Rod McD

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Jan 15, 2010

Comments

Total: 274, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Rod McD: Its a great pity Cosina don't offer them in other mirror-less mounts too. Why not Fuji, MFT and Canon M? Those of us who would like to use them will have to adapt the old Leica M mount lenses they already have out. For me personally the Apo Lanthar 65/2 is the most interesting of the three. I'm not sure if that will even be available in Leica M mount either.

I'd agree that a crop-sensor-only lens would restrict that lens to that sensor. Obviously a lens with a specific mount would have to be marketed to owners of that platform - as is the case with other independents now. I was suggesting that the same lens should be made in addition to FF options so no loss to FF platforms. I don't know that adapters are the perfect answer. (Like you I already use quite a few.) With no electronic contacts, Cosina would only need to change the lens rear barrel length and mounts. Samyang already follow that approach with a number of their MF lenses - successfully as far as anyone can tell.

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2017 at 03:18 UTC
In reply to:

Rod McD: Its a great pity Cosina don't offer them in other mirror-less mounts too. Why not Fuji, MFT and Canon M? Those of us who would like to use them will have to adapt the old Leica M mount lenses they already have out. For me personally the Apo Lanthar 65/2 is the most interesting of the three. I'm not sure if that will even be available in Leica M mount either.

@ Richard Murdey. Surely value is entirely subjective? If someone buys a Voigtlander lens, that deal is presumably good for both Cosina and the buyer. I use an Apo Lanthar SL90/3.5 on APSC and it's an excellent small all-round short tele, semi macro and occasional long portrait lens. I bought it because Fuji didn't offer a 90mm at the time. They've since released their 90/2 but I kept the Voigtlander - it's half the size of the Fuji lens, focuses closer, has a better MF implementation and great rendering. What's not to like?

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 23:19 UTC
In reply to:

Rod McD: Its a great pity Cosina don't offer them in other mirror-less mounts too. Why not Fuji, MFT and Canon M? Those of us who would like to use them will have to adapt the old Leica M mount lenses they already have out. For me personally the Apo Lanthar 65/2 is the most interesting of the three. I'm not sure if that will even be available in Leica M mount either.

I know full well that these are FF lenses. A good many mirror-less users do use MF FF lenses on smaller formats and they're not all used film-era glass. If you're making the point that the numbers may not be there to make it economic, OK, you may well be right. OTOH, you can't use what you can't mount. If they were offered in more mounts so that adapters could be avoided, maybe the take up would be higher.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 12:41 UTC

Its a great pity Cosina don't offer them in other mirror-less mounts too. Why not Fuji, MFT and Canon M? Those of us who would like to use them will have to adapt the old Leica M mount lenses they already have out. For me personally the Apo Lanthar 65/2 is the most interesting of the three. I'm not sure if that will even be available in Leica M mount either.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 21:39 UTC as 15th comment | 8 replies
On article Fotodiox Pro launches five GFX lens adapters (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rod McD: Hmm.... Apart from using other medium format film lens adapters, I can only think of a few uses (macro & TS perhaps) for 35mm/FF lenses that actually make sense unless you're cropping to FF anyway. In which case why bother to spend $7K to get FF?

And yes some FF lenses project a larger image circle than required to cover FF, but one needs to be very careful not assume that the area beyond the intended usage offers excellence in IQ simply because it's there. It can deteriorate quite rapidly.....

Many lenses have image circles bigger than the film/sensor sizes their designers intended them for. My point was that users shouldn't assume the IQ is excellent outside that area. And excellence is why one buys MF. If you look at lens test charts published by lab test sites, it's very obvious that IQ falls away WITHIN the intended area as one approaches the corners. That deterioration continues the closer one gets to the edge (as one can see if one uses TS adapters). I do acknowledge that a 30.6mpx FF crop might be useful in its own right and that portrait photogs may not care because they're interested in centre dominant subjects. But to anyone interested in say landscape or architecture it may be very important.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 21:43 UTC
On article Fotodiox Pro launches five GFX lens adapters (73 comments in total)

Hmm.... Apart from using other medium format film lens adapters, I can only think of a few uses (macro & TS perhaps) for 35mm/FF lenses that actually make sense unless you're cropping to FF anyway. In which case why bother to spend $7K to get FF?

And yes some FF lenses project a larger image circle than required to cover FF, but one needs to be very careful not assume that the area beyond the intended usage offers excellence in IQ simply because it's there. It can deteriorate quite rapidly.....

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 06:05 UTC as 9th comment | 4 replies

Pity - I would have been interested to check out and perhaps buy the 24-85.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 21:36 UTC as 163rd comment

What's with all these high-end and aspirant high-end designs that have clanking great metal buckles and fasteners all over them? Metal fasteners, glass surfaces and camera bodies just seem like such a poor mix when manufacturers have access to high grade nylon and Fastex type fasteners...... Retro isn't always good.

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2017 at 04:31 UTC as 24th comment
In reply to:

evogt500: Kinda pricy for a 50/2.

@villagranvicent. There is no previous 50mm lens in Fuji's lens range, faster or otherwise. And why not be objective and see how the new lens actually performs? The first one has yet to be sold.....

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 07:01 UTC
On article Feisty upstart: Hands-on with the Fujifilm X-T20 (341 comments in total)

I'm an XT1 owner. Is this possibly a great economic upgrade path to the 24mpx sensor and AF improvements? Possibly, but it means no AF joystick and a reduced EVF, both of which one might use routinely. And no sealing. Perhaps three of the best physical things on the XT2 missing. And no battery/power grip if one uses one. OTOH, smaller and a lot lighter. Or wait to see the XE3....? Decisions, decisions.....

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 06:50 UTC as 89th comment
In reply to:

thubten: Its hard to find a $1000 f4.5 lens under 400mm

Not really. Try Voigtlander 10, 12 & 15mm ultra wide angles.....

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 02:33 UTC

Interesting..... It might be nice as a hiking/ landscape lens in FF or APSC. The slow aperture wouldn't matter and the low weight would be an asset. The devil, of course, is in the detail...... It will be nice to hear about the actual IQ when some make it into the field. Until then, all we're going to see here is conjecture.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 02:30 UTC as 9th comment
On article New 20mm F2 4.5x macro lens released by Mitakon (121 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ace of Sevens: That focal range seems to mean this will have very limited applications. How is this considered a macro lens?

It's ONLY a macro lens. Maximum magnification is 4.5x, minimum 4.0x. It doesn't do anything else - ie it's a highly specialised lens for very close up photography somewhere in the range between the usual 1:2/1:1 macro lenses (that also focus to infinity) and microscopy.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2016 at 23:19 UTC
In reply to:

Rod McD: It's a pity people with the intellectual, manufacturing and marketing skills to do this can't turn their efforts to actually making decent lenses that either compete with the real thing or offer a few FLs the OEMs don't make.

@ Naturetech.... My comment in no way condoned or admired their counterfeiting activity - not for a nano-second. I share your sentiments about their ethics. My reaction was that if they have the skills to develop a working lens, why not do exactly that, put their own name on it and sell it as a legitimate independent alternative.

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 13:52 UTC

It's a pity people with the intellectual, manufacturing and marketing skills to do this can't turn their efforts to actually making decent lenses that either compete with the real thing or offer a few FLs the OEMs don't make.

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 03:43 UTC as 46th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

TFD: While picking up a $100 used MF Russian lens is interesting as a cheap and cheerful toy. The idea of modern and expensive manual focus lenses is just dumb. Regardless if it is an $800 Tokina or a $3000 Zeiss. Tokina knows how to make autofocus lenses selling a MF lens is just a marketing gimmick.

Maybe the next step will be uncoated lens, might as well just go further back in time.

@Krich13 Yes, some independents haven't reverse-engineered AF protocols but we've also seen those that do cutting out the smaller brands. Things have changed since the OEMS developed the ability to upgrade their AF. Maintaining the protocols is as big an ongoing task as reverse engineering them the first time. But that's only one side of the story - the fact is that MF lenses still sell. Some buyers are motivated by economy, others by choice. One only has to look at the price of Voigtlander, Zeiss and Leica. They cost as much or more than OEM AF options, yet some people still prefer them.

I disagree generally that it's inappropriate to use FF lenses on APSC and that APSC users are always better served by their own OEM lenses. It just depends on the OEM options, the specific FF alternatives and your uses. There are some very fine FF lenses that work perfectly well on APSC and there are sometimes advantages to using them. So having the choice is good.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 22:51 UTC
In reply to:

TFD: While picking up a $100 used MF Russian lens is interesting as a cheap and cheerful toy. The idea of modern and expensive manual focus lenses is just dumb. Regardless if it is an $800 Tokina or a $3000 Zeiss. Tokina knows how to make autofocus lenses selling a MF lens is just a marketing gimmick.

Maybe the next step will be uncoated lens, might as well just go further back in time.

@TFD..... MF lenses are far from dumb. Leica, Samyang, Zeiss, Voigtlander and a number of new Chinese optical companies offer a large range of MF lenses and there is very active interest in them. If there were no valid uses for MF, they'd all have gone broke years ago. Both AF and MF have their places and neither completely excels over the other.

My grumble about this new Tokina is why isn't it available in other mounts???

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2016 at 22:44 UTC
On article Cokin launches vintage-styled Riviera Classic tripod (94 comments in total)

I'm 60 and don't ever recall seeing leather covered tripod legs...... That aside the specs are actually quite good in relation to the legs, height and weight. I'm a lot less sure about the head - It looks like it only has two planes of adjustment. How does it work for vertical orientation? - It seems you probably have to rotate the camera on the QR plate and flip the head over to turn the camera onto its side. No thanks - there's a reason no-one makes those any more.....

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2016 at 22:14 UTC as 12th comment | 2 replies

For me, the 1" sensor is good, the lament is the lack of a zoom. I'm using an Oly TG4 for sea-kayaking - OK so far but the sensor is tiny and the seals don't inspire confidence. I also have a housing for my Canon G1X, but it makes it the size of a house brick - there's no way it can be stuffed into a life jacket. We need something like a big sensor folded light path, fixed zoom 'tough' camera. With REAL O-rings of course - why don't camera manufacturers use real O-rings instead of dubious molded seals for their battery, card and port doors.....

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 22:58 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Clyde Thomas: Congrats to all. Inspiring collection. The layers and dimensions of #12 are otherworldly. I'm taken aback by the cohesion of so many antagonistic forms. Nothing goes together, yet they mix well, offering courteous space to neighboring conflict. The people on the right, oblivious to the stew that roils around them, unaware of their own contribution to it all. Nicely coordinated with earth and water tonalities. I look away, only to be drawn closer to another form. Now the velvet sofa raking swirls. Now the blinds. Now the globes. Now I am a part of it all, adding my current surroundings to the labyrinth before me.

Now I'll walk my dog.

There are some very nice images in the collection. Sorry - #12 does absolutely nothing for me. I prefer mmcfine's boring and predictable landscapes..... with land in them. Water sometimes too. And even natural light. We're all different.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 13:13 UTC
Total: 274, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »