|
fjbyrne
Lives in
Southern, NJ, United States
Works as a
Engineer
Joined on
Sep 23, 2005
|
Comments
 |  |  |  |  |  |
| All Too Well by Hooyat from Song title theme “The name of the game” (Abba) | Smoking steps by aarif from Smoking! | Old Farm Truck by DaveN01 from Vintage Vehicles | Rim-Lit Dancer by Kukla from Dark | You Have To Be Cool.....Like This. by Focusing from Show me the funny | European robin by hwvlover from Songbirds 2020-2021 |
A Owens: Has anyone looked at the gallery yet? All the "action" shots look soft. Is this a camera or lens problem?
https://youtu.be/ZIIc58yF3_U
very good action shots
NeoGenFix: I would be interested in switching from my old Canon+Yongnou set-up to 2 or 3 of these plus a remote trigger but, what's with all the negative reviews of the XProC TTL on the B&H page?
Non-functioning triggers, faulty displays...Is their QC really that bad?
I heard it can be tough getting warranty work on Godox equipment. It was suggested to go with the rebadged Adorama Flashpoint version since they provide better support. I have 3 Flashpoint lights and thankfully they have been trouble free.
snapa: These are all excellent pictures, my picks are 3 & 12.
It's also interesting that 5 out of 12 where taken with Sony cameras, but that's not surprising.
I remember in years past how many used to point out that none of the contest winners were shot with a Sony. How times have changed.
WT21: Why was Sony not considered? An a7iii for example? I know why I stay away from Sony, but I’d still recommend others to consider it, given its af, clean RAW and wide lens selection. Or maybe the a7 series is missing dual cards? (Edit: a7iii is, I believe, dual cards?)
Why is it tribalism? Sony makes very capable systems so why not consider them?
Breakfastographer 2: If I'm getting the gist of this correctly, they're looking for projects that would actually benefit from Sony electronics products, and then they will use that for marketing by announcing who got what and how they're using it.
I assume charities dedicated to reducing electronics waste should not apply.
"would actually benefit from Sony electronics". Sony is a huge corporation that makes many electronic products that could easily benefit an organization. Their laptops , TV/projectors, audio and imaging products could be used for education and entertainment.
Of course Sony gets something from this - publicity and product exposure. No corporation does things out of the goodness of their non-existent hearts. But this is a nice symbiotic relationship that should be encouraged IMO.
QuietOC: These look very interesting. It is too bad they are Z-mount exclusive.
I've always wondered if the industry as a whole would be better off with a universal mount
Androole: Oh damn.
That 40mm f/2 looks amazing.
And if the sub-$400 MSRP is real, that is pretty much unprecedented value in the FF mirrorless world.
This looks like it might the same size, or even smaller, than the $600 Sony 40mm/f2.5.
Really makes a Z5 + 40mm/f2 + one of their slow zooms start to look like it could actually be a feasible replacement for us old-time M4/3 users, achieving a similar form factor and capabilities (which is not really the case in Sony or Canon land, so far, I'd say).
Sony's 40 has an aperture ring and a focus hold button which is nice imo.
steelhead3: When will Canon control those reds?
@MoonMadness Maybe when there is a Sony sample gallery without attacks by the color scientists?
Jeff DLB: The Tamron 11-20 f/2.8 @ $829 certainly seems more interesting than the Sony 10-18 f/4 @ $898.
I have a good copy of the Sony 10-18/f4 but I would definitely cross shop the Tamron if I was looking now
Sc1920: Coma doesn't look good.
https://www.lenstip.com/606.1-Lens_review-Sony_FE_14_mm_f_1.8_GM_Introduction.html
This person think coma performance is excellent: https://www.albertdros.com/post/sony-14mm-f-1-8-in-the-field
concorde 1954: The only thing that's not light weight is the price, Come on £1148 ($1600 US) is a bit over the top.
You haven't bought a new lens is a while have you?
Sc1920: Coma doesn't look good.
https://www.lenstip.com/606.1-Lens_review-Sony_FE_14_mm_f_1.8_GM_Introduction.html
Strange. The person who used it for astro in the dpr video said it was great.
Phil Flash: Fuji is really building a nice SYSTEM of lenses. The problem with 70-200 telephoto lenses in FF systems is they tend to be large and not have much reach, not to mention that they are expensive. If you're willing to compromise with a 5.6 maximum aperture, you get incredible reach (450mm equiv.), image stabilization, a compact and lightweight package, all at a reasonable price. This is really impressive if you've always wanted to do telephoto shooting but have been held back by size, weight, and cost. This lens gives one capabilities out of reach with most FF systems, with the added quality of APSC over a smaller format like M43. Fuji, you are really making me consider your system.
True but sadly it wouldn't be a DPR comment session unless it turned into a brand war
Phil Flash: Fuji is really building a nice SYSTEM of lenses. The problem with 70-200 telephoto lenses in FF systems is they tend to be large and not have much reach, not to mention that they are expensive. If you're willing to compromise with a 5.6 maximum aperture, you get incredible reach (450mm equiv.), image stabilization, a compact and lightweight package, all at a reasonable price. This is really impressive if you've always wanted to do telephoto shooting but have been held back by size, weight, and cost. This lens gives one capabilities out of reach with most FF systems, with the added quality of APSC over a smaller format like M43. Fuji, you are really making me consider your system.
Is Idaho wrong?
Thoughts R Us: Weird that they didn’t put this better quality LCD screen in their flagship a1 selling for $6500.
I wonder how many a1 owners feel slighted?
The a1 all along should have had a premium body, instead of putting their most advanced electronics in the same old consumer body. It was like putting a Ferrari engine in a Toyota Corolla body.
What exactly makes a premium body?
NickDakota: Not that it matters, but these are probably some of the ugliest lenses
"I don't like lenses that don't have internal focusing. I prefer physical aperture rings." I agree. I would buy an "ugly" lens with those features over a "beautiful" lens without them. I guess if there were multiple candidates with those features I would get the one that I found better looking.
NickDakota: Not that it matters, but these are probably some of the ugliest lenses
@kreislauf. Can't say I see anything special there as it looks fairly generic IMO. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
NickDakota: Not that it matters, but these are probably some of the ugliest lenses
Can't say I have ever bought a piece of camera gear on how it looks. What would be an example of a good looking lens?
cyberpi1: Soo there we have it: "E-mount is limited" myth busted.
Round 1. Weight:
Sony FE 50mm f1.2 - 778 g
Canon RF 50mm f1.2 - 950 g
Nikon Z 50mm f1.2 - 1090 g.
Round 2. Aperture blades count:
Nikon - 9. Canon - 10. Sony - 11.
Round 3. Size:
Sony is the smallest.
Flawless victory. Fatality.
@klausd. If you are referring to the RF 50/1.2 this site has it listed as not having stabilization in the lens
Halftrack: Looks like a great lens, but I can't help chuckling at the phrase "engineering plastic." The $15 FM transmitter that's sitting right next to me was surely designed by engineers, does that mean it's made of "engineering plastic?"
Plastic is plastic. Sometimes it's the best material for the job, sometimes not. If Sony is using it because it's the best option available (rather than just to save costs) they should have the guts to just say so.
I think you would be surprised how much engineering went into Legos