Joined on Jun 22, 2004
About me:

Voigtlander Bessa 66

Past cameras: Pentax Zoom90R, KX, Super Program, MZ-50, MZ-5

Past lenses: AI-s 300mm f/4.5 ED-IF, Tamron SP 17-35, Tamron 24-135 AF, Zenitar 16mm FE, Vivitar S1 200/3, Tokina RMC 70-210/3.5, Vivitar S1 70-210/2.8-4, SMCT 85/1.8, SMCT 50/1.4, K55/1.8, A50/1.4, FA80-320, Cosina 105/3.5, Sears 135/2.8, Jupiter 9 80/2, Sigma EX 15/2.8 FE, Kiron MC7 2x TC


Total: 72, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On article Video Overview: Fujifilm X-T10 (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

BRPWS: 4k. Great. I would like to see a real survey from Dpreview or any of the other review sites to find out how many people are really interested in 4K video as a feature to be incorporated in a still camera.

What's the big deal, if you don't like video, do not use it. A lot of these "I don't like video" arguments carries the misguided assumption that the same camera without the video feature would be more affordable - that cannot be further away from the truth.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2015 at 01:28 UTC
In reply to:

bluevellet: Cynics would say Fuji has a strong habit of releasing buggy, unfinished cameras to then try to fix them years down the line through the line. Yes, it's better than not fixing them at all. But it just doesn't encourage you to run out and buy the latest Fuji product since it is expected to be crippled.


Since you're not very clear with your assumptions, let me spell them out for you.

a) Fuji's initial release firmwares were buggy and not do things they promise
b) other manufacturers' firmware were not buggy that's why they're not fixing anything.

2 very questionable assumptions, to say the least. I'd say some of these "Cynics" are probably "astroturfers".

Link | Posted on May 11, 2015 at 16:26 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Imagine that. Actually upgrading a camera's focusing system without requiring the user to buy a new body. Would that other companies followed this.

As if any other manufacturer unlocks their cameras' full potential (CHDK, Magic Lantern anyone?) or gets things right for the first time?

Whether your assertion is correct or not, Fujifilm seems to be doing better than _ALL_ other manufacturers in this regard - which is what matters.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2015 at 16:19 UTC
In reply to:

Woody W.: Depends on what about it is being patented. It has to be both "novel" (new) and "non-obvious". I'll give them novel, but not non-obvious. Basically, once you have the ability to create a transparent display - a true invention, it is obvious to apply it in virtually any scenario in which a non transparent display might be used. (Note: the US Supreme Court has said "obvious to try" is, by definition not non-obvious.)

have you read the patent? "non-obvious" does not apply to the idea. It applies to the implementation of the idea outlined in the claims.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2014 at 15:02 UTC
In reply to:

Photato: Sony and Fuji made the same mistake in releasing too many products.
They should take a page from Apple and focusing instead in few refined products. Simpler, cheaper and customer doesn't get confused .
I would have only 2 models in the mirror-less segment. Basic and Premium with a 2 year hardware cycle but several firmware upgrades along the way.
If they need more variety, at least make a more distinct product like a mono chrome model. I know many people would buy a second body to have it .

Oh my, don't put Fuji and Sony in the same sentence. For your reference: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53109309

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2014 at 23:44 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T1 real-world samples gallery (185 comments in total)
In reply to:

ijustloveshooting: lower IQ than 24mp nikon aps-c sensor, not different than my 5N but the price of an A7....this camera is extremely priced for what it offers in terms of IQ...

What's the equivalent Sony 5N lens to the Fuji 56/1.2? Is the 5N weather sealed? Gosh, apart from the same size sensor and that both are mirrorless your 5N cannot be more different than the X-T1.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2014 at 15:37 UTC
In reply to:

Identity: I'm sure this is a lovely lens, but I was expecting shallower DOF in an F/1.2 lens. For me, APS-C is still the best balance of size, image quality, cost, and DOF control.

berni29...since you bring this up. I have had used all of MFT, APS, Fuji X and FF and I can tell you that the "equivalent lens" is smaller on FF.

Body size: smaller format wins
Lens size to achieve the same composition: larger format wins

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2014 at 18:34 UTC
In reply to:

nerd2: Even with misleading f1.2 aperture the DOF control (or lack thereof) looks worse than lowly 50mm 1.8 on APS-C camera. If you're after portrait, save your money and go to larger format period.

Naveed, f/1.6 is equal sure for a particular focal length and if you don't worry about composition and subject distance. for real photo taking...Den Sh is right.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2014 at 18:29 UTC
In reply to:

Oleg Vinokurov: Seems most people here concerned only with sharpness and equivalence of dof on FF. Well, it's sure sharp and has more than enough dof control, but hey, don't miss this awesome bokeh. Saw other samples with rather busy background, but bokeh was still really smooth and soft, seems 9 aperture blades do help here.

pdelux, wider than full body shots are not appropriate for demonstrating subject separation...as is head and shoulder shots. 85mm is used quite often for half body portraits from waist level up. Wide open this lens should demonstrate a good degree of subject isolation with that composition.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2014 at 18:26 UTC
In reply to:

BBking83: I know! How ridiculous!! Check out this photo: http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj524/picrumors/picrumors001/Bildschirmfoto2014-01-07um121412_zpsc083a830.png

Can you believe that the 5th skin pore on her nose is still slightly in focus!?!?! I mean, look at her cheeks and eyes! They could be WAY more blurred if you used a FF camera!

This lens is JUNK!

EDIT: Because a whole lot of people will argue against it, it's from here: http://www.quesabesde.com/noticias/leica-nocticron-42-5mm-f1-2-analisis-fotos_11255

Can't read Spanish? Google translate can help you. :)

It has a lot more to do than what is in focus and what is not. The more important thing is for things that are out of focus, how blurry they can become.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2014 at 18:24 UTC
In reply to:

ThorstenMUC: here is another gallery shot under controlled conditions (not mine):

Stand back! This and the cameralabs shots are too close to the subject.

This lens is designed as a 85mm equivalent - quite a few people would love to see compositions where half the subject (from waist up) is included and evaluate the bokeh for those shots wide open.

head and shoulder portraits and close distance shots are not enough. Almost any lens can throw the background OOF nicely when sufficiently close to the subject.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2014 at 18:09 UTC
In reply to:

Timmbits: I'm not on MFT, but MFT sure gets a nice lens.

Bring out a 20mm f1.2 (40mm equivalent) and I might just take a look at the MFTs.

MichaelJP, it is not just about how shallow the DOF is, it is also about the subject separation and bokeh. Even if the background is out of focus on both the f/1.4 and f/0.7, the f/0.7 background is creamier all else being equal.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2014 at 21:45 UTC
In reply to:

samhain: Nice price. But only 7 aperture blades? Hmmm....

If they are rounded even 6 can work...

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2014 at 18:20 UTC
In reply to:

audiobomber: The K-3 is a better photographic tool than the EM-1, with higher resolution, lower noise, broader dynamic range, switchable blur filter, -3EV sensitivity, three f2.8 AF points, dual card slots, more capable AF-C and tracking.

The EM-5 beat the D800E in this same poll. That says more about the number of m4/3 fanboys around here than it does about the cameras.

E-M1 has tiny sensor that makes images full of moire, microscopic LCD screen, viewfinder unusable at night, confusing control, useless scene modes, limited video resolution choice, insufficient storage slots, snail-pace USB speed, inferior battery life.

It is a lot of fun to write like bluevellet when you exaggerate everything.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2014 at 06:52 UTC
In reply to:

audiobomber: The K-3 is a better photographic tool than the EM-1, with higher resolution, lower noise, broader dynamic range, switchable blur filter, -3EV sensitivity, three f2.8 AF points, dual card slots, more capable AF-C and tracking.

The EM-5 beat the D800E in this same poll. That says more about the number of m4/3 fanboys around here than it does about the cameras.

Let's see.


Instead of hyperbole, just let people do their own comparison.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2014 at 06:41 UTC
On article Have Your Say: Best DSLR / SLT of 2013 (335 comments in total)
In reply to:

Anastigmat: I am partial to full frame, so I voted for the D610. It is a pretty lean year for new camera introductions. The Df is more a gimmick than real progress, and the other APS-C models is just a waste of money. You can get a used APS-C model on the market that takes good pictures, if you don't have a digital SLR camera, and if you already have an APS-C camera and want to upgrade, then consider a full frame, instead of wasting your money on something that isn't any better in terms of image quality.

In other words, according to almighty Anastigmat, anyone would be wasting their money if they buy anything but "FF". Not me I guess, having migrated from 35mm to greener pastures.

Cheap 35mm has already arrived for more than a year now. If it were really the only game worth playing, nobody would be making APS-C DSLR by now. That must be the reality. Oh wait...

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2013 at 03:57 UTC
On article Sony A3000 First Impressions Review (622 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Sony is so smart. They know that the average consumers only look at the specs list when making a camera buying decision. They want to see if it has the most megapixels(Check), has Full-HD video(Check although it is 1080i according to dpreview), and does it have a really high ISO limit(Check).

Give the people exactly what they want to see for next to nothing. They will take better pictures with this camera than their pocket camera or phone and they won’t have to break the bank to do it. Once you have them locked into Sony lenses you will have a customer for life even if there are better options out there.

Name a single significant recent Sony product (*recent = after the walkman)...yeah they make some good recorders - but it slips under the radar if one's interest is anything other than recording audio.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2013 at 06:57 UTC
In reply to:

Henrik Herranen: They lost me at the line where they said:
"Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM (equivalent to a 40mm f/2.8)"
(followed by many other lines of similar, ahem, data).

They really should know better. 40/2.8 on FF is _NOT_ the equivalent of 24 f/2.8 on crop. If it was, both systems would have the same DoF and blurring capabilities, but they don't.

Different images = no equivalence.

This image equivalence you're talking about only is only relevant for someone cross-shopping between the 2 different formats.

DXOMark should skip even mentioning it - just mention the format the lens is for should be sufficient. Anything more, it sparks off-topic discussions and becomes a distraction.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2013 at 13:43 UTC
In reply to:

Hugo808: So the lenses most people are going to use - 18-55, 18-135 - are the worst ones for the camera?

That makes it a tough sell, why can't we have a top performing standard zoom without having to carry around something heavy like the fast L series options?

Just once would be nice.....

the 18-55 and 18-135 ARE good-performing lenses if you stop them down about 2 stops or so. Don't use them wide-open.

So they already serve your purpose - light, slower, but performs well.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2013 at 13:36 UTC
Total: 72, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »