ecka84

ecka84

Lives in Lithuania Lithuania
Joined on Sep 18, 2009

Comments

Total: 496, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (301 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tim Reidy Productions: The best advice on buying a prime lens is to see what you are shooting with the zoom lens and get the prime that can match the focal length you desire the most.

Still ... it doesn't work like that. I'd need to see some samples first anyway (as many, as I can find, preferably RAW).

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2017 at 16:25 UTC
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (301 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tim Reidy Productions: The best advice on buying a prime lens is to see what you are shooting with the zoom lens and get the prime that can match the focal length you desire the most.

Not really. You may feel comfortable using some FLs over the rest of the zoom range, but it doesn't mean you like the results better. There are many reasons for using certain focal length. I don't use zoom lenses, because they are too much of a compromise for me. I tend to find the sweet spot and utilize it exclusively, which makes the whole zoom thing pointless. I'd rather stitch or crop, than use the so-so parts of a zoom lens, because even the most expensive zooms are farther from perfect, than many smaller, faster and pretty affordable primes.
Some say that "if it's good enough - it's good enough" and that's true. They just don't need primes.
I say - You don't need a prime lens, unless you know exactly which prime lens you need and why. And the best way to decide, is to look at other people's images shot with the lens in question.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2017 at 05:38 UTC
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (301 comments in total)

To each his own. My first non-kit lens was 150/2.8 Macro and I still adore it.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 18:17 UTC as 8th comment
On article Fast and light: Nikkor 24mm F1.8G ED lens review (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pat Cullinan Jr: "If you're an APS-C shooter the 36mm equivalent focal length with an equivalent aperture of F2.7."

Folks, you're buying a lens having a fast aperture of f/1.8.

No.
"which one produced the most 'noise' or grain" - Wrong question.
They are not made to produce noise and grain. They produce information and the bigger ones produce more of it, because they are getting more light at the same exposure values.
It may seem like it should be the same and perhaps it is when you look at the film with the same level of magnification. BUT, when you make same size prints from both, you will see that larger film frame gets you better quality, because there is more information and the noise/grain is smaller too.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2016 at 08:16 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pierre Racine: $2 000 (CAN) for what? A camera whose lenses are VERY expensive, most of them without OIS, no internal IBIS so no handheld video, AF probably not very good in low light, external rubber that will probably peels off like on XT1, 10 minutes videos, pfff... Yes it's nice but not on par with EM1 II which gives identical results except for neurotic pixel peepers and has a ton more functionalities and more efficient ergonomics.

I hate to repeat myself, but - "FF is just better".
:)
There are plenty of wonderful images on Flickr, that did not enough attention or any at all. And many mediocre and even poor images got thousands of Views and Faves. Therefore Flickr ratings in most cases are just random (with predictable "mechanics" though), dependent on your friend list size an pure luck.

Nice image. Bad attitude.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2016 at 11:09 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pierre Racine: $2 000 (CAN) for what? A camera whose lenses are VERY expensive, most of them without OIS, no internal IBIS so no handheld video, AF probably not very good in low light, external rubber that will probably peels off like on XT1, 10 minutes videos, pfff... Yes it's nice but not on par with EM1 II which gives identical results except for neurotic pixel peepers and has a ton more functionalities and more efficient ergonomics.

They are wrong. XF56/1.2 translates into FF85/1.8 not 85/1.4 and FF50/1.8 ~ XF35/1.2 and XF18-55/2.8-4 ~ FF28-84/4.3-6.1 :)
And Fuji is just an expensive crop camera :)

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 19:41 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pierre Racine: $2 000 (CAN) for what? A camera whose lenses are VERY expensive, most of them without OIS, no internal IBIS so no handheld video, AF probably not very good in low light, external rubber that will probably peels off like on XT1, 10 minutes videos, pfff... Yes it's nice but not on par with EM1 II which gives identical results except for neurotic pixel peepers and has a ton more functionalities and more efficient ergonomics.

@darngooddesign
Nice view :). Very nice actually.
Quality-wise it looks just like any other crop (except for Sigma Foveon :) maybe). Faaar from FF, sorry.
I mean, if you are happy with what you get, then fine, it is good enough for you. But preaching that it is "very close to FF" is just dishonest and wrong :(. You do not decide what's good enough for everyone. And I'm not saying that you cannot shoot nice pictures with it, I'm saying that FF is just better.

P.S. Your smaller lens examples are wrong.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 19:11 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pierre Racine: $2 000 (CAN) for what? A camera whose lenses are VERY expensive, most of them without OIS, no internal IBIS so no handheld video, AF probably not very good in low light, external rubber that will probably peels off like on XT1, 10 minutes videos, pfff... Yes it's nice but not on par with EM1 II which gives identical results except for neurotic pixel peepers and has a ton more functionalities and more efficient ergonomics.

@marc petzold
Yes, I'm still pretty young, thank you :), and I have not lost my vision and common sense just yet. I'm not a fanboy, I could use any camera, I just cannot afford them all :) or switching systems for no reason. 6D is not the best camera, but it is better than any crop, for my needs. I like Canon pricing though.
The tool is only as good as what you can potentially do with it.
6D makes quality images.
Fuji? - makes you comment and argue on DPR to defend someone's business profit? :D Fine.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 18:50 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pierre Racine: $2 000 (CAN) for what? A camera whose lenses are VERY expensive, most of them without OIS, no internal IBIS so no handheld video, AF probably not very good in low light, external rubber that will probably peels off like on XT1, 10 minutes videos, pfff... Yes it's nice but not on par with EM1 II which gives identical results except for neurotic pixel peepers and has a ton more functionalities and more efficient ergonomics.

[FACEPALM]

Yes, please, show me the pictures!
6D dynamic range is better than Fuji dynamic smearing.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 18:19 UTC
On article Fast and light: Nikkor 24mm F1.8G ED lens review (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pat Cullinan Jr: "If you're an APS-C shooter the 36mm equivalent focal length with an equivalent aperture of F2.7."

Folks, you're buying a lens having a fast aperture of f/1.8.

I'm tired of doing just that and repeating myself for god knows how many times :). Please just browse through my commenting history, please ...
Hint - when you are putting FX35/1.8 on DX body, around 60% of the projected light does not hit the sensor, it is being cropped off and forgotten. And when you put it on FX, all 100% of light is being used to produce the image. It has nothing to do with image brightness, because the rigged ISO numbers are compensating for that, which is the reason why you are getting less noise on FF.
40% vs 100%. That's all.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 18:08 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pierre Racine: $2 000 (CAN) for what? A camera whose lenses are VERY expensive, most of them without OIS, no internal IBIS so no handheld video, AF probably not very good in low light, external rubber that will probably peels off like on XT1, 10 minutes videos, pfff... Yes it's nice but not on par with EM1 II which gives identical results except for neurotic pixel peepers and has a ton more functionalities and more efficient ergonomics.

See :D You just can't stop preaching this BS :). APS-C is not even close to FF, because it is more than twice smaller. Equivalent optics are always similar in size, like FF85/1.8 vs XF56/1.2, or FF24-105/4 vs XF 16-55/2.8, or FF50/1.8 vs XF 35/1.2 which would cost a $1000 or more (jeez, even 35/1.4 costs $600!).
Somehow every Xtrans RAW I've dealt with got these same annoying problems. Look at the freaking images! It's all there! Compare the potential. Take the RAW, make the best out of it and feel the difference :). DO NOT COMPARE DEFAULTS WITH ZEROED NR SLIDERS! Do some real work and you'll see that Fujis are only made to look OK for lazy folks, but they are just lousy toys for those who are looking for real photography tools. Of course the new 24mp Xtrans is better than the old one, but there's like barely 8mp of usable data in it. Most of the pictures show smearing and artifacts when I put them on 4K display fullscreen. And in close-up they look like CGI or paintings. Get over it.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 17:56 UTC
On article Fast and light: Nikkor 24mm F1.8G ED lens review (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pat Cullinan Jr: "If you're an APS-C shooter the 36mm equivalent focal length with an equivalent aperture of F2.7."

Folks, you're buying a lens having a fast aperture of f/1.8.

[FACEPALM]

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 16:55 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pierre Racine: $2 000 (CAN) for what? A camera whose lenses are VERY expensive, most of them without OIS, no internal IBIS so no handheld video, AF probably not very good in low light, external rubber that will probably peels off like on XT1, 10 minutes videos, pfff... Yes it's nice but not on par with EM1 II which gives identical results except for neurotic pixel peepers and has a ton more functionalities and more efficient ergonomics.

All of it.
That Fuji APS-C is as good or better than any FF.
That crop lenses are much smaller.
That Xtrans captures details better and with less noise.
That Fuji is superior to everything else.
All that touchy-feely retro hipster nostalgia fetish ... and the rest of the BS, which has nothing do with the actual images. All I get is pre-cooked RAWs with ugly detail smearing (thanks to deceptive in-camera noise filtering) combined with fake details and artifacts (thanks to Xtrans), overrated ISO numbers, high price and the embarrassment of being involved in this raging community of ignorant Fuji worshipers :)

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 15:41 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kalhor: On "Image Quality" page set it to show "RAW @ 3200 ISO" and choose a FF camera for comparison. You will know how good is X-Trans sensor to capture images with less noise and sharper details in smaller body with smaller lenses.

One more important reason for X-trans sensor is, it captures more green light which it helps to capture nicer colors of between Red and Blue. And that's why colors looks better in Fuji cameras compared to others.

@IvanPavlov
OMG! Now there's two of us!
... who can see that it sucks at sharpness and details. Thanks bro :)
I think there are more of us, but they are afraid to speak up, because these Fuji zombies would eat them alive :)

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 13:31 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

PPierre: Nice camera from what I've seen so far, but the price is just crazy high. For pure IQ, I'd take an A7II. For fast AF, a D500 is great, and an A6500 could also do the job I guess, though again, no APS-C new lens for 3 years makes it a bit less competitive. I hope they'll announce some XE 3 soon, with this sensor, but with Bayer matrix, and a bit less expensive. Of course, if it could come with IBIS...

@xeriwthe
Sure, and a diamond ring is the best camera for any lady :)

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 13:21 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pierre Racine: $2 000 (CAN) for what? A camera whose lenses are VERY expensive, most of them without OIS, no internal IBIS so no handheld video, AF probably not very good in low light, external rubber that will probably peels off like on XT1, 10 minutes videos, pfff... Yes it's nice but not on par with EM1 II which gives identical results except for neurotic pixel peepers and has a ton more functionalities and more efficient ergonomics.

@darngooddesign
It could be so, if it wasn't that obvious :).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not competing with you, I just care about the truth. And the amount of BS on Fuji side just keeps growing and growing ...
I think there is more truth in Chuck Norris jokes, than in Fuji propaganda these days :))

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 13:13 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kalhor: On "Image Quality" page set it to show "RAW @ 3200 ISO" and choose a FF camera for comparison. You will know how good is X-Trans sensor to capture images with less noise and sharper details in smaller body with smaller lenses.

One more important reason for X-trans sensor is, it captures more green light which it helps to capture nicer colors of between Red and Blue. And that's why colors looks better in Fuji cameras compared to others.

Yep, FF ISO3200 JPG does look a bit better than X-T2 ISO200.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 02:08 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sam Santana: Do people really struggle to decide whether to buy a Fuji X camera or a Sony A6XXX?

I think they are at the extreme ends of the scales in terms of philosophy. I appreciate Sony's efforts in pushing the technological envelope as eventually that technology will trickle down to other camera manufacturers but at the end of the day I want a camera that feels right to shoot. I would think most people on these forums know where they sit on that spectrum (technology - feel) and most likely wouldn't be thinking of buying into the other system even if, like me, they are interested to see what others are doing.

I prefer reasonably priced cameras that produce best pictures and both a6#00 and Fuji X are not it. And I'm buying tools, not feelings, not "bells and whistles".

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 01:49 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pierre Racine: $2 000 (CAN) for what? A camera whose lenses are VERY expensive, most of them without OIS, no internal IBIS so no handheld video, AF probably not very good in low light, external rubber that will probably peels off like on XT1, 10 minutes videos, pfff... Yes it's nice but not on par with EM1 II which gives identical results except for neurotic pixel peepers and has a ton more functionalities and more efficient ergonomics.

@xeriwthe
They do make nice stuff, just like many others do. It's the stupefying BS propaganda and the fanboy(or girl) reaction to it that makes me worry. It's like being surrounded by zombies, who want to make you one of them :). All this embracing ignorance and critical thinking condemnation is very sad and depressing.
If Fuji was honest about their products, then they wouldn't be able to sell their stuff at current prices successfully (I think). So there's the motivation. Fuji is spending big money on propaganda and all the collaborators, which is just a one big BS factory, which I hate.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 21:53 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pierre Racine: $2 000 (CAN) for what? A camera whose lenses are VERY expensive, most of them without OIS, no internal IBIS so no handheld video, AF probably not very good in low light, external rubber that will probably peels off like on XT1, 10 minutes videos, pfff... Yes it's nice but not on par with EM1 II which gives identical results except for neurotic pixel peepers and has a ton more functionalities and more efficient ergonomics.

Actually, there are millions, who's level of tolerance and expectations for their underutilized and overpriced luxury toys is ridiculous. Of course you can make a decent 2 megapixel image out of $2000 24mp crop camera, or anything for that matter. It's the inadequate attitude towards photography tools that makes us facepalm every time we see a Fuji-fest on DPR :).
I'm not sure what's worse - Fuji or Apple? I'm afraid their clients are the same people and the Earth is doomed.
Have a nice life :)

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 17:51 UTC
Total: 496, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »