EvilTed

Joined on Mar 2, 2012

Comments

Total: 168, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Zeiss formally announces Batis 135mm F2.8 (183 comments in total)
In reply to:

straylightrun: So its not fast, its not compact and its not cheap. Why does this lens exist again? Are there people out there willing to pay this much for a Tamron designed lens , just for the blue badge?

@Satya

Have you shot the Amazing Nikon 105mm F1.4 yet?
F2.8 is NOT enough and this lens is testament to that fact.
F1.4 on a longer prime like this has an amazing look.
Try one on a Sony A7r II and put it alongside the 85mm F1.4 GM @ F1.4 and tell me which is better.
Now shoot both @F2.8 and wash your feet before inserting in mouth :)

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 05:47 UTC
On article Zeiss formally announces Batis 135mm F2.8 (183 comments in total)

Batis 135mm for $2000 vs. 70-200 F2.8 GM for $2500.
Hmmm, I know which I'd buy :)

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 05:41 UTC as 5th comment
On article Zeiss formally announces Batis 135mm F2.8 (183 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: So many moronic comments on this page - too big, too slow, overpriced, paying for the blue badge etc..

If only the lens designers at Zeiss knew as much as you guys eh? They could have made it smaller and a lot faster!

Why don't you try emailing them your lens schematics? Maybe chuck in some suggestions for where to use aspheres or air spaces and what kind of substrates they could go with. Ways they could polish the elements to cut down on light scatter...

I'm sure the guys at Zeiss/Tamron/Cosina or whoever throws this Zeiss junk together would be pleased to get your designs. They haven't got a clue, right?

Early indications are that the optical quality of this lens is astounding, but I'm sure you guys could do better.

One thing I'll add is that the Nikon 105mm F1.4 is exceptional on the A7r II.
Pity it can only be shot wide open, but luckily this lens is really wonderful that way. My favorite rendering lens on a Sony to date...

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2017 at 04:55 UTC
On article Zeiss formally announces Batis 135mm F2.8 (183 comments in total)
In reply to:

User3787089555: I would choose 100 STF GM, way better bokeh and only 3/4 price.

and half the light gathering. Woo Hoo!

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 03:33 UTC
On article Zeiss formally announces Batis 135mm F2.8 (183 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: So many moronic comments on this page - too big, too slow, overpriced, paying for the blue badge etc..

If only the lens designers at Zeiss knew as much as you guys eh? They could have made it smaller and a lot faster!

Why don't you try emailing them your lens schematics? Maybe chuck in some suggestions for where to use aspheres or air spaces and what kind of substrates they could go with. Ways they could polish the elements to cut down on light scatter...

I'm sure the guys at Zeiss/Tamron/Cosina or whoever throws this Zeiss junk together would be pleased to get your designs. They haven't got a clue, right?

Early indications are that the optical quality of this lens is astounding, but I'm sure you guys could do better.

@straylightrun

You say nervous, while I say swirling :)
I actually find the Sony 85 GM bokeh to be rather plastic and artificial looking.
Things look flat and lifeless, whereas Zeiss Batis 85 images have a lot of life.

I personally don't find any Sony lenses I've owned or tried to be exceptional.
Coming from Leica glass, I prefer what Zeiss can produce, be it with the Loxia or Batis range.

Each to their own, I guess..

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 03:32 UTC
In reply to:

Jacob the Photographer: Every once in a while a clever Photographer comes up with something NEW,
While we dumbos thought everything had been done.
So cool - love it !!

I agree. Pretty awesome. Well done. Great for adults and kids :)

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2017 at 18:01 UTC
In reply to:

RazorTM: And Nikon is pronounced "knee cone."

Bokeh comes from the word "bokeru" which means "to be blurred."

Gotten is not a word either :)

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2017 at 04:02 UTC
In reply to:

james s. kennedy: Bokeh is Bo and the eh rhymes with the he in heck.

I say Nikon as Neye and con as in Trump.

Then you would be wrong.
Or American.
Or both :)

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2017 at 03:59 UTC
On article Ultra-compact: Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II review (591 comments in total)
In reply to:

EvilTed: @Nowelly

It's useless as a street camera.
I tried one yesterday and the AF is too slow and sluggish and then there's the extreme high resolution that is none too forgiving of bad technique.

The result of my 1 hour test shooting F8 1/500s on the streets yesterday was ZERO sharp or in focus images.

If you favor the camping style of street photography (wait somewhere for someone to walk into your scene), this may be an acceptable camera, but for those of us who shoot one-handed and constantly on the move, it's just not going to cut it.

Again, its all depends upon your style and how you make images.
Resolution is not important in street photography.
Being discrete and shooting while moving is (at least to me).
Some street photographers wait for people to enter their scene.
Others like me are more dynamic and just shoot with the flow.

It's not about being inflexible.
It's about choosing the right tool for the job.
If you took a pole today of cameras used by serious, published, street photographers, I don't think you'll find the RX1r II very high on the list.

Go watch this video on the Master, Daido Moriyama and it may make things clearer why all cameras aren't really suited to street photography...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCL1SnIYZUw&t=185s

Start around 1:20

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2017 at 15:34 UTC
On article Ultra-compact: Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II review (591 comments in total)
In reply to:

EvilTed: @Nowelly

It's useless as a street camera.
I tried one yesterday and the AF is too slow and sluggish and then there's the extreme high resolution that is none too forgiving of bad technique.

The result of my 1 hour test shooting F8 1/500s on the streets yesterday was ZERO sharp or in focus images.

If you favor the camping style of street photography (wait somewhere for someone to walk into your scene), this may be an acceptable camera, but for those of us who shoot one-handed and constantly on the move, it's just not going to cut it.

I'm a very experienced street photographer and I've used all the leading cameras, both film and digital.
IBIS does nothing for movement, so it isn't going to help you on the street, except for stationary subjects.

Silent mode is passable on the street with the A7s because of the small resolution.
I shot with one and a 35mm F2.8 for over a year.
Silent mode is useless on the A6300/A6500, because of the larger resolution and finer pixel density.
It is even worse on the A7r II because of the larger sensor.
Jim Kasson wrote a good article on this, you should check it out.
Basically anything moving in the plane of the sensor will create horrible distortion, so unless you are shooting stationary targets, silent mode is not much use.

I've already had a Fuji X100F and hated it and flipped it the next day for what I paid for it.
Sorry, but the small Ricoh is still the superior street machine compared to any other I've tried.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2017 at 02:54 UTC
On article Ultra-compact: Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II review (591 comments in total)
In reply to:

EvilTed: @Nowelly

It's useless as a street camera.
I tried one yesterday and the AF is too slow and sluggish and then there's the extreme high resolution that is none too forgiving of bad technique.

The result of my 1 hour test shooting F8 1/500s on the streets yesterday was ZERO sharp or in focus images.

If you favor the camping style of street photography (wait somewhere for someone to walk into your scene), this may be an acceptable camera, but for those of us who shoot one-handed and constantly on the move, it's just not going to cut it.

No, but it is useless for street photography for the way I shoot.
Too much resolution requires good, steady, hand-held technique and this doesn't equate to shooting one handed, while moving (which is how I shoot on the street).

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 03:00 UTC
In reply to:

josseee: Im not sure if it was soo wise from fuji to skip FF world. I dont think its saturated at all, especially the mirrorless portion, which is practically a one man show by sony without any real competitor (sorry leica...)
Might it be that sony just said "we wont sell you any FF sensors if you enter the field" to fuji? just wondering ...

Sony have just announced they will start keeping their best sensors for Sony cameras, so Nikon and Fuji are potentially in trouble unless they are strategic "partners" to Sony's vision.

There is probably a very solid business reason why Sony has FF and Fuji has APS-C and now cropped MF market...

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 13:39 UTC
In reply to:

Tony Northrup: Awesome article, Rishi. Brave, too; nobody knows better than I how mathing crop factor and equivalence enrages people (yet accurately predicts performance).

The recent medium-format craze is reminiscent of the micro-four thirds craze almost a decade ago. Remember when everyone was excited to see tiny MFT 12-35 f/2.8 lenses that produced the same results as huge FF 24-70 f/2.8 lenses? That misconception launched an entire industry, and buyers spent millions assuming they'd get results that were simply impossible.

I do think the new medium format system cameras are compelling for reasons like the Fuji's interchangeable viewfinder, which is useful and needed. But most people seem to be buying into it for "separation" and "compression" and "that medium format look"... reasons that just don't exist.

and don't forget, it took Fuji 5+ years to get APS-C right...

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 13:11 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (891 comments in total)
In reply to:

EvilTed: I liked mine so much, I immediately sold it for what I paid for it after one day shooting it on the street.

I didn't think it has improved IQ much over the X100S and it certainly is no match for a Sony A6500/A6300 + 24mm F1.8 for AF speed or IQ.
I thought the lens was soft and not really good enough for the previous sensor, but it definitely feels dated now.

RAW images were very noisy at 3200 ISO and it had a tendency to miss focus completely on some shots, even at 1/500s and F8 with flash.

When I put mine on Craigslist there was someone else immediately flipping his and deciding to stick with his XT-2 and 23mm F2.
Not for me, and I'm not alone in not being that impressed either...

@wolfloid
Yes, you got me. I've never used any of the cameras or lenses.
I just hang out on camera forums to chat with people like you.

As for how a camera can be too small to wear around your neck?
Child!!!!
Do you ever look in the mirror before you go out?
University Lecturer, hmmm...

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 13:30 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (891 comments in total)
In reply to:

EvilTed: I liked mine so much, I immediately sold it for what I paid for it after one day shooting it on the street.

I didn't think it has improved IQ much over the X100S and it certainly is no match for a Sony A6500/A6300 + 24mm F1.8 for AF speed or IQ.
I thought the lens was soft and not really good enough for the previous sensor, but it definitely feels dated now.

RAW images were very noisy at 3200 ISO and it had a tendency to miss focus completely on some shots, even at 1/500s and F8 with flash.

When I put mine on Craigslist there was someone else immediately flipping his and deciding to stick with his XT-2 and 23mm F2.
Not for me, and I'm not alone in not being that impressed either...

Yes but it is still a crippled little fuss pot of a camera.
I've owned a lot of Fuji's including the X100s, but Fuji is a brand that once you leave it, you never go back.

The lens is it's biggest problem.
Fuji could have updated it with a new 18mm pancake and pleased a lot of people.
The AF is fussy, the ergonomics are still not right.
The Q button and the edge of the flap on the right side hit the palm of your hand all the time and there is still no real Back Button Focus ability with AF-C.

It's cute and almost girlie in it's little form.
Too big to shoot one handed and too small to have around your neck.

and don't get me started on their brain dead menus.
Everyone complains about Sony, but since when does Format belong under User Settings?
And why have they never fixed the ridiculous save settings behavior that they've had since day one?
It took me 10 or more attempts to get it to save settings before I remembered the stupid way it is implemented...

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 03:22 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (891 comments in total)

I liked mine so much, I immediately sold it for what I paid for it after one day shooting it on the street.

I didn't think it has improved IQ much over the X100S and it certainly is no match for a Sony A6500/A6300 + 24mm F1.8 for AF speed or IQ.
I thought the lens was soft and not really good enough for the previous sensor, but it definitely feels dated now.

RAW images were very noisy at 3200 ISO and it had a tendency to miss focus completely on some shots, even at 1/500s and F8 with flash.

When I put mine on Craigslist there was someone else immediately flipping his and deciding to stick with his XT-2 and 23mm F2.
Not for me, and I'm not alone in not being that impressed either...

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 03:12 UTC as 134th comment | 12 replies
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (888 comments in total)
In reply to:

gcbodie: OVF is better because I can tune it to my eyesight with the diopter whereas the EVF requires me to be wearing my reading glasses to use that screen.

You need glasses to see the controls on the camera though (unless you have memorized their position) :(

I find that when I use my Nikon DSLRs, my work flow is a lot slower than when I use my Sony A7r II, for this reason.

You are also wrong about checking things.
The EVF can be used 100% instead of the LCD and, in fact, it is the preferable method of shooting landscape photography (go read Lloyd Chambers blog).

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 18:29 UTC
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (888 comments in total)
In reply to:

gcbodie: OVF is better because I can tune it to my eyesight with the diopter whereas the EVF requires me to be wearing my reading glasses to use that screen.

@gcbodie

Actually, you got it the wrong way around.
Even if an OVF has a diopter, you still need your reading glasses to see what you shot, make adjustments or anything else.

With an EVF, you never need reading glasses because you can see everything, including all the settings menus directly in the diopter controlled viewfinder.
This is a major selling point of EVF vs. OVF for middle aged and older ;)

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 16:53 UTC
In reply to:

ijustloveshooting: Landscape comparison shot at F1.4 clearly (yes clearly) shows GM is sharper...sharper up to F4-5.6---at F8.0 i call even...

as a long time GM85 user, i can definitely know it's sharpness at F1.4 and i could never seen similar sharpness on Sigma F1.4 shots available on the net so far. GM85 at F1.4, in terms of sharpness, winner.

for portrait shots, it's always very hard to frame same photo in order to eliminate focus distance caused dof differences, and in these shots, it's also very visible .

I had two brand new copies of the 85mm F1.4 GM to test and to be honest, I wasn't that impressed.
The Nikon 105mm F1.4 on Sony via Novoflex is much nicer.
The GM is also noisy and vibrates all over the place.
I sent them both back...

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2017 at 03:58 UTC
In reply to:

iamatrix: Unfortunately so many people who praise lenses these days are paid by the manufacturer to do so, so it's extremely hard to discern the truth.

Here is a great example - sorry Jason but this is a BS video.
I have 2x brand new copies of the 85mm F1.4 GM and they are going back tomorrow.
The noise and the constant vibration as the lens chatters in AF-C is not what I expect from a flagship lens.

Don't take my word for it. Watch the video then read the responses...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEePLbHD3vI

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2017 at 03:43 UTC
Total: 168, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »