 77th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Desertbilly: If the AF and EVF are fast enough for birds in flight, I'll probably buy one, and demote the R to backup body.

@ Steve Anderson, interesting thanks. I don't like evfs either. They are not high enough resolution for me as I have unusually good vision, approx 20:10 rather than the average 20:20. I will likely be sticking with optical for a long time, even though I do like the idea of AI-powered face and eye tracking.

Hopefully some of the features make it in to the 5dv, or at least the IBIS.

Not sure what you mean regarding TVs though? Viewing distance usually means they are fine for me. Even a 120" projection at only full hd is also fine for me from only a few feet. Perhaps you are more sensitive to motion, or do you just mean the poor quality LCDs?

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2020 at 08:59 UTC
In reply to:

Desertbilly: If the AF and EVF are fast enough for birds in flight, I'll probably buy one, and demote the R to backup body.

Cool, thanks. Continuous update mode sounds good, although I presume that comes at a cost of resolution and fidelity?

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2020 at 06:40 UTC
In reply to:

Desertbilly: If the AF and EVF are fast enough for birds in flight, I'll probably buy one, and demote the R to backup body.

Is the r good enough for BIF in your opinion then? Not a birder, just curious. Had assumed evf wouldn't work well for birding.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2020 at 20:15 UTC

Haven't tried the mode dial yet, but it looks nice at least. I think the only advantage - other than aesthetics would be having more custom modes, whereas there may be some downsides with usabilty unless the dial had a clicker and always the first four clicks were the same A M S P modes in consistent order, sort of like a Philips Hue dimmer switch perhaps; that way you wouldn't need to check the lcd to select mode.

Incidentally, for the 5D4 I would like the option to display histogram in image review, along with a large image. I hope they add this in the R models. Currently the 5d4 will only do this with a tiny image. The histogram is too big relative to the image and means you have to cycle through viewing options rather than just use the same one all the time.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2020 at 20:12 UTC as 88th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

jonby: This is a serious concern for anyone that shoots film and travels a lot. Not sure what the situation is outside the US, but in many places in Europe there has been no culture for allowing hand inspections in recent times, so if these new scanners get rolled out worldwide, we could be in a situation where we have no certainty of getting our film through safely. Imagine going on the photography trip of a lifetime knowing there's a chance that all your work will be ruined on the journey home. You just wouldn't go.

I agree. Although I struggle to believe there are many people out there who will use film for such a trip rather than digital. The ones that still exist probably have to consider something else now as it is hard to guarantee a hand inspection will be approved on every occasion.

Perhaps they can post the film to avoid the passenger checks?

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2020 at 12:08 UTC
On article Canon unveils $400 RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM (509 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alex Rathmann: F4-7.1?!!! No thanks

@idm Canon has a full frame f2 normal zoom, what are you complaining about exactly?

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2020 at 10:03 UTC
On article Canon unveils $400 RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM (509 comments in total)
In reply to:

D200_4me: The target customer for this lens is probably not the gear discussion forum members. It's likely the customer that simply doesn't want to spend a lot/doesn't know photography well (doesn't know what aperture means and how it affects images/exposure). While this may not be a lens enthusiasts are interested in, it may well be a lens the 'soccer moms' and others are interested in. I imagine if Canon can sell plenty of them (to anyone), they don't really care if it's well received in the discussion forums. Only a tiny fraction of camera users actually visit discussion forums, so that's a ton of buyers out there that aren't hearing the complaints about f/7.1 ;-)

I'd say its for people who want full frame and an expandable, reliable system but don't want massive lenses all the time / at all.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2020 at 14:41 UTC
On article Canon unveils $400 RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM (509 comments in total)
In reply to:

Niko Vita: F7.1 is quite an innovation from Canon. I guess it is deliberately chosen for direct moon photography at 105mm.

What? Are you joking?! No, it's so it can be small.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2020 at 14:36 UTC
On article Canon unveils $400 RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM (509 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alex Rathmann: F4-7.1?!!! No thanks

Alex Rathmann what are you talking about? They have loads of those. This is a great, compact option for people who want a take anywhere zoom. It may be f4 most of the range for all we know.

Even at f7.1, this will have the same dof and sensitivity as a m43 lens at approx. f3.5.

It will go a long way to negating the size advantage of the smaller system whilst also allowing you to use different lenses etc that are more suited to full frame.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2020 at 14:34 UTC
On article Canon unveils $400 RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM (509 comments in total)
In reply to:

Androole: I think this is a wonderful lens, and exactly what FF needs. All the haters here are ridiculous. I'm guessing a lot of people here grew up when ISO 200 was the "fast film" on the market.

The reason that people pick smaller format systems in the first place is not because they want ultra high-end f1.0 lenses that can match FF equivalence, it's because FF doesn't have anything at all to offer that can match the equivalence of slow but affordable, compact, light, flexible, high-quality, and high-feature zoom lenses.

If this offers anything other than total potato image quality, at $400 and 400g this is a huge winner, and the absolute most sensible lens yet released for the RF system given the bodies they have on the market right now.

Agreed. EF should have (had) something like this. The only small zooms were decades old and a bit iffy.

I'm really impressed they had the guts to make an f7.1 zoom. This will be great for travel and general purpose for many people.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2020 at 14:28 UTC
Total: 596, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »