ecka84

ecka84

Lives in Lithuania Lithuania
Joined on Sep 18, 2009

Comments

Total: 1087, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

onlooker: $1200 for an equivalent of 90 mm f/2.4?

"It's not a matter of "need". It's a matter of compromise. FF makes some things easier/more convenient. Same with mFT."
- Yes, that's true. That's why mFT isn't my tool of choice, because I don't need the things it offers, like the pretentiously misleading F-numbers on small expensive lenses. Because I know what they are and what's their actual value.

"By billboards I meant large high quality images" - like a meter wide.
"That you view from hundreds of meters away. The reality is camera phones shoot billboards. What can you show me that's different?"
- No, I view them from a comfortable distance. You don't need high quality for the hundreds of meters away. But you do for half a meter away. Why can't you accept that I don't care about snapshot photography at all. Looking at a billboard from hundreds of meters away is just like looking at a picture on your phone. It looks small. I don't care about shooting tiny little pictures. You are throwing away image quality by reducing its size.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 19:51 UTC

You don't look like you're sorry, Josh.
And "I'm sorry" doesn't cut it. Imagine if the photographer took your guitar, smashed it over your face and then said she's sorry.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 18:14 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

onlooker: $1200 for an equivalent of 90 mm f/2.4?

There is no discussion. You don't need FF - you don't use one. Stop telling me that your m4/3 is as good as FF, because it isn't.

"People shot billboard pictures with 4, 6, 8, 10MP cameras. If they were good, m43 is good."
- By billboards I meant large high quality images, not meh quality throw away prints for street decoration. "they were good" - compared to what? Living in a cave was good, until it wasn't.

"Which is irrelevant to my light meter ... "
- Equivalence makes your light meter obsolete :).

"So now the camera doesn't matter? Congratulations - my point is made."
- What are you talking about? What I said is exactly opposite. I don't shoot snapshots, because they are not worth it. And if I'm shooting something, the I'm using FF.

"There are certainly instances where FF is the better tool. Yet those are the vast MINORITY of cases in my experience."
- Because you are shooting snapshots.
Good luck.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 17:32 UTC

Do they still output 2.5K resolution on their 5K displays? :)

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 16:56 UTC as 25th comment
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: Not bad.
Too overpriced.

And you are saying that I have no right to express my opinion? Because ... what?

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 16:15 UTC
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

onlooker: $1200 for an equivalent of 90 mm f/2.4?

You cannot and you shouldn't use the same ISO. Because they produce different results on different format cameras. Just learn that freakin' equivalence, man ...
Your "real world shooting" must be very different from mine. That's all. You shoot snapshots, I shoot billboards. And I don't need $2000+ camera gear for snapshots. In my head, if a picture isn't worth shooting in great quality, then most likely it is not worth shooting at all.
Why are you buying L glass for snapshots is beyond me, really. That's the problem with todays photography trolls. You are buying big expensive cameras and don't use its potential, while screaming that it is no better than your m4/3 "pocket camera". And you have no clue what the actual image quality is.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 15:12 UTC
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

lacikuss: My $300 Canon 85mm f1.8 does better than this lens without correction. Wake up Olympus I'm talking about a lens created in 1992.

Maybe you are not viewing images large enough to notice the advantage of the FF sensor. Which leads to another question - Why bother buying expensive modern cameras, if all you need is a tiny little snapshot? M4/3 is fine for that, only overpriced.
"6D may have advantage at higher ISO, but the shadow noise is really as bad as with other Canon sensors of that age." - The advantage is 2 full stops exactly :). And you should judge image quality by the amount of information (detail) the image contains, NOT by the amount of noise. DPR offers you a nice studio comparison tool, which allows you to download the RAW files, edit them properly and then compare. Looking at the noise specs at 100% is just extremely lazy and proves nothing,

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 10:48 UTC
In reply to:

cpugourou: for 300$ get 2 6To 5400 rpm drives and plug them raid 0 for much better perf and same capacity.

How about we RAID 28 microSD cards, 512GB each :)

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 09:24 UTC
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: Not bad.
Too overpriced.

I'm only defending the truth, which you (haters) are trying to bury under your ignorant pile of nonsense and fairy tales.
What's your problem? :)

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 09:13 UTC
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

onlooker: $1200 for an equivalent of 90 mm f/2.4?

You can use exactly the same shutter speed. What makes you think it should be different? Why it has to "match the optical rendering of the Olympus primes"? What if I like Canon rendering more? I don't have to prove anything to you. Google it.
Actually, it is you who have to prove to me, that physics have changed somehow, to your advantage, so that tiny little lenses on tiny little cameras with tiny little sensors are now beating FF in all departments, and are worth the ridiculous price they cost.
I didn't say that 5D3+F4 zoom is smaller. But it is much more convenient and cheaper. Although, if we count all of the primes it replaces, then it may be smaller an lighter too. I don't have time for that, sorry.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 08:46 UTC
In reply to:

Focus Shift Shooting: Still waiting for the 8TB Black drive from WD.

I'd pay more for them than these 14TB drives from Toshiba any day.

Exactly.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 23:38 UTC
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

onlooker: $1200 for an equivalent of 90 mm f/2.4?

It all has been proven already, with facts. Stop ignoring it.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 23:28 UTC
In reply to:

Focus Shift Shooting: Still waiting for the 8TB Black drive from WD.

I'd pay more for them than these 14TB drives from Toshiba any day.

All drives fail. I had DOA WD Red not long ago.
Toshiba as good/bad as WD?
Seagate - kill it with fire? :)

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 23:25 UTC
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

lacikuss: My $300 Canon 85mm f1.8 does better than this lens without correction. Wake up Olympus I'm talking about a lens created in 1992.

@DarkShift
6D shoots better pictures than any m4/3, despite its old sensor tech :).

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 23:11 UTC
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

lacikuss: My $300 Canon 85mm f1.8 does better than this lens without correction. Wake up Olympus I'm talking about a lens created in 1992.

@Impulses
Want more lenses? How much is m4/3 25/0.9 these days? I mean the 50/1.8 FF equivalent (got mine for $100). How much for m4/3 25/0.7, the FF 50/1.4 equivalent. How much for m4/3 20/1.4 pancake? Mine is $150.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 23:08 UTC
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

onlooker: $1200 for an equivalent of 90 mm f/2.4?

You are imagining things.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 23:05 UTC

These are the best :D

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 22:38 UTC as 36th comment
In reply to:

Focus Shift Shooting: Still waiting for the 8TB Black drive from WD.

I'd pay more for them than these 14TB drives from Toshiba any day.

I'd take two WD Green over one WD Black for the same price any day. Better be safe than fast.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 22:21 UTC
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

onlooker: $1200 for an equivalent of 90 mm f/2.4?

"Olympus 12-100 is absolutely superior"
- Sure, sure ... what else is new?

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 22:16 UTC
On article Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery updated (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

onlooker: $1200 for an equivalent of 90 mm f/2.4?

@LightCatcherLT
The thing is that you are not buying an expensive tuxedo. You are paying 3-4 times too much for a low quality insanely overpriced tuxedo, that is three sizes too small for you :) and you are trying to tell everyone that this is the newest fashion ("wealthy hobo with megalophobia").

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 22:14 UTC
Total: 1087, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »