whyamihere

whyamihere

Lives in United States Philadelphia, United States
Works as a Higher Education IT
Joined on Apr 8, 2012

Comments

Total: 190, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sony announces FE 50mm F1.4 ZA prime lens (293 comments in total)
In reply to:

whyamihere: This lens is emblematic of what I find wrong with Sony: they make brilliant products that are marred by confounding business decisions.

This is, what, the 6th lens that covers this focal length from Sony and/or Zeiss? (I count 4 primes and 2 zooms.) Were users really clamoring for this lens? Why didn't they consider other focal lengths? Even if it's a high quality optic, does Sony expect people are willing to spend $1500 for a 50mm f/1.4?

There's also the question of branding. Why is this a Zeiss and not a GM, other than the blue badge and the T* coating, and perhaps the exclusion of the XA element that makes the bokeh slightly different? Should we expect yet another 50mm that is a GM, which will make for a 5th 50mm prime? Why can't Sony just make GM and G lenses while Zeiss just makes their own brand products? Right now, we have Sony G & GM, Zeiss Batis and Loxia, and Sony/Zeiss. That's 5 lens brands from only two companies.

Sony needs to pick a direction and stick with it.

As for, "Why include zooms?": Some people don't need or want duplication in the lenses they buy. 50mm is covered by 6 different products, just as 35mm is covered by 6 different products (35mm f/1.4 and f/2.8, the 16-35mm and 24-70mm zooms from Sony/Zeiss, another 24-70mm from Sony, and a 35mm f/2 from Zeiss). If I own a 24-70mm, do I need a 35 or 50mm prime? Often times, probably not, but that depends on the individual to figure out whether there's any additional benefit to having a prime and a zoom.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 15:58 UTC
On article Sony announces FE 50mm F1.4 ZA prime lens (293 comments in total)
In reply to:

whyamihere: This lens is emblematic of what I find wrong with Sony: they make brilliant products that are marred by confounding business decisions.

This is, what, the 6th lens that covers this focal length from Sony and/or Zeiss? (I count 4 primes and 2 zooms.) Were users really clamoring for this lens? Why didn't they consider other focal lengths? Even if it's a high quality optic, does Sony expect people are willing to spend $1500 for a 50mm f/1.4?

There's also the question of branding. Why is this a Zeiss and not a GM, other than the blue badge and the T* coating, and perhaps the exclusion of the XA element that makes the bokeh slightly different? Should we expect yet another 50mm that is a GM, which will make for a 5th 50mm prime? Why can't Sony just make GM and G lenses while Zeiss just makes their own brand products? Right now, we have Sony G & GM, Zeiss Batis and Loxia, and Sony/Zeiss. That's 5 lens brands from only two companies.

Sony needs to pick a direction and stick with it.

Tesilab: See my statement that immediately preceded yours. Even removing the zoom lenses, there's still 4 50mm-ish lenses for a 3 year old system, which is silly. I'm also talking more towards the needless product overlap from two companies that already cross-market like crazy. Product confusion just means Sony (and perhaps Zeiss) are being aimless and not really caring what their customers really need out of the system.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 15:40 UTC
On article Sony announces FE 50mm F1.4 ZA prime lens (293 comments in total)
In reply to:

whyamihere: This lens is emblematic of what I find wrong with Sony: they make brilliant products that are marred by confounding business decisions.

This is, what, the 6th lens that covers this focal length from Sony and/or Zeiss? (I count 4 primes and 2 zooms.) Were users really clamoring for this lens? Why didn't they consider other focal lengths? Even if it's a high quality optic, does Sony expect people are willing to spend $1500 for a 50mm f/1.4?

There's also the question of branding. Why is this a Zeiss and not a GM, other than the blue badge and the T* coating, and perhaps the exclusion of the XA element that makes the bokeh slightly different? Should we expect yet another 50mm that is a GM, which will make for a 5th 50mm prime? Why can't Sony just make GM and G lenses while Zeiss just makes their own brand products? Right now, we have Sony G & GM, Zeiss Batis and Loxia, and Sony/Zeiss. That's 5 lens brands from only two companies.

Sony needs to pick a direction and stick with it.

What Sandy B said. We're talking about a 3 year old camera system that has many other focal lengths that need to be addressed. Canon and Nikon have been around for nearly a century, have extensive back catalogues, and tons of 3rd-party support. Replication is to be expected for those companies. Not so much for Sony.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 15:16 UTC
On article Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sample Gallery (269 comments in total)
In reply to:

zeratulmrye: looks like a decent performer

Wanderer23, I think that exactly points out the problem Sony has. If they had already covered all the holes in the lineup, a 4th 50mm lens would be fine. Instead, it's simply irritating because they would have been better off releasing just about any other lens aside from 35mm or 50mm, which now have several lenses covering those focal lengths. They're not Canon or Nikon, who have decades-worth of back catalog and tons of 3rd-party support, where replication is to be expected. This is a 3 year old camera system that many people are still wary about for this very reason, among others.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 15:12 UTC
On article Sony announces FE 50mm F1.4 ZA prime lens (293 comments in total)

This lens is emblematic of what I find wrong with Sony: they make brilliant products that are marred by confounding business decisions.

This is, what, the 6th lens that covers this focal length from Sony and/or Zeiss? (I count 4 primes and 2 zooms.) Were users really clamoring for this lens? Why didn't they consider other focal lengths? Even if it's a high quality optic, does Sony expect people are willing to spend $1500 for a 50mm f/1.4?

There's also the question of branding. Why is this a Zeiss and not a GM, other than the blue badge and the T* coating, and perhaps the exclusion of the XA element that makes the bokeh slightly different? Should we expect yet another 50mm that is a GM, which will make for a 5th 50mm prime? Why can't Sony just make GM and G lenses while Zeiss just makes their own brand products? Right now, we have Sony G & GM, Zeiss Batis and Loxia, and Sony/Zeiss. That's 5 lens brands from only two companies.

Sony needs to pick a direction and stick with it.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 14:57 UTC as 39th comment | 14 replies
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Poor x-t1 owners

Like I said, when a client notices, I'll upgrade. Until then, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 12:56 UTC
In reply to:

Abbas Rafey: It might be good camera but it is too expensive, with this price you can get canon 6D with nice glass or Nikon d610/750, or you can pickup Pentax K-1.

Abbas: I have a D600 that I use alongside my X-T1, and I often prefer using the latter. I wouldn't put them in the same category, nor would I compare a 4-year-old DSLR to a brand-new, yet-to-be-released mirrorless camera that have radically different target audiences. Plus, all the cameras you mentioned are the exact same price or more expensive than the X-T2 here in the US.

Nobby2016: I don't know what everyone else does with their cameras, but I use my Fuji camera to make photos.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 12:34 UTC
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Poor x-t1 owners

I own the X-T1, and I don't understand your comment, Favorable Exponynt. My camera still works. It didn't break just because an X-T2 was announced. I haven't heard a paying client tell me that I need to upgrade.

So, why the pity?

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 12:26 UTC

I know speedring adapters exist, but I really wish they would have stuck with the Bowens S mount. The Alien Bees clamping mechanism is fiddly and I never thought it felt secure.

Still, I'm certainly interested in these lights to complements the strobes I have.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 19:53 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

art99: If the can be powered from DC source like V or Gold mount ENG type batteries then that would really be awesome as I would not have to look around for AC sockets or a generator.

If you can find a 36V DC source with the right connector - looks to be 4 pin XLR - I don't see why not. That's going to be a honking big battery though.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 19:50 UTC

"Somewhat cryptically, Ricoh says it will announce availability for the camera at the beginning of July."

I'm going to assume that probably translates to: "Recent earthquake messed up our supply chain. We need to figure out a reasonable timeframe for delivery, but we didn't want to not announce something because August/September is a busy time for the camera industry."

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2016 at 22:17 UTC as 99th comment
In reply to:

notnaff: Oh, goody. Does anyone know who sells a laptop with usb-c and usb-A ports?

Notnaff: Lenovo has a number of laptops with both connectors.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2016 at 02:34 UTC
In reply to:

Godiwa: 515MB/s? Why can't we have SD cards with this speed? And without costing as much as a space shuttle...

SD cards will never achieve those speeds for all the reasons Impulses mentioned. Another important consideration is the simple matter of space. An SSD has a lot of x/y/z space to work with, so it doesn't matter that your typical drive is the size of a small smartphone. Memory cards for cameras have to be small, otherwise you wind up with a much bigger camera.

Either way, modern SD cards are just too simplistic in their design and have pretty much scaled to the maximum of their capability. Other formats might get beyond 500MB/s as technology advances, but that won't be anytime soon.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 00:23 UTC

DPR: Assuming the following isn't already under consideration, might I suggest...

1. Testing the D4/s and see if this is a trend for the series. If so...
2. Investigate whether there's a tradeoff between sacrificing dynamic range for unedited high ISO output.

Considering the target for these cameras is photojournalists and sports photographers, they're not likely to spend much time adjusting images after-the-fact, meaning the exposure they have is what they're going to turn into an editor, which is better than no photo at all. Nikon could be making a technical decision here, and that there's no real middle-ground between 'has insane high ISO' and 'has amazing dynamic range'.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 00:20 UTC as 158th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

JOrmsby: No OS, No interest here...

"It's borderline moronic to launch a 1.5kg tele lens without IS."

Yeah, about that...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/91680-USA/Canon_2569A004_70_200mm_f_2_8L_USM_Autofocus.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/539401-REG/Tamron_AF001NII_700_70_200mm_f_2_8_Di_LD.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/124669-USA/Nikon_1986_AF_Zoom_Nikkor_80_200mm_f_2_8D.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/207356-GREY/Nikon_1909_Telephoto_AF_S_Nikkor_300mm.html

Care to revise that statement?

PS: Those were only the first four lenses I could think of. There are more, I'm sure.

Edit: I forgot the most obvious example...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/551436-REG/Sigma_597306_200_500mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html

$26,000, 15.67kg, and no IS. Shocking.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2016 at 21:09 UTC
In reply to:

Ruy Penalva: Without image stabilization with this focal length is not a good stuff.

Find me all the Canon and Nikon primes at the equivalent focal lengths that have image stabilization. Also, I'm sure the tripod foot is there for a reason...

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2016 at 21:02 UTC
In reply to:

halfwaythere: I'm just curious how many of the vocally enthusiastic people will actually buy this lens.

The cheaper and lighter 18-35/1.8 isn't actually that great of a seller.

Seems to me like Sigma is flooding the market with lenses that nobody ever asked for while ignoring the "usual suspects": 84/1.4, 135/2, 24-70/2.8 OS or an updated 70-200/2.8 OS.

Amazon sales charts are snapshots in time and not indicative of trends. It's a significant difference, and something I wish people who quote Amazon stats would learn and realize they mean almost literally nothing. Also, are you looking at all five variants of the 18-35mm, or just one single mount? Are you assuming Amazon is representative of the whole market?

Niche products can be lucrative if they don't cost a lot to make and sell well enough to justify their existence. Breaking even on cost to produce and resale is not a reason to not make it (see: Sigma's camera business). Niche ≠ poor seller. Niche = very specific audience, which may or may not be predisposed to buying this product.

Their Art primes are popular because they have a specific audience. They're a high quality value alternative to Nikon and Canon. As I pointed out earlier, the lack of IS means nothing when you consider the primes it replaces also lack IS (and there's a tripod foot, meaning they want you to use it).

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2016 at 20:56 UTC
In reply to:

halfwaythere: I'm just curious how many of the vocally enthusiastic people will actually buy this lens.

The cheaper and lighter 18-35/1.8 isn't actually that great of a seller.

Seems to me like Sigma is flooding the market with lenses that nobody ever asked for while ignoring the "usual suspects": 84/1.4, 135/2, 24-70/2.8 OS or an updated 70-200/2.8 OS.

"The cheaper and lighter 18-35/1.8 isn't actually that great of a seller."

Data? Source?

"Seems to me like Sigma is flooding the market with lenses that nobody ever asked for while ignoring the 'usual suspects'."

I think their avoiding flooding the market with the 'usual suspects' and carving out a lucrative niche market for lenses they can produce without exceeding or lagging behind demand. (They're a small company in Japan, after all.) Sure, most of their existing Art series primes are competitive, but, on the whole, they're 'just another option'. Nothing else like the 18-35mm f/1.8 exists, and I'm willing to bet that it sells well enough to justify for it to be produced on an ongoing basis.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2016 at 20:33 UTC
In reply to:

LF Photography: Sigma is quickly becoming the most exciting lens manufacturer of today. Every new lens released lately has been a revolutionary marvel of speed and sharpness, and all for an extremely competitive price.
If the rumors are true, I can't wait to combine this 50-100mm f1.8 with the (soon to be mine) 18-35mm f1.8, both of which effectively make my Pentax K-3II with IBIS have less ISO noise than any FF DSLR with a f2.8 lens, at least wide open.
It's a good time to use APS-C DSLR's!

Now if Sigma could only do something about the AF issues...

"Sigma is introducing the heaviest lenses on a market that is now demanding light stuff. This is again a good reason to buy mirorrless."

If that's true, Sony and Fuji are doing something terribly wrong with some of their lenses. The three Sony G Master lenses weigh about as much as their DSLR counterparts, and Fuji's 16-55mm, 50-140mm, and 100-400mm lenses, aren't exactly light.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2016 at 20:11 UTC
In reply to:

mosc: So on Canon and Nikon, the 24-70 f2.8's are pretty close in price to the 70-200 f2.8's. Sigma's 18-35 f1.8 is $799, why would the 50-100 f1.8 be so much more money (reported $1500)? Seems like their price target is their own 18-35 f1.8 doesn't it? Maybe $999?

Canon 24-70: $1,800 70-200: $2,000
Nikon 24-70: $1,800 ($2,400 stabilized) 70-200: $2,100
Sigma 18-35: $800 50-100: ??

$1,500 seems high for an APS-C zoom. Even one that fast.

I might add that, when you consider the prime lenses this single zoom is replacing in either full frame terms (e.g. 85mm, 100mm or 105mm, and 135mm), or APS-C equivalent (50mm, 85mm, 100mm or 105mm), you're either breaking even at $1,500, or saving a fair bit of cash.

That is to say, if $1,500 is the real price, some would probably prefer to have the single lens.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2016 at 20:01 UTC
Total: 190, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »