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


Total: 189, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

This is a bit of a torture. My favourite is 50 but would have to choose a fast 35 to cover it all. I'd upgrade to either the Sigma or 35/1.4G - would need to shoot with the Sigma to decide. Thinking ahead, it would be the prime because I can expect the IQ to be improving and so I could use cropping and retain the quality. Otherwise, if everything stayed as is, I’d go with 24-70/2.8 zoom.
If I was allowed a pair of lenses, the second one would be 280 - 700 mm - 200-500/5.6 VR/14 TC III. A fast 35 and that would actually make me quite happy.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 11:33 UTC as 59th comment
On article The Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 is old-fashioned fun (184 comments in total)

As lenses are becoming sharp and people tired of wild image processing they look for other differences for their photography or simply to distinguish their gear from the mainstream. I think what MOG is doing with their Trioplan/Primoplan series is great, for example, and that we will see more of this and similar efforts in the future. The MF is a bit shame on these but ML can handle this. But we can expect more branching and the AF lens market more niched in the future as well.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 16:44 UTC as 38th comment

With a bit of distance and DOF, it’s surprisingly sharp at f1.8 across the frame - #36.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2017 at 09:38 UTC as 65th comment

Not surprised the 12-24/4 wins the complexity. Looking at these large bulging concave elements I am always thinking it's quite a feat to make them, especially in tighter tolerances. The use of the aspherical lens gives them a pair of attractive UWAs – the 12-24 seems to be a great lens. Also relatively compact thanks to that element.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 22:35 UTC as 29th comment | 1 reply

What a gorgeous 14/1.8. Starting the year in big style. All interesting lenses.
It’s apparent that Sigma benefits from the proactive approach the company adopted when dealing with some post-boom effects.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 10:02 UTC as 66th comment

I wouldn’t expect this exactly but given the potential of 1 inch sensor, especially long term, and depending on other decisions, this may be a good move despite some disappointment of those waiting for the cameras.
It’s a saturated segment taken firmly by Sony and others with some excellent cameras developed years ago. The sensor size as a key component of the system or platform should be chosen with particular care.
So Richard was right then having reservations about the DL cameras being realised as announced.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2017 at 06:22 UTC as 34th comment
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (273 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?

I can imagine, I used it as well. It’s about the same optically sharpness-wise though I liked the Tokina a bit more and kept it. The Sigma handles flare better, and the lateral CA. I think reports say the new Tokinas have improved CA correction now.

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2016 at 21:56 UTC
On article Got Bokeh? DxO reviews the Nikkor AF-S 105mm F1.4E ED (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: I repeat:
This lens is 95mm F/1.4; at infinity! The 105mm are a blatant lie.

Yes, good points and the difference seems to be more than what is usual. It’s possible I’d prefer it was labelled as 100 or 95. But I’d first want to see how the lens is behaving. Comparison shots at usual distances with 105/2 (etc.) would tell me.
I cannot comment on the rest, lensrental are quite geeks and that includes precision, it’s not they are not equipped (they perform measurements few other labs do). This is not to say dxomark has it wrong. I have zero information to explain anything and experience tells me not to jump to conclusions.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 15:57 UTC
On article Got Bokeh? DxO reviews the Nikkor AF-S 105mm F1.4E ED (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: I repeat:
This lens is 95mm F/1.4; at infinity! The 105mm are a blatant lie.

It’s a little steep, it usually is closer. There can be some variation in obtaining the number, too. Lensrentals gives 49.5 and dxomark 47.5 for 50 Art.
FL is measured at infinity. What will have more practical weight, with this lens especially, is the effective FL (or FOV) away from infinity – compared to other lenses of similar use (FL).

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 17:24 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1147 comments in total)

A fair review of a first high-end camera since the iconic NEX 7.

The APS-C is a second-tier system to Sony. Which is similar to other brands as no one seems to go fully into two systems of neighbouring formats. Canon perhaps has gotten furthest with this. Pentax, slightly different, but also far from ideal and so is its volume on the market.
To me the highlights of the NEX type cameras are the position of the viewfinder, simplicity, extremely capable operation and traditional, solid, brick-like shaped body. Battery power is not that big problem as these spares are tiny, or not always as a lot depends on how the camera is set and used; more lasting power is always welcome.
The second-tier systems will be getting incremental improvements but the main arena is now 135 format where Sony is continuing their ambitious plans which of course means also lenses.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 09:41 UTC as 73rd comment
On article Gear of the Year: Richard's choice - Fujifilm X-T2 (172 comments in total)

Look of Sony native (even Sigma) APS-C lenses is a weak point of the system (not the only one). I wouldn’t mind using word ugly sometimes. Fujinon lenses are generally nice in comparison and as I say it’s not just nitpicking but quite a contrast. And of course this matters.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2016 at 20:18 UTC as 23rd comment
In reply to:

Howard: "Plastic is so beautiful, mermaids love it, so let's put more in the ocean!" -- is that the message?

It shows the beauty of nature and its elements, waste, human signature and fragility (vulnerability) of both.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 18:54 UTC

I was quite stunned when I saw the first shot in the morning. The work with the bottles makes for even stronger visual impact than the human element (and could make a separate piece without it - though I wouldn't change anything). The first and second are truly excellent.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 18:46 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

maxnimo: Hard to believe that any 20mm lens would need to be so tall (long), especially in this age of excellent pancake lenses.

@maxnimo Knowing Tokina and the trend/demands this lens will try to achieve minimum aberrations and softness across the frame and aperture range. I.e. it’s going to have relatively consistent sharpness. If we are talking about the same lens – a 20/2 FE lens of a smaller size could not be made as good and also not as inexpensive.

You can also optimise a lens for a small size and for the performance in the centre as another useful configuration. 20mm UWA is one of the less attractive candidates for this. Though being an f2 lens it's not that absurd idea (still, hardly a priority).
Then there is the flange distance factor that’s confusing. A ML body is thin making the distance shorter and lenses have to very often make up for the distance by their own size so that they can be designed properly – as needed (The ML is not only about size).

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 18:30 UTC
In reply to:

maxnimo: Hard to believe that any 20mm lens would need to be so tall (long), especially in this age of excellent pancake lenses.

A pancake of this FOV and speed will be compromise on everything but the size. That can be a good compromise and for some use even great.
This most likely is a negative-lead type which doesn’t need a large element for its arrangement deals inherently better with the peripheral shading (though the end result depends on the exact design). It’s the positive-lead UWAs - usually with those bulbous elements - that need to be really wide diameter.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 06:02 UTC
On article Have your say: Best prime lens of 2016 (152 comments in total)

This has to be Nikkor 105. Tamron or Sigma Art 85? I hear both are excellent. OK, Art. The PC 19 may well be best of all but not my lens, third.
The Olympus has some great telephoto there, I saw samples..

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2016 at 17:14 UTC as 10th comment
On article Have Your Say: Best Zoom Lens of 2016 (74 comments in total)

Nikkor 70-200/2.8 e looks very nice so far; second 12-24 Art – not far from the 11-24/4 it starts at 12mm which helps with the size. I feel the Canon 16-35 III may be a small notch over the GMs? may be not. Hey this only is fun:)

PS, I see the Sigma 50-100mm F1.8 is doing very well. Well deserved!

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2016 at 17:04 UTC as 4th comment

Canon removes somewhat perceivable gap in the sensor quality, in what I’d regard as "the real-world one", in another category and after the 6d makes another camera that I really like. It takes first place as both d5 and d500 are a bit further for my needs. I ran out of the bars the Alpha 6500 would be next! All of them are fantastic.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2016 at 16:42 UTC as 11th comment
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (273 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 (273 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 20th comment
Total: 189, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »