Rex C

Joined on May 2, 2019

Comments

Total: 143, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Usually the videos start with...episode shot with ...so there was a little suspense.

I thought this looked a little different and then after the first scene they let us know.

Who knew a medium format cam could looks so wonderful? Great contrast and great colors.

And the lens looks awesome too.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2019 at 23:22 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

bayindirh: The images are very good, the lens is very very sharp. When compared Fuji's colors, they are joy to look at.

Kudos to Fuji for creating this gem. Personally I love how Fuji's X-System is progressing and improving. I would not return to APS-C from FF but, I really like Fuji all-round.

Congrats & kudos again. :)

Some sour grapes there.

For video especially, Fujifilm has the best colors.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2019 at 23:18 UTC

It's so tiny...well compared to the Sonys. :D

Reminds me of the old Oly 150 F2. Crazy sharp and good reach.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2019 at 19:22 UTC as 21st comment

Sound can be very moving and important.
A child's voice from long ago, a long passed love one...

I think this is why most I know like short old videos vs. old pictures.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2019 at 00:03 UTC as 19th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS Rebel SL3 review (319 comments in total)

Wow,

If true then this applies to most M43, APSC and possibly FF cameras too....
(Exeptions might be those with longer reach kit lenses?)

"Good smartphones will convincingly blur backgrounds better than the... kit lens will allow"

Another reason not to buy an ILC if you are only going to use the kit lens?

Ouch.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2019 at 13:18 UTC as 68th comment
In reply to:

Miles_H: Japan is the Olympus best-selling market . When this market is not selling well , I dare not imagine what other markets will be like .

Olympus still use the same and old sensor (16mp sensor From 2011 to now , after 8 years / 20mp sensor Form 2015 to now after 4 years) , So it's not interesting, and it's not attractive , This is why I think Olympus sales will drop.

Sony has its own sensor development technology , and Fujifilm X-Trans sensor is upgrade to 4th generation , also Fujifilm have new Bayer sensor , This is why I think sales will rise.

The high speed readout 20MP sensor first used in the EM1/2 is not from 2015.
Think before you post false stuff.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2019 at 00:55 UTC
In reply to:

Peter Del: Super-telephoto, I think super-heavy is a more apt description! Just buy Olympus with a 300 etc and give your back a treat!!

Rishi, if you hop over to DxO you will see the A9 and EM1/2 do not conform to equivalence as expected. There is only about a 1 bit difference in tonal range at the most used ISOs, and as pointed out DR (good indicator of shadow noise) is virtually equal up to ISO400. At higher ISOs the difference gets close to what we would expect when calculating equivalence.

Now the A7RIII is a different animal. It does have greater DR at low ISOs as does the A7iii.
It's just the A9 that for a FF camera (like Canons too) has a limited for DR.
Maybe you could check and see if this is due to the stacked sensor.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 23:59 UTC
On article Sony FE 600mm F4 GM OSS sample gallery (107 comments in total)

I see a lot of samples taken at F5.6 and F8.
In those cases there is no benefit to the $13000 lens vs. A significantly smaller Oly 300/4.

And you can't just walk down the street or go on a long hike with a lens that size and that expensive. If you slip on a mossy spot you will either break the lens or some bones.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 16:18 UTC as 28th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Rex C: The A9 and the EM1/2 have the same DR from ISO100 to ISO 400. Noise at those ISOs is not an issue.

So do I spend over $5000 on an A9 and this lens and break my back carrying them?
Or do I spend about half on an EM1/2 and panny 100-400...getting more reach, same IQ (better colors), and make it easy to hike and travel with a relatively small combination?

Obviously going FF means spending a lot more money and suffering with difficult to transport lenses.

Tkbslc,
Thanks for some sanity. Reality eludes some here.

And the truth is, most people won't be willing to lug around a lens that large, nor want to take it on long hikes. I sae a Canon owner slip while hiking down a hill with a similar size lens....it was NOT pretty.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 15:59 UTC
In reply to:

Peter Del: Super-telephoto, I think super-heavy is a more apt description! Just buy Olympus with a 300 etc and give your back a treat!!

There will be no noticeable noise at ISO100 to400 with EM1/2. And DR would be the same as the A9.
At these focal lengths subject isolation won't be problem either.
In fact the greater DOF will make getting sharp images easier too.

But the best feature of the EM1/2 is it takes pictures BEFORE your brain can make your finger press shutter, so fewer missed shots.
And for birds taking flight, 60FPS RAW files is amazing.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 15:53 UTC
In reply to:

Peter Del: Super-telephoto, I think super-heavy is a more apt description! Just buy Olympus with a 300 etc and give your back a treat!!

The EM1/2 and A9 have same DR at ISO 100-400.

Just get that 300mm lens and the 100-400mm lens.

You will save money and you won't break your back or your wrist (those Sony's have uncomfortable grips for giant lenses).

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 14:39 UTC

The A9 and the EM1/2 have the same DR from ISO100 to ISO 400. Noise at those ISOs is not an issue.

So do I spend over $5000 on an A9 and this lens and break my back carrying them?
Or do I spend about half on an EM1/2 and panny 100-400...getting more reach, same IQ (better colors), and make it easy to hike and travel with a relatively small combination?

Obviously going FF means spending a lot more money and suffering with difficult to transport lenses.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 14:35 UTC as 48th comment | 13 replies
In reply to:

thorgal: 13% for Sony?

According to Sony trolls all already switched to Sony so it should be 100%.

To be fair, even though they are only at 13% (less than 1/2 of Nikon), and even though their sales fell 6.6% YoY (4-5x worse than Canons 1.3), Sony does have the highest per unit price. That is a very good thing. That means higher revenue but few customers.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 12:46 UTC
In reply to:

Rex C: Film is the "subscription plan" in the camera industry that every manufacturer desires.
Companies want customers locked in spending money every month.

If you buy a car that uses petrol only, you are locked into buying petrol.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 11:00 UTC
In reply to:

Rex C: People clearly put fanaticism over reality.
"At 37.3 percent of all units sold, Canon remains the market leader"
And Canon only lost 1% in revenue YoY in a contracting market. (Not good but not a disaster...and better than everyone except Fujifilm and Sony)

Somehow that is a disaster and shows Canon is badly losing to everyone???? That is delusional.

Canon and Sony each are doing OK. Canon lost a little revenue YoY and Sony lost some customers (but made more revenue).

Fujifilm is the only one that increased sales and revenue.

Smartphones.

Sony tried to shift to making higher end smartphones and bringing in more revenue per sale.

They now lose hundreds of millions trying to sell smartphones and had to drop out of some of the largest regions.

Samsung and Apple were smart to build market share, and now they are doing well.

Huawei is another company killing Sony because they are will to not make as much revenue now and instead build market share and loyal customer support.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 02:52 UTC
In reply to:

Rex C: People clearly put fanaticism over reality.
"At 37.3 percent of all units sold, Canon remains the market leader"
And Canon only lost 1% in revenue YoY in a contracting market. (Not good but not a disaster...and better than everyone except Fujifilm and Sony)

Somehow that is a disaster and shows Canon is badly losing to everyone???? That is delusional.

Canon and Sony each are doing OK. Canon lost a little revenue YoY and Sony lost some customers (but made more revenue).

Fujifilm is the only one that increased sales and revenue.

Quiquae,
I agree completely. Fujifilm is increasing their profitability and BCN confirms this.

And their market share is expanding rapidly.

I guess I should have said they probably are putting a priority on expanding market share, because long term that will mean even greater profits.

And I don't know anyone who doesn't think Fujifilm makes the best APSC mirrorless cameras today. Although some think that I'd there is ever an A7000 in the coming year...it might be better than the old XT3.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 01:25 UTC
In reply to:

Rex C: I see people trying to spin bad news.

The only company increasing units sold (increasing number of customers) and value sold, is Fujifilm.

The market as a whole looks bad.

T3,
I don't think A7iii sales have plummeted like you keep saying.
It has done very well and still is.

But Sony did have a bad Q4.
And because FF is such a small market, overall Sony has lost customers (but still made money), at least in Japan.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 00:22 UTC

They don't really mention Panasonic.
This article from back in February has some info on how they were doing.
Interestingly in this article you can see in the graph as of February Olympus and Canon were battling for the leading mirrorless sales.
Olympus needs to release a new EM5 and EM1 if they want to regain their lead.
https://www.bcnretail.com/research/detail/20190223_107139.html

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 00:14 UTC as 41st comment
In reply to:

Rex C: People clearly put fanaticism over reality.
"At 37.3 percent of all units sold, Canon remains the market leader"
And Canon only lost 1% in revenue YoY in a contracting market. (Not good but not a disaster...and better than everyone except Fujifilm and Sony)

Somehow that is a disaster and shows Canon is badly losing to everyone???? That is delusional.

Canon and Sony each are doing OK. Canon lost a little revenue YoY and Sony lost some customers (but made more revenue).

Fujifilm is the only one that increased sales and revenue.

13% has been their ceiling for some reason.
It shows what many suspected too. While Nikon was not making as much selling cameras and lenses combined (we don't know about cameras only), Nikon is still possibly selling near twice as many cameras and reaching near twice as many customers.

The question is how long can Fujifilm keep their momentum gaining customers and market share.
I am sure they are happy to exchange reduced profits (actually BCN said they increased) for rapid growth in their customer base.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2019 at 00:01 UTC
In reply to:

Rex C: I see people trying to spin bad news.

The only company increasing units sold (increasing number of customers) and value sold, is Fujifilm.

The market as a whole looks bad.

Sony has virtually dropped out of the affordable APSC camera market.
They are losing unit sales (market share/customers) but making more per camera sold.
It's a good plan and has worked well for Leica.

The problem is once you are behind in customers it is hard to catch back up. Look at how hard entering the FF mirrorless market is. Look at how Sony could never catch up selling DSLRs or SLTs and eventually quit.

Ironically in 2008 Sony had a 13% market share. This report says they have a 13% market share.
That seems to be their ceiling for customers. Since they can't gain customers they instead are selling higher priced bodies and ignoring the majority of potential customers. Kind of like Leica.
Nothing wrong with Leica either.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2019 at 23:33 UTC
Total: 143, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »