Henning W

Lives in Canada Vancouver, Canada
Works as a Architect/Photographer
Joined on Dec 13, 2003
About me:

Own/use Leica M, Canon EOS, Nikon MF, Hasselblad, Mamiya, Noblex, Roundshot,
Camboo, Sinar and some others. Lots of lenses.


Total: 58, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Sigma interview: 'This is just the beginning' (339 comments in total)
In reply to:

NOWHITELENS: I like big and heavy lenses!
I find it interesting that Sigma successfully introduces big/heavy lenses while some people claim everybody wants small/light equipment!

You can always add weight. That's easy. What's not easy is making very high quality small and lightweight lenses of which you can carry a number. If I want a fairly complete range of focal lengths with me, say from 15 to 400 too little weight is rarely a problem.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2018 at 01:13 UTC
On article Here's why your beloved film SLR is never going digital (294 comments in total)
In reply to:

Enginel: I think there is much worse problem not mentioned in text: most of film camera shutters were not made for tens of hundreds of actuations like those in digital cams.
And in cameras with leaf shutter it's closed by default so with you're not liveview option like with a real digital cam.

I put a lot of film through some of my Nikon F2's and F4's, but I don't know how many. But: I also have in my possession a Leica MDa that has had over 4 million actuations (it was used as a copy camera on a Reprovit in a medical education facility). I don't know of any digital camera that's up to that number; mine certainly aren't.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2018 at 04:49 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (1024 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jefftan: i am more and more curious of yi m1
look at comparison with g9

Different ballpark.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2018 at 20:28 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (1024 comments in total)
In reply to:

SGal23: mmm, color is not good for my eyes....

Then you should stick to B&W.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2018 at 20:21 UTC
In reply to:

photogeek: Meh, I’d rather they designed a smaller 24-70 that doesn’t weigh a ton for their existing system

To this whole segment: Designing high performance lenses that are smaller costs money. So, do you want to pay or do you want to shlep, or do you accept lower quality?

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2018 at 00:22 UTC
In reply to:

Checat: Nikon on the same mount as Sony to create best lens ecosystem… It will never happen but it is nice to have a dream ;)

I'm sure that Nikon would make an adapter that would allow mounting F mount lenses with a maximum of functionality; maybe not so good for screw focussing but certainly electronic focussing.

With a 16mm flange distance and a wider mount, there would be the possibility of third parties offering fully functional adapters for Sony mount lenses as well.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2018 at 00:04 UTC

Part IIIf, part M6, part M9. Two rewind levers, a rewind crank and two part shutter speed dial plus a rear screen and buttons. Labelled MP. And ugly. Yuck.

Either more real or more imaginative would have been my preference; but since I'm not in the market in any case, it doesn't really matter.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 04:24 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

Ben O Connor: Dear Sigma; please find a woman designer to your lens factory. Noone has complain about optical quality. But lenses are horrible by outlook.

I used to own a sigma 30mm F 2.8 for my E-PM1. A wonderful field of view for streets. No distortion at all! Even it looks OK. Untill I attach the lens hood!!! A black horrible looking cheap plastic front of a shinny silver lens.

Unfortunately I don't own this lens anymore. But don't miss its outlooks really. I was about to buy a 30mm F 1.4 for my GM1. But no way, looks horrible and huge as nothing else!

In part, Sigma lenses are very large because to make them small with the same performance and apertures costs. See Leica. But this lens is ridiculous. There's no way I'd be interested in getting one.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2018 at 00:42 UTC
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: I have the 6s plus and the 7 plus. I have not noticed any performance hit at all on either. My granddaughter has my old 5s and used it to play games and play kids YouTube. It also seems just fine. I think there is more to how this actually works than what is being told.

My 5s is just fine as well.

Interesting articles explaining a bit more of this:

Apples PR on this is rather shaky, but conspiracy theorist should probably look elsewhere.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2017 at 04:41 UTC
In reply to:

urje: It's an ugly hack, but the issue described is no joke. My old 5S would crash whenever the battery was below 25% or so and I would open an app (which would cause a spike in power consumption). This happened especially in the morning, when the cold in my bedroom dropped battery strength even further. With a new battery it performs all the way down to 1% again.

Apparently this is an iPhone thing, so perhaps androids have their power supplies designed more robustly.

I have an iPhone 5s, which runs fine. All updates done. When the battery is low, it warns me but nothing else.

You phone has some other issue.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2017 at 04:26 UTC
On article Canon patents 400mm F5.6 catadioptric 'mirror' lens (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

Erk1024: There is a big advantage to these lenses in that they can be made into very large apertures, and this can overcome the loss of contrast from the central obstruction. An 8" cat is as sharp as a 6" diameter lens, but a heck of a lot cheaper. I've shot photos through a 14" catadioptric scope, and it was amazingly sharp.

A problem though with cat lenses is that while the aperture may be f/5.6, the t-stop is likely about 1-1/2 stops less, so more like T/9 or T/10. So you have the disadvantage, especially significant for long lenses of a slower t-stop, but you still have the very shallow dof which you can't (usually) increase.

I've shot with a couple of different cats, including a little with the Zeiss 1000mm f/5.6, which actually had fairly good contrast (for a cat) and excellent 'sharpness'.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 22:25 UTC
In reply to:

Aaron801: I thought Trump was anti-regulation... I guess not.

I'm not sure relying on him for truthful reporting is a good idea.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 02:59 UTC
In reply to:

zoranT: Does that affect my gun arsenal?

Rather: as long as you mount a gun on your drone you'll be fine.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 02:57 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1092 comments in total)
In reply to:

Focus Shift Shooting: If you're above 5' tall, get the Nikon. If your hands are the size of an 11yr old chimpanzee, get the Sony.
It's really quite simple actually. ;)

I make a joke, but honestly I love Sony products. I love their innovation. They tried to change the shape of cameras a couple of times, and they are evolving their designs to be more ergonomic. And that's why at this time, I stuck with Nikon. They've been in the game for so long now with class-leading DSLR products and you can feel it when you hold that D850 comfort in your hand. Like it belongs there. The Sony feels like you're holding a frozen cube with its hard edges and smooth polished surfaces.

Just a few years ago, Sony emerged with these amazing cameras and they are right in the mix at the top with Canon and Nikon. Where the heck did they come from all of a sudden? It was like, "not the top" - then - "top". Boom!

I wouldn't be surprised if Sony figures out the last few things to get me GAS'd up for the A7Rv when they own the top.

I have reasonably large hands (6'-2"), used to shoot Nikon and switched to Canon around 2000 and now mostly shoot Olympus with some Sony A7rII. The Olympus feels best in my hands, the Canon next best and the Sony the worst. Size isn't really the issue; it's the overall feel. I also have a Panasonic GM5, a VERY tiny m43 camera that I like better in some ways than the Sony for handling.

However, the Olympus is the camera I pick up most often, as it feels right, is as fast as anything on the market, has outstanding IBIS and many truly amazing lenses that are better corner to corner than what FF manufacturers offer. But, and everyone knows this, the technical quality of the files is not up to D850 or Sony A7rII or III standard. If I feel I need that, I will take the Sony, but that happens less and less often.

The two cameras under discussion are now also reasonably fast, although hardly like the Olympus M1 mkII, and are not likely to change my preferences.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 21:51 UTC
In reply to:

Zigmont: "The main driver of growth is the systematic realignment of the company that has taken place in recent years."

In other words, they fired a bunch of people, outsourced their technology and cut corners wherever possible, so they could claim to stockholders that it was a good year. Typical corporate BS.

Leica basically doesn't have stockholders, as Dr. A. Kaufmann owns 51% and controls it. He bought it in 2007 or so and 'realigned' it according to his vision. They didn't fire people; they hired lots and built a new factory. Corners stopped being cut, as the company before Kaufmann was poorly run and out of options. Dr. Kaufmann, a billionaire who made his money in another business, loves Leicas and wanted to restore the company to its former glory. He invested in the company both by buying it and putting money into all aspects of the company, and it has paid off. He sold 49% of the company some years back for more than he put into the company, but he still retains control.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2017 at 06:56 UTC
In reply to:

Lobbamobba: Anyone with half a brain already knew this.
Its just the jealous hater militia who has scream "fail" and "idiots" when they comment their products.

The irony is companies like PanaSony are loosing money on every camera sold and people still criticize Leicas pricing.

Nice to end a Friday with a chuckle.

@dash2k8 - Yes, we (PanaSony) lose money on every camera we sell, but we make it up in volume.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2017 at 06:49 UTC
In reply to:

ZurichPhoto: So you buy this lens for $12K use it for a several years and decide to sell it ... and you get, what $9-10K?Your cost of "renting" it over that time is far less than I'll pay for the times I'll need to rent a 600MM f/4 Nikon over that same period, To each his own ...

I'd be careful saying that people who pay $12K for a lens are idiots ... I'm not so sure that's the case. Something tells me if you can afford a $12,000 lens, you're probably making your way through the world just fine, thanks. No different than saying someone who can''t afford a $1200 lens must be a moron.

About 20 years ago I bought a 50/1 Noctilux used, for $1600. About 25 years ago I bought a 75/1.4 Summilux for $1800 new. Around the same time I bought a lot of Canon gear, as I was switching from Nikon to Canon for SLR stuff. I easily spent $15,000 on Canon lenses. Guess which lenses are worth a lot more than I paid for them and which are worth not much at all.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2017 at 03:55 UTC

The MTF's look amazing. Better than those of the 75/2 AA. Too bad about the price, weight and size.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2017 at 03:49 UTC as 46th comment
In reply to:

John McMillin: It seems to cost more and more to win the race- who can take the blurriest photo?

@Canonlight - Wow; just announced and already you have done a full comparison to the Sigma 85. How lucky for all of us!

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2017 at 22:30 UTC
In reply to:

stevo23: Wow - that's quite remarkable. So is the price. I'd love to have some time with this lens.

@SarahTerra; What a clueless comment. It's as if you can't comprehend that this is a lens intended for FF bodies.

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2017 at 22:24 UTC
Total: 58, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »