ecka84

ecka84

Lives in Lithuania Lithuania
Joined on Sep 18, 2009

Comments

Total: 873, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article ICYMI: Canon 28mm F2.8 IS USM sample gallery (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: The question is:
Is it better than SONY's FE 28mm F2? Which is twice faster and $50 cheaper.

Post-processing and skill can change a lot actually. Let's not blame neither the camera nor the photographer for everything. Because it's both, always. However, it's your fault if you are choosing wrong tools for the job, or using right ones in a wrong way. Most people are lazy, me included. And they expect their new shiny expensive gear to work perfectly to their taste right out of the box. Which is just impossible, because different people like different things. But you can calibrate your camera to produce the right "look". I do like Canon Camera Standard profile, but I've messed around with all kinds of images from various cameras and it is possible to make them (most of them) look like Canon. So, perhaps the lack of trying could be the only problem.
Not sure why GH4 size makes any difference to you. The whole pro setup is still huge, specially with the DMW-YAGH unit. I'd say just as big as 1DC.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 15:11 UTC
On article ICYMI: Canon 28mm F2.8 IS USM sample gallery (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: The question is:
Is it better than SONY's FE 28mm F2? Which is twice faster and $50 cheaper.

"Betterness" is not some kind of magical camera property. Better cameras are better to work with for very specific reasons in specific circumstances and for a reasonable price. It is possible to make a $10000 camera footage and a cell phone camera footage to look similar (which I believe has been done numerous times already), but it doesn't mean that they are comparable. Every camera can potentially be better at something, on a spectrum. And every operator can potentially fail at taking advantage of those better camera features or in post-processing. Everything is measurable/quantifiable and the rest is just a superstitious nonsense.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 00:27 UTC
On article ICYMI: Canon 28mm F2.8 IS USM sample gallery (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: The question is:
Is it better than SONY's FE 28mm F2? Which is twice faster and $50 cheaper.

It's not really about the look. It's about the workflow, tool flexibility, versatility and all the important things like battery life, fps, bitrates, flippy touch screen, IBIS, non-overheating, clean HDMI out, price, etc. Judging a tool by the out of context final product is just silly. Same as all the FF vs crop "which is which" guessing BS snapshot comparison galleries, which are meant to fool people. The looks are done in post-processing.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 20:40 UTC
On article ICYMI: Canon 28mm F2.8 IS USM sample gallery (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: The question is:
Is it better than SONY's FE 28mm F2? Which is twice faster and $50 cheaper.

Something like that :)
Yes, the 18-35F1.8 almost covers an APS-H frame, with a bit of vignetting past 28mm (I think). And no problems for video. Many people like to use it on the a6500 via speedboster.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 02:16 UTC
On article ICYMI: Canon 28mm F2.8 IS USM sample gallery (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: The question is:
Is it better than SONY's FE 28mm F2? Which is twice faster and $50 cheaper.

IMHO, for intense video purposes, a speedboosted Sigma 18-35F1.8Art on a proper Panasonic camera (GH4/GH5) is a winner.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 17:50 UTC
On article ICYMI: Canon 28mm F2.8 IS USM sample gallery (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: The question is:
Is it better than SONY's FE 28mm F2? Which is twice faster and $50 cheaper.

The new 35F1.4L'II is superb, but is it worth the extra $$$ over the Sigma 35F1.4|Art for non-professional use? Specially for video. Because I'm not sure :).

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 14:55 UTC
In reply to:

Chris Dodkin: Sensor size only matters on forums like DPR - outside of that, it's a non issue for everyone else, including photographers

No. But your answer was 100% predictable and expected. Doesn't it bother you why your magical MF lenses aren't as good on the APS-C? I'm just curious what magical explanation you have for that. Is it a punishment from the Fuji god for non-feng-shui gear combinations? :) Or maybe you are afraid to even try it for the same reason?. Anyways, you are delusional.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 05:13 UTC
In reply to:

Chris Dodkin: Sensor size only matters on forums like DPR - outside of that, it's a non issue for everyone else, including photographers

The ignorant are ignorant of their ignorance. But the false knowledge is even worse.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 02:52 UTC
In reply to:

Chris Dodkin: Sensor size only matters on forums like DPR - outside of that, it's a non issue for everyone else, including photographers

What you haven't worked out is that your GFX lenses on APS-C cameras are just as bad or as good as any crop lens can be. The only reason you are getting higher quality pictures with GFX lenses is because of the larger sensor. Just like FF is better than APS-C.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 00:19 UTC
On article ICYMI: Canon 28mm F2.8 IS USM sample gallery (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecka84: The question is:
Is it better than SONY's FE 28mm F2? Which is twice faster and $50 cheaper.

@Ebrahim Saadawi
Thank you for your quick review :). I agree that they do not compete directly. But I think that $500 for a slow prime lens is a bit much. I'm just trying to understand why this lens even exists. IMHO, Canon should have updated their 20F2.8USM instead. I think that most potential buyers are either getting the 24F2.8IS or the 35F2IS. I can imagine its place in videography though. It is much smaller than wide or standard F2.8 zooms.
I don't think that 28mm is boring. However, if it's boring, then why not 24F2.8IS or 35F2IS? I have the old 28F1.8USM and I rather use my 40F2.8STM for landscaping (stitching) than that lens. Close-ups and portraits is where it shines with its nice and dreamy "retro" bokeh that no cell phone can produce :).

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 23:44 UTC
On article ICYMI: Canon 28mm F2.8 IS USM sample gallery (57 comments in total)

The question is:
Is it better than SONY's FE 28mm F2? Which is twice faster and $50 cheaper.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 15:01 UTC as 14th comment | 20 replies
In reply to:

Frits Gooss: I'm not impressed ! I prefer my 100-400 Canon mark II

Don't you people know that you can use Canon lenses on Sony cameras? Jeez...

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 14:43 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Talking about imaginary capacities ... Where are all the promised 2TB SD cards we've been waiting for a decade? Which makes me think that these 40TB drives will turn out to be 10TB to 20TB :)
What about the price? I remember paying around $30-$50 per TB, 8 years ago. And it's the same now. An average user these days needs like 5 times more storage capacity than 8 years ago. Back then, you could put 128GB SSD in your laptop and it's fine. Now, with a 128GB SSD you can't really do anything, because it's just too small. You can barely fit one serious game on it and for content creation (like 4K) ... just forget it. So, if those drives will cost around $2000 each or more, then who is going to buy them? Datacenters? Those are only good for backups. We need an affordable consumer solution. I think 'ultra-high capacity' drives should be more cost-effective. The larger the capacity - the lower the price per TB. NOT vice versa, like we have today. Things have to change.

You think it is reliable?
I'm done with USB drives (and with Seagate too, :) I think). Data gets corrupted while transferring via USB pretty often. Not to mention the stupid encryption policy, which makes it possible for you to lose all the data if the box fails, despite that the actual disk itself is fine. I prefer WD RED, internal, and handling encryptions myself.
139 / 5 = 27.8 which is not worth the headache.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 00:07 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Ma: Back in my day, we only had single-digit terabyte drives and everyone owned a couple because that's the best they could do at the time.

What changed? :) I've just bought a single-digit terabyte drive two days ago. Today's 4TB-6TB drives seem to have the best $$$/capacity ratio.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 22:56 UTC

Talking about imaginary capacities ... Where are all the promised 2TB SD cards we've been waiting for a decade? Which makes me think that these 40TB drives will turn out to be 10TB to 20TB :)
What about the price? I remember paying around $30-$50 per TB, 8 years ago. And it's the same now. An average user these days needs like 5 times more storage capacity than 8 years ago. Back then, you could put 128GB SSD in your laptop and it's fine. Now, with a 128GB SSD you can't really do anything, because it's just too small. You can barely fit one serious game on it and for content creation (like 4K) ... just forget it. So, if those drives will cost around $2000 each or more, then who is going to buy them? Datacenters? Those are only good for backups. We need an affordable consumer solution. I think 'ultra-high capacity' drives should be more cost-effective. The larger the capacity - the lower the price per TB. NOT vice versa, like we have today. Things have to change.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 21:27 UTC as 14th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

badi: "what's possible in the world of photo storage"
... well, actually in the world of storage. The photo storage is just a tiny part of that, and probably number 241 or something in importance. :)

Well, of course. Most of it is occupied by porn :).

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 20:10 UTC
On article Google shares high-resolution Pixel 2 sample photos (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: For me, a phone MUST have these:

- MicroSD card, and
- 3.5mm jack.

NO COMPROMISE on the above!

Then, and only then, I look at how good the camera is, now that any top model camera phones are already very good.

And I also prefer a long battery life, or a removable battery.

Let's see how many "Likes" I can get.

@Ebrahim Saadawi
Clearly, you don't understand how it works and you don't need real high quality images, because obviously you can't tell the difference. Those quality attributes are all being "castrated" when you shoot JPEGs in the first place. And shrinking everything down to 2.5 mega pixels reduces the quality even farther.
Out of the camera JPEG dynamic range? - Nonsense.
Low light? Noise? - The automatic in-camera noise reduction has no mercy for data it destroys in the process.
AF? - Well, yes. That's one good point there.
Out of the camera JPEG skin tones? - It's a mess, no matter what camera you use. Those quality attributes are mostly important for post processing.
However, I can imagine why your shooting preferences can be justified, like when your job is just to make the client happy, while making money faster and easier. But it makes little sense if you are doing it for pleasure.
There are cameras with NFC for wireless transfer, you might find it interesting too. Good luck.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 18:25 UTC
On article Google shares high-resolution Pixel 2 sample photos (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: For me, a phone MUST have these:

- MicroSD card, and
- 3.5mm jack.

NO COMPROMISE on the above!

Then, and only then, I look at how good the camera is, now that any top model camera phones are already very good.

And I also prefer a long battery life, or a removable battery.

Let's see how many "Likes" I can get.

@Ebrahim Saadawi
Why can't you just shoot those 1920x1280 JPEGs with your phone? You don't need a high-end DSLR for such low quality images. Or just get an EYE-Fi card and transfer wirelessly.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2017 at 13:56 UTC
In reply to:

the Mtn Man: Would anybody care about this guy's opinion if he didn't have a hot wife to take pictures of? Anyway, these kinds of "tests" are stupid. Any camera and lens is capable of capturing great images in the hands of a competent photographer.

@the Mtn Man
Well, you must be a very lousy photographer then.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2017 at 13:38 UTC
On article Google shares high-resolution Pixel 2 sample photos (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: For me, a phone MUST have these:

- MicroSD card, and
- 3.5mm jack.

NO COMPROMISE on the above!

Then, and only then, I look at how good the camera is, now that any top model camera phones are already very good.

And I also prefer a long battery life, or a removable battery.

Let's see how many "Likes" I can get.

I could live with a dongled 3.5mm, but no SD card policy is stupid and insulting. $100 for extra 64GB of storage? - Sorry. I can have two 128GB cards for that price and keep them after the phone is gone.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2017 at 23:19 UTC
Total: 873, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »