lancet

lancet

Lives in Croatia (Hrvatska) Zagreb, Croatia (Hrvatska)
Joined on Dec 10, 2009

Comments

Total: 36, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Nikon 105mm F1.4E ED sample images (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: f1.4 sample portraits are too shallow in my opinion,with this price range a 135mm f1.8 would be better reasonable shallow depth with same bokeh
but this lens is so good for low light,you could take some lowlight shots

@DamianFL
And yet I shoot portraits and hotel interiors professionally and rarely use a lens wide open, as do most of the people who shoot those two things. The are more sides to photography than just events.

And in the studio I will use my Nikkor 85 1.4 since I love it's rendering even at f/8 and compared to Nikon 70-200 2.8 it's certainly lighter. But I do have an f/1.4 lens because there are rare situations for which I need a fast 85. And it's quite as sharp and contrasty as the 85 1.8 when stopped down.

If you have a quality fast prime, it will be really sharp stopped down. I take the example of old Nikkor 50 1.2 Ai-S which when stopped down was sharper that the 1.4 and 1.8 versions.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2016 at 06:33 UTC
On article Nikon 105mm F1.4E ED sample images (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: f1.4 sample portraits are too shallow in my opinion,with this price range a 135mm f1.8 would be better reasonable shallow depth with same bokeh
but this lens is so good for low light,you could take some lowlight shots

#stopdownasneeded is also good

Not only good but usually preferred by your customers. :)

@Emadn13
No, it's like having a Ferrari and then slowing down before a corner instead of running of the road ;)

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 21:48 UTC
In reply to:

Cariboou: Here Canada price of 70-200 Sony 3.599$ Nikon 2.699$

Not really a useful comment, since neither will Sony work on Nikon. And there are far more Nikons out there. The point is that this lens costs 50% more than Nikon and Canon equivalents, and the Canon especially is considered one of the best lenses in their whole system. So, Sony should be really doing something unique to explain the price hike. But in the end the market will pass it's judgement and discern winners from losers.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 07:33 UTC
In reply to:

attomole: I don't quite get this mini medium format thing, from what I understand on equivilancy, the lenses available here will not capture more light than FF with the fast zooms an primes available for that format. Maybee Fuji think FF will crash on there high end APSC offerings.

@winkalman
It's hard to tell if they are being profitable from sales in APS-C. Most of Fuji profits in imaging come from Instax and not X system. We know that Pentax was not profitable. Sony became profitable after A7 series launch, although probably most of it was driven by A6000 so Sony could be pulling profit in there.

I think that Fuji would have similar position in the market and profits if it launched the X system as FF. They wouldn't sell that many units but they would have much higher profit margins. I7m not critiquing since I like the Fuji system, I'm just saying that what they thought would be their primary advantage didn't end as such.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 22:03 UTC
In reply to:

Kostasm: Uses the same sensor to X1D, but this is double in depth... (probably in weight as well)
Well, you 're not gonna compete the Swedish beauty only through price factor!

@kostasm
I think the issue is the mass necessary to dampen the vibrations from focal plane shutter.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 14:05 UTC
In reply to:

attomole: I don't quite get this mini medium format thing, from what I understand on equivilancy, the lenses available here will not capture more light than FF with the fast zooms an primes available for that format. Maybee Fuji think FF will crash on there high end APSC offerings.

I do think that Canon and Nikon mostly dominate the APS-C market as well. That's where most of their sales happen.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 08:29 UTC
In reply to:

endofoto: Flash sync 1/8000. You can shoot f2 and 1/4000 on the beach middle of the day.
Medium format lenses can sync only upto 1/800. This is the solution for portraitscapes.

@RPJG

Exactly, shutter speed is irrelevant in that seting since you are using flash speed to freeze movement.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2016 at 12:34 UTC
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (947 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dimit: How come a cellphone offering less costs more??? God only and Apple know!

Did you not notice how Leica functions?

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 19:02 UTC
On article Nikon D500 versus D750: Which one is right for you? (372 comments in total)
In reply to:

MHT: I've been trying to decide between the D750 and D500 for months. I shoot primarily landscapes but also everything else at times and I can only justify one (expensive) body.
I've been leaning towards the D750 but didn't anyone else find this a bit disturbing:
"...the D500 provides an electronic first curtain shutter option, which allows landscape photographers to ensure vibration-free images – something that can be a challenge with the D750."
Is the "challenge" met by the firmware update, turning off VR when tripod mounted, locking up the mirror, or something else?? The last two are my common operating practice but a statement like that certainly deserves more of an explanation! I get why the D500 may have an advantage but wouldn't this "issue" affect portraits and pretty much anything other than moving targets? If I buy the D750, how do I go about meeting this "challenge" I wonder?

@deliverator
That is not completely correct because there is still shutter movement that causes vibration.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 06:45 UTC
On article DxO ONE real-world sample gallery (181 comments in total)
In reply to:

tkbslc: It's as expensive as a Canon G7X, with the same image quality, but I can't use it without a phone attached. Instant fail.

It's definitely capable of great output, it's just in a form factor that makes zero sense for 99.9% of us.

Then it's like a Leica M60 :)
And much cheaper :)

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2015 at 16:33 UTC
In reply to:

BobYIL: Typical Leica: 30 x 45mm sensor with 1 (one) AF point for $16.900? Hi Seal and Medvedev! How are you guys?

@noirdesir
Yes, Pentax has 27 but they are so clustered in the center (because they were designed for an APS-C cam) to make it irrelevant. You still need to focus and recompose.
The best solution in MF land is Hasselblad's True Focus that calculates the compensation for recomposing. It's accurate in around 95% of cases.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2015 at 09:45 UTC
In reply to:

Just a Photographer: Now all mirrorless camera manufacturers are profitable.
Sony, Fuji and now Olympus all presented black figures recently for their imaging business.

While Nikon and Canon are suffering. Its not that these DSLR manufacturers make losses on selling systems, but they do loose heavily in profitability and marketshare over the recent years.

Times are changing.

As far as I know, Nikon published yesterday better results than expected and camera division is profitable.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2015 at 11:04 UTC
In reply to:

QuarryCat: ok - a "cheap" Super-Tele for the second best camera-system - not a bad idea.
But when you see how good already Tamron and Sigma are placed on this market, I doubt about a success für Nikon.
It is on the heavy side, maybe it is mechanical better then Tamron.
I don't like the starting point at 200 mm - I would favor a 5.6/100-500 mm or a 5.6/100-600 mm.

The 2.8/24-70 mm VR also inspired by Tamron and right before Canon comes with a new version in IS.

If I still had my D3, I would buy the 1.8/24 mm - that is right in the middle, not so expensive, not so heavy and large like the 1.4/24 mm - a great idea!

Nikon is still fighting - that is always good news!

@QuarryCat
Just as Canon jumped on when Nikon released a high dynamic range sensor. Nikon's lens is not stealing market from Canon when you can't mount it on a Canon camera. I doubt there will be a lot of switchers when Canon's lens is already excellent.
It will be renewed in a regular 7-8 year cycle.
Their bigger priority now is releasing a good 16-35 2.8 than updating an already excellent lens.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 07:22 UTC
In reply to:

Lassoni: Very skeptical about 200-500. It's much heavier than Tamron's older 200-500 (maybe due to constant aperture, and addition of VR). Still, way too heavy for my liking. A real shame they chose not to use PF in any of these lenses.

1.2kg vs 2-2.3 kg. I really don't see point in this. PF would've made the lens 1.5kg

@p5freak
It could, but it's quite telling that they didn't incorporate DO in new 100-400 zoom.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 23:40 UTC
In reply to:

Daniel4: I'd rather have a lightweight 24-50/2 for better low-light and bokeh. I can easily crop from 50mm to 70mm.

There would be nothing lightweight in 25-50 2.0. It would be bigger than this lens. Look at Sigma 24-35 which only goes to 35mm and weighs 100g less with same filter thread.
As I said earlier, god bless the lens designers around here with all their knowledge and ideas.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 12:42 UTC
In reply to:

Lassoni: Very skeptical about 200-500. It's much heavier than Tamron's older 200-500 (maybe due to constant aperture, and addition of VR). Still, way too heavy for my liking. A real shame they chose not to use PF in any of these lenses.

1.2kg vs 2-2.3 kg. I really don't see point in this. PF would've made the lens 1.5kg

God bless all the lens designers and optical engineers visiting these forums. Maybe Nikon and Canon should employ all of them to finally design some decent lenses, I'll not even mention Zeiss or Leica.
@p5freak - Canon 70-300 DO had some serious optical compromises and was never a big seller like their normal 70-300, so I don't see any point to your comment. Or you just want a lens with a certain technology inside irrespective of quality?!
If you want small and light with some image quality compromises it's easy to go to a mirrorless smaller format.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 12:29 UTC
In reply to:

QuarryCat: ok - a "cheap" Super-Tele for the second best camera-system - not a bad idea.
But when you see how good already Tamron and Sigma are placed on this market, I doubt about a success für Nikon.
It is on the heavy side, maybe it is mechanical better then Tamron.
I don't like the starting point at 200 mm - I would favor a 5.6/100-500 mm or a 5.6/100-600 mm.

The 2.8/24-70 mm VR also inspired by Tamron and right before Canon comes with a new version in IS.

If I still had my D3, I would buy the 1.8/24 mm - that is right in the middle, not so expensive, not so heavy and large like the 1.4/24 mm - a great idea!

Nikon is still fighting - that is always good news!

I highly doubt you'll se a Canon 24-70 2.8 with VR in next five years since it'a a fairly recent lens and these lenses have a long lifespan. If they wanted to release something like that, it would have been released instead of the current one which came after the Tamron. Just designing such lenses takes couple of years.
So, if you are in Canon mount the only VR option with 2.8 aperture is the Tamron which advises against using it for video by the look of it.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 12:18 UTC
On article Fujifilm XF 90mm F2 LM WR real-world samples (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

DVT80111: Read the review in lenstip. The score is unprecedented which made me salivated a little.

However, lot of my portraits taken with Canon 70-200/4L already required a lot of softening and edit to hide all the facial imperfections. So sharp lens is great, but does it make a practical difference?

I am not so sure.
Beside, using the legs as zoom is not always possible.

@DVT80111

Sometimes IS can make your images less sharp than not using it.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2015 at 09:54 UTC
In reply to:

Serious Sam: Lens is often loved or hated. As far as I can remember, hated many lens…..2.8 FF zoom for its weight, Sony Zeiss prims for its price, etc….. I had never question a lens fundamental existence until this one comes along. The exact reaction is HELLO!! YOU SERIOUS??

For its price, I can get a Nikon 35 1.8G, on the wide get a Tokina 2.8 UW zoom/ Sigma 24 1.8. This combination is much more flexible.

At such a short focal variation and only F2, what is Sigma thinking??

@ Serious Sam

It replaces a 28mm prime as well, hence the three primes.

Cheers

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2015 at 10:56 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5DS real-world sample gallery (217 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thuravi Kumaaran: Great improvement in DR - if things go like this Canon will surpass Sony, in sensor DR in which they were lagging.

@JJ Rodin

You could equally argue that Nikon is free to take the best sensors on the market and tweak them for top performance (since it's clear the Sony sensors perform better in Nikon bodies than in Sony), then having to protect their own outdated sensor supply unit.

There are pros and cons to each approach, but a camera is significantly more than it's sensor. Sensor is like 50% of the whole picture, so to say :)

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2015 at 02:41 UTC
Total: 36, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »