Rod McD

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Jan 15, 2010

Comments

Total: 374, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Rod McD: Hi Barney. Thanks for the review. There have been very, very few reviews of this whole family of lenses. It's amazing that Handevision expect to sell any without making them available for testing to web review sites. I'd really appreciate seeing reviews of the other four lenses if that possibility emerges for DPR. For me, as a Fuji user, the interest would be in the 75 and 90mm lenses - Fuji offer nothing in 75mm and their 90mm is massive (as mirror-less lenses go). Thx.

Hi, Thx. I don't know that it is that niche. The Iberit group of lenses are available to every mirror-less system (FF, APSC or MFT) via either native mount or via M adapters. I doubt there would be the same level of interest in all FLs. I expect an OEM 35mm & 50mm are available in every system, but the 24, 75 & 90 might be good options *if *the IQ is good. No-one seems to know whether their optical design is up to the minute or dates from the film era (with the usual problems of resolution and CAs at wide apertures). Hopefully they're very good - reviews of the other FLs would be great if that's possible.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2018 at 04:06 UTC

Hi Barney. Thanks for the review. There have been very, very few reviews of this whole family of lenses. It's amazing that Handevision expect to sell any without making them available for testing to web review sites. I'd really appreciate seeing reviews of the other four lenses if that possibility emerges for DPR. For me, as a Fuji user, the interest would be in the 75 and 90mm lenses - Fuji offer nothing in 75mm and their 90mm is massive (as mirror-less lenses go). Thx.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2018 at 06:29 UTC as 23rd comment | 4 replies
On article Why you should own a 135mm F2 lens (385 comments in total)

Everyone should have one? I know taste is subjective, but it seems to me that some people have become obsessed with blur and bokeh. Yes the Samyang is good and yes there are lenses with bad bokeh. But for many of us, somewhere in between, are plenty of short to mid-tele lenses that will deliver solid service (in terms of subject separation) without carrying around still another kilo for the sake of more blur.

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2018 at 11:12 UTC as 46th comment
On article Canon patents 400mm F5.6 catadioptric 'mirror' lens (220 comments in total)

Hmmmm.... I can't see the point. It's rare that f5.6 - 8 reflex lenses can't be used at base ISO and you need to stop down to reduce excessive exposure. You might in some circumstances want a smaller aperture to get more DOF but this electronic ND filter isn't going to do that for you. The real problems with reflex lenses are 1) modest resolution - good refractors are better - and 2) the dreaded dough-nut bokeh that draws attention to itself and just isn't the way we see the world. Solve that, and you might have a winner......

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2017 at 08:07 UTC as 11th comment

That tripod support look incredibly light for the mass on top of it (to me, at least). Anyone else notice it? - It looks like it would be very prone to flex or vibration. I really don't now why manufacturers keep making tripod supports ever taller..... There was a time when they used to make them neat and close-fitting to the lens and they never had the flex and vibration problems you sometimes get today.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2017 at 05:51 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies
On article Hands-on with new Fujifilm X and GF lenses (123 comments in total)

There's much to like about the Fuji 80mm, but I'm dismayed by its mass. At 750g it's heavier than some FF 1:1 lenses. It will be a very front-heavy lens on Fuji's small camera bodies, some of which are half its weight. And it will weigh 900g with either of the TCs that Fuji are touting that it's compatible with. Worse, having designed a heavyweight, the real disappointment is the lack of a tripod collar. They should have offered a removable collar like the Canon's. No doubt sacrificed by a bean counter somewhere in the accounting department.

I'll be interested to see what its working distance is compared to the pre-existing 60mm macro at 1:2 and at 1:1 on extension tubes. The new 80mm is an IF lens where the old 60mm is external focus.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2017 at 05:20 UTC as 8th comment

Offer a Loxia 25/2 and I'll show some interest.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 09:43 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

Rod McD: I have a great ILC system, but still use the old Canon G1X Mk 1 as a 'grab & go' / 'light travel' camera. It's been bullet proof. Not everyone wants a system, so this is an interesting release when other companies are languishing in the large sensor, fixed zoom market. The Nikon DLs never emerged. The LX100 is 3 years old and the LX200 is nowhere in sight. Fuji only offer the fixed prime X100F.

I think people should accept the camera for what it is tended to achieve, not complain about what it isn't designed to do. Yes the lens is slow, though probably very capable for many uses. People are complaining that it's not pocketable but a faster or longer zoom lens would have been much bigger on APSC. It's smaller and lighter than an APSC ILC with an interchangeable zoom. I suspect that it would make a nice travel camera. The larger sensor and built in EVF are welcome. And the sealing is something you don't get on every ILC that costs more. Let's be objective and see the IQ.

True, the G1X III was, I think, not leaked or particularly expected now. So, you may be right, but people have been predicting an LX200 for over a year.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 20:40 UTC

I have a great ILC system, but still use the old Canon G1X Mk 1 as a 'grab & go' / 'light travel' camera. It's been bullet proof. Not everyone wants a system, so this is an interesting release when other companies are languishing in the large sensor, fixed zoom market. The Nikon DLs never emerged. The LX100 is 3 years old and the LX200 is nowhere in sight. Fuji only offer the fixed prime X100F.

I think people should accept the camera for what it is tended to achieve, not complain about what it isn't designed to do. Yes the lens is slow, though probably very capable for many uses. People are complaining that it's not pocketable but a faster or longer zoom lens would have been much bigger on APSC. It's smaller and lighter than an APSC ILC with an interchangeable zoom. I suspect that it would make a nice travel camera. The larger sensor and built in EVF are welcome. And the sealing is something you don't get on every ILC that costs more. Let's be objective and see the IQ.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 00:27 UTC as 41st comment | 2 replies
On article Nikon's official D850 lens recommendation list (308 comments in total)

Er, no 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, or 85mm? Or any of their macros, which are usually the sharpest pick of the lot? Surely that's where 90% of photography gets done??

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 22:29 UTC as 97th comment

Focal reducers definitely have their place in adapting down to near sensor sizes, but I can't see this model selling. I thought the Q had passed into history. No new bodies, no new lenses. And whatever the equivalence of Nikon FF lenses on the tiny sensor, the whole galumphing front heavy beastie would defeat the purpose of the Q anyway. I'm happy to be proven wrong.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 04:56 UTC as 41st comment | 4 replies

Interesting, but is the new 40/2 just another cosmetic upgrade with the same (very good) glass or has it actually been improved in its optics as well?

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2017 at 13:25 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Rod McD: Thanks for the link. LR's tech articles are always a worthy read. I'd be interested to see an extension of the study to test the impact of CPLs on IQ, as they did with clear filters. I've never had any doubts that my polarizers have been polarizing.... I can see the effect. However, given all the debate (religion?) regarding clear and UV filters and the potential impact they may have on IQ, one would speculate that a CPL (which is a more complex structure) would have more.

Appreciated. Thank you.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2017 at 13:37 UTC
In reply to:

Rod McD: Thanks for the link. LR's tech articles are always a worthy read. I'd be interested to see an extension of the study to test the impact of CPLs on IQ, as they did with clear filters. I've never had any doubts that my polarizers have been polarizing.... I can see the effect. However, given all the debate (religion?) regarding clear and UV filters and the potential impact they may have on IQ, one would speculate that a CPL (which is a more complex structure) would have more.

Surely surface flatness is only part of the story? As I understand it, there's a metal foil and adhesives in the CPL sandwich. How about actually evaluating the impact on images from a few benchmark lenses of different FL, with and without a CPL? Or are we to simply take as read the view that clear filters may or may not have an impact on IQ, but all CPLs are just fine?

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2017 at 08:10 UTC

Thanks for the link. LR's tech articles are always a worthy read. I'd be interested to see an extension of the study to test the impact of CPLs on IQ, as they did with clear filters. I've never had any doubts that my polarizers have been polarizing.... I can see the effect. However, given all the debate (religion?) regarding clear and UV filters and the potential impact they may have on IQ, one would speculate that a CPL (which is a more complex structure) would have more.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2017 at 23:19 UTC as 30th comment | 5 replies
On photo common kingfisher in the Your Best Photo of the Week challenge (4 comments in total)

Good shot! Cheers, Rod

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 07:36 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

neverendinglight: The new 80mm Macro lens seems a little disappointing (especially when compared to existing 60mm Macro and 90mm F2 and Sony 90mm) but...

...Let's talk about the 200mm F2 WR OIS! That's a lens to get stoked about! Will it be less than $1700 though?

Hmmm...... There is no 200/2 available from any manufacturer under a list price of US $5600. Why would the Fuji be any different? Fortunately for my dreaming and my wallet, it's far too short for my interests anyway.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 23:08 UTC
In reply to:

Rod McD: We've waited a long tome to see this lens. I'm very confident that it will have excellent optics and I'm glad to see that it has a limiter switch on the barrel alongside the OIS switch. It looks substantial but we don't know the weight - the full specs aren't out. I'm betting that it's heavier than the 90/2 (540g) and if people start using it with TCs or extension tubes, it may well be a very front heavy rig without it's own tripod collar. More so on the smaller Fuji bodies. We also don't know if its IF, and if so whether it allows decent working distances at higher magnifications. I look forward to hands on reports.

IF designs have some advantages but they aren't all good. An IF lens doesn't focus by extension, but the downside is that the focal length reduces as you increase magnification, which makes working distances shorter at high magnifications anyway.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 22:52 UTC
In reply to:

Rod McD: We've waited a long tome to see this lens. I'm very confident that it will have excellent optics and I'm glad to see that it has a limiter switch on the barrel alongside the OIS switch. It looks substantial but we don't know the weight - the full specs aren't out. I'm betting that it's heavier than the 90/2 (540g) and if people start using it with TCs or extension tubes, it may well be a very front heavy rig without it's own tripod collar. More so on the smaller Fuji bodies. We also don't know if its IF, and if so whether it allows decent working distances at higher magnifications. I look forward to hands on reports.

Thx. If that 750g is confirmed, the 80mm Macro is a VERY substantial lens for the Fuji system. It would have made a tripod collar all the more useful. Imagine mounting a 750g lens on a 150g TC = 900g total weight on a camera like the XE3 or XT20 that weigh under 400g. And then attach the whole rig to a tripod via the camera's base plate socket. Perhaps not a wise move....

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 07:42 UTC

We've waited a long tome to see this lens. I'm very confident that it will have excellent optics and I'm glad to see that it has a limiter switch on the barrel alongside the OIS switch. It looks substantial but we don't know the weight - the full specs aren't out. I'm betting that it's heavier than the 90/2 (540g) and if people start using it with TCs or extension tubes, it may well be a very front heavy rig without it's own tripod collar. More so on the smaller Fuji bodies. We also don't know if its IF, and if so whether it allows decent working distances at higher magnifications. I look forward to hands on reports.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 07:05 UTC as 36th comment | 5 replies
Total: 374, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »