Mark9473

Joined on Oct 6, 2006

Comments

Total: 122, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

EdnaBambrick: Not one mention of chief ray angle in this entire discussion. Jeeezus people.

Why does that matter for legacy lenses? They'll still be at the same distance from the sensor.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 15:18 UTC
On article 2017 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $500-900 (546 comments in total)

Haven't they noticed the Panasonic G85 is now below $900?

Link | Posted on May 5, 2017 at 09:20 UTC as 47th comment | 3 replies
On article Panasonic Lumix FZ80/FZ82 real world samples gallery (77 comments in total)

Looks like an excellent camera if you never pixel-peep. I find that very hard to do, however...
I'd be interested to see how it does at flower close-ups.

Link | Posted on May 1, 2017 at 12:40 UTC as 29th comment | 1 reply
On article In praise of shooting monochrome landscapes (342 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark9473: Apart from perhaps the one with the chapel, I think they would all look better in colour.

Mario, that's a lighthouse.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2017 at 13:06 UTC
On article In praise of shooting monochrome landscapes (342 comments in total)

Apart from perhaps the one with the chapel, I think they would all look better in colour.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2017 at 11:34 UTC as 114th comment | 4 replies
On article Samyang announces VDSLR 16MM T2.6 cine lens (18 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark9473: I have difficulty understanding a manual focus cine/video lens with such short focus throw. How is this actually used?

You must have misunderstood my comment, or I your reply.

The distance scale has a marking for infinity and the next one down is 2m which is about 6 ft. Compare with Sigma's recently announced 14mm cine lens which is markings for infinity, 30ft, 15ft, 10ft, 8ft, 7ft, 6ft and so on.

If that doesn't make a difference to you then I'd like to know more about how you "set the distance on the scale".

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 23:31 UTC
On article Samyang announces VDSLR 16MM T2.6 cine lens (18 comments in total)

I have difficulty understanding a manual focus cine/video lens with such short focus throw. How is this actually used?

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 20:00 UTC as 5th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

D200_4me: On every m4/3 camera I've owned (G2, GH2, E-M5, E-M1, G85), even with a high quality lens and base ISO, it seems there's always some sort of mild grain visible when you view the image at 100%. Why is that? By comparison, if I use a middle of the road lens like the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 on my FF Nikon DSLR, the image is crystal clear (no dimpling or grainy look at all) at base ISO. I'm not talking about sky photos, but images of various objects with no sky/atmosphere involved. I'm genuinely curious about that and not complaining. Just want to know what the reason is for that very mild grain. I would have expected some differences at higher ISOs, but I assumed at base ISO (200 for example), the image should be totally clear even on a small sensor. This is not something you'd notice at normal viewing...just when you zoom to 100%.

m4/3 cameras have a bit of noise at base ISO. On galleries such as this one, this is often accentuated by doing some post processing without any noise filtering.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 14:09 UTC
On article At the market: Panasonic GH5 sample video (79 comments in total)

I so want one of those crabs ... I mean, cameras.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2017 at 12:26 UTC as 24th comment
On article Pentax KP Review (658 comments in total)

To me, this is one of the most appealing DSLR's on the market.
Put an EVF in it and better video and I might buy one.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2017 at 17:23 UTC as 107th comment

Great that there are further developments in this area. I have a Metabones SpeedBooster but I welcome competition, manufacturers pushing each other further. Using quality old manual focus lenses on a mirrorless body is great fun, and when they also give good results what's not to like?

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 21:59 UTC as 12th comment
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (892 comments in total)

I had my old film camera, a Nikon FM2N, out from storage today (wanted to use a lens that was still attached to it). I looked through the OVF, wanting to explain to my son how this ancient piece of technology worked - he wasn't interested, but anyway, that OVF view was by far not as bright, large and detailed as I remembered.

An EVF such as on my Panasonic G80 has a few drawbacks in some circumstances, but in many more circumstances it has significant advantages. Some people may see that balance differently, but I would never want to go back.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 19:29 UTC as 258th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: It didn't really get smaller did it?
http://camerasize.com/compare/#206,692

Thankfully not across the line. But try comparing the smallest E-system DSLR (that E-420 you selected) to the smallest m43 mirrorless (instead of picking the largest).

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2017 at 00:31 UTC

When I was buying my first DSLR the Oly E520 was the most compelling affordable camera on the market, with IBIS, the best anti-dust, live view, the best JPEGs, and able to use my old Nikkor lenses.

Oly's excellent 15-54 and 50-200 zooms were the cherry on the cake. They were so good that they (and the clunky live view) made my Nikkors obsolete. No regrets, those zooms seemed to have no weaknesses at all.

We all know the history of Olympus. I used to wonder why they never brought the rumoured 100mm macro lens to market, nor any fast wide prime - until it became clear that financial mismanagement had drained the company's resources. This also prevented the needed progress in sensor technology, which is what ultimately killed the system (I would give a finger to have the Canon G1XII sensor in my Olympus E30 body - I would still be using it).

And so some of the best lenses ever produced, were let down by a system unable to evolve not for technical reasons but because of mismanagement.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 21:49 UTC as 109th comment | 2 replies
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX850 real world samples (65 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark9473: Good images; seems like a very capable kit lens. I may have to get me that one.

Thanks for the hands-on experience. Guess I'll go on using my Nikkor AI and AIS primes on my G80. They are much more robust I'm sure.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2017 at 19:42 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX850 real world samples (65 comments in total)

Good images; seems like a very capable kit lens. I may have to get me that one.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2017 at 11:09 UTC as 18th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Mark9473: Camera production numbers are back to where they were in the 1980's. Camera manufacturers were doing well back then, so there's little reason for all the doom and gloom. The bubble they created in the early 2000's is clearly over but I don't think anybody realistically thought that was going to last. They saturated the market and that's all there's to it.

I think some people mistakenly take these graphs as an indication of cameras used. That's a big mistake. I think a lot of the digital cameras sold in the last decade are still in use. I also think the vast majority of smartphone users only occasionally use it to take a picture.

Actually, I wasn't.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2017 at 20:00 UTC

Camera production numbers are back to where they were in the 1980's. Camera manufacturers were doing well back then, so there's little reason for all the doom and gloom. The bubble they created in the early 2000's is clearly over but I don't think anybody realistically thought that was going to last. They saturated the market and that's all there's to it.

I think some people mistakenly take these graphs as an indication of cameras used. That's a big mistake. I think a lot of the digital cameras sold in the last decade are still in use. I also think the vast majority of smartphone users only occasionally use it to take a picture.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2017 at 13:03 UTC as 45th comment | 6 replies
On article Flickr reveals its top 25 photos of 2016 (190 comments in total)

I don't know if it is my settings, but it used to be that galleries such as this one could be clicked on to get a "gallery view" and then you'd get a bit larger images to look at than these postage stamp sized ones. Lately this only works very exceptionally. Has something changed on the site or is there a trick I'm not aware of?

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 14:28 UTC as 73rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

fluppeteer: I've asked them (on Kickstarter) to clarify how this isn't just a gimbal head, and also if they can comment on stability/centre of gravity with their flip-up portrait orientation. I'll see if they respond.

I'm confused that they're "ready for production" but are only trying to raise $9000, which (not my area) doesn't feel like the set-up cost for a production line as much as an order for aluminium. I guess they're not planning to sell many?

This is a well established company selling well known very high quality mounts for astronomical telescopes, capable of high stability at very high magnifications (much more stable than a gimbal head): http://www.halfhitchtelescope.com/

They are in close contact with their astronomical user base. As this is their first foray into photography, I think they went to Kickstarter just to reach out to a user base not yet known to them.

The production equipment and raw materials is all there and waiting to start, I am sure.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 12:03 UTC
Total: 122, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »