The Lamentable Lens

Joined on Apr 21, 2020

Comments

Total: 53, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Hands-on with the new Panasonic Leica 25-50mm F1.7 ASPH (391 comments in total)
In reply to:

MarshallG: Is it just me, or does anyone else think this “Panasonic-Leica” brand thing is unsettling, like “Hyundai-Porsche”?

It seems that there simply is no more Leica; it’s just a licensed brand name of Panasonic.

@MarshallG: You’re weirdly bothered by this uncomplicated and fairly common business arrangement. Not sure what that’s all about, but I’m going to go ahead and move on. Take care.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2021 at 12:27 UTC
On article Hands-on with the new Panasonic Leica 25-50mm F1.7 ASPH (391 comments in total)
In reply to:

MarshallG: Is it just me, or does anyone else think this “Panasonic-Leica” brand thing is unsettling, like “Hyundai-Porsche”?

It seems that there simply is no more Leica; it’s just a licensed brand name of Panasonic.

@MarshallG, if you’re asking about the lens in this article, then it’s a Panasonic lens developed as part of Panasonic’s longstanding partnership with Leica. Information regarding that agreement—which includes technological cooperation and trademark licensing—is readily available online if you’re interested. These kinds of agreements aren’t all that uncommon—car companies do the same thing, for example, although generally without the trademark licensing.

Are you suggesting that they’re not separate companies? Who makes Leica M camera bodies and lenses? How about the SL? Or the Q?

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2021 at 21:10 UTC
On article Hands-on with the new Panasonic Leica 25-50mm F1.7 ASPH (391 comments in total)
In reply to:

MarshallG: Is it just me, or does anyone else think this “Panasonic-Leica” brand thing is unsettling, like “Hyundai-Porsche”?

It seems that there simply is no more Leica; it’s just a licensed brand name of Panasonic.

Leica and Panasonic have been cooperating in the digital camera space for 20 years, so it’s not a recent development. And it’s simply a cooperation and licensing agreement—they’re still separate companies. Leica still makes its M cameras and lenses, and it’s SL cameras and lenses, and it’s fixed-lens Q cameras.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2021 at 12:26 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Olympus M.Zuiko 8-25mm F4 Pro review (128 comments in total)
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: Since nobody seems willing to spell it out, 411 grams is 14.5 ounces which, in the tradition of telling you what you already know, is almost a pound. That's a lot for m43 where some of the best lenses are just 3 or 4 ounces (which you also know.) On the other hand, the 8-18 Panasonic is also 14 ounces so if the 8-25 is as good as the 8-18, it looks like a nice option for $1000.

“Sorry, but no. … I have my Pansonic 8-18 sitting on a postal scale, and with the hood, caps and a UV filter, it weighs 14 ounces.”

@abrasive: at the risk of stating the obvious, if you’re trying to compare the weight of the 8-18 to the weight of this new 8-25, then you need to remove the hood, the caps, and the filter, then put it back on the scale.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2021 at 11:39 UTC
In reply to:

ffking: One can only hope that the drones were expensive - OTOH, I'm actually surprised that the birds abandoned their nests so readily after a single localised incident - maybe the gulls were just in there quickly...?

Experts interviewed about this incident noted that the colony was already under stress from off-leash dogs and off-trail cyclists (both of which are also prohibited), and increased drone activity before this incident. So this drone crash may have just been the last straw.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2021 at 17:03 UTC
On article Why have cameras and lenses become so expensive? (672 comments in total)
In reply to:

jhorse: There is a cost factor that has a strong influence on prices if companies are to stay in business. To stay in business they need year on year profits - not large profits, which many would call profiteering, but profits nonetheless. The cost factor is wages. Employees expect pay rises - often annually - and they have to be funded. Factor in wage inflation and in my mind looking at the trends, camera companies have held prices fairly well to the baseline years as a proportion of customer income (2008/09 blip notwithstanding).

@nonolet: Take a look at Nikon's financial reports for the fiscal year that just ended (3/31/21). Even after accounting for one-time costs associated with its restructuring, the company was operating at a loss. In the prior fiscal year (almost all of which predated the pandemic), it barely turned a profit, and the imaging business operated at a loss. And more to the point, of course, camera sales have been steadily declining for years.

I'm certainly not here to defend these corporations or their labor practices, but the numbers are pretty ugly. When you say that the "stubborn beancounters" refuse to pass on the massive savings, how much of Nikon's negative profits are they supposed to share with consumers?

Link | Posted on May 31, 2021 at 11:10 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 II initial review (284 comments in total)
In reply to:

Will R1: Panasonic makes the most video oriented interchangeable lens cameras. This they do very well. I'd likely pick this camera over the S1H or any other video hybrid today, especially the ones that don't over sample.

I was think about small sensor video cameras this weekend. During the PGA broadcast, they used a camera with a shallow depth of field, and it was very distracting. The subject kept going in and out of focus and it looked terrible. In contrast they switched to a different camera showing Phil M. and the ocean waves crashing in the distant background. It was a gorgeous shot. I hope for most TV events they ditch the larger sensors, and stick with the better looking 'everything in focus' shots.

I had a similar thought when the NFL started doing the same thing with Sony cameras on gimbals in the end zone. When they cut to those shots, which also used a shallow DOF, the focus was often a mess, and I always found it distracting.

Others seem to really like it, and to each their own, I suppose, but I really didn't care for it.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2021 at 15:42 UTC
In reply to:

panther fan: After decades of almost never discontinuing a lens it seems that both Canon and Nikon are drastically shrinking their portfolio:
https://www.canonrumors.com/recently-discontinued-ef-lenses/
Nikon:
https://nikonrumors.com/2021/05/12/nikon-is-slowly-discontinuing-more-nikkor-f-mount-lenses.aspx/

But a lens just released in 2018? That seems like a waste of R&D

@Peter CS: Personally, I hope the camera companies continue to service their DSLR market, too, but from a strictly business standpoint, the internal pressure must be pretty intense. These companies are able to sell more mirrorless cameras than DSLR cameras these days, and those mirrorless sales bring in substantially more revenue per unit sold. The pitch to invest in R&D and production on the DSLR side must be getting harder and harder for them to make. Taking emotion and personal preference out of it, the writing certainly appears to be on the wall.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2021 at 15:20 UTC
In reply to:

Relaxed: Can I buy a vowel?

Ok, well, that made my day. I like where we landed :-)

Link | Posted on May 19, 2021 at 19:30 UTC
In reply to:

Relaxed: Can I buy a vowel?

Sure, I'd bet all sorts of alternative domain extensions are available. They probably could have gotten "wandered.biz" or "wandered.info" if they wanted those, too. But for better or worse, most businesses want and use ".com" for their commercial websites.

Listen, the branding is odd -- "PRVKE" is a terrible name, IMHO -- but it's a weird thing to complain about. Some crunchy hipsters in Utah found success selling bags with funny names. Good for them!

But then I suppose you want them to cut their hair, turn down their music, and get off your lawn, too, right? :-p

Link | Posted on May 19, 2021 at 10:56 UTC
In reply to:

Relaxed: Can I buy a vowel?

Now? Maybe. Not sure how that helps a start-up six years ago. Anyway, weird thing to be upset about. Let’s all move on. :-)

Link | Posted on May 18, 2021 at 23:14 UTC
In reply to:

Relaxed: Can I buy a vowel?

@Mr Bolton -- Sort of irrelevant, though, if you don't have $20k ;-)

Link | Posted on May 16, 2021 at 11:31 UTC
In reply to:

Chris Crevasse: I tried the original Prvke and am baffled by why any photographer would think the bag is "nearly perfect." The tiny side opening is useful only if you want access to a single camera with a lens attached. If you want to do anything else, like change lenses, you either have to take the bag off and set it down, or move the bag from your back to your front and open the clamshell. It is a colossally poor design, especially compared to a backpack like the Peak Design, which has side openings that provide quick access to the entire contents of the bag simply by swinging the bag to your side.

@Malling Fair enough, although everyone has different needs and preferences. Load lifters without a frame can certainly help dial in the fit, but of course to actually lift the load and transfer it to your hips requires the frame and hip belt. And for the majority of the time I'm carrying my gear -- even my full kit -- I just don't need a full frame/load-lifter/hip belt set-up. Comfortable shoulder straps and a decent chest strap are plenty.

I have the Prvke 31L, and although I certainly don't think it's a "near-perfect" bag as the review suggests, I've never had an issue with comfort/fit/weight. If I were doing more serious hiking, that would be a different story. But for taking it out on a shoot for a few hours (nature/trails/seascapes/cities) or using it as a travel bag, it works fine.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2021 at 21:58 UTC
In reply to:

Chris Crevasse: I tried the original Prvke and am baffled by why any photographer would think the bag is "nearly perfect." The tiny side opening is useful only if you want access to a single camera with a lens attached. If you want to do anything else, like change lenses, you either have to take the bag off and set it down, or move the bag from your back to your front and open the clamshell. It is a colossally poor design, especially compared to a backpack like the Peak Design, which has side openings that provide quick access to the entire contents of the bag simply by swinging the bag to your side.

As with everything else, it comes down to personal preference and needs. If someone needs/wants frames, load lifters, adjustable torsos, hip belts, etc., then they can use a proper backpacking pack and put a camera cube in it, or they can go with one of the camera bag companies that caters to that need (e.g., Atlas Packs).

And if someone just needs an everyday carry bag, or something a bit bigger and more robust, but for which frames, load lifters, etc. would be overkill, then they can look to the PDs and Wandrds of the world. In that scenario, a decent chest strap goes a long way. Heck, my favorite bag is my Think Tank Retrospective shoulder bag.

As with the cameras themselves, just different tools for different jobs.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2021 at 18:25 UTC
In reply to:

Class A: "Cameras systems keep getting smaller as manufacturers expand mirrorless lines..."

The cameras are often smaller but are the systems as well?

Could you compare a Pentax KP with some Pentax pancake primes against a current mirrorless APS-C camera with recent mirrorless lenses?

Which system would be smaller / lighter?

@Class A: I'm not sure this really holds up. I was going to note that comparing FF to APS-C doesn't make much sense -- one should compare apples to apples.

But even in your scenario, something like the Sony a7c -- a FF mirrorless camera -- is smaller and weighs less than the KP, and you can pair it with any number of small primes (the Samyang 45 1.8 weighs a mere 160g; the Sony 35 2.8 weighs 120g) and you'd still likely end up with a smaller and lighter kit than the KP, while still having a FF sensor.

That doesn't make it better, of course (I prefer a larger camera body), but it's generally true that mirrorless provides a size and weight advantage over DSLR.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2021 at 20:16 UTC
In reply to:

ActionPhotoPassion: Can the straps be set up on the side, to have tripod on the side ?

Otherwise it would be impossible to travel with it in airplane cabin. Tripod set at the bottom of the bagpack is impossible to keep under airplane seat.

You can carry the tripod in the "water bottle" pocket on the side. There is a strap just above that pocket to hold it in place. This has worked really well for me, although I have the larger 31L version the bag.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2021 at 19:59 UTC
In reply to:

Tons o Glass 0 Class: Why do brnd nmes nd prdct nmes hve to be splld lk ths?

Ok, that was pretty funny. Oops,I mean: tht ws prty fny.

The answer, according their website at least, is that "wandered.com" would have cost them $20,000, so they bought "wandrd.com" for $10 instead.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2021 at 19:50 UTC
In reply to:

Kit Lens Avenger: Recycling the old "If It Feels Good, Do It" schtick. Got it.

In other world news, I'm having siding work done on my house at this very moment.

Right, the man makes a 19-minute video that includes detailed discussion of compositional elements and how to walk a viewer through a photo. He talks about the so-called "rules," when he uses them -- and when he doesn't -- and why. He gives actual examples of how this works, and why he's made the choices he's made based on the scene he was shooting, or the story he was telling. And in each case, it's detailed, thoughtful, and quite deliberate.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, of course, but "if it feels good, do it" is simply not an accurate or fair summary of this video.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2021 at 17:36 UTC
In reply to:

Relaxed: Can I buy a vowel?

The names are completely absurd, but if you believe the story on their website, securing the domain for "wandered.com" was going to cost them $20,000, and they could get "wandrd.com" for $10.

So it turns out that buying those vowels would have cost them about ten grand a piece. At that price, I'm not sure I blame them for going with the silly version...

Link | Posted on May 10, 2021 at 16:47 UTC
In reply to:

juntoalmar: Question for people who own a similar design bag. Isn't that "rollable" design a pain to use because it takes a lot of time to open/close the bag? I often open/close the backpack (sometimes immediately because I forgot to take something). I feel I would be rolling/unrolling all the time and (eventually) getting a bag with a zip.

Opinions?

I use the 31L version of this bag. All my camera gear goes in the sections you access by unzipping the back panel -- or using the quick side access -- like most photography bags.

The rolltop generally stays rolled down and out of the way, but I do sometimes use it for clothing, either for managing layers on a single outing, or for when I'm traveling for a night or two. It's nice to have that expandability when you need it, but to be able to roll it down and keep the bag smaller when you don't. It's surprisingly versatile.

That said, I don't think rolltops make sense for an everyday carry bag, so I don't use it (or recommend it) for that purpose. It doesn't have enough other organization for my tastes as an EDC bag anyway. But for travel and for daily photography outings where I take a fair amount of gear, it's been surprisingly good. It has protected my gear on lots of days in the sand and salt water, and it's been comfortable to carry on moderate hikes.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2021 at 16:35 UTC
Total: 53, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »