PerL

Lives in Sweden Sweden
Works as a Design & layout
Joined on Nov 25, 2002

Comments

Total: 371, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article How the 50mm lens became 'Normal' (63 comments in total)

A 50 mm lens is "normal" because on a SLR with 1x viewfinder the magnification is 1:1 at infinity . You dont get the impression of getting "closer" as you do with a tele, and you dont get the impression of getting ”away” as yo do with a wide-angle. That is why the term "normal" make perfectly sense.
This is offset somewhat by the fact that the viewfinder magnification is slightly less (0.8 x-0.97x or so on most SLRs (and a lot less on DSLRs). However, this is countered by the fact that a closer distances than infinity the magnification increases in the viewfinder. I just pulled out a Pentax ME, a Minolta SRT 101 and a Canon Ftb, all fitted with a 50 mm.
On the Canon which has the smallest viewfinder, objects appear life size at about 1 meter, on the Minolta a few meters further away and on the ME which has the largest OVF, a little more. With all of these it feels very natural to name the 50 "normal" since it gives a life-size view, or close to.
See also my comment further below.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 10:17 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
On article How the 50mm lens became 'Normal' (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

PerL: A 50 mm lens gave 1:1 magnification in the viewfinder with a 35 SLR.
(Todays FF DSLRs have smaller viewfinders.)
So sure there was something "normal" about the 50, not just that it was easy to manufacture.

BJL - the important part is that a viewfinder with 1x magnification gives a a 1:1 size image with a 50 mm lens. That is the interesting correlation that motivates the term "normal" on a 50 mm.
That is something you noticed when you used a SLR even if the actual viewfinder was slightly less than 1x (at infinity – larger at medium and close distances) – you looked at virtual life size when you used a 50, and it was very easy to see why it was called a "normal" lens.
BTW I have owned and used lots of SLRs, from Pentax (ME and MX), Nikon (FM, FE, F3), Minolta (SRT 303, XE-1), Konica (T3), Yashica (TL Electro), and most of them had viewfinders big enough that if you looked at a person trough them with a 50 mm it appeared as life size.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 07:38 UTC
On article How the 50mm lens became 'Normal' (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

PerL: A 50 mm lens gave 1:1 magnification in the viewfinder with a 35 SLR.
(Todays FF DSLRs have smaller viewfinders.)
So sure there was something "normal" about the 50, not just that it was easy to manufacture.

@BJL The Pentax ME/MX had 0.97x magnification. But the magnification is rated/measured at infinity. From a few meters or half portrait distance the image magnification is larger than at infinity. So when you look at a a person at normal shooting distance they appear life-sized in the viewfinder with many of these cameras.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2018 at 20:24 UTC
On article How the 50mm lens became 'Normal' (63 comments in total)

A 50 mm lens gave 1:1 magnification in the viewfinder with a 35 SLR.
(Todays FF DSLRs have smaller viewfinders.)
So sure there was something "normal" about the 50, not just that it was easy to manufacture.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2018 at 15:45 UTC as 20th comment | 5 replies
On article Nikon dominates World Press Photo 2018 camera breakdown (385 comments in total)

That Nikon and Canon shift the dominant position is probably more or less random. But that the two brands totally dominate is clear, and has been so, not for years, but for decades. And for good reason.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2018 at 21:21 UTC as 93rd comment | 7 replies
On article Opinion: the Sony a7 III could be the new Nikon D750 (1232 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shangri La: Tow words: lens selection.

That is right. The lenses is why you won't see many sports shooters with Sonys.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2018 at 23:50 UTC
On article Opinion: the Sony a7 III could be the new Nikon D750 (1232 comments in total)

How is the ergonomics? Especially with some serious lenses? The Nikon DSLRs fits like a glove, you can tell that they are experts in that area when you handle one. The Sony looks to me as it would give you cramp with a large lens.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2018 at 18:42 UTC as 160th comment | 7 replies
On article Video: Sony a7 III overview (223 comments in total)

In Europe it is 3000 dollars, so the label "basic" doesnt fit here.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 23:50 UTC as 37th comment | 17 replies
On article Sigma unveils 105mm F1.4 Art 'bokeh master' (326 comments in total)

Looks like a true Sumo-wrestler of a lens....

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 16:36 UTC as 44th comment
In reply to:

kociasek: Just read that In Europe it will cost 2300 euro (body only) , 2500 euro with the kit lens (28-70 f/3.5-5-6).

@dansclic
I read all the comments on about how much value for money the new Sony was. I thought it would be the new entry level FF Sony. Then I realized when I saw the price point in Europe that I was completely mistaken. My only interest in this would be for the video if the cost was low. For stills I cant see what the big fuzz is about compared to other 24-36 mp FF cameras, like a much cheaper D610.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 15:54 UTC
In reply to:

kociasek: Just read that In Europe it will cost 2300 euro (body only) , 2500 euro with the kit lens (28-70 f/3.5-5-6).

Yes, I saw it. About twice the price of a Nikon FF D610. A little disappointing.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 10:55 UTC
On article Canon EOS M50 Review (1302 comments in total)

Is the IS software based? Could it compare to real hardware IBIS for movie shooting?

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 11:39 UTC as 279th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

TMHKR: This is basically the Nikon version of DO lenses, right?

@tonywong
Yes, but it seems that Nikon has better technology. The Canon DO-series has been plagued by IQ concerns from the start (low contrast) but Nikons gets very high remarks.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2018 at 21:32 UTC
In reply to:

TMHKR: This is basically the Nikon version of DO lenses, right?

If it will be like the 300 PF it will sharper, more compact and more affordable than the Canon DO-line.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2018 at 18:29 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (1025 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stejo: While I agree that there's no merit to simply matching an existing performance at a later date, if you exceed said performance, while being noticeably better in a number of areas, and while the previous top performer is still current and you also undercut its price, you probably deserve the gold.

That was a cheap shot dpr.

eno2
The D500 has better IQ and is better for shooting action. That is pretty heavy factors. For me, the EVF viewfinder flutter and behaviour during AF would be unacceptable in this level of camera. Many of the other things you mention is highly debatable. Ergonomics – it is hard to better high end Nikons here. Viewfinder, although the EVF of the G9 is larger, the D500 has a large viewfinder. And many, especially high end users, prefer the stability and crispness of an OVF.
I agree about the video part, but not much else.
It is a little more expensive, but judging from the history of previous Panasonics, resale value is better with the D500.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 21:12 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (1025 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stejo: While I agree that there's no merit to simply matching an existing performance at a later date, if you exceed said performance, while being noticeably better in a number of areas, and while the previous top performer is still current and you also undercut its price, you probably deserve the gold.

That was a cheap shot dpr.

@jorginho
The problem is that Panasonic seems to position the camera as made for action shooting , while the tech isn't well suited for it. So, no the D500 viewfinder is better – if you shot sports.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 19:23 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (1025 comments in total)
In reply to:

horsth: I'm shooting in CAF now for one week with the G9 mostly birds in flight with the Oly 300mm and the PL 100-400 and have not once experienced that "wobbling" or "flutter" what the guy is talking about. I also tested my other Pana lenses, no wobbling at all. I also never experienced such a behavior with any of my older Pana bodies. Maybe it happens with some non-DfD lenses. Maybe it's a question of lighting....

The Cameralabs review also mention the flutter.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 19:20 UTC
In reply to:

chimbos_matt: Congratulations to the 4 people that will actually purchase this lens!!! Nikon should be focusing on the lenses that people do buy and there sharpness, they are falling further and further behind.

Nice summary of DXO scores by lens type.
http://briansmith.com/sony-fe-lenses-sharp-canon-nikon-glass/

About "Nikon falling behind" an referring to "Nice summary of DxO-scores":
Almost the first I read when I look at the link is this:
"• Sony lenses were tested on the 42mp Sony a7RII
• Canon lenses were tested on the 50mp Canon 5DS R
• Nikon lenses were tested on the 36mp Nikon D800E".
As we know Nikon now has a 46 mp camera (D850) which makes the comparison obsolete.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 16:52 UTC
In reply to:

badi: "If you're using this $12,000+ lens on an APS-C body"

For what i know, unlike Canon, Nikon has this "APSC" mode on their FF bodies, right? On D850, that mode is also about 20MPx resolution as well...

@Marco Nero
Have you compared the optical formula so you know it is a "reverse engineered Canon"? You know that Nikon made a 200-400 before Canon?

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 14:33 UTC

I dont think everybody realises that this is a true professional lens – not a hobby item (unless you are an extremely dedicated amateur or very well off). The former 200-400 was one the fundamental sports pro lenses, and now it is updated. You can talk about the price, weight or what ever – this is a lens for photo agencies or people that has a full-time business in photography. The price is by the way about the same as the Canon 200-400, likewise aimed at pros.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 14:30 UTC as 52nd comment | 9 replies
Total: 371, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »