JensR

Lives in United Kingdom Bath, United Kingdom
Works as a Mechanical Engineer
Joined on Nov 23, 2003
About me:

Hi,

thanks for stopping by!
If you want to see what I'm up to, send me a message :)

My 'plan':
Talk Pentax into a digital Electro-Spotmatic! (This needs some work...)

-------------

Older Signatures:

'LBA knows no bounds, and seeks no justification...' (Jim King, 2005)
http://www.jr-worldwi.de/photo/index.html - Photography, Tech and Geek stuff :}

'Why is everyone answering rhetorical questions?' (Me, 2005)

'Well, 'Zooming with your feet' is usually a stupid thing as zoom rings are designed for hands.' (Me, 2006)

'I only trust those photos I have faked myself.' (Me, 2007)
http://www.jensroesner.de/

--=! Condemning proprietary batteries since 1976 !=--

'I don't want them to believe me, I just want them to think.'
Marshall McLuhan

Comments

Total: 165, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

DPPMetro: By the way, here's a note: Pentax's K-1 was supposed to be sold at 1999 (and also comparably in Euros), but actually the price was raised for the street. Due to strict controls in Europe, undercutting is not allowed. The inability to undercut was supposed to encourage B&M sales, but has ended up backfiring due to the fact that slow stock can not be undercut to be moved, as is the case for my main camera store, who still has lenses from September there (I bought the K-1). The other two stores are having similar issues and are not restocking unless there's an order. Now as of the second to last dire report of Ricoh's financial state, Ricoh raised prices across the board Europe- a point discussed on ALL of the other Pentax forums, but when discussed on the forums here, the mods deleted all references to price hikes, despite every other forum reporting them, territory by territory.

Those anti-under-price contracts have nothing to do with the EU. The EU regulations are against predatory pricing, a company with a large market share (for example Canon) are not allowed to sell their products below their production cost in order to drive out competition. (Similar laws exist in the US, but they are not enforced since a 1993 verdict.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_102_of_the_Treaty_on_the_Functioning_of_the_European_Union
Think about it, if it were EU law, it would not have to be part of the dealer contract! No, these rules are imposed by the manufacturer on their dealers.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 23:42 UTC
In reply to:

Impulses: Pentax aside, this seems like a bit of a stagnant category...

If you compare camera prices between the US and the EU, also compare prices for healthcare. Different countries have different ways how they organise their lives.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 23:30 UTC
In reply to:

Boomy: Hello all. I could use sone help. Its been 10 years since I've wanted to shoot pictures again. I'm preparing for a trip to Iceland with my family. Here is where I stand.

I have decided to buy a Sony a7ii. I will most likely buy the 24 240 zoom simply because there isn't much choice and I can't afford a multiple lens budget at the moment. If you have lens suggestions please let me know. I want a lens that will be compatible with the full field sensor.

Questions:

I have a Sony 18 200 3.5 lens (made in Japan) from my older Sony alpha 100. Should I buy the new lens and sell the old one? Not even sure if mount us the same. Don't mind buying new lens.

I have a Sony GN56 flash unit. Is this compatible with the a7ii and lens with TTL?

Any suggestions for a light weight travel tripod welcome.

I think I have to disagree with STS here.
I have switched from a Pentax ist DS with the 18-250 to a Sony A850 with a 28-300 to a Pentax K-1 with their 28-105 and a Sigma 135-400. The image quality went up, but not the quality of my "art".
I need to get a properly adjusted 28-300 ASAP, because this constant lens switching is driving me nuts.
I do move around with a super zoom, I am not lazy in that regard.
But if I need to switch between three lenses (I use a super wide as well), that drags me down.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 23:23 UTC
On article Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 R LM WR sample gallery (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZeBebito: Nothing a proper FF camera can't do.

darngooddesign: "FF is only the sweet spot if you are a fan of FF."

There is a tiny niche where MF outperforms FF with currently available lenses. You know what niche that is? Very high MP photos for scenes with some kind of movement, shot at low to medium-low ISO. For every other scenario FF is better or equal for less money and bulk.

If you disagree, make an argument, an example, some physics equation, show us you can do more than one-liners.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2017 at 22:05 UTC
On article Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 R LM WR sample gallery (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZeBebito: Nothing a proper FF camera can't do.

deep7, of course we could. I say that with confidence, even without knowing what photo you looked at. But you know, show us the image and we can discuss.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2017 at 21:56 UTC

Weird choice of kit. "Amateur" kit has much better range of focal lengths, only drawback is less control over DOF. Now, give the "pro" kit a 24- or 28-70/2.8 and see how that works.

Or, you know, realise that an APS-C dSLR is still a pretty sweet piece of kit and give the professional photographer a compact zoom from 2010.

I'm sure the pro would get great photos even with substantially worse gear, but IMO that gear selection is not very helpful. But then, this article was for getting clicks, not to truly inform, so I guess mission accomplished.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2017 at 21:53 UTC as 17th comment
On article Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 R LM WR sample gallery (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZeBebito: Nothing a proper FF camera can't do.

@darngooddesign ...replace APS-C with µFT, replace µFT with smart phone...

Due to the combination of sensor technology and available lenses 35mm is still a sweet spot at the moment. There are some lenses that can almost remove that advantage, but not quite. A larger system such as MF could offer lenses that cannot be done physically on 35mm, but to my knowledge, these are not (not yet?) available.

Anyway, dpreview had a write-up on this.

That said, sometimes a smart phone *is* the right compromise.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 13:19 UTC
On article Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 R LM WR sample gallery (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZeBebito: Nothing a proper FF camera can't do.

@Pete_W He meant a "proper FF-camera" not a "proper-FF camera".

@deep7 35mm might be a compromise, but it's a mature compromise with a plethora of options. So, no, one doesn't need to be a hypocrite to think 35mm offers the best compromise. (And yes, MF is also a compromise, and so is LF or whatever you want to throw at those you deem blind and deaf :D )

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 10:25 UTC
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: So if you can’t use Sony then what should you use for Astrophotography? Canon has been said to have poor dynamic range and poor noise performance. Nikon doesn’t have the software support that Canon does. So what is left Olympus and Panasonic? Fuji? CCD with all of its cost?

Cheers, and yes, I forgot to mention the compass. The K1 has an option to show the compass on the screen, which is neat, but more commonly useful is that the photos get GPS tagged with heading (direction).

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 10:05 UTC
In reply to:

ZOIP: Still own one and use it for professional work sometimes, the appeal lies in three areas, the viewfinder and ergonomics are excellent but most importantly the colour/tonal rendition is just beautiful, as close to medium format neg film as we ever got with digital in my opinion.

Yep anything over 400 is a bit noisy but it can be cleaned up well enough, but in use I found 400iso really was 400, where as Canons I had at the time overstated their ISO so 400 on the Canons was really only about 250 ISO so the Sony disadvantage compared to the Canons was not really as great as it might at first appear.

The Canons in particular used a less dense red filters which helped high ISO performance but traded off colour quality, especially for ruddy skin tones, Sony chose to go with stronger filtering that traded off high ISO performance but liberated fabulous colour subtlety for the time and even for today.

The noise was largely a result of the red channel being far less exposed at a sensor level, but at low ISO it was fine.

I developed a whole system around shooting the A900 through a red/magenta filter with appropriate RAW processing, this equalised the cross channel exposure at the sensor level and liberated the most glorious colour, clarity and tonality I have ever achieved. Though effectively you are shooting at about 32 ISO.

Anyhow I still love mine and have never regretted the purchase.

I'd question that @sunlit.
Sounds good at first read, but it's wrong to assume that the high-ISO capabilities of modern sensors are bought by weak CFAs. If that were the case, base ISO would go up, which it hasn't.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 10:02 UTC
In reply to:

Gollan: I feel bad for Sony owners who got burned by the firmware update. A simple "we will fix it" from Sony would go a long way here, but perhaps astrophotographers are not an important target market for Sony.

I like how you insult the people who do the in-field testing from which you benefit...

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 00:29 UTC
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: So if you can’t use Sony then what should you use for Astrophotography? Canon has been said to have poor dynamic range and poor noise performance. Nikon doesn’t have the software support that Canon does. So what is left Olympus and Panasonic? Fuji? CCD with all of its cost?

FWIW, the star tracker works by using GPS to know the camera location, then (as far as I know) it uses the same sensors (accelerometers) used for image stabilisation to know where the camera is pointed and shifts the sensor accordingly.
With the previous firmware, they added a feature so the rear display also offers a red tint mode, which does not throw off your eyes' darkness adaptation.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 00:22 UTC
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: So if you can’t use Sony then what should you use for Astrophotography? Canon has been said to have poor dynamic range and poor noise performance. Nikon doesn’t have the software support that Canon does. So what is left Olympus and Panasonic? Fuji? CCD with all of its cost?

Do I know you @sh10453 ?
I think you can hardly say that I am preaching the K-1 much, considering how rarely I post here nowadays. You'll also notice I did not actually say that I own the K-1 here.
So how is your quip at me helpful to anyone? Does me owning the K-1 have anything to do that @mpgxsvcd included 4/3 cameras in their list but left out a 36MP full frame camera that has astrotracer and tether support? Hm.

Link | Posted on May 5, 2017 at 18:57 UTC
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: So if you can’t use Sony then what should you use for Astrophotography? Canon has been said to have poor dynamic range and poor noise performance. Nikon doesn’t have the software support that Canon does. So what is left Olympus and Panasonic? Fuji? CCD with all of its cost?

Depending on your software requirements, check out the Pentax K-1.

Link | Posted on May 5, 2017 at 12:54 UTC
In reply to:

oldfashioned: great camera, no questions. but first nonsense: the flash mount. Second nonsense: memory stick (a waste of space). There must be a special office over there dedicated to that: combine marketing and nonsense for the pleasure of the boss (only). the customers? who cares

Misleading. Every manufacturer has an interest in a lock-in.
Sony bought the Minolta camera business. Minolta used this style of hotshoe. The A900 is a continuation of the Minolta lineage.
You will have noticed that the sony-born Sony cameras have a standard hotshoe. So don't blame the Minolta hotshoe on Sony's desire for customer lock-in.
Sony also allows third-party apps to run on their cameras, who else does that?
If you want to be mad at Sony, complain about the memorystick.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 12:02 UTC
In reply to:

maxmarra: I had a chance to play with this camera back in 2008. focus system was pretty rubbish (in comparison to my 40D) but FF sensor was Epic though U must be crazy to choose this over 5D

Lucky you, several of mine are on the list of problematic or incompatible lenses: https://www.panoramaplanet.de/comp/
And with a cheap chipped adapter they will even have shake reduction on the Sony.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 23:54 UTC
In reply to:

cshyde: Just to show the stupidity of that famous on-line auction site that starts with an E. There are A900 cameras selling for more than used A7 II bodies.

Was actually hoping for the A950 Andre mentioned maybe with liveview on the main LCD, but it became clear it was SLT only.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 12:45 UTC
In reply to:

naththo: That top of Sony A900 may be a breach of Pentax design copyright?

Because Sony has any reason to evoke the Nikon design aesthetics... ...much more plausible that they aimed for a retro style of a "generified" Japanese prism hump.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 12:41 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Even with a price tag $5000 less at the time than Nikon's D3x, this camera wasn't exactly a sales winner, was it? The D850 was the downmarket version as I remember.

But the D800 was outsold by a factor of 1000:1 by spearmint chewing gum.

Seriously, are you surprised that Sony who were then a pretty small player in the ILC industry would have a pretty small market share?

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 12:31 UTC
In reply to:

oldfashioned: great camera, no questions. but first nonsense: the flash mount. Second nonsense: memory stick (a waste of space). There must be a special office over there dedicated to that: combine marketing and nonsense for the pleasure of the boss (only). the customers? who cares

The flash mount was a carry over from Minolta, so it made some sense for Sony to keep it. Back then Sony Photo was a smaller company than now, without the resources to complete overhaul everything.

Memory Stick was actually a rather affordable storage medium, but I agree, it was a nuisance and IMO it should have been clear to Sony that this was a bad idea.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 12:29 UTC
Total: 165, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »