blohum

Lives in United Kingdom Cornwall, United Kingdom
Joined on Jan 6, 2011

Comments

Total: 65, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

blohum: I'm still amazed that people think m43 should not have premium lenses.

There are already plenty of small and cheap options within the m43 system and this is what I love about it, you can go from the tiny GM1 with 12-32mm or 20mm 1.7 right up to workhorse cameras like the GH4+12-35mm or EM1 with something like the 300mm f4... don't want to spend much? m43 has been around long enough to have a great market of second-hand cameras that can be picked up for peanuts; want great optics, get something like the 75mm 1.8 or 42.5mm 1.2.

m43 will always be a little behind in image quality, but absolute image quality is not what everyone needs. For example, I was out with the camera club the other night and there were some great crepuscular rays building on the horizon... my friend who uses a D810 didn't bring his 70-200mm lens as he didn't want to carry it, I had my 45-150mm in the bag, hence I got the shot.

If you think something is going to lose too much value, just don't buy it... there aren't many things in the world that don't depreciate in value, m43 and cameras in general are not immune to this.

This is why I rarely buy anything when it first comes out, I'm prepared to wait until the price reaches a point where I'm happy to pay.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2016 at 16:01 UTC
In reply to:

blohum: I'm still amazed that people think m43 should not have premium lenses.

There are already plenty of small and cheap options within the m43 system and this is what I love about it, you can go from the tiny GM1 with 12-32mm or 20mm 1.7 right up to workhorse cameras like the GH4+12-35mm or EM1 with something like the 300mm f4... don't want to spend much? m43 has been around long enough to have a great market of second-hand cameras that can be picked up for peanuts; want great optics, get something like the 75mm 1.8 or 42.5mm 1.2.

m43 will always be a little behind in image quality, but absolute image quality is not what everyone needs. For example, I was out with the camera club the other night and there were some great crepuscular rays building on the horizon... my friend who uses a D810 didn't bring his 70-200mm lens as he didn't want to carry it, I had my 45-150mm in the bag, hence I got the shot.

It's only bad if you see a lens as an investment... I buy lenses to use them, surely the point of owning a lens is to create images with it?

If I buy a car, I don't expect to sell it for the same amount years later; if I buy a new TV I don't expect to sell it for the same amount; what about a phone? a suit? or even a camera body for that matter?

Remember that NOTHING has an intrinsic value; a lens is an inanimate object after all, it's a simple supply and demand scenario, things will only remain expensive when there is more demand than supply.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2016 at 15:46 UTC
In reply to:

blohum: I'm still amazed that people think m43 should not have premium lenses.

There are already plenty of small and cheap options within the m43 system and this is what I love about it, you can go from the tiny GM1 with 12-32mm or 20mm 1.7 right up to workhorse cameras like the GH4+12-35mm or EM1 with something like the 300mm f4... don't want to spend much? m43 has been around long enough to have a great market of second-hand cameras that can be picked up for peanuts; want great optics, get something like the 75mm 1.8 or 42.5mm 1.2.

m43 will always be a little behind in image quality, but absolute image quality is not what everyone needs. For example, I was out with the camera club the other night and there were some great crepuscular rays building on the horizon... my friend who uses a D810 didn't bring his 70-200mm lens as he didn't want to carry it, I had my 45-150mm in the bag, hence I got the shot.

So after all the moaning that m43 lenses are too expensive, it's now also bad because prices come down?

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2016 at 10:33 UTC
In reply to:

blohum: I'm still amazed that people think m43 should not have premium lenses.

There are already plenty of small and cheap options within the m43 system and this is what I love about it, you can go from the tiny GM1 with 12-32mm or 20mm 1.7 right up to workhorse cameras like the GH4+12-35mm or EM1 with something like the 300mm f4... don't want to spend much? m43 has been around long enough to have a great market of second-hand cameras that can be picked up for peanuts; want great optics, get something like the 75mm 1.8 or 42.5mm 1.2.

m43 will always be a little behind in image quality, but absolute image quality is not what everyone needs. For example, I was out with the camera club the other night and there were some great crepuscular rays building on the horizon... my friend who uses a D810 didn't bring his 70-200mm lens as he didn't want to carry it, I had my 45-150mm in the bag, hence I got the shot.

We all have our own limits and this is 12mm far too expensive for me , but if you have the cash and want it then why not? No-one is forcing you to buy it, and if the pricing is that ridiculous then no-one will buy it and the price will be forced to come down.

I recently got the 12-35mm f2.8 for £300, it was priced at around £1,000 when it first came out... time or money, your choice.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2016 at 09:38 UTC

I'm still amazed that people think m43 should not have premium lenses.

There are already plenty of small and cheap options within the m43 system and this is what I love about it, you can go from the tiny GM1 with 12-32mm or 20mm 1.7 right up to workhorse cameras like the GH4+12-35mm or EM1 with something like the 300mm f4... don't want to spend much? m43 has been around long enough to have a great market of second-hand cameras that can be picked up for peanuts; want great optics, get something like the 75mm 1.8 or 42.5mm 1.2.

m43 will always be a little behind in image quality, but absolute image quality is not what everyone needs. For example, I was out with the camera club the other night and there were some great crepuscular rays building on the horizon... my friend who uses a D810 didn't bring his 70-200mm lens as he didn't want to carry it, I had my 45-150mm in the bag, hence I got the shot.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2016 at 09:15 UTC as 43rd comment | 9 replies
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (483 comments in total)
In reply to:

Haim Hadar: This week will be remembered as the "D-word" tantrum week... IMO it's great that DPreview staff is sharing the enthusiasm over an impressive piece of equipment.

Wish sony could have pulled out a little extra magic and shave off a few hundred grams of this camera as 1.1kg seems too heavy for long hikes - It weighs the same as my tent.

Does your camera also keep you dry and warm overnight? :)

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 07:00 UTC

Ignore the nit-pickers Ken, this is a great set of work! Who says a photo needs to be realistic? A photo should represent how you interpreted the scene and I've enjoyed all of these.

I visited the area 10 years ago, unfortunately I only had a compact camera and very little photographic knowledge at the time... one day I'd like to go back!

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2016 at 21:41 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1063 comments in total)
In reply to:

coyot3: So overpriced. 4/3 should be more cheap.

there's plenty of cheap m43 bodies around, unfortunately this just isn't one of them.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2016 at 22:07 UTC
In reply to:

Old Cameras: Years ago I bought my wife a Canon aps film camera. It has a switch to allow you to take a "normal", wide and extra wide format picture. When you got the film developed they would automatically print it that way. It actually took pretty good pictures. She loved it. Years later I had to break it to her that the aps film was discontinued and I bought her a very compact 8mp Nikon pocket camera. She hated it. To this day she has never used it. She hates the gadgetry factor of it even though it's beyond simple. She uses her iphone for pictures and videos. I think she's an example of the kind of customer camera companies have lost.

and for a compact camera, you just turn it on, point and shoot... really struggling to see how that's more gadgety.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2015 at 14:01 UTC
In reply to:

Old Cameras: Years ago I bought my wife a Canon aps film camera. It has a switch to allow you to take a "normal", wide and extra wide format picture. When you got the film developed they would automatically print it that way. It actually took pretty good pictures. She loved it. Years later I had to break it to her that the aps film was discontinued and I bought her a very compact 8mp Nikon pocket camera. She hated it. To this day she has never used it. She hates the gadgetry factor of it even though it's beyond simple. She uses her iphone for pictures and videos. I think she's an example of the kind of customer camera companies have lost.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but isn't an iPhone more "gadgety" than a compact camera?

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2015 at 09:38 UTC
In reply to:

WACONimages: Where is the haze removal function in my bought/payed copy of LR6???

That was a huge failure Adobe to leave that out and only available for the monthly subscribers. No way I ever gonna do that.
I didn't find/read any documentation that the Haze Removal function weren't in the full payed single copies of LR6

@HowaboutRAW not sure if you've just replied to the wrong comment but I do 99% of my editing in LR... obviously depends on your editing needs but I only use PS if I really need to.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2015 at 12:24 UTC
In reply to:

WACONimages: Where is the haze removal function in my bought/payed copy of LR6???

That was a huge failure Adobe to leave that out and only available for the monthly subscribers. No way I ever gonna do that.
I didn't find/read any documentation that the Haze Removal function weren't in the full payed single copies of LR6

I agree that Adobe should have included this for users of LR6, I can understand that CC users will get major new versions upon release but this is a minor update.

Not perfect but try googling for "prolost dehaze presets"...

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2015 at 11:59 UTC
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: 25 mm F0.95 sounds impressive, but it has the same DOF as a 50 mm F2 for FF and a 35 mm F1.4 for APS-C. Not all that fantastic.

Wow! Took longer than usual for someone to mention equivalence!!

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2015 at 08:12 UTC
On article Readers' Showcase: Dale Johnson (39 comments in total)

Great set, particularly liked #3 and #13

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2015 at 08:21 UTC as 10th comment

Well, if there's one good thing to come from this it's that more people are now aware of Joel... I'd never come across his work until now.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2015 at 08:16 UTC as 8th comment | 2 replies

There's some sour people out there, I'll bet that most of you would love to be presented with a scene like that!

Well done to Tony for being in the right place at the right time and having the knowledge and skill to be able capture a stunning image like that!

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2015 at 08:25 UTC as 54th comment
On article Readers' Showcase: Martin Kozak (77 comments in total)

I don't do sport at all, but these shots are great; extremely creative... fantastic work Martin!

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2015 at 08:36 UTC as 10th comment
On article Readers' Showcase: Nicolas Alexander Otto (40 comments in total)

Great set! Especially liked 5, 7, 9 and 10.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2015 at 22:05 UTC as 17th comment
In reply to:

StefanD: Darn... I just sold my Canon 70-200 4.0L to exchange it with the Olympus 35-100 2.0 only to find out that that beast weighs 2 times as much :-(

the 35-100 2.0 was for four-thirds DSLRs, not micro four-thirds...

Link | Posted on May 21, 2015 at 12:51 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 (497 comments in total)
In reply to:

straylightrun: Why is there no IBIS?

I'm not an expert but the usual answer is that 4K video produces a lot of heat and the heatsink required is too large for IBIS to move efficiently...

Link | Posted on May 18, 2015 at 13:25 UTC
Total: 65, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »