marc petzold

marc petzold

Lives in Germany Germany
Joined on Mar 12, 2014

Comments

Total: 1569, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Throwback Thursday: the Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L (81 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: Soligor have had a 24-70 MF lens, away long time before this Canon, albeit not F2.8, but variable Aperture. It was the 1st 24-70 i can remember btw.
Soligor 24-70 mm / 3,5-4,8 MC C/D was the full name back then. Besides this, the Mk. 1 of this 2002 24-70/2.8L USM wasn't that great at all - the predecessor 28-70/2.8L USM was better. Just since 2012, when Canon brought the Mk. II Iteration, this Zoom is the standard all other 24-70's are judged by.

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/528-canon2470f28ff

The 2012 as "lowcost" alternative released 24-70/F4L USM is the better then compared to Mk. I of the 24-70/2.8L USM.

...and even before the 24-70's, there was the 28-70's, before this the 35-70's line.

I know this lens, but haven't bought it when i've had the chance for about 150 bucks like mint condition, because for being a historical collectors item, the 1st zoom lens. But wasn't that good optically. It was years before the Icarex 35. (1966-70) And because of this one Lens - as it was being named "Zoomar", all current variable Focal Length Lenses are just being named like this, a "Zoom Lens". ;-)

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 15:40 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: the Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L (81 comments in total)

Soligor have had a 24-70 MF lens, away long time before this Canon, albeit not F2.8, but variable Aperture. It was the 1st 24-70 i can remember btw.
Soligor 24-70 mm / 3,5-4,8 MC C/D was the full name back then. Besides this, the Mk. 1 of this 2002 24-70/2.8L USM wasn't that great at all - the predecessor 28-70/2.8L USM was better. Just since 2012, when Canon brought the Mk. II Iteration, this Zoom is the standard all other 24-70's are judged by.

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/528-canon2470f28ff

The 2012 as "lowcost" alternative released 24-70/F4L USM is the better then compared to Mk. I of the 24-70/2.8L USM.

...and even before the 24-70's, there was the 28-70's, before this the 35-70's line.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 12:01 UTC as 28th comment | 3 replies
On article Leica SL Review (628 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: The OOC JPEG looks like a slightly greenish color cast. For this price, i'd get the GFX-50s Fujifilm, if i would have the money. ;) The AF doesn't seem to be reliable into avialable light, and DR is limited, too.

About the EVF, afaik i've read somewhere onto the Net that this 4.4 MP EVF is a time-based multiplexed Design, therefore it doesn't feature real 4.4 MP Resolution.
For instance - Panasonic does have the same technique since a very long time - the G1 EVF (2008) for example is the same, sequentially multiplexed, time-based, 1.44 MP EVF...but it does look good outdoors, even nowadays.

Ergonomically, and from the IQ, the GFX-50s Fujifilm seems like a bargain into comparsion, and it's smaller from size, too. :-)

Anyway, it was nice to read. thanks DPR.

HowAboutRAW: The SL isn't 2014 Tech. I ignored nothing - it's just that you try to bond me on things that i haven't said this way and endless talks without sense. I do have some fast lenses (50/1.4 & 35/1.4 MF and use them for shallow DoF sometimes) Enough for this.

Have fun. Good Light.
Marc

.edit.

Even wikipedia says 2015, not 2014:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_SL_(Typ_601)

But perhaps you do seem to know "alternative facts" about the Leica SL, as this term also becomes popular by the current trump administration.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2017 at 23:17 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (628 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: The OOC JPEG looks like a slightly greenish color cast. For this price, i'd get the GFX-50s Fujifilm, if i would have the money. ;) The AF doesn't seem to be reliable into avialable light, and DR is limited, too.

About the EVF, afaik i've read somewhere onto the Net that this 4.4 MP EVF is a time-based multiplexed Design, therefore it doesn't feature real 4.4 MP Resolution.
For instance - Panasonic does have the same technique since a very long time - the G1 EVF (2008) for example is the same, sequentially multiplexed, time-based, 1.44 MP EVF...but it does look good outdoors, even nowadays.

Ergonomically, and from the IQ, the GFX-50s Fujifilm seems like a bargain into comparsion, and it's smaller from size, too. :-)

Anyway, it was nice to read. thanks DPR.

HowAboutRAW, don't put my words in mixed-up context - it simply isn't meant this way. I wrote only, MF users don't have that fast lenses like FF users, but they don't need it because of other factors.

Just read my comments right before you quote or answer it - thanks.
All other things doesn't make sense at all.

Good Light!

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2017 at 18:07 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (628 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: The OOC JPEG looks like a slightly greenish color cast. For this price, i'd get the GFX-50s Fujifilm, if i would have the money. ;) The AF doesn't seem to be reliable into avialable light, and DR is limited, too.

About the EVF, afaik i've read somewhere onto the Net that this 4.4 MP EVF is a time-based multiplexed Design, therefore it doesn't feature real 4.4 MP Resolution.
For instance - Panasonic does have the same technique since a very long time - the G1 EVF (2008) for example is the same, sequentially multiplexed, time-based, 1.44 MP EVF...but it does look good outdoors, even nowadays.

Ergonomically, and from the IQ, the GFX-50s Fujifilm seems like a bargain into comparsion, and it's smaller from size, too. :-)

Anyway, it was nice to read. thanks DPR.

Indeed, who cares..as i don't like EVFs anyway. I still use them, because some of my Cameras aren't DSLRs. But i do get massive eye strain whileas doing so, anyway. Fuji GFX50s Samples _are_ better, that's a fact - from what i've seen onto the net so far..but one can't compare FF vs MF, it's like comparing apples & oranges. MF lenses aren't as fast as FF lenses, true - but they don't need it to be either way, and because of the bigger sensor(film) size, they gather more photons, or here simply saying light.

I said already last year before the SL, the next Sony A7 iteration should have a EVF with about 4 to 5 MP resolution. Funny thing as a sidenote, that you're always protecting Leica, as it does seem during the past 8-15 months, w/o owning one. I never said it's bad, anyway. And any Leica would find they potentional buyer, indeed.

So into the End - Horses for Courses. :)

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2017 at 16:03 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (628 comments in total)

The OOC JPEG looks like a slightly greenish color cast. For this price, i'd get the GFX-50s Fujifilm, if i would have the money. ;) The AF doesn't seem to be reliable into avialable light, and DR is limited, too.

About the EVF, afaik i've read somewhere onto the Net that this 4.4 MP EVF is a time-based multiplexed Design, therefore it doesn't feature real 4.4 MP Resolution.
For instance - Panasonic does have the same technique since a very long time - the G1 EVF (2008) for example is the same, sequentially multiplexed, time-based, 1.44 MP EVF...but it does look good outdoors, even nowadays.

Ergonomically, and from the IQ, the GFX-50s Fujifilm seems like a bargain into comparsion, and it's smaller from size, too. :-)

Anyway, it was nice to read. thanks DPR.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2017 at 15:27 UTC as 139th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

marc petzold: As i wrote days ago on a rumors site: Canon introduced this slower 18-55/F4-5.6 STM for 2 reasons compared to it's 18-55/3.5-5.6 STM brother - 1) cost reduction, it's cheaper to produce, less materials, slower speed. 2) it's smaller, suits small DSLRs like the SL1 better, and upcoming like the 800D/77D...

I do think this is a step into the wrong direction. Personally, i'd have loved much to see a 15-55/3.5-5.6 STM Lens as 18-55/3.5-5.6 successor, to give us 24mm Wideangle (in FF-terms) on a Kitlens.

True

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 07:35 UTC

Finally, the since 2015 rumored Sigma ART 24-70/2.8 DG OS HSM....i am wondering about the cost, and how good the IQ would be into comparsion with the Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC (2012), the Tokina AT-X Pro 24-70/2.8 (2015), Nikons 28-70 2.8 VR E (2015) Lens, and the mighty Canon 24-70/2.8L USM Mk. II (2012) then.

I hope the new Sigma is at least as good as the Tokina, which is optically a tad better than the Tamron. From these five 24-70's, currently only the Canon & Tokina are the only ones without built-in image stabilizer.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 07:32 UTC as 84th comment | 4 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (241 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: I don't know what you could get a good condition D80 for today but I don't think it's really super cheap. Nikon is a nice lens pool to have but most of the older stuff is full frame. The oldest APS-C lens choices are not that different than they are today in price.

The camera I was looking at for super cheap (<$300) that still has a lot of life left is the Fuji X-E1. Fuji was very active with firmware updates and in the end it seems like a pretty polished interface. You have exposure and shutter dials along with a rear dial you can use for aperture on their cheaper lenses (no aperture on lens wheel). Their lens lineup is all new so there aren't too many bargains.

The A99 is probably a good bet for those looking into FF. It's less than a D700 or 6D and similar to a A900. A7m1 isn't far behind either but A99 gives bargain lenses.

A lot of the early m43 bodies are pretty junky in terms of AF and sensor quality. I wouldn't look at any of the 12mp models. Lenses ain't cheap either.

@mosc
"A lot of the early m43 bodies are pretty junky in terms of AF and sensor quality. I wouldn't look at any of the 12mp models. Lenses ain't cheap either."

I hardly disagree with this. Take pictures, not studying DxOMark orscientific Tests here is much better. For instance, especially the GF1/G1 Lumix mFT with 12 MP Sensor does give a great Tonaity, and this Sensor really squeezes most of it's 12 MP out into a picture. Of course - one has to work with RAW.

Further, the Lumix 14-45/3.5-5.6 OIS "Kitlens" is still very good, way sharp from Center to Corner, and better than the 14-42(II) and 12-32, and current Lumix 12-60/3.5-5,6 (MTF does show it) The G1 is my go-to camera, EVF is 100%, and bigger than D80/D90 and equal Canon DSLR. Battery Life way good. I don't go over>ISO 400, max. -800 rarely. The lens goes usually for ~65 to 100 EUR, whileas the Body for usually 40 to 60 EUR. I paid full price into early 2009, but never regret. Even i do like OVF much more than EVF into general.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2017 at 12:53 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (241 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kabe Luna: My first "serious about photography" camera? That'd be the groundbreaking Canon EOS 10s 35mm FILM SLR. Three AF points was mind-blowing back then. As were 5 fps and spot metering, coming from a Rebel S II. Fantastic camera with which I learned oh so much and, eventually, created pictures I'm proud of to this day.

Carey, i still have my EOS 650 - it's mint, and like new. Works with flying colors. Only thing got broken within the years - the Eyecup. Unfortuntely, haven't found exactly the same (more square) but then i've put the Canon Eb as replacement on it - works perfectly. :-)

edit And one AF Point is/was enough - but therefore a very bright, and huge glass Pentaprism OVF - i still like it much. Later there was the EOS 10, still a great SLR, and more advanced features. Used it with the EF 28-70/3.5-4.5 II, T-Max 100 & Tri-X 400 mostly back then. I could never afford a EOS 3 back then.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2017 at 10:03 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (241 comments in total)
In reply to:

GustavoGabriel: I bought a old 350d in 2008! It was my first camera and i was very happy with results. Today i have a d7000, but i owned a d60 for just R$ 250,00 ($80) and i am impressed with the colors.

For that reason as said, i do love my old CCD Sensor-based DSLRs.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2017 at 10:01 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (241 comments in total)

Does anyone here have the current DxO Optics Pro 11.x and tried a noisy ISO 1600/3200 D80 RAW File with Prime denoise? Would be interesting to see how good it could be....

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 12:00 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (241 comments in total)
In reply to:

MrBrightSide: Colors are SO much nicer than CMOS cameras, but can anyone explain why?

@fPrime
I I know. And the D700, 5D I, A7S(II) are prefered because of their huge pixel pitch size and 12 to 12.8 MP. This was often being discussed into the Forums here. Someday, i'd buy myself a used A7S II, and therefore i have IBIS with all my MF lenses and very good HighISO IQ.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

marc petzold: As i wrote days ago on a rumors site: Canon introduced this slower 18-55/F4-5.6 STM for 2 reasons compared to it's 18-55/3.5-5.6 STM brother - 1) cost reduction, it's cheaper to produce, less materials, slower speed. 2) it's smaller, suits small DSLRs like the SL1 better, and upcoming like the 800D/77D...

I do think this is a step into the wrong direction. Personally, i'd have loved much to see a 15-55/3.5-5.6 STM Lens as 18-55/3.5-5.6 successor, to give us 24mm Wideangle (in FF-terms) on a Kitlens.

Nobody shoots Landscape Photography usually wide-open. 3.5 never is sharp with that Lens, and gives enough DoF for Landscape Photography. .
My 24-105 F4L USM is also a "Kitlens" on certain Bodies.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 12:31 UTC
In reply to:

marc petzold: As i wrote days ago on a rumors site: Canon introduced this slower 18-55/F4-5.6 STM for 2 reasons compared to it's 18-55/3.5-5.6 STM brother - 1) cost reduction, it's cheaper to produce, less materials, slower speed. 2) it's smaller, suits small DSLRs like the SL1 better, and upcoming like the 800D/77D...

I do think this is a step into the wrong direction. Personally, i'd have loved much to see a 15-55/3.5-5.6 STM Lens as 18-55/3.5-5.6 successor, to give us 24mm Wideangle (in FF-terms) on a Kitlens.

ecka84 - yes, but it isn't a "Kitlens". It costs a hell lot more.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 11:35 UTC
In reply to:

marc petzold: As i wrote days ago on a rumors site: Canon introduced this slower 18-55/F4-5.6 STM for 2 reasons compared to it's 18-55/3.5-5.6 STM brother - 1) cost reduction, it's cheaper to produce, less materials, slower speed. 2) it's smaller, suits small DSLRs like the SL1 better, and upcoming like the 800D/77D...

I do think this is a step into the wrong direction. Personally, i'd have loved much to see a 15-55/3.5-5.6 STM Lens as 18-55/3.5-5.6 successor, to give us 24mm Wideangle (in FF-terms) on a Kitlens.

For Landscape work, one always stop it down. So it doesn't matter. F3.5 to F4 is way minor difference.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 11:33 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (241 comments in total)
In reply to:

MrBrightSide: Colors are SO much nicer than CMOS cameras, but can anyone explain why?

For instance, see this (old) Comparsion: Pentax *istDL2 vs K-5 here:

https://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2013/07/colour-rendition-shootout-6m-ccd-vs-16m.html

http://smg.photobucket.com/user/RiceHigh/library/K-5/Colour_Test_Vs_DL2?sort=9&page=1

Bottom Line, as mentioned years before - all current, mathematical, scientific Testcharts, etc aside - CCD Color was being prefered, and that is still why i do love the Output from my D40/D80 much more than my D90&D7000 Nikon. I was wondering back then, how to tweak my D90/D7000 Colors to look like the D40&D80 was before.

CCD Color is more true-to-life for my Eyes. Albeit i must admit, i do like the Output (RAW) also much from my Sony DSC-R1, and Canon 5D, which are both CMOS Designs. ;-)

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 18:16 UTC
On article Fujifilm XF 23mm F2 R WR sample gallery (282 comments in total)

I don't care about absolute sharpness at all, i do care more about "look", haptics & usability, also IQ about a lens. That's why i do love my old MF lenses, too. This is my lens i'd get this year. Suits the X-E1 perfectly as walk-around Lens, very versatile focal length. On other reviews, this XF 23 F2 WR had shown that it is capable of delivering "3D Pop" just like some old Zeiss Glass. A bit corner Softness at F2 wide open is expected, and ordinary. I do like this Lens very much.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 13:00 UTC as 60th comment | 2 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (241 comments in total)
In reply to:

tinternaut: My first serious camera was a Nikon D40. I broke it. Apparently, dealing with dust issues by using a can of air is not a good idea. Pity - it took amazing photos. So I suppose my first actual serious camera was the Olympus E-510 (with many changes of lens, and not a single dust spot to this day).

I've checked my D40 yesterday night - original Box, Kitlens, all like new...slightly >8000 Actuations. Served me really well, can't tell, but i do like it much more than my D70s, even D80...because of it's small size factor. Also, it's DR is better than the D80, albeit with 6 MP, but therefore huge Pixelpitch. :-)

DR D40 vs D80

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D80-versus-Nikon-D40___518_229

At ISO 400, the D40 scores a full stop better than the D80, despite being ranked lower than the D80 into DxOMark. At ISO 200, which is the lowest on D40, it is 2/3 Stop better than the D80.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 12:53 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (241 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cameracist: First DSLR for me was the Pentax K10D - same sensor, same generation. Similar feature set.
Great cameras even today.

The K10D is the better DSLR, because it's being weather-sealed, for real.
Have the Samsung GX-10, which is 95% the same, but slightly different Body, and Menue System. K10D also scored higher than the D80, and does have a ultrasonic Sensor Cleaning System...and also built-in IBIS.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 11:09 UTC
Total: 1569, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »