Sosua

Sosua

Lives in New Zealand (Aotearoa) Auckland, New Zealand (Aotearoa)
Works as a Product Manager
Has a website at www.samwaldron.co.nz
Joined on May 25, 2006
About me:

I'm an amateur photographer who is fortunate enough to spend a decent amount of time in the field shooting.

My first love is landscape, although i'm really enjoying shooting more people, travel and the adventures it brings.

I am working towards dedicating two months a year to travel and landscape photography and while it is nice to subsidise part of the costs, I do it for the love.

Comments

Total: 186, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: All these DN lenses are meant for an APS-C sensor. On M43, they're totally worthless.

I agree, of course M43 already have the stellar 60mm Macro, but the more the merrier!

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2013 at 22:27 UTC
In reply to:

wakaba: A.) take a camera that can hardly resolve 1200lpm
-slow AF
-no viewfinder
-supersmall sensor
-heavy incameraprocessing
-hardly enough battery power to run a "big" AF-lens
B.) stick an adapterring on
-that has additional glass in it
- lots of electric leads
-is generic to lenses
C.) stick an expensive lens on
-that can resolve 2000lpm
-is hardly compatible with the ring

...and get what exactly? Better pictures? DoA.

Enjoy living in the dark ages, the SLR was modern in the 1960's.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2013 at 03:55 UTC
In reply to:

forpetessake: I'm quite skeptical that this gonna fly. One thing, I don't believe they will be able to preserve the image quality -- sometimes even simple protective filter significantly affects image quality, and here they added a lot of glass to lens' carefully crafted optical formula. Secondly, no fast autofocus means manual focus for all practical cases. But EF lenses have terrible manual focusing ring. Finally, EF lenses are too big and heavy to appeal to many people using NEX bodies. I have LA-EA2 adapter and A-mount lenses, and though there are no problems like here (focusing is fast and precise, image quality is not affected), yet I find even that setup to be too big and heavy and practically unusable with NEX body -- I would rather go with DSLR body if I wanted to use those lenses, it would be free from all the limitations and cost less too.

Check the white paper, it makes pretty compelling reading.

Includes MTF graphs for multiple lenses and formats, plus sample images. The idea adding elements detracts from IQ is due to teleconverters magnifying defects - this theoretically does the opposite.

Not all EF lenses (or full frame) lenses are large either... this will apply beyond EF glass, and no doubt at a lower cost when you look at the $400 Leica R to Fuji X adapter...

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2013 at 03:21 UTC
In reply to:

Adrian Harris: IF this works without degrading the image quality, what a fantastic way to get a new range coverage for my existing M4/3 lenses. the 45-200 will now be a 31-140 and faster. Plus the excellent 14-45 will become a 10-31. Nice having that extra wide end for scenery etc.
But how well will the adapter perform optically, that is the thousand dollar question and could be the deal breaker ?
OOpsi - just realised I got that all wrong - it won't work with the proper lenses for the system, what was I thinking of.
Sorry for expressing my dreams.

You need to start with a lens with a larger imaging circle... E.g. DX and FF lenses will work on M43 with the adapter, but not M43 / 43 lenses.

The white paper is really interesting, and well explained in laymans terms with images and illustrations.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2013 at 00:06 UTC
In reply to:

Prime_Lens: Quite interesting.. but it is a total donkey doo doo.

I am sure it will make it stop faster.
More light concentration is more light concentration, after all.

Sharper? Revolutionary?
Nah~
All they are doing is slapping in a piece of convex glass to an existing adapter.
And every time you add more layer of glass to the lens, the IQ goes down, and becomes more prone to internal flare and ghosting. Because it creates yet another glass surface for light to penetrate or bounce off of.

It's a fool's gold guys..

I think the fact it was designed by the guy who made the coastal Optics 60 and its $600 is more encouraging than if it cost $100...

We will see, essentially seems to be a way of getting 'FF' look from your FF lenses on APSC

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2013 at 22:39 UTC
In reply to:

Mssimo: FAQ

-What does it do: Makes image circle smaller to fit small sensors better. You can also call this a anti crop adapter.
-Will not work on any DSLR (only mirrorless cameras)
-Does it work: Yes
-Does it degrade image quality: No, it might make it a bit better (on small sensor) How is this possible? Same reason every picture looks good on a 4x6 vs Poster size
-Does it make my lens faster: It makes the image circle smaller so "more light" (think back to burning ants with a magnifying glass when you were a kid)
-Why has this not been done before? Mirrorless cameras have only been out for a few years.
-Has this been technology been used before? Yes, the Olympus 14-35mm F2 and 35-100mm F2 are in reality 24-70mm f2.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 lens but with a adapter "built in" and these are known as the finest and fastest zoom lenses of their kind. Also check out the world of telescopes.

Feel free to add to this list.

Very helpful, thanks.

This is quite the development, although comes at a time I guess when mirrorless platforms are fleshing out their lens line ups but still, really interesting.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2013 at 22:10 UTC
On article CES 2013: Hands-on with Samsung NX300 (150 comments in total)
In reply to:

Karl Summers: Sorry I missed it. I was at the LG booth checking out their vacuum.

Haha, well played Karl

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2013 at 01:51 UTC
On article Best Camera of 2012: And the Winner is... (1414 comments in total)

Well this was predictably controversial.

Loving the OMD, it's the smaller camera that 'could'.

Link | Posted on Jan 1, 2013 at 05:20 UTC as 437th comment
On article The DSLR Field Camera (180 comments in total)

And of course this and similar techniques allow you to capture a wider field of view.

Handholding with good discipline (use those VF grid lines) and modern software enables easy and excellent results too if parallax is not an issue.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2012 at 00:52 UTC as 44th comment
On article Dpreview Users' Poll: Best Camera of 2012? (1507 comments in total)
In reply to:

James A Rinner: Two full frames and a micro 4/3 are taking over 62% of the votes! The Canon and the Nikon may produce better pictures for the pixels peepers but the OM-D EM-5 is definately the "Camera of the Year" when it comes to being a game changer for many photographers. I bet many of those Canon and Nikon voters also own an OM-D!

Marike - Indeed the E-M5 the IQ got better - to a point where it became acceptable for many, many users. It also combined innovations such as 5 axis IBIS, live preview and weather sealing in such a small body.

Fundamentally all the D800 did was improve IQ as well, except full frame quality was already acceptable.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2012 at 22:01 UTC
In reply to:

raven900sx: At that price i would of expected it to be weather sealed, especially as the om-d is weather sealed and there are only 2 native m4/3rd weather sealed lens...unless they are going to have a separate line of super expensive lenses like the 4/3 SHG range?

I have no idea of the expected pricing for it here in NZ but if its close to to the 12mm f2 at NZ$1225 then its out of my league sadly :(

even the lens hood for the 12-50 costs us NZ$92 over here

Hey Raven - in NZ you can get the 12mm F2 for $1170 from Photo Warehouse and up until the end of January - 20% cashback so you are effectively only getting it for $950 from a Bricks and Mortar store - cheaper than a straight USD conversion... The 17mm F1.8 Will retail at about $700 here.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2012 at 23:36 UTC
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: I dont get these crazy expensive m43 lenses. Small formats should not be a premium format. These lenses cost more than FF lenses. thats nuts

If they perform as good or better at a third the size, why not?

$500 is very far from an expensive lens BTW

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2012 at 07:22 UTC

Pretty good value compared to the Nex 24 1.8?

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2012 at 07:20 UTC as 62nd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

noirdude: Good review! But I stay with my tamron 18-270 VC for street photo, the VC works as promised. It's just to expensive for a walk around lens, not to mention its weight too.

Keep it up!

Likely does OK on a 6mp sensor, but certainly does not appear to be able to keep up with the pixel pitch of modern APS-C chips - a shame, since its a new lens...

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2012 at 05:25 UTC

I presume the ratings are within its own category? (Reading the review and looking at the samples it looks like an 800gram lemon)

Would be interesting to see what the lens categories are.

Surely Nikon would be better placed creating useful enthusiast DX lenses to pump life into the format?

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2012 at 00:22 UTC as 50th comment

Keeping feet on the ground, probably something like the XE1 (Once RAW support is ironed out) but with the OMD IBIS and AF and a full suite of compact, high performance lenses.

Or a slightly more compact, lightweight version of the new Leica M with D4 like ISO performance and IBIS.

In other words, the technology already exists, just need to combine it...

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2012 at 23:57 UTC as 456th comment
On photo Alfred Hitchcock presents 'The Birds' in the Plethora challenge (14 comments in total)

Fantastic image mate - awesome stuff!

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2012 at 22:03 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
On article Just Posted: Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 review (187 comments in total)

Pretty darn impressive for a small sensor compact - would like to see raw output as those jpegs are getting some pretty fine detail for the pixel pitch.

I can't help but feel this is a year or two late however with the rise of alternatives.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2012 at 23:13 UTC as 68th comment
In reply to:

marike6: It great that Sony is expanding their lens line-up, and the 35 1.8 and the UWA zoom look interesting. Based on a few of the jpegs I'd say raw (or at least raw + jpeg) is more or less a requirement. Of course I have no idea is NR can be dialed down. If so, jpegs could possible be quite usable.

Still, the most interesting new mirror-less camera for me IQ-wise is the Fuji X-E1.

But for HDSLR video shooters, and for someone who want to buy into the highly adaptable E-mount system, the NEX-6 looks like a fine camera.

I agree on the proviso LR / ACR get the kinks out or processing...

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2012 at 02:36 UTC

Difficult to really tell of course, but the 35mm 1.8 looks pretty good - wide open and stopped down.

Impossible to tell with the 10-18mm unfortunately, with high ISO, wide open shots and no flat field stuff.

Looks OK in the ISO 400, 18mm 5.6 shot but JPEG NR isn't helping.

Look forward to more on these two lenses, if they are up to snuff, makes NEX so much more attractive.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2012 at 23:13 UTC as 55th comment | 1 reply
Total: 186, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »