ManfredGrebler

Lives in Germany Germany
Works as a Photographer
Has a website at www.pferdebilder.info
Joined on Jan 13, 2017

Comments

Total: 177, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ManfredGrebler: I agree with polarizers and ND filters.
UV filters have been unnecessary even in the analog world.
Graduated ND filters, well, in my opinion post processing gives better results, all the more if you take two images with different exposures.

Marc: Thank you.... - I have been taking photos for 40 years now. And even in the analog period the use of UV filters was VERY controversial. Maybe in the very early days of photography UV filters may have been neccessary. But not in the 80s and later. I remember all these discussion very well. - Just like today and here.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2020 at 06:44 UTC

Looks like a good option when you travel with different camera brands / battery types. But than, if the only charger breaks you will cry.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2020 at 15:38 UTC as 37th comment
In reply to:

JDPhotographer: I have been using these filters (Pol, neutral and grad) for ages and still use them. I never used a UV filter. In 30 years, I have never broke/scratched a lens . Each filter you use degrade the image quality. UV is useless : it does not bring anything to the pictures , degrade your image at different level and are quite expensive for what they do.
But I understand that people could use them for peace of mind. Generally speaking, Pro don’t use them.

I don't use UV filters in 99.99 %. But I have some (or "protection filters") for special situations. For example in front of a waterfall with lot of mist in the air. (I have to clean the filter every minute at least.)

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2020 at 16:24 UTC
In reply to:

ManfredGrebler: I agree with polarizers and ND filters.
UV filters have been unnecessary even in the analog world.
Graduated ND filters, well, in my opinion post processing gives better results, all the more if you take two images with different exposures.

SteveAnderson: Please read my post again. And differ between "normal" ND filters and graduated ND filters.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2020 at 10:19 UTC

I agree with polarizers and ND filters.
UV filters have been unnecessary even in the analog world.
Graduated ND filters, well, in my opinion post processing gives better results, all the more if you take two images with different exposures.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2020 at 07:34 UTC as 78th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

tlinn: I've never been one to oppose video features on a camera, as long as they don't get in the way of stills shooting. Occasionally, they even come in handy. That said, when Fuji introduced the X-T3's new 26MP sensor with backside illumination, my understanding was that any potential noise benefit from BSI was "spent" on improving the readout speed instead. If true, this is an example of video functionality being something other than benign relative to stills functionality. I'm not arguing that this was the wrong call. The X-T3 has been a successful model. But I do wonder what will happen when new features are only of benefit to videographers. That's the point where I personally quit upgrading.

Class A:
EVF is a question of DSLR or Mirrorless, nothing to do with video.
OSPDAF is also QUITE useful for still with mirrorless cameras.
Don't know how you get the idea of noise vs. video ability

Seems you are mixing up something.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2020 at 10:48 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T4 full-production sample gallery (155 comments in total)
In reply to:

Majikdragon: @cxsparc

IBIS should be turned off at high shutter speeds regardless of the manufacturer, it isn't just for Fuji.

No IS can always work 100% perfect. You will often see (very small) artifacts. In case of long exposure these are negligible compared to shake blur. But for short exposure times you risk a drawback by IS. (And this knowledge is as old as IS exists.)

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2020 at 09:31 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T4 full-production sample gallery (155 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ivan-san: The photo with the metal bridge (photo ID 5605526604) appears all kinds of mushy when viewed at 100%. The beams, rails, and basically any straight detail in the bridge appear wavy, as though seen through heat shimmer; the river and the greens lack a lot detail as well. Is this the X-trans sensor at work? If so, I didn't realize it could be so horrible; a mid-range smartphone takes sharper photos (granted, it won't have the zoom reach of the 55-200 the X-T4 photo was taken with).

The 55-200 is not really a poor lens. But I think it is the wrong lens to test a camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2020 at 07:04 UTC
On a photo in the Fujifilm X-T4 sample gallery sample gallery (7 comments in total)
In reply to:

Advent1sam: I am no fan of xtrans, and this first landscape image hopefully makes it clear and obvious why!

This lens isn't good at f5 and I see various jpeg and sharping artifacts. Unfortunately the RAW file download does not work.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2020 at 17:57 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T4 review (1491 comments in total)
In reply to:

perry rhodan: Really hope this will be the last xtrans from fuji. Hehe. LOL

Fuji offers completely free RAW converters.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2020 at 09:08 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T4 review (1491 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photofrankenstein: XT4 is the APSC reigning king or the closest to perfect APSC camera however an APAC camera nevertheless. And its pricing certainly pushes it into a dangerous zone of competing against some of the most successful and best executed cameras of late, namely Nikon Z6 and Sony A73. Fuji xt4+16-55f2.8 +56 cost more than Z6 24-70 kit +85/1.8 and that is problematic for Fuji. Z6 offers better high iso and same depth of field at FF f1.8 vs apsc f1.2, weighs about the same, sharper across the frame, video tracking eats Fuji for dead. That is even before mentioning some killer lenses like 20/1.8, 24GM Sigma 35/1.2 etc.

Why always looking at the price only and why should APSC be cheaper than FF? The target audience is a different one. I own Nikon and Fuji. Look at the size and weight of Nikon's Z prime lenses. And compare to corresponding Fuji lenses. (Aperture and depth of field are not important in many use cases.)

Link | Posted on May 21, 2020 at 08:36 UTC
In reply to:

eno2: The SD format is the future, high speeds together with backwards compatibility is the way to go!

XQD and now the more expensive CFexpress are bad uninteresting jokes, meant only to dig big holes into our wallets!

I for once will never buy a camera without an SD card slot!
That's why the A7III is selling so good even now after 2+ more years after the launch at almost full price and the newer Z6, even heavily discounted is uninteresting, mostly because of that single XQD card slot!

SD is too small and fragile for professional use. And SD express is far in the future, while CFExpress is now. Do you really think that pros spending some 10.000 $ for their camera equipment care about the price of cards?

Link | Posted on May 21, 2020 at 07:04 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T4 review (1491 comments in total)
In reply to:

AlejandroI: This a great camera, but isnt the price a bit to much on the high side? For 1.7K USD I can already get a Sony a7iii, yes video is not as good, but autofocus will be much better, and to some extent also image quality. But if what you want is video, than you have the Panasonic S1, which has all the time ongoing discounts and can be found for just a bit more, arund 2K, yes in this case autofocus might not be as good as with the Fuji, but you will get better image and can do 4.2.2 10 bit at 4k.... (i am not much into video so here i am just repeating what i read in the internet)

Just wait for a cash back promo. I'm sure it will come soon.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2020 at 16:32 UTC
In reply to:

Larawanista: Very nice photos. Should temper the passion of trolls to argue about dynamic range, high ISO noise, etc. In the hands of artists, a phone camera is more than enough.

It depends what kind of artist you are. For an "Instagram artist" this might be ok. "Real" artists want their work printed in large formats, and than you will see the difference.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2020 at 10:30 UTC
In reply to:

Kiwisnap: How does Apple have any control over the matter?

I think it is not the trademark but the design of iphone is also protected.

Link | Posted on Feb 29, 2020 at 08:47 UTC
In reply to:

sunnycal: How can Apple dictate where a product purchased off the shelf is used? Sure, Apple brand is visible but that shots qualify as fair use.

"Fair use" - if it applies in this case - is something in the US. But movies are usually shown worlwide. In other countries other legal rules are valid.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2020 at 08:19 UTC

The decision is very reasonable. No commercial software company can live with "free updates for ever". Except - like Topaz labs did in the past - you always make a "all new" product and cancel the old one. Which is in no way better for customers.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2020 at 08:06 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

Irakly Shanidze: Basically, no matter how you call a subscription model, it is still the subscription model, "make no mistake about it" :D

Some people seems to have their own very strange definition of "subscription model".

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2020 at 08:02 UTC
In reply to:

georgievv: I kind of feel bad for the vendors paying for those ads. They were charged big $ for irrelevant ads shown to people who were not influenced by the ads at all (probably the norm for most ad campaigns). I hope Instagram provides good tracking tools for vendors to audit how the ad budget was spent. Our company used to advertise with Google and more than half of the spending was going for irrelevant web searches no matter how hard we tried to strengthen the rules for exact phrase search. Finally we got tired of wasting money and stopped.

Why should i be influenced by ads that are in no way relevant for me?

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2020 at 20:18 UTC
In reply to:

georgievv: I kind of feel bad for the vendors paying for those ads. They were charged big $ for irrelevant ads shown to people who were not influenced by the ads at all (probably the norm for most ad campaigns). I hope Instagram provides good tracking tools for vendors to audit how the ad budget was spent. Our company used to advertise with Google and more than half of the spending was going for irrelevant web searches no matter how hard we tried to strengthen the rules for exact phrase search. Finally we got tired of wasting money and stopped.

I often wonder who are the most stupid? Companies spending big $ for ads nobody wants to see and providing no roi. Or people who get really influenced by these ads and spend money because of that.

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2020 at 12:47 UTC
Total: 177, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »