Alphoid

Joined on Jun 24, 2011

Comments

Total: 251, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Alphoid: Welps, not something I'd ever buy. $2500 and no autofocus. Not criticizing, but not all too useful for still work.

I dig the interchangeable mount. I was very excited when Sigma introduced that, and then sad when it went to less than a handful of lenses, and then nowhere. Although now that I'm seeing no A-mount.... Or Pentax....

I'm not judging the lens, but the marketing+coverage. I'm judging the hype run-up dpreview had from a dpreview reader's point of view, followed by the let-down from a dpreview reader's point of view. The lens would be a fine release if not for that. If it was on camcorder info or something.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 05:36 UTC
In reply to:

Alphoid: Welps, not something I'd ever buy. $2500 and no autofocus. Not criticizing, but not all too useful for still work.

I dig the interchangeable mount. I was very excited when Sigma introduced that, and then sad when it went to less than a handful of lenses, and then nowhere. Although now that I'm seeing no A-mount.... Or Pentax....

Plenty of people took still photos with Zeiss Jena lenses in 1910 with a maximum aperture of f/4.5. That doesn't mean I'd personally drop $2500 on a lens with 4 elements in 3 groups in 2016. It'd be a niche product. That wouldn't necessarily make it a bad product -- just a niche one.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 00:50 UTC
In reply to:

Alphoid: Welps, not something I'd ever buy. $2500 and no autofocus. Not criticizing, but not all too useful for still work.

I dig the interchangeable mount. I was very excited when Sigma introduced that, and then sad when it went to less than a handful of lenses, and then nowhere. Although now that I'm seeing no A-mount.... Or Pentax....

I said I wasn't criticizing. It seems like a fine cine lens. Given the "blockbusters" language, I was just hoping for something more ... mainstream.

Perhaps they meant blockbusters literally -- cine lenses, rather than something which will make a big splash.

If not for the ramp up/let down, I wouldn't have said anything.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 00:42 UTC

Welps, not something I'd ever buy. $2500 and no autofocus. Not criticizing, but not all too useful for still work.

I dig the interchangeable mount. I was very excited when Sigma introduced that, and then sad when it went to less than a handful of lenses, and then nowhere. Although now that I'm seeing no A-mount.... Or Pentax....

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 00:26 UTC as 11th comment | 8 replies
On article Samyang teases 'summer blockbuster' lens announcements (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alphoid: I'm going to bet they'll re-release their existing lenses in autofocus and nice aesthetics. The numbers work out right. I'm going to bet they'll be overpriced too. This won't be a $150 prime, but a $600 prime. I'm going to bet it will be met with a collective 'meh' as it won't save much over Sigma, Tokina, or similar. Unless it's all E-mount.

Manual focus + AF unit focus would be fine. That's not actually what those units do. You focus at infinity. They do the rest. For beginners, especially, I'm not MF+fine tune is practical.

On the other hand, simpler lenses are fine for most purposes.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 18:27 UTC
On article Samyang teases 'summer blockbuster' lens announcements (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alphoid: I'm going to bet they'll re-release their existing lenses in autofocus and nice aesthetics. The numbers work out right. I'm going to bet they'll be overpriced too. This won't be a $150 prime, but a $600 prime. I'm going to bet it will be met with a collective 'meh' as it won't save much over Sigma, Tokina, or similar. Unless it's all E-mount.

That focusing method only works if you don't do much compensation for spherical aberrations. It's perfect with a simple lens. With a modern lens with a complex optical formula, I'd expect you'd trade off unreasonable amounts of image quality. That's speculation based on my limited knowledge of optical design.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 16:12 UTC
On article Samyang teases 'summer blockbuster' lens announcements (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alphoid: I'm going to bet they'll re-release their existing lenses in autofocus and nice aesthetics. The numbers work out right. I'm going to bet they'll be overpriced too. This won't be a $150 prime, but a $600 prime. I'm going to bet it will be met with a collective 'meh' as it won't save much over Sigma, Tokina, or similar. Unless it's all E-mount.

True, but I'm not sure we need more complex formulas. The nifty fifties do very well. Samyang is a price leader, but is limited to a niche of advanced/low-budget photographers due to lack of autofocus. Adding AF would make it usable for most beginners. A set of ~$100-$200 autofocus primes from 12mm to 200mm starting at f/1.8 for wide angle, going up to maybe f/2.8 around 135mm would be a game changer, especially if it included a basic macro lens, like the old Vivitar 100mm f/3.5. A beginner could buy a Pentax for $350, spend another $650 to get a 12mm f/1.8, 24mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.4, and maybe a 100mm f/3.5 macro, and have a very decent and complete set of equipment (well, maybe with tripod and flash) for just north of a grand. Lenses in Samyang's price range -- $300ish -- would have a pretty big impact too. A beginner could get the 24mm and the 85mm f/1.4, and have a pretty decent set of equipment.

Another competitor to Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, and others would be a bit of a yawn.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 15:27 UTC
On article Samyang teases 'summer blockbuster' lens announcements (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alphoid: I'm going to bet they'll re-release their existing lenses in autofocus and nice aesthetics. The numbers work out right. I'm going to bet they'll be overpriced too. This won't be a $150 prime, but a $600 prime. I'm going to bet it will be met with a collective 'meh' as it won't save much over Sigma, Tokina, or similar. Unless it's all E-mount.

A nifty fifty is $100-$200. A 50mm f/1.4 is around $350 in most systems. The Samyang lenses are decent, but they're a nice prime, not a state-of-the-art prime. Comparing to Canon lenses, Samyang generally comes out behind in reviews. The advantage is price. The Samyang 24mm TS is very decent for $750. The Canon is better, but $1900.

If Samyang is able to add AF and keep prices as is, they'll sell like hotcakes. If prices go up by a couple hundred bucks, people will likely look to the major brands instead (even if those couple hundred bucks pay for improved IQ). With Sigma in the mix, the market for $600-$2000 lenses is pretty saturated. It's also likely Samyang will take 1-2 generations to get AF fast and reliable.

Cheap lenses have major holes. Samyang could easily fill those.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 13:36 UTC
On article Samyang teases 'summer blockbuster' lens announcements (122 comments in total)

I'm going to bet they'll re-release their existing lenses in autofocus and nice aesthetics. The numbers work out right. I'm going to bet they'll be overpriced too. This won't be a $150 prime, but a $600 prime. I'm going to bet it will be met with a collective 'meh' as it won't save much over Sigma, Tokina, or similar. Unless it's all E-mount.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 10:05 UTC as 26th comment | 10 replies

Honestly, the prices here don't seem at all reasonable. 24-70mm f/2.8 is $2000 in Sony A-mount, $1800 in Canon, $1600 in Nikon, $1300 in Pentax, $780/$1300 in Tamron, $750 in Sigma. The $2500 price in Sony is more than a little high.

The wireless flash systems is also quite overpriced.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 14:56 UTC as 18th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Alphoid: I'll make predictions: They will have a very good base technological concept, but they will go the way of Lytro. They'll fail to execute. They'll build up a patent minescape and reputation which will make it hard for others to follow.

Overall, I think this may be the future of imaging.

@Delusionn Any existing lens mount would work with 4-way lightfield pixels.9-way or 16-way, it would depend on the aperture and focal length of the lens, but it'd be possible to cover a good subset. And the fallback would be it acting a s4-way.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 23:55 UTC
In reply to:

Alphoid: I'll make predictions: They will have a very good base technological concept, but they will go the way of Lytro. They'll fail to execute. They'll build up a patent minescape and reputation which will make it hard for others to follow.

Overall, I think this may be the future of imaging.

@ZDman Lytro's product was atrociously bad. Proprietary files locked into a weird web service. It's not something I can see anyone sane ever using. I would have bought one if it had an open file format and worked with *some* standard photoediting program -- any one would do. Competent execution would be:

* License a camera mount to get a body of lenses. Canon, Nikon, Sony A, Pentax, MFT, Nikon 1, doesn't matter.
* Create a standard file format. Partner with either Adobe, DxO, Corel, or someone else for software support.
* Release a camera with a 50 megaray sensor offering sensible resolution. I'm not talking uber-high resolution, but for example, 4-way pixels and 10MP, or 9-way pixels and 5MP.

@photenth That's exactly the point. An array of small sensors can offer more surface area and a wider baseline than a single large sensor at much smaller size. Ten 1/2.3" sensors are quite competitive for low-light with a single APS sensor, but the overall system is about 1/10th the size.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 14:30 UTC

I'll make predictions: They will have a very good base technological concept, but they will go the way of Lytro. They'll fail to execute. They'll build up a patent minescape and reputation which will make it hard for others to follow.

Overall, I think this may be the future of imaging.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 10:18 UTC as 14th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

Karroly: A P&S camera with only one sensor has a battery life around 300 shots. Will this one with 16 sensors - and much more computing power - have a battery life of about 20 shots ?

I'm also curious whether the processing will be in-camera or in post. The camera may do the bare minimum needed for preview if they're clever. But v1.0 products usually aren't clever.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 10:15 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Ma: 16 lenses, all with infinite DOF after about 3 feet.

But they combine to give narrower DOF computationally. The spec of interest is baseline between lenses.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 10:14 UTC
In reply to:

Eigenmeat: Nice concept, but I think this initial iteration will have trouble beating a $600 A6000 pancake zoom in both size and image quality. I think a RX100 III/IV will also give better quality and much cheaper price.

That depends on aperture and total sensor area. Specs don't say. But even 1/2.3" sensors would give similar total surface area, and I'd guess it's something like f/2 lenses. That would give potential for quite a bit better images.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 10:14 UTC
On article Under pressure: Canon vs. Nikon in a hydraulic press (294 comments in total)
In reply to:

M1963: This is cringeworthy. Two beautiful cameras crushed by some clown with a ridiculous accent. What do people do these things for? I can understand Jeremy Clarkson bombing an Alfa Romeo Arna, but this is just gratuitous.

Edutainment. Some of them have interesting insides, fluid dynamics, or otherwise. Better than the most things. Although I admit this one was a little uninspired.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 23:27 UTC
In reply to:

Alphoid: Nits:

* Bokeh is a little bit harsh. Look at the telephone in the third photo.
* Serious issues with moire and aliasing on the shirt on the last photo.

That's not to say the photos look bad, but for $10k...

Other notes:

* Square catcheye isn't as aesthetic at round, at that level of detail
* Honestly, it's amazing how pretty the subject is at normal dimensions, and how many defects come out at 100% crop. Nose. Cheek. Eye. And all the hair on the face. It's almost like looking at her through a microscope. No one looks good under a microscope.

I'll be interested to see how Hassy addresses those in the final camera :)

Well, I'd expect a $10k camera to not skimp on the AA fitler, as is the trend these days, and to perhaps to use the extra room on f-stop to be a little gentler on the SA and leave nicer bokeh in place.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 02:10 UTC

Nits:

* Bokeh is a little bit harsh. Look at the telephone in the third photo.
* Serious issues with moire and aliasing on the shirt on the last photo.

That's not to say the photos look bad, but for $10k...

Other notes:

* Square catcheye isn't as aesthetic at round, at that level of detail
* Honestly, it's amazing how pretty the subject is at normal dimensions, and how many defects come out at 100% crop. Nose. Cheek. Eye. And all the hair on the face. It's almost like looking at her through a microscope. No one looks good under a microscope.

I'll be interested to see how Hassy addresses those in the final camera :)

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 01:40 UTC as 54th comment | 7 replies
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2604 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alphoid: @rishi Look at the number of comments in this thread where people misunderstood what you wrote about AF-S vs. single point in the conclusion. People are clearly misunderstanding your writing. That's an indicator of bad writing, not bad users. I understand what you wrote is /technically/ correct. I just read it myself. Without the context of the autofocus page, it sounds like autofocus on the Pentax is broken, not just broken for sports shots. I'd consider scrapping it, and writing what works well and what doesn't (rather than just about what doesn't).

You should at least mention it works well in AF-S. You should also consider, in the conclusion, writing out AF-C. Many of your readers won't know that means continuous autofocus.

Here's a conclusion: "Unfortunately, the autofocus system still lags in this category. It is on-par with Canon cameras from ____[date], or cameras of __ class. It is a little hesitant in single autofocus mode. In continuous focus tracking, for fast-moving subjects and narrow depth-of-field (f/2.8), we missed about 50% of the shots. With focus tracking, we missed 85% of the shots -- the tracking system would lose track of the subject frequently. Low-light autofocus was precise, but very slow, taking ___ seconds to reach focus." DPReview: I place the above text in the public domain if you'd like to use it as a starting point ;)

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 10:52 UTC
Total: 251, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »