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, Kiron MC7 2x TC


Total: 82, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

mgblack74: This is great for the faithful. I feel bad for the people who sold theirs within a year for a dissatisfied experience. This is a good and bad practice that Fuji is doing. Great that they are supporting their user base. But this reputation of releasing half baked firmware might bite them in the ass. Potential customers may put off buying Fuji until there is a firmware in place the community is really happy with.

The software on my Fuji felt complete when I bought it. Just like how it was advertised and priced.

The new firmware are enhancements and new features, with only minor fixes.

Plus, not releasing firmware does not mean what's on the camera is bugless - they just choose to ignore instead of to fix them.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2016 at 13:00 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Jeez...
It's a full-blown Fuji-vangelist conference here :D
Come on, people, you don't have to worship every piece of ... khm, khm ... gear Fuji throws at you. Have some self-respect and be critical. You can do it!
Wish you luck, crazy world :)


Oh no need to be sorry. You have nothing to be sorry about. However, I'd recommend anyone, including yourself, who wants to know more about FF vs APS-C try it out and use both systems for years, like I did, instead of listening to crusades on the Internet.

About EF-M? Check out one of the very, very few sites that actually care to review the M3, supposedly already the best body that Canon has to offer: www_dot_photographyblog_dotcom/reviews/canon_eos_m3_review/

Conclusion: "While the EOS M3 is undoubtedly a much better camera than the EOS M, it still seems that Canon aren't fully committed to producing a complete mirrorless system, so much so that we'd recommend you consider offerings from Sony, Fujifilm, Panasonic and Olympus instead, all of whom are fully invested in compact system cameras."

I tried the M3 and I must agree with this conclusion looking at system.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2015 at 17:12 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Jeez...
It's a full-blown Fuji-vangelist conference here :D
Come on, people, you don't have to worship every piece of ... khm, khm ... gear Fuji throws at you. Have some self-respect and be critical. You can do it!
Wish you luck, crazy world :)

ecka84 you seem to be on an FF crusade here. everyone knows about the tradeoffs between the two formats. what's new that you're bringing to the discussion? nothing.

as for an EF-M lens being the most bang for the buck UWA. I hope you're kidding. as a system, I would take Nikon's 1 or even Pentax Q before I consider EF-M.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2015 at 01:12 UTC

I cannot spot any metering control and WB control on the switch, which is troubling. WB adjustments and switching among spot, segment, and centre-weighted are the most frequent operations...at least for me.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2015 at 22:09 UTC as 70th comment | 7 replies
On article Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS review (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jiri Folta: I was taken by the quality of Fujifilm cameras and lenses. Not only optical quality but also craftsmanship quality. It was major reason why I sold my Nikon D7000 and all those plastic Nikon lenses made in China, Thailand and so on.
Now, I'm reading that new Fuji lenses are plastic and made in China (XC 16-50mm OIS and XF 27mm (as written on fujirumors.com - First Look: X-M1 with New Kit Zoom and Pancake Lens). An idea of photographic company that is going to bring quality materials and some quality spirit is gone. I hope not but it seems like things are going this way.
Reading some day that X-Pro 2 or X-E 2 are made in China I would sell it all away.
I don't want to buy plastic in China made lenses and cameras. I want in Japan made metal quality. For me, buying Fuji was not only buying photographic tool, it was also investment in the future! It was some kind of promise many photographers had accepted.
I hope we can call Go Fuji Go in the future again!

Speaking as an ethnic Chinese, I hate to say it but it is true hat "Made in China" in most cases DOES imply a lower quality.

If you haven't heard, they sell to their own people fake eggs, fake rice, fake bags, fake diapers, poisonous infant formula, etc. etc. Name it and they have it.

Would you trust things made there? Without QA facilities owned and run by non-Chinese, I don't.

Note that it only applies to Mainland China or PRC. Things made in Taiwan or Hong Kong are still fine.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2015 at 17:37 UTC
In reply to:

Joachim Gerstl: Great! Now add 16/2, 23/2 and 56/2.

28/2 pancake, please.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 21:50 UTC
In reply to:

sirkhann: Still double the price compared to Nikon's Nikkor 35/f1.8G DX, which is also splash proof sealed. The Nikkor is sharp, has aberratons, inconsistent in AF and its out-of-focus bokehis on the rough side.

Not happy for having to downgrade for F2.0 to get better bokeh and IQ from the F1.4 version...

Since when does dropping lenses on the floor determine how well they are built?

The low end Nikon lenses wiggle when they extend - none of the Fujis do. They're just put together better. In the long run, you'll find less dust in the interior, less likely to have fungus, etc.

I converted from Nikon FX to Fuji. If you say Fuji lenses are overpriced for what they are - tell you what, ALL Nikkors are overpriced for what they are.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 21:46 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T10 Review (510 comments in total)
In reply to:

chj: AF is better in a Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, and Olympus. So basically Fuji has the worst autofocus in the industry. So it's good for stationary subjects and cameras. Just about ANY camera can take good photos if the subject and camera are completely stationary. Fuji's reputation for the best color in the industry doesn't make up for it even remotely. You can easily adjust color. You can't fix bad focus. There is nothing more frustrating than a camera that can't lock on.

I can guess the response from many at DPR. "Use manual focus." Well it seems you have to with a Fuji. P.S. I'll put my money on Panasonic's AF against any experienced manual focuser in a tight focus shootout anyday.

@chj the only reason Canon wasn't mentioned is because their mirror less bodies AF like 2003-ish PowerShots did.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 01:47 UTC
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.

I have a lot of respect for good videographers. Good videos are a lot more difficult to produce than good stills, much more time spent on post, etc. Of course the best photos and the best videos are mostly incomparable due to considerable artistic insight, but most people don't achieve either anyway.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2015 at 01:56 UTC
On article Video Overview: Fujifilm X-T10 (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

Papi61: I think that in 2015 many people would consider the absence of 4K video a deal breaker. Especially now that the Lumix G7 is out.

Papi61...as much as I agree with what you say about video...made in China would be a deal breaker, and I'm an ethnic Chinese. A lot of things made in that country...simply explode.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2015 at 01:34 UTC
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
Total: 82, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »