chriscotec

chriscotec

Lives in Australia Sydney, Australia
Works as a Photographer
Has a website at www.chrisbennettphoto.com
Joined on Jan 2, 2007

Comments

Total: 85, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Leica SL Review (1080 comments in total)
In reply to:

chriscotec: " . . . . but when has purchasing a Leica ever been a strictly rational decision?"

It definitely was from the first prototype, in the early 1900s and through WWII. Along with the Contax it was the most practical and well designed run and gun camera, brilliant for war coverage in the day, as well as many other subjects. Its use of 35mm cine film truly revolutionised photography more than any other camera. Everything else was bulky and slow to use.

The Leica was blatantly ripped off by Japanese companies in the 50s, who then moved on with innovation. Leica never really managed the move to SLR and beyond in terms of being an innovator. They have needed the help of companies like Minolta (for their SLRs) and Panasonic (for digital cameras).

I can certainly see why people love modern Leicas for what they are, an object of art, but as a photography tool, now, you are right, there are better options, regardless of price.

Yes, I agree that link is pretty obscure. I was also referring to the point and shoot part of the business, which is a big part of sales. Many of those cameras have been re-branded Lumix models. I am not sure that D-Lux cameras having virtually identical specs to their Lumix counterparts helps the exclusivity of the Leica brand as a whole. It would be hard to tell exactly how much this relationship stretches into the design of Leica's premium cameras. I suspect that you are right and it is not that much.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 21:17 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1080 comments in total)

" . . . . but when has purchasing a Leica ever been a strictly rational decision?"

It definitely was from the first prototype, in the early 1900s and through WWII. Along with the Contax it was the most practical and well designed run and gun camera, brilliant for war coverage in the day, as well as many other subjects. Its use of 35mm cine film truly revolutionised photography more than any other camera. Everything else was bulky and slow to use.

The Leica was blatantly ripped off by Japanese companies in the 50s, who then moved on with innovation. Leica never really managed the move to SLR and beyond in terms of being an innovator. They have needed the help of companies like Minolta (for their SLRs) and Panasonic (for digital cameras).

I can certainly see why people love modern Leicas for what they are, an object of art, but as a photography tool, now, you are right, there are better options, regardless of price.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 13:42 UTC as 74th comment | 5 replies
On a photo in the Sigma 85mm F1.4 DG HSM Art sample gallery sample gallery (3 comments in total)

This image shows what struck me with the first images I took with this lens. The colour fringing is really quite pronounced, yet reviews, like the DxO one (that places this lens at the top of the pile), give it excellent ratings for chromatic aberration. I don't get why the figures and the pictures don't match.

Don't get me wrong, it is an easy thing to fix and the lens image quality is otherwise amazing. The lens definitely suffers from chromatic aberration though.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2017 at 21:21 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

J A C S: "... despite stellar scores in the DxOMark ranking, ..."

This is impossible. If it has stellar DXOMark scores, it is stellar, period.

Praise the Lord! There is only one bible, and it is DXOMark, and it is never wrong. I am guessing these people who are seeing flare must be possessed.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2016 at 10:30 UTC
In reply to:

Lea5: Some Leica bashing here as usual

That's because there are those who have the money and are willing to stick their head up to defend fashion over economic sense, because they do like a bashing.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 12:03 UTC

I shoot architecture for a living and can't imagine life without my T/S-E 17mm. Most projects I do needs a lens that is wider than 24mm for some shots. My 17mm lives on my camera.In the rare cases it is too wide I move the tripod a step in.

Welcome back too architectural photography Nikon (almost).

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 12:10 UTC as 23rd comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

JHern: Awesome lens! Too bad it is practically useless on film SLRs.

Sorry, that comment makes no sense. Photographers (me included) used wide angle tilt/shift lenses on film DSLRs for years before digital and live view. In terms of metering, it was trickier, but basic photography skills are all that are needed. What do you mean by "practically useless"?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 12:00 UTC
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art real world sample gallery (217 comments in total)
In reply to:

Indohydra: I assume that Sigma will soon release a Sony Emount soon enough? I would like to see side by side comparison tests of the two lenses

I think the release of Sigma's MC11 adapter is the reason why we shouldn't hold our breath on Sigma releasing any native E or FE mount lenses in the near future, pity.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2016 at 14:28 UTC
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art real world sample gallery (217 comments in total)
In reply to:

Spiridakis Michael: Not to say how impartial is the presentation of equipment in Dpreview... where is the kind of shot with the huge flare like the Irix....??? https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/2602927096/irix-15mm-f-2-4/3710416566

Certainly not conventional flare but, in a way kind of cool. It could be the next cult thing. It seems to only be an issue of the sun is smack bang in the middle of the frame. That used to be something to be avoided, but with this lens, I could imagine a whole exhibition, just using this effect. I can also see how, with a bit of framing control you could avoid it all together. It is the more messy, slightly off axis flare artefacts, like the one on the article's opening image that concern me. It looks like some flare will be a fact of life with this lens. I guess you'll have to learn to harness it.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2016 at 14:24 UTC
In reply to:

chriscotec: Given that they have only made manual focus lenses until now, it would be good to see a bit of detail on the AF mechanisms and motors. Not all of them are created equal. The good thing it that it should be easy to get the 14mm right in this area, and that's the one that interests me most.

AF is not one size fits all. Let's both move on, please. Over and out.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 15:18 UTC

For those on a budget, buy the black one and a can of paint stripper.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 15:15 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

Gene Kelly: a fool and his money are soon parted

Tom-A

Gene Kelly could have tested the (less expensive) black version. Should he have expected a different result?

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 15:11 UTC
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: You can think like this:
the cost of jumping into digital photography is about $7,000-10,000 overall at least (over the years). During the time you start with (1) bridge cameras, then (2) try each new mirrorless system and some lenses, (3) a DSLR or two and a some good lenses, (4) buy extra gear and muddle around, (5) selling and reselling, and (6) spending all that time in GAS flu, you realise that you could have saved yourself lots of time by choosing a camera and a lens that will last a long, long time.
This is handmade MF lens, built like tank. AF and motors will not rattle elements apart. Using it constantly involves you totally into your art. It will outlive you. If not this, then choose 50mm Summarit, new M262, and you end up spending even less money (check link below), but skipping over boring parts, and time lost forever but which you could have used to develop serious photography skills.

http://goo.gl/YnDoWM

Actually PanchoVilla Leica and Zeiss cameras and lenses were responsible for most of what we have all seen from world war 2, Nikon followed the trend in the 50s, Canon too. It would be a bit disrespectful to say Leica can't handle being used in conflict zones. Although cameras have been used in war for well over a century, Leica and Zeiss were the first to become tools of the trade. Nothing against metal Nikkors, I have had many great ones.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 15:01 UTC
In reply to:

chriscotec: I always have a little smile to myself when I see a new Leica announcement. Nearly all of them are for an old product in a new finish. I sometimes wonder if there are people out there who have the spare money to collect the whole set. Is this a thing?

Haha, brilliant! Thanks. That is a great word to express my thoughts.

We will probably see a lot of flattened ones, from collectors being distracted and hit by busses.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 14:42 UTC
In reply to:

chriscotec: Given that they have only made manual focus lenses until now, it would be good to see a bit of detail on the AF mechanisms and motors. Not all of them are created equal. The good thing it that it should be easy to get the 14mm right in this area, and that's the one that interests me most.

Sorry, I didn't realise I was communicating with a lens designer who has aced all AF design problems, past and present. I guess we can tick the AF box for lens design now then and move on to the next imperfect issue. Well done!

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 14:33 UTC
In reply to:

SushiEater: Sigma is getting ballsy with pricing because all of you praising Sigma all the time. I am keeping my 12-24mm and 85mm. Both are great.

I must have had a good run with the three I have then. No focussing issues here.

When it comes to weather sealing, I haven't really tested any of my Sigmas in a downpour. I have found it pretty easy to plan around getting my camera gear soaked, I can't afford to replace it so it is just something I have learned to do. If I was photographing outdoor sports events, I agree, this might be an issue. I see the 500mm lens is going to be weather sealed, that's good, it suits it's intended use. I can't imagine the 20mm, 35mm and 50mm Sigma art lenses I use letting water in like a boat with a hole, but I am sure, (actually I know), they can handle heavy drizzle without a problem. In real life shooting these lenses are certainly up to the job, in terms of robustness. Rent one and try it, you probably shouldn't just go on spec sheets that say "no weather sealing".

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 14:20 UTC
In reply to:

FodgeandDurn: Is the benefit of MF undone by the relatively slow lenses? I love Fuji and I am glad they've made something so ambitious, I am wondering what advantage this camera has over a high resolution DSLR with an Otus lens, a combination that is considerably cheaper. Of course faster lens adaptation will be a factor.

I can think of uses for this setup, but nothing that 35mm can't do, and a lot of that comes down to the lens map. More of a question than a criticism. I'd love to use this to photograph stars, but even then I wonder whether an A7s wouldn't be just as useful (of course this isn't this Fuji's intended primary use).

This system is probably no bulkier than Canon and Nikon's pro DSLRs but may open up new production possibilities in commercial photography.

The question is whether there is a need for more fidelity than cameras like the Sony A7RII and the Canon 5DS R, Nikon D810 etc. When the ultimate output mediums for professional work are the web, magazines or even billboards, the list of current cameras that can do the job is pretty long already. The argument of being able to use a crop doesn't really apply here. On the kind of shoots that this camera is aimed at, you can bet the art director will not stop until the shot is perfectly framed in camera.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 11:51 UTC

If a manufacturer is going to start from scratch with a whole new lens system, Fujifilm is one of the few that can do it. Most people think of the consumer cameras and see that they are a re a small player here compared to Canon, Nikon, Sony etc. They do all of their serious work in film and TV though, where lenses can cost as much as houses. I am pretty sure they can make a good go of this and change the landscape of medium format digital photography.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 11:44 UTC as 52nd comment
In reply to:

SushiEater: Sigma is getting ballsy with pricing because all of you praising Sigma all the time. I am keeping my 12-24mm and 85mm. Both are great.

The Sigma Art lenses deserve all of the praise they get. They are beautifully made lenses with optical quality to match. I used to hate Sigma lenses but what they are doing now is outstanding. I have the 20mm, 35mm and 50mm. Their only downside is weight and size, but that is a price I am happy to pay.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 21:48 UTC
In reply to:

dave: I wonder how it compares to my new FE 90.2.8 macro lens? I know that the Sony is longer by 1.5". I went with the 90/2.8 for its 1:1 macro, as well as portrait abilities.

I do understand that the loxia lenses are compact. As I said, I have the 21mm. I understand this is not a direct comparison with the other Loxias but the 21mm has a fair amount of glass and is relatively heavy for it's size. The 90mm Sony, which I also have is not the monster people think it is and 690g is not exactly heavy either. For reference, the 21mm Loxia is a little over half the length of the Sony and you can see from the picture of all of the Loxias in the article that the 85mm lill be a bit longer than that, so no, it won't fit in the back half of the Sony macro lens. I love the Loxia I have and it is very compact but we are not talking pancake lenses here, they still have substance, especially weight.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 08:15 UTC
Total: 85, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »