ecka84

ecka84

Lives in Lithuania Lithuania
Joined on Sep 18, 2009

Comments

Total: 605, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Zeiss formally announces Batis 135mm F2.8 (181 comments in total)

Not sure why would I take this one over the Batis 85.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2017 at 20:06 UTC as 27th comment | 3 replies
On article Zeiss formally announces Batis 135mm F2.8 (181 comments in total)
In reply to:

PorscheDoc: I am sure that the IQ will be very high, but at $2k for a f/2.8 lens, I will wait to see how it compares to the Sigma 135 f/1.8 Art. I use multiple systems and routinely adapt Canon and Nikon lens to Sony E/FE.

Why not Sony Zeiss T* 135mm F1.8 (SAL135F18Z)? That one is only $1800.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2017 at 19:52 UTC
In reply to:

Noah Placebo: Smaller sensors have advantages over larger ones. Larger sensors have advantages over smaller ones. The advantages are different. This has been the case since the birth of film. No news here.

Well, obviously, you don't know about cameras as much as you don't know about cars :)). More engine power alone doesn't automatically make a faster car. OK then let's imagine a car analogy. Not really a good one (kind of a backward analogy), but ... just to show how ignorant you are.
500kg car with a less powerful engine can be much faster than 2000kg car with a more powerful engine. And a bigger engine doesn't even mean that it must be less fuel efficient.
Or we can make it even simpler - Bigger wheels can make a faster car if the rest is equal. Believe it or not ...
"relatively low ISO" - Exactly. MFT ISO 400 is relatively as high as FF ISO 1600 in terms of noise. And stop looking for absolutes, there are none. Lower pixel density doesn't make a higher quality image. More and more accurate information does. That's why the sensor size matters. Given the same level of technology, FF wins against crop either because it has bigger pixels, or it has more of them, or both.
Try harder ...

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2017 at 22:16 UTC
In reply to:

Noah Placebo: Smaller sensors have advantages over larger ones. Larger sensors have advantages over smaller ones. The advantages are different. This has been the case since the birth of film. No news here.

Don't you realize that different cameras have different sensors and different sensors have different photo sites with different sensitivity range? The ISO thing is just a number to make ignorant people life easier. It doesn't tell you how much the signal and noise are amplified. Your understanding of the AMOUNT OF LIGHT is wrong. You are stuck around "getting the right exposure" lesson. LIGHT TRANSMISSION and the AMOUNT OF LIGHT are not the same.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2017 at 02:25 UTC
In reply to:

Noah Placebo: Smaller sensors have advantages over larger ones. Larger sensors have advantages over smaller ones. The advantages are different. This has been the case since the birth of film. No news here.

OMG, your ignorance emission is devastating :D
So, let's say you want to be paid for a job in $100 bills cash and then your employer gives you two $100 bills. You may ask where are the rest 48 of them and he says - What? That wasn't the deal. The deal was that you want to be paid in $100 bills and you've got it. Take it or leave it.
This light transmission of yours is same thing exactly. It's not the amount, it's the "bill denomination".

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2017 at 11:16 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: I don't get it ... Why are you Fuji trolls bashing Canon/Sony/Nikon to glorify Fuji?
C/S/N have many of those "new" features for years. Is it that hard to be honest with yourself? Don't you have any self-respect at all?
OK, now you can throw your rotten tomatoes (aka. non-arguments and "bovine excrement"). I mean, being a Fuji fanatic must be hard. You have to keep inside all the pain, frustration and anger while praising the Fuji-lord. Because otherwise you will be expelled from the sect. The steam vapor must go somewhere, just let it go ... I'm ready :)

I'm not, I'm bashing (criticizing) all of them for stupid things they do.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2017 at 07:40 UTC
In reply to:

Leandros S: Given the below similarly themed and titled argument from eight months ago, I'm no longer sure that full frame is where it's at, either:

https://breakfastographer.wordpress.com/2016/07/03/craving-full-frame-read-this-first/

Life is too short to comment on every stupid thing on the Internet. You just got lucky :). Have a nice day.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2017 at 09:23 UTC
In reply to:

Noah Placebo: Smaller sensors have advantages over larger ones. Larger sensors have advantages over smaller ones. The advantages are different. This has been the case since the birth of film. No news here.

Well, then why are some camera manufacturers putting cheaper crop sensors in their expensive cameras? :) And make expensive optics for them ... Sounds like a scam.
"Price, often in a smaller body and can use much more compact lenses, greater depth of field for a given f-stop. That's three ... " - ... misconceptions that instantly come to ignorant minds. F-stops are not given, they are relative numbers without any discrete values. Larger format cameras have wider DoF range and there is no problem with reproducing an image from a smaller sensor format. Basically, larger sensor got everything smaller sensor has plus more. Equivalent optics are similar in size and crop optics are often unreasonably overpriced. Because most people do not care to understand that something like Panasonic 35-100/2.8 is not a 70-200/2.8, so they are paying $1300 for a 70-200/5.6 equivalent lens with a smile on their faces. I mean for FF you can get a faster lens with more zoom range for 1/2 or 1/3 of the price.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2017 at 00:34 UTC
In reply to:

analoggrotto: This article right here is why my new 5d4 and 300/2.8 II will NOT be purchased from Amazon. Take the space, the exposure and status of the web's #1 photoblog to add more confused rubbish to an already confusing hobby. What a sponsored fraud, the readers deserve better. Instead of focusing on every camera's disadvantages, how about a more positive edge? Photography is emotional and rewarding for the interested and dedicated hearts and mind yet this website wants to prove otherwise time and time again.

Hearts are blood pumping organs. Try using your brain for a change :)

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 10:07 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: I don't get it ... Why are you Fuji trolls bashing Canon/Sony/Nikon to glorify Fuji?
C/S/N have many of those "new" features for years. Is it that hard to be honest with yourself? Don't you have any self-respect at all?
OK, now you can throw your rotten tomatoes (aka. non-arguments and "bovine excrement"). I mean, being a Fuji fanatic must be hard. You have to keep inside all the pain, frustration and anger while praising the Fuji-lord. Because otherwise you will be expelled from the sect. The steam vapor must go somewhere, just let it go ... I'm ready :)

... yawn ... :)

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 03:06 UTC

Not a single word about Data Integrity management :( or ECC?
Data safety-wise, NAS = BAD (maybe not as bad as USB NAS, but still).
"Gigabit Ethernet ports for unparalleled performance" - Really? How about 10 Gigabit Ethernet? Or Thunderbolt?

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 03:05 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

ecka84: I don't get it ... Why are you Fuji trolls bashing Canon/Sony/Nikon to glorify Fuji?
C/S/N have many of those "new" features for years. Is it that hard to be honest with yourself? Don't you have any self-respect at all?
OK, now you can throw your rotten tomatoes (aka. non-arguments and "bovine excrement"). I mean, being a Fuji fanatic must be hard. You have to keep inside all the pain, frustration and anger while praising the Fuji-lord. Because otherwise you will be expelled from the sect. The steam vapor must go somewhere, just let it go ... I'm ready :)

So it's like they are selling pre-production cameras and then finish them later :)

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2017 at 12:08 UTC

I don't get it ... Why are you Fuji trolls bashing Canon/Sony/Nikon to glorify Fuji?
C/S/N have many of those "new" features for years. Is it that hard to be honest with yourself? Don't you have any self-respect at all?
OK, now you can throw your rotten tomatoes (aka. non-arguments and "bovine excrement"). I mean, being a Fuji fanatic must be hard. You have to keep inside all the pain, frustration and anger while praising the Fuji-lord. Because otherwise you will be expelled from the sect. The steam vapor must go somewhere, just let it go ... I'm ready :)

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2017 at 07:54 UTC as 22nd comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

Stephen Scharf: A meangingless spec-based (or spec-chasing) comparison. I'm disappointed; this article doesn't discuss the real advantages of MF at all...

You can keep your astral woo woo to yourself mister Scharf.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2017 at 05:58 UTC
In reply to:

Leandros S: Given the below similarly themed and titled argument from eight months ago, I'm no longer sure that full frame is where it's at, either:

https://breakfastographer.wordpress.com/2016/07/03/craving-full-frame-read-this-first/

"... if you shoot 16 megapixels on APS-C, then shooting 36 megapixels full frame, you will get the same PER PIXEL noise, at the same ISO."
- So what? You still get less noise on FF. And if you don't care about the difference between 16 and 36 MP, then perhaps a P&S camera will do too.
- Same BS about diffraction. He doesn't realize that the number of pixels matters even more than pixel pitch. IQ = information. Which is why sensor size matters.
"So if we shoot the same apertures, we gain a stop of light. ... how much does it cost to gain a stop of light?"
- And then he compares the "cheapest chips" he could find (used), to tell us that 2 stops of extra light cost $150. Like the IQ is out of the question at this point ... why not just take off the lens and keep it open, it's more light that way and costs nothing.
Then, somehow (?intentionally), he absolutely forgets no mention the fact that FF gets more light from EACH of your lenses and how much a used FF camera can cost these days.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 05:49 UTC
In reply to:

Stephen Scharf: A meangingless spec-based (or spec-chasing) comparison. I'm disappointed; this article doesn't discuss the real advantages of MF at all...

So it's magic then? Unmeasurable magic?
What's a "luminance tonality"? Sounds like "breadness of butter" :). Is there really such a thing, or are you just pretending to know stuff? I'm sorry, but it makes no sense.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 04:41 UTC
In reply to:

analoggrotto: This article right here is why my new 5d4 and 300/2.8 II will NOT be purchased from Amazon. Take the space, the exposure and status of the web's #1 photoblog to add more confused rubbish to an already confusing hobby. What a sponsored fraud, the readers deserve better. Instead of focusing on every camera's disadvantages, how about a more positive edge? Photography is emotional and rewarding for the interested and dedicated hearts and mind yet this website wants to prove otherwise time and time again.

There is only one thing you can do about it. Relearn the whole thing from the beginning. Or do nothing and stop arguing about stuff you don't know (you only think you know).

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 03:39 UTC
In reply to:

Leandros S: Given the below similarly themed and titled argument from eight months ago, I'm no longer sure that full frame is where it's at, either:

https://breakfastographer.wordpress.com/2016/07/03/craving-full-frame-read-this-first/

DO NOT READ THIS! There is a lot of BS there and little truth.
The author is juggling all kinds of unscientific assumptions, superstition and wishful thinking, which have nothing to do with reality. Articles like that are just someone's faulty opinions, which can easily mislead and confuse those who are looking for easy answers and solutions. It's just some guy on the Internet.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 03:26 UTC
In reply to:

analoggrotto: This article right here is why my new 5d4 and 300/2.8 II will NOT be purchased from Amazon. Take the space, the exposure and status of the web's #1 photoblog to add more confused rubbish to an already confusing hobby. What a sponsored fraud, the readers deserve better. Instead of focusing on every camera's disadvantages, how about a more positive edge? Photography is emotional and rewarding for the interested and dedicated hearts and mind yet this website wants to prove otherwise time and time again.

"It is confusing for very simple, fundamental reasons. ISOs, F stops, focal lengths, equipment weights, bags, exposure times, filters, blah blah. Fundamentals affecting the light hitting your sensor ..." - it is all very simple and logical.

Life would be boring without technology. This is what makes us human.
I'm amazed how many people actually prefer not using their brains and evolve back "monkeys" :). The worst thing is, they are using technology to spread this nonsense.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 01:47 UTC
In reply to:

Stephen Scharf: A meangingless spec-based (or spec-chasing) comparison. I'm disappointed; this article doesn't discuss the real advantages of MF at all...

This is exactly what DPR did.

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2017 at 20:11 UTC
Total: 605, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »