 |  |  |  |  |
| Family portrait by Minas_Eye from Three of.... | Eastern Blizzard by DHAPhotography from cold | Bubbles by jonestheroad from Foam and Bubbles - Macro Challenge | Passion Flower by Minas_Eye from What passes for normal | Concert building Amsterdam by Edith Das from What do you miss? |
So based on the rumors, this is the 70-200 with finally fixed AF, yeah?
poipoipoi_2016: Out of curiosity, is there an optical reason all the super-fast lenses are specifically 58mm?
Roland, a 29mm fast MFT lens is 58mm equivalent. Hence why I asked 58.
Out of curiosity, is there an optical reason all the super-fast lenses are specifically 58mm?
entoman: For those with M chip Macs, why not try the beta, and provide Adobe and Apple with feedback that will improve functionality and performance. If it crashes, send both of them a crash report. If something isn''t working the way you want it to, tell them. Make your voice heard.
But don't even consider using it for any serious editing - stick to the current PS and LR running in emulation mode, until Adobe and Apple have between them ironed out the numerous bugs that are inevitable with such a major change of architecture.
It's sort of on Apple in that any bleeding edge performance software is taking advantage of all sorts of subtle undocumented performance optimizations and leaky abstractions and if you just gutted their model of how memory works, you just ripped up their ability to roll their own memory allocator. Which is built into the guts of the system.
Think about Halo 1 v. Halo 4 on the original Xbox. Same hardware, but they'd had half a decade to learn how to use it.
And... in practice, at some point, we're going to eat this pain because ARM just caught up. So I note it, and blame no one.
wcan: After seeing some of the amazing performance demo's on the M1 Macs, I am wondering if the right question to ask is: "why are the M1 machines performing so amazingly" or "why are the Intel based systems performing so horribly"?
To watch the demos, one gets the impression that you would never need anything more than an M1 based machine with 8GB of RAM.
My vague impression of x86-64 is that modern-day CPUs are abstraction layers on top of abstraction layers with decades of cruft and undocumented abstractions that must be part of the system.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2281932 - Similar concept.
Whereas if you make everyone move to ARM, you can build a new system and then make everyone fix their stuff to match your optimizations.
poipoipoi_2016: Anecdotally yeah, I'd agree with that on my recent Samyang 45/1.8 adventures.
1 copy that was just awful to the point of uselessness, 2 that were "bad", 1 that I kept.
I'd say just have useful return policies.
It never gets tack-sharp in the corners even at f/8 (and stopping up from f/1.8 to f/2.8 does some miracles), I just wanted one that wasn't obviously decentered across half the frame, ordered in 2 copies from 2 different suppliers after the first two were bad, and kept the best one.
/My 55 is good, I just never used the focal length and am trying to sell it, shameless plug.
Anecdotally yeah, I'd agree with that on my recent Samyang 45/1.8 adventures.
1 copy that was just awful to the point of uselessness, 2 that were "bad", 1 that I kept.
chadley_chad: I just dont get the point?
I'd love to see details, but if I did street/city/possibly some nature video professionally, I'd at least eyeball it.
icexe: Looks like it would be fun to play with for an afternoon, then the novelty would quickly wear off and it would sit on a shelf gathering dust thereafter.
If the center globe is sharp enough, I'd love to pull this into NYC and go for a walk. Could you imagine that in Times Square?
Or Millenium Park. It needs skyscrapers though.
poipoipoi_2016: Has anyone used the Lensbaby 1?
This feels both fun/funny enough I'd actually use it, and *barely* cheap enough I might be able to throw it on the high end of my Christmas list.
Half the point of this is that it's cheap enough I could figure out if I was serious about effect lenses or not.
It's about the same price as buying a cheap manual focus rail and renting a couple of macro lenses for a week for example.
Has anyone used the Lensbaby 1?
This feels both fun/funny enough I'd actually use it, and *barely* cheap enough I might be able to throw it on the high end of my Christmas list.
Absolutic: Sony enjoyed it while it lasted. The moment Canon made 2 decent MILCs, tables had turned.
They'd still need to give me non-insane primes, but yes, that zoom trio has me drooling.
Clyde Thomas: Dear Yongnuo Marketing Moguls...
You missed a great opportunity to create a silver version to match the a7C silver cam. Flipsters would fall all over the combo. But your decision to dress this FF as red stripe Canon mounted on Sony crop cam... Missed it.
Samyang does the same exact thing, and I'm really not sure why.
tinzi1: 14-24mm f2.8, insanely lightweight (650), godlike optic, nobody comes even close to Nikon on this territory and of course you're going to have to pay for this nobodyelsebutme privilege. If a person try to dig issues with this lens, might as well quit photography because this lens is as good as you can get in 2020 -and probably far beyond.
The native mirrorless alternative is Sony and Sony's $3K.
Wide fast zooms are hard.
justmeMN: "This camera is better sealed than most; I doubt there's very much ventilation at all. Somebody should look into that."
So, a leaky camera that runs cooler would be better?
From the perspective that heat generation is best dealt with through constantly replacing the air in the case, yes. The best video cameras are either huge or come with dedicated fans built in.
Obviously, there's tradeoffs to that. Fans consume power, and more holes means more holes for water to leak in through.
And for a stills camera, the current build is good. Possibly even ideal; I can happily take this up a mountain during monsoon season. And as an 8K video camera... see the complaints about heat/overheating/time limits/etc.
As I said below, "Pick your poison".
Camera makers (re?)discovering what computer people have known for decades: Sealed boxes are bad juju for heat, but sealed boxes also keep the water and cat hair out.
So pick your poison.
/It feels like an excellent stills camera that is supposed to do video for some reason?
CaNikonianite: Great. Another type of card. Wouldn't it be easier to load, say, a 250gb storage inside the camera so we can be done away with these silly cards?
1) Redundancy. I hike across the Grand Canyon and I'm not going back because my card blew up.
2) Wow, 250GB is tiny for that hike.
*Stares at EOS R5*
*Stares slightly harder at the price of the EOS R5. And 70-200*
*Goes on B&H, prices out a new system and accessories in Canon instead of Sony*
$11000 and we're still waiting on the 24/1.4
Yeah, I ain't buying you, but dang am I going to internet window-shop for a few years.
CAT Productions: Should be interesting to see how the R5 files compare with the Z7/D850 files.
I second 40-45MP as being the sweet spot for now.
Not sure I'd spend $3800 on a new body and I want my lovely prime selection back (I don't want to haul or pay for f/1.2), but the RIV is overkill in terms of both DOF and noise tradeoffs.
But I'll consider switching to Canon if they give me a 24/1.4 and an 85/1.8 (Edit: They have an 85/2! Canon, give me a 24/1.4 and I'll talk). They've already got my three zooms.
Androole: I have to respect the technical innovation here, but this is just getting a bit absurd.
Making compelling compositions that feel natural that are wider than ~20mm is often a challenge.
9mm is just bonkers, and a rectilinear perspective that is that wide is really extreme and unnatural. The edge-stretching associated with such a wide FoV is just crazy (as you can see in their samples).
Broadly speaking, I've found two compositions that work.
1) "Getting it all in" where there's no negative space and, critically, there's interesting things going on vertically as well as horizontally. IE: Unless there's good clouds, that low line of mountains on the horizon needs you to pick a mountain under telephoto not UWA.
2) There's interesting leading lines coming from behind you into the frame.
Ideally, you have *both* #1 and #2. Hence "street" or "indoors" or "museums". Narrow alleys with wide lenses are very interesting.
Whether or not *9* mm is going to have enough things to put in the frame or isn't going to distort like mad (or just plain isn't going to ignore what's down the alley as per sample) is an open question.
/And in practice, I don't trust my ability to deliberately do it b/c "down the alley", so I use a zoom just in case I actually want 31mm instead.