Strolic Furlan

Strolic Furlan

Joined on Aug 27, 2010


Total: 1040, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On a photo in the Laowa Argus 35mm F0.95 sample gallery (DPReview TV) sample gallery (2 comments in total)
In reply to:

phouphou: missed focus. s.o. needs to practise MF skills ;-)

It's not missed focus, the lens is so soft it seems out of focus, it happens also with the Mitakon 50mm f0,95 RF III

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2021 at 07:48 UTC

Wow! But where's Godzilla?

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2021 at 09:44 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

KLO82: I don't know why Apple insists on glossy displays. I always prefer matte displays for photo editing.

I have a Macbook M1 pro, hate the OS, love the machine and yes, I would prefer a matte display nonethess.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2021 at 10:14 UTC

I like my R6 getting firmware love from Canon :)

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2021 at 16:20 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

MinAZ: Hmm, no update for the R5?

Rumors are saying that a new R5 firmware is coming late summer but it has to be seen...

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2021 at 16:08 UTC
In reply to:

D135ima: I think EF 16-35 f/4 is still most well balanced canon ultrawide zoom. It doesn't brakes any sharpness records, but it decent and has understandable vignetting and other distortions.

It is more than decent.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2021 at 10:21 UTC
In reply to:

IamJF: As it's obvious for everybody - that's VERY steep for a wide f4 zoom. Which should be in the 1000,- area.

But it's significant wider - that's a big bonus for the people who needs it. And it's MSRP.

But for most of us who simply want a good F4 16-35 for a reasonable price - this lens is not an option.

With the Nikkor 14-30 you get (from Lenstip):
- a lot of problems with distortion on RAW files,
- huge vignetting on full frame,
- weaker image quality on the edge of the frame at the 30 mm focal length,
- too hight astigmatism,
- a bit too high lateral chromatic aberration at the 14 mm focal length.

For sure it's a nice compact lens, 7% of barrel distortion is really too much for me and IF the Canon RF 14-35 f4IS will be optically better and weather sealed than the steeper price could be (at least partially) justified.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2021 at 10:19 UTC

Screw-in filters, 14 mm and close-up, IS. Expensive but very tempting indeed.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2021 at 05:47 UTC as 91st comment
In reply to:

ecka84: "Development of compact devices supporting 8K is a very high priority"
- Well, making more "new" old 20mp cameras won't help convincing people to ditch their "old" old 20mp cameras. Maybe it is about more megapixels after all, not just 8K.
I think that 4K (HQ) is still fine for most people. And 'feeding' customers with 20/26/30mp for the next decade would be pretty lame.

I don't dare to call my R6 an "new" old 20MP camera, it has nothing to share with the 6D, not even the price. My favourite MP count is 30 but 20, for prints and socials are really more than enough. The R6 is really nice.

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2021 at 18:04 UTC
In reply to:

Spacemunkie: Had mine for a few weeks now. AF is solid as a rock, great looking files, heaps of DR, low noise, great ergonomics. Absolutely excellent camera :)

Should have been perfect with a 30 MP sensor, but at the moment I keep using my R6 :)

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2021 at 10:40 UTC
In reply to:

armandino: Both R5 and R6 seem to be primarily great photographers cameras. Too bad Canon opted for a flip rather than tilt screen. That is a big downside imo. Drives me nuts when shooting stills. While absolutely fantastic cameras, I still believe that Canon still needs to let the DSLR feel go and embrace Mirrorless all the way. I would definitely question the "SUPERB ERGONOMICS".

I use the R6 for stills (and used Sony FF for two years) and I prefer the flipping screen (also 3 of my friends that have bought the R6 have the same opinion).

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2021 at 10:39 UTC
In reply to:

VincentMike: In essence: a not verygood camera at a full premium money...keep waiting. And the the one's whose know-how could make a good one FF refusing to do it (AKA Olympus)

Unfortunately it is a very good camera indeed and the DPR score is spot on, at least I am using it and not only reading reviews. One of my friends use the R6 for sports and wedding and she is enthusiast about R6 performance, also with EF lenses.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2021 at 10:35 UTC
On article There can be only one: why isn't the EOS R3 an EOS R1? (580 comments in total)
In reply to:

BrentSchumer: "Given Canon's historical reticence to over-claim what its cameras are capable of..."

Like the R5 and 8K video?

"(and the no-doubt bruising experience surrounding the R5 and R6's video capabilities may well have left the company erring on the side of caution)"
Better reading carefully before posting.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2021 at 08:51 UTC
On article Full-frame mirrorless lens guide 2021 (1519 comments in total)
In reply to:

Strolic Furlan: Uhm maybe Canon RF 400 f2.8 L IS USM and Canon RF 600 f4 L IS USM are missing, they derive 96% (guessing) directly from EF counterparts (which probably were created RF ready), but they are RF nonetheless.

Ok I can get this but in the Sony section they add "In addition to covering most of these bases, Sony has had time to add specialist lenses, such as 600mm F4, 400mm F2.8, 100-400mm and 200-600mm telephoto options, equivalents to which aren't currently available for other systems.", so I guess it should be fair also to mention the RF 400 f2.8, the RF 600 f4 and the RF 100-500.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2021 at 14:23 UTC
On article Full-frame mirrorless lens guide 2021 (1519 comments in total)

Uhm maybe Canon RF 400 f2.8 L IS USM and Canon RF 600 f4 L IS USM are missing, they derive 96% (guessing) directly from EF counterparts (which probably were created RF ready), but they are RF nonetheless.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2021 at 08:21 UTC as 41st comment | 2 replies
On article Leica Q2 review (1654 comments in total)

Maybe the most beautiful camera around by far, as far as concerns me.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2021 at 09:04 UTC as 27th comment
In reply to:

FrancoPhoto: Nice!! Another very expensive machine that won't take a single photograph that hasn't already been taken a thousand times!! Yep, I'm that discontented about photography.

Very useful comment, I hope you have posted the same comment also on other comment section cameras.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2021 at 08:40 UTC
In reply to:


Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2021 at 08:39 UTC
In reply to:

mikegt: Body as large and as heavy as a brick and it will cost a small fortune whenever it finally ships (probably not before the end of the year). Body-building professionals I'm sure will like this camera; others will stay away, as this thing is just too big.

And as usual Canon will stick a small-body screen on the back and thereby not take advantage of the huge amount of space available on such a large camera body.

"It will cost a small fortune", yes because other brands give their top-of-the-line cameras for free I guess.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2021 at 08:35 UTC

@Canon, please give us more infos! We want them! :D

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2021 at 08:33 UTC as 12th comment
Total: 1040, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »