ecka84

ecka84

Lives in Lithuania Lithuania
Joined on Sep 18, 2009

Comments

Total: 372, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Nikon D500 versus D750: Which one is right for you? (344 comments in total)
In reply to:

MHT: I've been trying to decide between the D750 and D500 for months. I shoot primarily landscapes but also everything else at times and I can only justify one (expensive) body.
I've been leaning towards the D750 but didn't anyone else find this a bit disturbing:
"...the D500 provides an electronic first curtain shutter option, which allows landscape photographers to ensure vibration-free images – something that can be a challenge with the D750."
Is the "challenge" met by the firmware update, turning off VR when tripod mounted, locking up the mirror, or something else?? The last two are my common operating practice but a statement like that certainly deserves more of an explanation! I get why the D500 may have an advantage but wouldn't this "issue" affect portraits and pretty much anything other than moving targets? If I buy the D750, how do I go about meeting this "challenge" I wonder?

@Thermidor
Actually, with a good holding technique and something like 6D + 40/2.8STM, it is possible to get sharp pictures even at 1/15sec. Any chance for D750 to do that? I can get like 2 sharp images out of 5.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 14:16 UTC
In reply to:

Ayoh: 135mm 1.8 would be more useful. The DOF would be the same. 105mm is too close to 85mm.

I think 105/1.4 is meant to be used instead of 85/1.4, which would leave more 'space' for the 50/1.4 or 58/1.4.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 14:03 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: This is nice :D
At last, something to compete with 85/1.2, kind of.

Yes, me too. Only now Nikonians will have something to brag about too :D

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 01:01 UTC
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: Not being sarcastic at all. At last, a lens with "endearing character." I haven't seen the word "character" used to describe a lens in forever it seems like. Thank heavens Nikon continues to release lenses that are more attuned to the needs of art than they are to commerce.

It's all about nicer pictures, not about hipsterical fetishism of nostalgia.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 17:53 UTC

This is nice :D
At last, something to compete with 85/1.2, kind of.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 17:19 UTC as 28th comment | 3 replies
On article Nikon D500 versus D750: Which one is right for you? (344 comments in total)
In reply to:

MHT: I've been trying to decide between the D750 and D500 for months. I shoot primarily landscapes but also everything else at times and I can only justify one (expensive) body.
I've been leaning towards the D750 but didn't anyone else find this a bit disturbing:
"...the D500 provides an electronic first curtain shutter option, which allows landscape photographers to ensure vibration-free images – something that can be a challenge with the D750."
Is the "challenge" met by the firmware update, turning off VR when tripod mounted, locking up the mirror, or something else?? The last two are my common operating practice but a statement like that certainly deserves more of an explanation! I get why the D500 may have an advantage but wouldn't this "issue" affect portraits and pretty much anything other than moving targets? If I buy the D750, how do I go about meeting this "challenge" I wonder?

D750 by itself is less affected by the vibrations, because it has larger pixels. I'm a Canon shooter, but I've never had any problems with shutter vibrations on 20-ish MP FF cameras. Maybe because I use LiveView for landscapes. With crop - yes, sometimes it did happen.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2016 at 23:22 UTC
On article Nikon D500 versus D750: Which one is right for you? (344 comments in total)
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: On a crop sensor lens distortions like CA and softness are magnified in proportion to the reduction in sensor size. Also, the bokeh tends to be worse because of the shorter focal length for a given FOV. Finally, the F-mount lens options for 20-100 mm FOV are - taken as a whole and including legacy glass - typically more attractive on FX than DX.

For reach, for responsiveness, for chasing down Pokemon - sure, the D500. For pretty pictures and all the "right" lenses, the D750.

@GRUBERND
You are welcome :)
What you call "a tiny tradeoff in IQ", actually is around 60% of loss. You may not notice that it is such a big difference. There might be a very simple reason for that, like - You don't utilize the full potential of your tools. It's OK, it's fine, just don't preach it to the rest of the world.
So, thank you and good luck :)

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2016 at 21:58 UTC
On article Nikon D500 versus D750: Which one is right for you? (344 comments in total)
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: On a crop sensor lens distortions like CA and softness are magnified in proportion to the reduction in sensor size. Also, the bokeh tends to be worse because of the shorter focal length for a given FOV. Finally, the F-mount lens options for 20-100 mm FOV are - taken as a whole and including legacy glass - typically more attractive on FX than DX.

For reach, for responsiveness, for chasing down Pokemon - sure, the D500. For pretty pictures and all the "right" lenses, the D750.

@GRUBERND
Then perhaps you should keep your careless comments to yourself.
What do you get with crop, if it's not even cheaper, just fps? I think that D3s is even cheaper these days and that thing is plenty fast.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2016 at 15:39 UTC
On article Nikon D500 versus D750: Which one is right for you? (344 comments in total)
In reply to:

helltormentor: @ Barney Britton

You highlighted the issues stemming from using DX lenses on a full frame body, but You didn't mention the possible IQ degradation caused by using FX lenses on a cropped sensor body. Since both share almost the same amount of pixels (24 vs 21), D500 has much smaller pixel pitch which in turn asks for a more resolving lens. Apart from some Zeiss lenses, most lenses designed for full frame are not up to that task. D500 is even more demanding than A7RII ! Using lenses designed for full frame on cropped sensor bodies is what many people do (I have even seen full frame lenses on 20MP Micro 4/3!) but it is far from sharp.

Actually, it's not the FX lens performing worse on the DX body. It's the DX body (APS-C sensor) performing worse than the FX one. The lens performs the same whatever body you put it on. Cropping kills image quality by throwing away 60% of the information and magnifying all the flaws. There are exceptions, when the lens can provide much more than the FX camera needs, but this is only a question of time, before FX grows more resolution (like A7R2 and 5DsR).

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2016 at 12:48 UTC
On article Nikon D500 versus D750: Which one is right for you? (344 comments in total)

Full Frame Forever!
:D
FFF!

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 16:18 UTC as 71st comment
On article Canon EF-M 28mm F3.5 Macro real-world samples (17 comments in total)
In reply to:

straylightrun: If Canon makes an M4 with integrated viewfinder in a rangefinder style body and a standard f/2.8 zoom, they can easily overtake Sony's APS-C range, especially with their name alone. Sony has pretty much given up on it anyway and is focusing on FF.

And you need a huge F2.8 zoom lens for a tiny mirrorless camera because ... ?

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 15:39 UTC
In reply to:

marcio_napoli: For those complaining about the price, here's something to think about.

I'm pretty sure a large part of Leica customers (and I'm not trying to criticize them) secretly want it to cost that much.

It's related to that feeling of:

A) owning something very few people will own,

B) in case you had to work extra hard to own it, it'll have a very special feeling when you do get to own it. You'll feel extra rewarded.

I mean, guys, if Ferraris were affordable, then what's the point? The mythical status would water down.

Ferraris can only be "that" special when just a few people own it.

I don't blame Leica for acting this way.

If Leica products were affordable, than owning it wouldn't be that much different than owning a Nikon.

This is not a Ferrari.
200mm F2 is a Ferrari.
This is like a Rolls-Royce.
:)

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2016 at 18:56 UTC
On article Canon EF-M 28mm F3.5 Macro real-world samples (17 comments in total)

I like the idea of a built-in LED. Canon should use that for their EF system too. Maybe a new 60/2.8 Macro and preferably not EF-S :), because it should be fun to use on FF, which have no built-in flash.
I know, I know ... it's not really an innovation or anything. Smartphones have had that for "ages" now. It's just a nice feature to have.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2016 at 18:06 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

boinkphoto: I read a lot of the negative posts here and think:

a) Taking out of context just to be negative (ie: "satisfy everyone") - who wouldn't say that? Clearly Fuji has made very quirky niche cameras, so they don't take that in the literal sense.
b) I get that you wish Fuji had say touch screen and other features you find on your cameras. A lot of us are perfectly happy with the way Fujis are today. So, if "satisfy everyone" is bad, then conversely some people are going to wish things are different. It doesn't mean the Fuji cameras are bad anymore than yours lacking the Fuji features are bad. Not having "X" (whatever "X" is) doesn't mean a camera is bad. To each their own. What's important to you may not be important to me. Buy the camera that has "X" then, don't diss Fuji.

For a camera system in this price range, not having A, B, C ... X, Y, Z, is a big deal.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 21:35 UTC
In reply to:

sunnycal: How about satisfying people who prefer Bayer filter?

I'm glad. Doesn't make it any better though.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 20:16 UTC
In reply to:

sunnycal: How about satisfying people who prefer Bayer filter?

It's fanboys like you making DPR commenting section embarrassing.
XTrans is inferior. Every sane person can see that. And yet you keep trolling everyone with that silly propaganda BS. What is wrong with you? Look at the facts.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 17:06 UTC
In reply to:

sunnycal: How about satisfying people who prefer Bayer filter?

@Neodp
So, just to refresh my memory, I've downloaded some DPR studio RAW images for comparison and guess what, XT2 sucks in terms of details even at ISO 200. Those hair look like pasta, and small text is mostly unreadable (or barely readable), while both D500 and D750 are fine in that regard. Not to mention the first thing I've noticed, it's the XT2 exposure by 0.6 of a stop darker. Same old ISO scam.
Next stop ISO 3200. D750 got full stop lower noise and better details than D500, while XT2 is more blurry (just like if it was filtered with a pretty strong luma NR before they've put RAW label on it) with weird grain pattern and the "pasta" got worse (now it doesn't look like pasta, more like melting cheese).
ISO 6400 - same thing, more grain.
D750 is the clear winner. Get over it!

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 16:54 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Andina: I too would want to see a FF with the current image quality. Despite how much we try to convince ourselves that it doesnt matter, it does. Even compared to the first Canon 5d FF kicks high gear which makes me, at least, hesitant in investing in a lens system which is expensive and to be obsolete soon. Hassie has even released a MF compact so an APC is really an outdated format, unless one wants to do Bill Cunningham type of photography.

Mr. troll - are you hallucinating, or are you just making thing up? Because that's not my position on this topic. I guess you are just too simpleminded to understand how things work and what I'm actually saying. You are just reducing everything down to a kindergarten level conversation.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2016 at 23:16 UTC
On article Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sample Gallery (268 comments in total)
In reply to:

PB47: This is off topic but I wish 43mm had become the standard kit lens instead of 50mm. There's a Luminous Landscape article about 40mm lenses that mentions an interview with Sally Mann where she says 40mm is "about right" (she mainly shot with an Olympus 40mm for years). I love the full frame images I've seen out of that Pentax 43mm. 43mm just seems like the sweet spot. Pentax nailed it. If only Canon would make a fast 43mm 1.8 STM. That's my dream lens. But only Pentax will do something that weird.

@villagranvicent
They did, only they are asking $800 for it. Greedy peddlers ... :))

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2016 at 19:24 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Andina: I too would want to see a FF with the current image quality. Despite how much we try to convince ourselves that it doesnt matter, it does. Even compared to the first Canon 5d FF kicks high gear which makes me, at least, hesitant in investing in a lens system which is expensive and to be obsolete soon. Hassie has even released a MF compact so an APC is really an outdated format, unless one wants to do Bill Cunningham type of photography.

Sure, sure ... go feed your iPhone, footeebag :)

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2016 at 13:28 UTC
Total: 372, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »