HSway

HSway

Lives in United Kingdom London, United Kingdom
Has a website at www.sunwaysite.com
Joined on Mar 21, 2010

Comments

Total: 171, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Rock Nikon: I am a Nikon guy. How does it compare to the 14-24? Or 10-24mm Nikkors?

The 14-24 is excellent on Dx. The Sigma has a little weaker centre so it will shine on Fx more (also given the very good resolution in the outer regions). Both are a bit overkill lenses for Dx that shine on Fx, I’d take a look at several new Tokina UWA zooms instead – these will give you a more comparable angle of view as well.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 10:39 UTC
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (202 comments in total)

Very helpful and interesting. Dxomark results are very similar to the samples here. I am usually careful with relying on the tests with these angles. The conclusion is spot on. Sigma is a great lens and when it comes to the sharpness across the field its strong point is f8. It’s more limited at and beyond 20mm. The lack of CA and distortion control is very impressive.
The 11-24 holds its own and that's when taking its price into account, it’s the better lens for me. The mention referring to its lateral CA as rather extreme – to me it would be more that the 12-24/4 is extremely clean. From the design standpoint, I’d go for more distortion (of the Canon or of my 14-24 that have a good control) over less consistent resolution. It’s likely that Sigma gave its preference the other way, and that, in theory, it could be improved when designed for about the same distortions and less clean CA. Anyway these are difficult beasts. The more grateful many of us are for the study.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 10:20 UTC as 5th comment
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (762 comments in total)

Vilia in 83.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 18:19 UTC as 412th comment
On article Fast Five: Sony Cyber-shot RX100 V Review (405 comments in total)

Is there a real* weakness relative to the competition? The pop-up viewfinder really sets it apart from the other cameras then. That sadly includes the future DL 24-85. Even if you don’t need it much for your shooting its benefits become clear enough when shooting outdoor in the bright - brightish conditions. That is often. Of course, the new segment goes through a development as a whole. But it strikes me as ingenious and aggressive from Sony to bet on a feature that imo matters most – and being able to implement it – a good viewfinder.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2016 at 13:36 UTC as 73rd comment
In reply to:

HSway: That’s first time I see the purpose for V cameras explained: It’s for professionals who need to do a quick job with a telephoto without lugging a lot of gear.

Amateurs/enthusiasts sometimes don’t like the professional gear (mostly because it’s expensive or heavy) so the V could fit this category possibly for its reasons. That would then explain the limited market for the V and why Nikon may not be that concerned by this fact. OTOH, if the ambition was anything more, then the V line cameras would certainly struggle among the competition.

Fair point. Looks that I should actually have said – finally I got it. My mistake. To be honest there were more of us struggling with this.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 18:10 UTC

Of course, speaking of serious compact cameras, there is the simple little marvel of APS-C machine like the a6500 and the whole array of cameras from others. But it seems that implementing ML on this level would upset Nikon APS-C strategy and their all-DSLR role in it. The ML is not part of it yet (apart from the known part). Who knows what the plans for the future are. One has to respect that. The responsibility is on their shoulders. Frankly pushing into saturated market packed with excellent products is not that inviting, especially these days. They do their best to stay efficient. And there is the continuous pressure towards the 135 format even Sony can’t resist.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 17:59 UTC as 47th comment

The DL cameras look great I think. And it’s an excellent idea to include this concept. I am sure the mention of d800 user was just an example to highlight the appeal for Nikon users (controls etc.). I also think Mr Inoue, in his explanation, hints that J cameras are meant more for lower-end user. But there is also the possibility of using the DL platform/style for these users instead. This would seem more intuitive for this type of a buyer – compared to the interchangeable lens camera like the J. I haven’t formed a strong opinion on this and I like the J5 camera but it seems to me that the IL cameras will be all soon be expected to have some finder.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 16:53 UTC as 51st comment

That’s first time I see the purpose for V cameras explained: It’s for professionals who need to do a quick job with a telephoto without lugging a lot of gear.

Amateurs/enthusiasts sometimes don’t like the professional gear (mostly because it’s expensive or heavy) so the V could fit this category possibly for its reasons. That would then explain the limited market for the V and why Nikon may not be that concerned by this fact. OTOH, if the ambition was anything more, then the V line cameras would certainly struggle among the competition.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 16:28 UTC as 54th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

Timur Born: Having the focus ring closer to the camera is a real benefit for video shooting (where AF is useless on Nikon cameras). This is one of the things I like about my Tamron 24-70.

The zoom ring has to offer really smooth action then, though, else you have to change your grip on the lens instead of just using finger-tips (one area where the Tamron 70-200 often fails).

Example of that each lens needs to be tried individually could be my 200-500 VR. When handholding 200-500 VR I use collar foot for support as some do which also puts my fingers right under the zoom ring (also placed second) and creates nice room for my fingers to turn the ring. (The long throw makes the zooming still difficult.)
Most of the time I am zooming on a tripod with loose head with this lens, which is much more comfortable. And I don't zoom very often with this lens.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 13:30 UTC
In reply to:

Timur Born: Having the focus ring closer to the camera is a real benefit for video shooting (where AF is useless on Nikon cameras). This is one of the things I like about my Tamron 24-70.

The zoom ring has to offer really smooth action then, though, else you have to change your grip on the lens instead of just using finger-tips (one area where the Tamron 70-200 often fails).

I was thinking exactly that. The 70-200/2.8 lens won’t be used for video as much though (as for the typical use).
I hold the telephotos (all lenses) close to the camera to become one solid piece of a body but someone taller with longer hands can like to support the telephoto further from the camera as I remember reading in the lens forum. It’s one way of stabilising the lens vs another.
My Canon 70-300 L had the zoom ring placed second which I didn’t exactly like but it wasn’t a problem either (and it was harder to turn). Each lens is different, though, this lens was short, bulky (it extended). But I can’t base much opinion on this because I didn’t use it ideally but on small, later very small APS-C bodies. Best will be to do real shooting with the particular lens rather than trying this out in a shop, including those zoom switches that you can preset.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 12:37 UTC
In reply to:

HSway: Probably a superb lens, and lighter. 70-200 is perhaps most useful zoom on Fx in what can still be considered a normal range (just as useful for UWAs). And it’s really good idea to split that utility into 2.8 and f4 versions. Nikon eventually followed the Canon’s very nice lens with its modern f4 zoom. With all these choices now (four, five?) it’s going to be really good including for those unhappy about the focus breathing. The price should settle lower after a while (in UK).

Professional equipment.. And the real value of the currency plays its part. The version II was £ 2000 at launch but that was 7 years ago. Wex has 70-200/2.8 FL for £ 2650. Add to it the trouble the pound experiences recently, this will reflect in import prices. The large fluorite lens costs extra. If the price cycle is on the track with the version II the pricing of the 70-200/2.8 FL wouldn't be unreasonable. If the pound recovers in the near future it should improve the price.
The new 105/1.4 may be a bit more expensive for what it is. I now noticed at camerapricebuster there were two £ 200 drops yesterday (Castle and Park Cameras), the lens is sold barely two months, it will go down. The 19 PC has some devilishly complex optical formula. yes it seems expensive. OTOH my 24/1.8G and 200-500 VR were excellent value.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 16:30 UTC
In reply to:

HSway: Probably a superb lens, and lighter. 70-200 is perhaps most useful zoom on Fx in what can still be considered a normal range (just as useful for UWAs). And it’s really good idea to split that utility into 2.8 and f4 versions. Nikon eventually followed the Canon’s very nice lens with its modern f4 zoom. With all these choices now (four, five?) it’s going to be really good including for those unhappy about the focus breathing. The price should settle lower after a while (in UK).

@Guy Swarbrick This perhaps can go both ways at this point. The next direction for the pound probably set by the High Court ruling...

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 15:35 UTC

Probably a superb lens, and lighter. 70-200 is perhaps most useful zoom on Fx in what can still be considered a normal range (just as useful for UWAs). And it’s really good idea to split that utility into 2.8 and f4 versions. Nikon eventually followed the Canon’s very nice lens with its modern f4 zoom. With all these choices now (four, five?) it’s going to be really good including for those unhappy about the focus breathing. The price should settle lower after a while (in UK).

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 21:07 UTC as 32nd comment | 4 replies
On article Modest Updates: Nikon D3400 Review (373 comments in total)
In reply to:

HSway: That looks like an upgrade for the connectivity.
And the minor changes could well be a deliberate change in configuration in connection with the 5xxx series.
Perhaps the typical buyer doesn’t know much about the external microphones. In that light, I could understand that the vibrating filter cleaning aid isn’t all that crucial either for most people running with these cameras as you still need to have it cleaned or clean it.
I’d rather worry about the negative feedback (reviews) many can use as a guide or conformation for their decision which can make the buyer look elsewhere. So this might be a little problematic. This group people are probably well used to the features-packed gadgets and can quickly spot the 'disadvantage'. And you can't blame them - it's still a default (useful) feature.

The review is fair imo and very positive. I was thinking more from the manufacturer’s (Nikon) point of view to get the sense of the upgrade as debated in the comments. So in my view on what I see as a little problematic change in the feature set I think that it could be rather 'smart' to include the cleaning aid even if it wasn’t seen as very important for this line.
As for the review again, it is very useful and needs to be pointing out things and be a real review, absolutely!

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2016 at 21:54 UTC
On article Modest Updates: Nikon D3400 Review (373 comments in total)

That looks like an upgrade for the connectivity.
And the minor changes could well be a deliberate change in configuration in connection with the 5xxx series.
Perhaps the typical buyer doesn’t know much about the external microphones. In that light, I could understand that the vibrating filter cleaning aid isn’t all that crucial either for most people running with these cameras as you still need to have it cleaned or clean it.
I’d rather worry about the negative feedback (reviews) many can use as a guide or conformation for their decision which can make the buyer look elsewhere. So this might be a little problematic. This group people are probably well used to the features-packed gadgets and can quickly spot the 'disadvantage'. And you can't blame them - it's still a default (useful) feature.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2016 at 19:14 UTC as 78th comment | 2 replies
On article Fast and light: Nikkor 24mm F1.8G ED lens review (158 comments in total)

The Nikkor can surprise with hexagon-shaped flare when shooting handheld and the sun is just outside the frame. These were some quick shots off the boat and with the target moving so more time will tell about this.
I noticed this less intensive blur and slower transition when comparing it to other lenses. I am satisfied with the bokeh from it though, and with overall rendition like the colour. With regard to CAs I have minimum problems on my D600/750. This lens impressed me and as mentioned, it is very compact for such a lens. The Sigma brings its advantages, less of vignetting and the speed probably most tangible.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2016 at 12:28 UTC as 9th comment

Just had the little NEX 6 in hands when packing the car for our trip and it reminded me how nice form factor these cameras are. We have seen quite impressive evolution since this camera, especially in shape of the a6300 and now this a6500 with IBIS which looks like an excellent higher-end compact camera and a timely entry for the market. The lens system isn’t developed as systematically and particularly as some other APS-C/MFT systems but you can still get some excellent lenses for the system.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2016 at 17:03 UTC as 205th comment
On article Going wide: Irix 15mm F2.4 sample gallery (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

DamianFI: How would this compare to the Zeiss 2.8/15 Distagon?

If it was anything like this it would be famous by now. The new Samyang 14/2.4 may flare less. Well I think that’s probable. It could also be corrected for the mixed distortion the older version has.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2016 at 09:35 UTC
On article Going wide: Irix 15mm F2.4 sample gallery (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

jkrumm: I don't see much appeal to rectilinear super-wides, flare or no flare.

Exactly, you have control over this and can minimise or to emphasise the effect. Wider angles like 14-11 mm are more special effect FLs, sort of rectilinear "fish eye". UWAs generally can also help shooting with preferred (corrected) perspective like straight lines some less wide angle can struggle with for a given shot. (Followed by aspect ratio adjustment.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2016 at 09:28 UTC
On article Going wide: Irix 15mm F2.4 sample gallery (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Contra Mundum: Going wide: why?

That's the question an average reader is going to ask after looking at those extremely boring pictures. Readers aren't going to mull in their heads if the lens worth the money, they are going to question the very need for that lens.

Average reader will likely search for articles on use of UWA if he feels the need. It's easier than it ever was. Luminous Landscape will be one of the destinations. These are ideal samples that can easily spare you buying a lens – or encourage to for that matter, lots of flat surfaces/landscape, apertures, resolution, field curvature etc.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2016 at 09:09 UTC
Total: 171, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »