achim k
Joined on
Feb 5, 2012
|
Comments
 |  |
| Fascia walkie talkie building London by ian herridge from Abstract Architecture | Global Reach by cjf2 from Battleship |
Beginner's GuidesGetting Started
In-depth testingLatest Camera Reviews
Beyond the studio testsFeature Articles and Videos
real world performanceField Test Videos
see how we seeSample Galleries
In-depth ReviewFujifilm X100F
Show CoverageHits and Misses from CP+ 2017
Throwback ThursdayClassic Cameras from Days Past
What's that Noise?Shedding some light on the sources of noise
2464FeatureWhat is equivalence?
J A C S: The real weakness of this lens, IMO, is the busy bokeh in some situations. This is also visible in some of the samples here.
I remember a review that praises it's bokeh as smoother than comparable 35/f1,4 lenses (at same aperture). It's still a rather short focal length, so for my taste the bokeh is quite satisfying.
p51d007: For selfies d "snapshots" they aren't bad, but photography is about capturing light, & given the size of cellphone sensors, they do an "ok" job, but can't even match that of a small camera, in sensor size or lens quality.
I totally agree! My smartphone is not the latest model (Galaxy Note3) but the colors look fantastic and very realistic as far as I watch the images on this very device. As you said: on my Eizo computer monitor they just are "ok" and mostly have to be a little pimped when mixing them with images from my real camera.
landscaper1: I wonder what the manufacturer of this dongle had to pay Leica for the use of its TM?
They need the money for legal expenses when leica goes to court.
Beautiful and amazing! But I turned off the disturbing sound.
GEONYC: KODAK never made a good camera and their digital cameras were very good at the time, but... The Apple and the Huawei are way ahead. I hope to see them go to bankrupt part 2. The company was good, it was the people. They are/were chemists not engineers. I had a few personal experiences with them... All bad.
It's not true that they never made good cameras. The retina series had good reputation.
I don't like the false color!
mjdundee: Sorry - this link leads to a gallery with samples marked Sony a9.
correct! I don't find the Lumix gallery neither
Battery life was horrible. I had the camera for some weeks, best thing was the lens. Manual mechanical zoom lens with universal range. I liked the EVF, but the camera often shut down when the day's temperature raised. The batterie door had to be opened and closed again to continue shooting. When it came from repair, the improved successor was announced (with sensor-based image stabilisation, I think the first model on the market with this feature) AND the canon 300D (Digital Rebel). I sold the dimage and got the canon.
I tried it but didn't like the colors and therefore kept my 300D!
M.Zuiko 12-100 Pro on mFT or EF 24-105 L on 5D III
Jonathan Brady: This will be a hard sell to Canon users, or at least it should be. The Canon 135L isn't lacking and eyelash-sharp portraits are the norm with that lens. It can be found, barely used, for $650-750 easily. Buying a 3rd party lens which is 50% heavier and twice the price is an odd proposition when the first party lens is available in such great condition at such a low price.
*I realize I'm comparing used to new. And as soon as the used price of Sigma 135/1.8 drops, we can reevaluate.
The Sigma could be a challenge if it had image stabilization. It's the only feature I sometimes miss with my Canon 2/135 L
Agfa Silette LK, with fixed 2,8/45mm (3-element) lens and light metering. Distance had to be estimated. First SLR: Pentax Spotmatic. First digital: Coolpix 990, first DSLR: Canon 300D
whakapu: It's interesting how the lab images from dpreview and imaging resource often produce completely different conclusions (possibly because IR only compare jpegs). More interesting still is how the Pentax K1 in pixel shift mode completely wipes the floor with all these cameras for noise and moire.
Just for fun I switched to JPEG and compared, Fuji has the best. But who will use this camera in JPEG mode?
XeroJay: 5DIV. I use the OVF just as I have for years, but also now use the LiveView with DualPixel AF af if it were a mirrorless. It's actually just like using a big Canon Full Frame EOS-M. The best of both worlds in one camera. Okay, so it's not technically an EVF, but then again most EOS-M bodies don't have an EVF either.
Only the M5 could be a candidate. Nice EVF, good handling (a bit slow), but far too expensive and not quite up-to-date, not enough small lenses.
I have an Olympus in the meantime and love the stunning image stabilization. Canon lost the leadership in this category (as well as in some others).
XeroJay: 5DIV. I use the OVF just as I have for years, but also now use the LiveView with DualPixel AF af if it were a mirrorless. It's actually just like using a big Canon Full Frame EOS-M. The best of both worlds in one camera. Okay, so it's not technically an EVF, but then again most EOS-M bodies don't have an EVF either.
in my opinion the least comfortable way to use a DSLR
GrahamD: EVF without a doubt. It immediately gives me an idea of what the picture is going to look like and I love all the extra information you can get overlaid, plus manual focus aids, etc. I could quite happily live without an LCD display on the back though!
although you are right, on vacation I sometimes do not want to see how the picture will look but want to see the nature through the optical viewfinder as near to the naked eye as possible. Just enjoy the framing.
karlkk: mirrorless manufacturers tend to make a lot of noise about these cameras, yet their sales stay stagnant.
weight ? wait ! Nikon d5600 weighs 415 grams while fujifilm x-t2 weighs 507 grams , sony a6500 weighs 453.All using same 24mega sensor size.Differences in size are not that huge either.And lenses are often very similar in size , too - but much more expensive.
of course optical is much more accurate and always effective , while evf is difficult to use in poor light conditions.
Extremely small mirrorless is necessarily difficult to handle on manual settings.
Panasony are wasting their money on pr hype for a system that won't last no matter how hard they try brainwashing us.
In my opinion, EVF is better in poor light conditions. The image is brighter and I can adjust the exposure to taste as I see it. For landscapes in good light I prefer OVF, at least when it's a good and big one (FF). I have both systems, Olympus and Canon.
zavart: Just too bad that Panasonic could not make GH5 with internally rotating sensor. This would truly make life much easier for portrait shooters...I think micro 3/4 has the best chances of implementing such a solution because of the relatively small size of the sensor inside. OH...well maybe Lumix GX9 will have it...., after all it already has a pop up viewfinder ...so this solution would really complement this camera very well indeed. :)
@ zavart .. and then a beamer with a square panel, too! 4000x4000 pixels please. Just a dream
zavart: Just too bad that Panasonic could not make GH5 with internally rotating sensor. This would truly make life much easier for portrait shooters...I think micro 3/4 has the best chances of implementing such a solution because of the relatively small size of the sensor inside. OH...well maybe Lumix GX9 will have it...., after all it already has a pop up viewfinder ...so this solution would really complement this camera very well indeed. :)
technically it might be easier to take a square sensor. For my way to take pictures, I rotate the whole camera for 90 °!
For me: I don't enjoy taking pictures with my phone. The images are not bad when I look at them on the phone. But on a bigger screen? ?
No real zoom, no viewfinder, no release button, laggy operation, it's not a real camera for me. A stopgap.