DeathArrow

Joined on Sep 26, 2016

Comments

Total: 588, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Nice. Although hard to focus on a DSLR.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2020 at 15:20 UTC as 26th comment | 11 replies
On article What you need to know about the new Leica M10-R (498 comments in total)

In the top right side of the article there is a link to buy it from Amazon for 715€. :D

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2020 at 15:19 UTC as 79th comment
In reply to:

Charlie Jin: Well. Whatever.
Most already moved to Sony and
they are not coming back to get this.

@entoman, all manufacturers are after your money. Of course you shouldn't just take their words.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2020 at 07:07 UTC
On article Hands-on with Canon's new RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

DeathArrow: Kind of expensive.

Well, it's good to pick the mount taking in consideration lens availability and lens prices.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2020 at 07:05 UTC
In reply to:

DeathArrow: Were they drunk when they designed these lenses? Who they think would but them? They would expect the next Olympics, people will shoot with R5 and 600mm f/11?

Shooting birds in flight with decent shutter speeds will mean noisy photos in anything but bright sun. Also, f/11 means the AF will be less snappier.

These lenses will be usable with decent IQ only when shooting things at distance with slow shutter speeds.

Of course they aren't meant for Olympics, I just exaggerated a bit.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2020 at 07:04 UTC
In reply to:

Charlie Jin: Well. Whatever.
Most already moved to Sony and
they are not coming back to get this.

"Canon claim that AF is just as efficient with adapted EF lenses on RF bodies."

Canon could claim anything to get our money. Better test before buying something, don't just take their word.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 20:18 UTC

Were they drunk when they designed these lenses? Who they think would but them? They would expect the next Olympics, people will shoot with R5 and 600mm f/11?

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 18:18 UTC as 94th comment | 21 replies
On article Hands-on with Canon's new RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM (191 comments in total)

Kind of expensive.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 18:07 UTC as 40th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

hetedik: Looks, like a nice camera.

If the covid situation doesn't get worse, the R6 will be on the shelves from September.
Until than, Sony is going to announce the A7-IV with better specs and lower price. In the meantime the A7-III is going to sell for app. 1.500 USD/EUR, which is already the normal price on ebay.

Btw, some comments here calls the A7-III an entry level camera....
Ridiculous. Of course, I don't know, how much money these people have, usually spend on their cameras. They have though a point according the fact that the A7-III entered the marked 2 years ago!

A7III has much more available lenses and at better prices. It also has double the battery price and perhaps the AF is better. And all of that for a much nicer price.

I don't see R6 overselling it.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 18:01 UTC
In reply to:

Charlie Jin: Well. Whatever.
Most already moved to Sony and
they are not coming back to get this.

At least you can find much more lenses for Sony, at better prices. And the AF is just very good. Also, battery life is good.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 17:59 UTC
In reply to:

DeathArrow: I would expect at least as a good IQ, AF and battery life as A7III. And at least as many lenses for similar prices. Anything less makes me want to buy Sony.

Don't buy Sony, you will regret not buying it earlier. :)

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 09:17 UTC
On article Canon EOS-1D X Mark III review (1371 comments in total)
In reply to:

garyknrd: Sounds like if you want the best AF you need to head over to Sony , Nikon after reading this article. Now I am curious to see how the R5-6 stacks up to the 1DX III.

@Sharlin, most users buy this for Sports and Wild life. Sports and Wild life shooters care a lot about AF.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2020 at 13:02 UTC
On article Canon EOS-1D X Mark III review (1371 comments in total)

Too bad AF sucks compared to competition. Otherwise a nice camera.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2020 at 13:00 UTC as 46th comment | 3 replies

I would expect at least as a good IQ, AF and battery life as A7III. And at least as many lenses for similar prices. Anything less makes me want to buy Sony.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2020 at 06:53 UTC as 61st comment | 3 replies
On article Will vlogging change your next camera? (304 comments in total)

Absolutely not. I'm only interested in photography.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2020 at 06:48 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply

So when we will see some nice, slow, dark f/11 and f/13 zoom lenses so the FF users can have the same benefits of MFT users?

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2020 at 08:54 UTC as 70th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Harold66: What a terrible video ! First of all, you talk like a m4/3 F4 lens is an equivalent F8 lens period, like DOF equivalency is the ONLY criteria which matters. Have you heard about exposure? Which means that to get your "equivalency" the 35mm sensor cameras at equal speed needs to bump the iso by two stops losing some of the IQ advantage in the process. But more importantly, you continue to spread this silly idea that thin DOF is always to be sought . Maybe most people agree for portrait stuff but it is far from being the case from every subject. For wildlife, for instance , there are instances when you want the animal surroundings to be in focus in which case the advantage of using m4/3 lenses extend beyond just weight and size by providing a better result at f 5.6 than the 35mm combination would at F11
And this is from reviewers who claim they like the m4/3rds . they could have fooled me
Harold

No, when people talk about equivalency, they think more in terms of noise and light gathering ability. And that implies f/4 on MFT equals the result of f/8 on FF.

That is due to basic physics, because the area of MFT sensors is 4x times less than the area of FF sensors.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2020 at 08:51 UTC

Is there a demand for slow and expensive lenses? Olympus 12-100mm f/4 is more expensive than the superior Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 and 24-70 f/2.8

Would I pay more for a 24-200 f/8 FF lens than I pay for f/2.8? No. And I doubt many will.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2020 at 08:00 UTC as 73rd comment
In reply to:

Melatonin: DSLR quality vs DSLR reality, there is a difference. You can say an image has the quality of a DSLR but that image may be entirely fake. Does that matter?

Any image is fake at is doesn't 100% reflect the reality. Do you believe that a long exposure photograph taken by a film camera with no software is real? Or that reality looks like a a shot taken with a super telephoto or ultra wide angle lens?

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2020 at 06:55 UTC

I consider computational photography as applying algorithms to enhance the image taking processes.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2020 at 06:52 UTC as 54th comment | 1 reply
Total: 588, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »