kreislauf

kreislauf

Joined on Apr 20, 2013

Comments

Total: 786, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ebarak71: I think that one of the major factors, as mentioned here, is good glass.
But the trouble is that crpped cameras doesn't have a range or even any, dedicated ASP-C quality glass.
It's been proven (at least in DXO mark numbers...) that full frame lenses are not 100% compatible with cropped sensors optically.

ah the never ending sharpness debate.
I'm waiting for the 48 megapixel sensors and the people, who still see more detail on the 135 sensors compared to APS-C

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 09:28 UTC
In reply to:

meanwhile: The point of this video is being missed. He is saying forget your GAS. Forget your gear upgrade lust. Forget waiting until you have THE camera. Do great work with what you have, and that it's quite likely more than capable of doing whatever you need it to.

yes, problem is, that the GAS is actually a pretty cool hobby in itself.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 09:16 UTC
In reply to:

rened: Its so true its not the gear but the person making the picture and doing the post processing. Possibly with one exception choosing the right fixed focal length lens. I might add a 1.8 is in most cases most probably a better option then a fancy 1.4 and certainly then a 1.2.

as a crop sensor user i disagree.
having aps-c lenses with f1.4 or even f1.2 is a pretty cool thing

and besides the aperture, there is sometimes a perceived difference in rendering (that I don't know much about), for example fujis xf35 f1.4 vs xf35 f2

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 09:15 UTC
In reply to:

quatpat: I'd really be more interested in what the image difference would be using the same 85mm lens on both cameras, at the same aperture, but with a different subject distance to match the field of view. Because, many of us own full frame lenses already, so the actual image difference with the same lens at the same aperture but different subject distance would be interesting.

For example: Full frame body with 85mm lens at f1.8, subject distance 5m; vs APS-C body, same lens and aperture, subject distance 8m.

It would be interesting to see the difference in DOF in this comparison.

yeah, and while you're at it, you could do some scientific studio test scenes and lens/sensor benchmarks.

not what the video is about. it is real world use and the message is hard to swallow for some: 135 sensors do not offer those massive IQ differences over APS-C than we saw 10 years ago.
ouch. now what with your ff lenses?

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 09:12 UTC
In reply to:

photo099: Crazy since all this could be done in a much safer way and better controlled environmen...

looks save and controlled to me.
you guys always find something to talk down...

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2017 at 22:18 UTC
In reply to:

Lou P Dargent: What we need now is a silver X-Pro 2 body to go with the silver lens option.

Mike Emerson clearly has no chill

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2017 at 23:38 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (820 comments in total)
In reply to:

skanter: Still fixed LCD? Deal breaker.

Ore you click on my username and gather some info, e.g. what cameras I use ;) knowledge is power...

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2017 at 08:36 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2492 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eugene232: Fuji calls it "Fujifilm X-Pro2 Body Professional Mirrorless Camera (Black)"
They think word "professional" adds extra $700 to price

What are you talking about? This camera is with the 1600 USD.
But go ahead an whine about the xpro2, the em1ii and the gh5

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2017 at 08:51 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2492 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ramchi: Debating self for few months between Sony RX1R2 and X-Pro 2!!! Though both are unavailable in my country (India)!

Those are completely different cameras regarding output and handling.
You can debate much longer or you just go and see them in a store.

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2017 at 08:47 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III (204 comments in total)
In reply to:

virtualreality: It's about time to upgrade the kitlens. 14mm (28mm equiv) is not wide enough, most companies offer 16mm (24mm equiv) lenses now. Also aperture size is small (3.5-5.6) considering the small image size. Olympus offers 14/3.5 where other manufacturers offer 18/3.5.

your math is wrong.
A 18mm f/3.5 lens gathers 65% more light than a 14mm f/3.5 lens
A 18mm f/4 would gather around 26% more light than the 14mm f/3.5 lens.

Formula: Area= pi * (focal lengh/2*aperture)^2

Link | Posted on Sep 4, 2017 at 08:01 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (820 comments in total)
In reply to:

freediverx: Do any local retailers stock this camera? I'd like a chance to play with one in person without having to buy one.

So you really want us to answer if your local retailers stock the camera??

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2017 at 06:48 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (820 comments in total)
In reply to:

skanter: Still fixed LCD? Deal breaker.

Ok, thank you for your comment and stating the obvious.
I need to tell you, sarcasm comes in many flavors and I do own a x100 camera

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2017 at 06:45 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (820 comments in total)
In reply to:

MarekMJE: Hello,

I bought X100F 6 weeks ago and made ca 600 pictures with it. Generally I am very disappointed, not because of choking power swith, nor because of stucking focus in auto mode AF-S or not functioning AF illuminator, but because of poor pictures quality.
So far my experience with cameras was limited to SONY RX100 II and I did lot of comparisons between those two cameras. Comparison was carried with good light condition so ISO was limited to 400.
Genaral impression is that Fuji have worse dynamic range what was manifested by more contrasty gloomy look, while SONY gave more even lit picture ( much more close to reality) . What interesting SONY picture was more three dimensional
( more micro contrasty). I tried different film simulation even RAW and DR settings at Fuji, but this general impression was unchanged.
I am sending my copy to service, but I am not expecting miracles.
My advice, do not trust reviews!

Marek MJE

before I trust your single post, I'd trust the dozens of reviews and provided raw files to test myself.
If your RX100 fares better than the X100, you made some serious mistakes!

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2017 at 13:19 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (820 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sworks29er: Fantastic marketing...digital is linear in end result. The fuji x100f is a cheap Leica make belief in the end. The x100f ends up with a in-viewfinder full of dust after a few days of use , never fixed since the first x100. The knobs and dials are not well designed and engineered... lot of play... Digital end result amazing...shutter to sensor...body not to price paid...

I own a X100T for 2 years (without any bag) and no dust in the viewfinder.
the knobs and dials are well enough designed for me w/o any play.
And yes, it is a cheap Leica, that is why I could afford it!!!

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2017 at 13:17 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (820 comments in total)
In reply to:

james s. kennedy: Any significant benefits over my refurbed Fuji X3 for $250?

We don't need you to convince to buy that camera.
This is not how this works. If you are fine with your old camera, super!

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2017 at 13:14 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (820 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: £1250? no interchangeable lenses? Digitally faking 50mm and 70mm lenses and resizing ? Unsupported RAW files in a lot of softwares? On SAle???

what are you talking about???
Lens: you pick that (btw have a look at the retail prices for RX1RII or LeicaQ)
Digitally faking: don't use it then
Unsupported RAW files: what software are you using? 1995 MS Paint 1995??

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2017 at 13:13 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (820 comments in total)
In reply to:

JKeith77: I still love (60%) and hate (40%) my original X100. It still takes remarkable pictures and the viewfinder was truly innovative aside from the quirks that are indeed frustrating.

But I really see no need to upgrade until Fuji stuffs a full frame CMOS sensor in there, adds dust/WR sealing, and improves the video capabilities. I would be willing to pay around $1500 for that version.

you should try the new X100F or the X100T. H-U-G-E difference in handling and shooting.
maybe the output is comparable, but the difference in the shooting experience is a blast

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2017 at 13:10 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (820 comments in total)
In reply to:

K1000usr: @Richard Butler, it would be fun to see a comparative shootout with a Sony DSC-RX1* series camera. Not exactly apples to apples, but similar in many ways.

I am sure both cameras will outshine in some categories, some mutually exclusive.

Thanks.

skanter, you made K1000usrs point very well!
applause.

You are one of those die-hard brand fans that we all love because of the facts presented.

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2017 at 13:08 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (820 comments in total)
In reply to:

freediverx: Do any local retailers stock this camera? I'd like a chance to play with one in person without having to buy one.

did you confuse this forum with google?

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2017 at 13:00 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (820 comments in total)
In reply to:

james s. kennedy: It seems to me that the XPro2 would be a much better buy. Why limit yourself to one focal length. I might buy the x100 for $300.

To answer your question, please find every discussion thread for each of the X100 releases.
But here is a quick one for you: we pick the X100x because of its limitations and the small formfactor.

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2017 at 12:59 UTC
Total: 786, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »