ogl

ogl

Joined on Jan 28, 2010

Comments

Total: 613, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

zeratulmrye: not bad optical quality but the weight and size... geez

Weight and size are good.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2016 at 14:46 UTC
In reply to:

ogl: The problem is not body shape of K-1. The problem is Sigma doesn't follow the specs of K-mount and makes mount ring of bayonet wider. For example, 70-200/2.8 II HSM has 65.7 mm, the original Pentax lenses has 58.5-59 mm, the max. diameter should be not wider than 63 mm. The widest diameter of original Pentax lenses is 63 mm.

I think Sigma is junk. Was, is and will.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2016 at 14:07 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: Will Sigma replace the part that gets scratched?

The specs of K-mount could be found in every original Pentax lens. FA50/1,4 has 63 mm. It's the widest variant.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2016 at 14:04 UTC

The problem is not body shape of K-1. The problem is Sigma doesn't follow the specs of K-mount and makes mount ring of bayonet wider. For example, 70-200/2.8 II HSM has 65.7 mm, the original Pentax lenses has 58.5-59 mm, the max. diameter should be not wider than 63 mm. The widest diameter of original Pentax lenses is 63 mm.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2016 at 04:16 UTC as 9th comment | 13 replies
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: Will Sigma replace the part that gets scratched?

88SAL - No. You are wrong. The problem is not body shape of K-1. The problem is Sigma doesn't follow the specs of K-mount and makes mount ring of bayonet wider. For example, 70-200/2.8 II HSM has 65.7 mm, the original Pentax lenses has 58.5-59 mm, the max. diameter should be not wider than 65 mm.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2016 at 04:13 UTC

The problem is simple - Sigma even can't produce mount ring for K-lenses under specification - not wider than 65 mm (max. diameter), never checked the real diameter of real Pentax cameras - 58.5-59 mm, doesn't pay any licence fee to Pentax. It's Sigma's fault and they will fix it. It's good.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2016 at 03:58 UTC as 10th comment

Make "Turn LCD off" in menu and you get camera without LCD.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2016 at 15:12 UTC as 64th comment | 2 replies

Pentax K-3II is a bit sharper in RAW

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2016 at 17:54 UTC as 104th comment
In reply to:

ogl: Like nothing

I like the beauty, not everyday's hell.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2016 at 12:32 UTC

Like nothing

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2016 at 06:13 UTC as 14th comment | 3 replies
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: The lens is the main part of the camera. If there is no sharpness at all, how to use such camera?

Funny... how do you explain the difference between software ISO and measured ISO? For example, indicated ISO1600, 3200, 6400 of X100 are the same ISO1000 as DXO had measured. All other cameras have same trick only in expanded mode. Expanded mode is software ISO too.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2016 at 02:57 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: The lens is the main part of the camera. If there is no sharpness at all, how to use such camera?

Do you insist on that there is no real ISO in camera? The ASA and DIN film speed standards have been combined into the ISO standards since 1974.
The current International Standard for measuring the speed of color negative film is ISO 5800:2001 (first published in 1979, revised in November 1987) from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Related standards ISO 6:1993 (first published in 1974) and ISO 2240:2003 (first published in July 1982, revised in September 1994, and corrected in October 2003) define scales for speeds of black-and-white negative film and color reversal film, respectively.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2016 at 02:56 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: The lens is the main part of the camera. If there is no sharpness at all, how to use such camera?

The determination of ISO speeds with digital still-cameras is described in ISO 12232:2006 (first published in August 1998, revised in April 2006, and corrected in October 2006). DXO measures ISO speed under such standarts. The ISO system defines both an arithmetic and a logarithmic scale. The arithmetic ISO scale corresponds to the arithmetic ASA system, where a doubling of film sensitivity is represented by a doubling of the numerical film speed value. For example, a film rated ISO 200/24° is twice as sensitive as one rated ISO 100/21°. If DXO measure ISO1000 - it means it's ISO1000 under ASA method of scale.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2016 at 02:55 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: The lens is the main part of the camera. If there is no sharpness at all, how to use such camera?

Measured ISO = real ISO.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2016 at 10:18 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

ozturert: Look at "Cons". They have been more or less the same since XPro1:
Critical detail at 100% suffers
Waxy-looking skin in high ISO images
AF tends to hunt
X-Trans sensor design limits Raw-converter choice
And lens... X100s and X100T's lenses were good but not very good in my opinion. Strange though, as Fuji's X-series prime lenses are usually very good (except from 18mm f2.0) but X100s and this X70 are not as good as rivals.

maybe they can't do good compact lenses for compact bodies.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 13:30 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: The lens is the main part of the camera. If there is no sharpness at all, how to use such camera?

I can repeat one more - Good photo with good sharpness will be better. Good photo with bad sharpness won't be better. Bad photo will be bad with any lens.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 13:28 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: The lens is the main part of the camera. If there is no sharpness at all, how to use such camera?

Fujifilm X100 - ISO1600 is real ISO1000, ISO3200 is real ISO1012, ISO6400 is real ISO1076.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 13:26 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: The lens is the main part of the camera. If there is no sharpness at all, how to use such camera?

Don't compare apples with oranges. You try to avoid discussion to another side. Good photo with good sharpness will be better. Good photo with bad sharpness won't be better. As for high ISO - Fujifilm X100 had ISO trick - indicated ISO and real ISO had a big difference. It's hard to say anything about X70 without DXO tests. Anyway, photography needs light. No light - no photo. You can make good noise reduction in RAW converter with GR or Nikon A, but you can't change lens of X70 :)

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 12:14 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: The lens is the main part of the camera. If there is no sharpness at all, how to use such camera?

as for me, it's sharpness of mediocre zoom lens, not fixed one.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 08:29 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (364 comments in total)

The lens is the main part of the camera. If there is no sharpness at all, how to use such camera?

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 04:54 UTC as 58th comment | 15 replies
Total: 613, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »