Impulses

Lives in Puerto Rico Puerto Rico
Works as a student
Joined on Apr 7, 2013

Comments

Total: 2791, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2017 (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jake2046: Question...for the people who are switching to Sony. Is it really worth it?...I know Sony mirrorless camera is pretty awesome but I don't think it's leap and bound that much better than Nikon or even Canon...the amount of money to rebuy all the lens are pretty costly...no?

The fact that it's even a question and that you're suggesting Canon and/or Nikon will have an alternative in the long run speaks volumes IMO. Some people aren't heavily invested in a system, there's still new camera buyers even if they're not a huge market segment, and some people would rather not wait.

I think Canon and/or Nikon will certainly offer a high end mirrorless option in the long run... I also think the one that more aggressively develops that new mount OR more cleverly retains backwards compatibility will likely have the other's lunch. They've both waited too long for Sony to just go away at this point.

Money's on Canon despite their lachadeisical usual lackadaisical development pace... If only because they have more resources, are better divested, and already have Dual Pixel as a base.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 10:07 UTC
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2017 (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

cosinaphile: wow it seems the pixel 2 impressed you guys a lot

while its spec are impressive .... the loss of audio port and sd slot gives me pause

The removable media ship on Google phones sailed even longer ago, it's kind of silly to still refer to the option as removable media when most people don't take the card out for the lifetime of the device (I didn't and I'm a geek, just too much of a hassle to be pulling cases/covers, etc).

The only time it really helps the average consumer much IMO is when the device gets trashed in between having done Wi-Fi backups of whatever media you have on it. I'd rather have more/faster internal storage than the card slot, even tho I agree it shouldn't be a choice between the two.

The reality is they've made it a forced choice in most cases... TBH I have much more of an issue with Google adopting Apple-like pricing on the internal storage upgrade tiers. I don't mind a premium/pricey phone, but don't charge me $100 for a $10 doubling of NAND.

64GB base and $100-150 for a bigger jump (say 256GB) would be easier to swallow.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 09:58 UTC
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2017 (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

cosinaphile: wow it seems the pixel 2 impressed you guys a lot

while its spec are impressive .... the loss of audio port and sd slot gives me pause

For one thing, I'm already using BT when I'm putting convenience first, with on ears or most portable headphones (or those doing their own DSP for NC) you're not gonna tell the difference, at all. If I want to conserve battery life and/or use high end IEM I can deal with the dongle.

It's not like the removal of the jack prevents you from using 3.5mm headphones AT ALL. Sure the dongle might be a slight hassle and it's price a little gougey, but USB-C is likely to be around for the next 10 years (micro USB was far less forward thinking and it lasted us 7 FWIW). Buy a couple dongles once and get over it.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 09:55 UTC
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2017 (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

cosinaphile: wow it seems the pixel 2 impressed you guys a lot

while its spec are impressive .... the loss of audio port and sd slot gives me pause

I'm an audiophile too, and I've got about as much invested in personal audio gear (never mind the HT) as in camera gear, AND I don't think companies need to be rushing to kill the 3.5mm jack when it doesn't really gain them the much physical volume internally (still need some analog amp circuitry for the speakers, all you save is literally the jack's space)...

I don't even see what Google gets out of it (unlike Apple w/Beats). That being said, I don't think it's omission is the end of the world, certainly not enough to gripe about it on every single article that mentions the Pixel. As glad as I was that they kept it on the first Pixel (which I'm still using), I wouldn't rule out a device without it either.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 09:51 UTC
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2017 (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rich Niewiroski: Your "Best entry-level ILC" category makes no sense. The winner here is the Olympus OM-D E-M10 III, but DPR literally just published a buying guide comparing the exact same cameras and the winner there was the Canon EOS Rebel SL2. Way to be consistent, guys.

" Buying the SL2 will give you a lot more choices for lenses than Olympus. "

Because M4/3 has no pancakes? Oh no wait... The above statement doesn't ring very true if you want a wide prime of and kind... Or great lenses that aren't unnecessarily big (FF).

I'll grant you this tho, Canon has economies of scale in its favor. The two mentioned pancakes and specially the UWA zoom are much cheaper than the alternatives in M4/3 or *any* mirrorless system. As would be a nifty fifty...

That's about where the price advantage ends tho, but it's definitely a factor to weigh up. Those couple lenses might be all a beginner ever needs for a long time.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 09:41 UTC
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2017 (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

HaoAndHui: Consider the Olympus menu system I wouldn't consider any of them to be a good entry level camera - if the target is for "entry level" people.

It's true that you could get used to their menu, but again, it's for "entry level".

Yeah I'd probably recommend anything Panasonic over an Oly to a beginner or as an entry level model (and I love my E-M5 II), BUT I haven't used the new UI on the E-M10 III so I'm A) gonna trust DPR that Oly made some strides in that regard and B) gonna give Oly some credit for what I thought was an otherwise underwhelming refresh. I would've *so* rather had OSPDAF than 4K as an enthusiast and stills shooter, but I get why the E-M10 is seeing the most refreshes in their lineup.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 09:33 UTC
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2017 (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

Luis M. Anibarro: best compact camera Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 IV?????
really... compact?????

None of the old terms really fit well either, bridge only applies to the superzooms and someone would be complaining about why there's no compact category instead, and P&S would probably have everyone complaining even tho it might be the most neutral (and the biggest disservice to those models at the same time?).

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 09:29 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: Let me explain the part people don't really "get" with these premium m4/3 lenses. An FF lens cannot keep look of its bokeh when stopped down to gain more workable DoF: you gain DoF, but kill the bokeh. And if you like bokeh, the DoF is so thin it is impossible to work with; or must move farther away, which, again, changes the composition and needed magnification.
Premium designs for m4/3 solve those problems, and such lenses deliver best of both worlds. (1) More DoF is better to avoid errors when shooting dynamically, with less focusing mistakes especially in portraiture. (2) Bokeh at f/1.2 is made NOT to match f/2.4 bokeh of a conventional aspherical design, which is very messy, but SURPASS it by far. The lens allows optical design (with more elements but with less thickness of glass) to render bokeh as if made with a much faster portrait lens of a classic design with fewer elements.
For those who really understand this, the m4/3 becomes best thing since sliced bread!

Oh and again, I actually preordered the thing so I'm hardly biased against it, but you're grasping at straws so hard to hype it that it's almost embarrassing.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 23:54 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: Let me explain the part people don't really "get" with these premium m4/3 lenses. An FF lens cannot keep look of its bokeh when stopped down to gain more workable DoF: you gain DoF, but kill the bokeh. And if you like bokeh, the DoF is so thin it is impossible to work with; or must move farther away, which, again, changes the composition and needed magnification.
Premium designs for m4/3 solve those problems, and such lenses deliver best of both worlds. (1) More DoF is better to avoid errors when shooting dynamically, with less focusing mistakes especially in portraiture. (2) Bokeh at f/1.2 is made NOT to match f/2.4 bokeh of a conventional aspherical design, which is very messy, but SURPASS it by far. The lens allows optical design (with more elements but with less thickness of glass) to render bokeh as if made with a much faster portrait lens of a classic design with fewer elements.
For those who really understand this, the m4/3 becomes best thing since sliced bread!

That's still nonsense, I'm sorry. Unprecedented? 0.2m is pretty standard fare for a M4/3 prime , that's a result of the format and not something groundbreaking on the part of this lens.

I'm pretty sure my 12/2 and 20/1.7 also feature a 0.2m min. focus distance, and the Laowa 7.5mm f2's is even less (the 42.5/1.7 is more but it's less than the Oly 45/1.8 and the focal length helps with magnification).

Most M4/3 lenses feature a shorter minimum focus distance than your average FF lens, just like most P&S can also focus really really close. Funny how that works...

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 23:53 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

Prognathous: Images look good, but don't justify the $1200 price tag unless one insists on using m43 to get this look.

Btw if E mount had a lot more lenses like that 35/2.8 I'd be a lot more interested in that system (the Samyang or the CZ really, I wouldn't balk at the price of the latter after spending a few grand on a body). If I was made of money I'd probably own an A7R plus one of those or an RX1 (the cost of one of those is about 1/2 of my M4/3 investment tho).

I'm not quite sure why the few slower primes made for FF systems always seem to be wides, wouldn't say, an 85/2.8 still offer some space/weight savings? And isn't speed even less necessary for DoF control at that FL? I'm pretty happy with what I get out of my f3.5 equivalent M4/3 prime at that FL anyway, like I said, wider is the only place I've wished for more but not enough to adopt a new system.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 18:41 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

Prognathous: Images look good, but don't justify the $1200 price tag unless one insists on using m43 to get this look.

@Prognathous I'm not dead set on M4/3 above all else, I've looked at other systems and fixed focal length compacts multiple times. Thing is tho, are those cheaper options you describe still cheaper once I add the cost of an extra body? (and ignoring the extra bulk or complexity of shooting two different systems)

That's where my analysis ended on most occasions, either that or on the fact that most fixed FL compacts (X100, etc) aren't weather sealed. Had a sealed X100 come along I might've gone down that route instead. When you look at the lens in a vacuum, then sure, the value proposition might seem poor... For existing users it's not tho.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 18:33 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

Angrymagpie: Pro-lenses with pro-prices are great and all, but I hope MFT camera could give us lenses with similar headline specs (maximum aperture, focal length) but in a much smaller form factor and sensible price points that drew many people into the system in the first place...

Or just give us the refreshed version of the lineup we have (17mm f1.8, for instance), but with weather-sealing

I would, not to stand there for half an hour but it's nice knowing I don't need to run for cover immediately, and Oly's sealing has a pretty well proven track record. I don't think it's at all unreasonable to wish for less expensive yet sealed primes.

Fuji made a bunch of less expensive yet sealed primes for their system. The Sigma 16/1.4 might be worth a look. I don't think you'll ever see a budget version of an f1.2 lens tho, not from a first party, not really how it works on any system.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 18:03 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

jst13: For mft to big..all benefits from Mft are gone , compared to APSC and FF lenses also expensive. Pro Bodys are now massive and lenses too...........and for the new mft price ranges..you can buy much better and less bulky systems..like Fuji or Canon M line and Sony
Jürgen

My 7.5mm f2, 12mm f2, 20mm f1.7, 42.5mm f1.7, 12-32mm, 35-100mm (both of them), and 7.5mm f3.5 fisheye ALL disappeared from my bag as soon as I preordered the 17mm f1.2, instantly. Oh and my GM1 got taken into custody plus the GX850 actually had a 4" growth spurt.

True story, scout's honor.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 18:00 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

hmzppz: I would definitely buy it if it were 4 times cheaper. Now back to my precious Lumix 20 f1.7 mk1, which is still serving me fine after so many years.

I have/love the 20/1.7, one of my most used lenses, and I'm getting this one too... Not letting the 20/1.7 go tho, it adds up to one of the better traits of this system IMO, the ability to scale up or down quite well.

Might seem a little redundant to some, just like having two different 35-100s (f4-5.6 & f2.8), or an UWA zoom and a 7mm f2 prime, but it works well for me. Having two distinct booste sizes to choose from might play a role there too...

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 05:58 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: Overpriced stuff, not much cost to develop such lens nowadays, it reminds me of the no on own $899 1 Nikkor 32mm F1.2

The new Sigma 16/1.2 will be an interesting comparison and that's sealed... Isn't the Sony/CZ APS-C 24mm also weather sealed?

Fuji's sealed equivalent is 'only' f2 but a lot of M4/3 users would kill for any cheaper/slower yet sealed primes (pretty much all have been premium designs outside the 60mm macro... 8mm f1.8 Pro FE, PL12, 17/25/45 f1.2 Pro, 300/4 Pro... might've forgotten something).

This obviously doesn't fill that hole, but the point is it's not totally devoid of competition within or outside the system.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 04:45 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

waldoh: Disregarding compression.

17 1.2 = ~35 1.2 (2.4 DoF) - $1199
35 1.4 FF = ~$1500
35 1.8/2-2.8 FF = ~$500

M4/3 is cool and useful in video and to shed weight but these prices are quite high.
I think I would take a small FF body with a slower 1.8-2.8 lens and rely on the sensor size advantages for any low light (non flash) photography.

Hell 23mm (35 equiv) aps-c lenses can be had for $400-$800. Same size body, bigger sensor, less money.

So? Goes great with my PL8-18 & the other 35-100 too. ;)

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 04:38 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

Infared: Just sold my Nocticron and took delivery on the 45mm f1.2 PRO. It feels and performs so "right" on my E-M1 II !!! It has this great organic look to the image, too...with super-smooth bokeh.. I feel that the slightly lighter weight smaller size, shorter hood and faster focusing, make the handling superb compared to the Nocticron. No unneeded aperture ring or IS, either. Just a fantastic lens.
The 17mm PRO will be my next lens and then I will have the whole f/1.2 PRO triad. These lenses really make photography so much fun! Does anyone know when the 17mm's will start shipping in January?

That's interesting, even the hood design is sort of a role reversal... Early Oly premium primes (12, 75, etc.) all had that terrible (IMO) thumbscrew tightened hood design, metal might look nice and all but it's not super practical in a hood. Heck Oly didn't even include said hoods with the lenses (or any of their lenses early on).

Mind you, Pana has had plenty of awful hood designs too... The PL25's square hood is just silly and the 35-100 f2.8's is seemingly longer than that of any lens in the system for some unfathomable reason (seriously, it's like 2/3rds the length of the lens). The Pro prime hoods sound like the PL8-18's, which I like a lot, I think it's the only OEM hood I've used consistently.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 04:34 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: Let me explain the part people don't really "get" with these premium m4/3 lenses. An FF lens cannot keep look of its bokeh when stopped down to gain more workable DoF: you gain DoF, but kill the bokeh. And if you like bokeh, the DoF is so thin it is impossible to work with; or must move farther away, which, again, changes the composition and needed magnification.
Premium designs for m4/3 solve those problems, and such lenses deliver best of both worlds. (1) More DoF is better to avoid errors when shooting dynamically, with less focusing mistakes especially in portraiture. (2) Bokeh at f/1.2 is made NOT to match f/2.4 bokeh of a conventional aspherical design, which is very messy, but SURPASS it by far. The lens allows optical design (with more elements but with less thickness of glass) to render bokeh as if made with a much faster portrait lens of a classic design with fewer elements.
For those who really understand this, the m4/3 becomes best thing since sliced bread!

I'm sorry but that's just hogwash. Even this 17/1.2's bokeh improves in some regards as it's stopped down (tho not in all senses)... Transitions might get sharper when it's stopped down (to not get into the whole feathered hype) but bokeh balls also get rounder and lose that cat's eye look at the edges. Which of the two you prefer is really quite subjective, but there's a number of changes for better or worse as it's stopped down, as with any lens.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 04:25 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michiel953: Halfway through the gallery (on a decent calibrated screen), and they are impressive. Compliments to the photographers for presenting such a well thought out range of well observed images.

Now how much is a Pen-F, 24, 35, 50 and 85 "EQUIVALENT" set-up, at this f1.2 quality level again?

" Sorry, but we cannot compare those lenses with FF ones, we don't have f3.6 equivalent primes lol. " -ZeBebito

I actually wish we did... There's a few small f2.8 FF primes and many of them strike a really nice size/performance balance, if there were even more I might be shooting FF instead of M4/3 primarily.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 03:10 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

Infared: Just sold my Nocticron and took delivery on the 45mm f1.2 PRO. It feels and performs so "right" on my E-M1 II !!! It has this great organic look to the image, too...with super-smooth bokeh.. I feel that the slightly lighter weight smaller size, shorter hood and faster focusing, make the handling superb compared to the Nocticron. No unneeded aperture ring or IS, either. Just a fantastic lens.
The 17mm PRO will be my next lens and then I will have the whole f/1.2 PRO triad. These lenses really make photography so much fun! Does anyone know when the 17mm's will start shipping in January?

Huh, I didn't realize the Nocti was actually larger... That might be one of the few instances in the system where Panasonic's rough equivalent to an Oly lens is actually larger and/or one of the few instances where OIS took it's toll on the design (unlike say, 45/1.8 vs 42.5/1.7, etc).

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 03:02 UTC
Total: 2791, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »