ptox

Joined on Dec 18, 2011

Comments

Total: 243, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

kobakokh: if Olympus will set more realistic prices for OM-D and this lens, they will be very popular in the world, and also will be enough for millions of customers, including some professionals. But in this dragon-like prices i am not sure... For example, OM-D with 12-100 will be cost about 2300 USD! Its more then Nikon D750 with 24-120 (with real F4!) + 50/1.4G + Yungnou YN685 professional flash! And last set will be FAAAAR better then OM-D system...

"with real F4!"

The most braindead equivalence argument so far. Congratulations.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 16:14 UTC
In reply to:

StevenE: ho hum . an f/8 equiv zoom

StevenE: your post is boring. It adds nothing. Go away.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 16:13 UTC
In reply to:

ogl: It's 28-200/f8.0 equivalent for FF...F8.0...Hmmmm...

24-200, not 28-200. And seriously, why bother posting this? Everyone's pretty well aware of what f/4 means on MFT...

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 16:11 UTC
In reply to:

sonics: Looks like a great lens, but gone is the compact m43 format:

http://camerasize.com/compact/#594.613,660.545,hd,t

What do you mean "gone"? It's not "gone" -- you can still buy small MFT lenses. Nothing changes with the availability of this lens. And re this lens, it still makes no sense: a 12-100 f/4 can only be made so small -- are you saying MFT would be better off if this lens didn't exist? It's still smaller than the APSC or FF equivalents (by focal length) ..

Your post is just nonsensical.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 16:09 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (657 comments in total)
In reply to:

monokultur: This is a very cool cam - indeed. I shot FT and mFT for more than 6 years. Even made money out of my shootings. But last year I did a step by step switch to Full Frame. And once you have tasted this - there is no way back. The files are much cleaner - at any ISO. The sharpness and tonality at pixel level is so much clearer. You can crop the files to half the size and still get real sharpness where the mFT file is looking flat and more and more like a smartphone picture.

Given the choice: Canon 6D and 50mm 1.2 vs. E-M1 II 25mm 1.2 or Canon 6D and 85mm 1.8 vs. E-M1 II 42.5 1.2
I would always choose the 6D. And than I would rather buy a 70-200 F4 L than the 40-150 2.8.

Why stop there? Go to medium format this year!

In all seriousness... yeah, FF sensors produce better absolute IQ than 43 sensors -- just like MF sensors are better than FF.

That's no surprise. But ultimate IQ is not the only consideration. Obviously.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 20:36 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (657 comments in total)
In reply to:

bergat: It is very strange Olympus goes with its errors. I do not understand whyOlympus continues with 4/3. It is not better start with APS-C?

In other words, "duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh".

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 20:29 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (657 comments in total)
In reply to:

sknai16: It is now as expensive an almost as big as cameras with much larger sensors. The MFT sensor size remains the weakness of the system and the lenses are now substantially more expensive than the Sigma Art line of lenses. Something does not make sense and I think people will start to react. I went back to Nikon!

"The MFT sensor size remains the weakness of the system"

Is there really room for yet another APSC or FF system? The size is the whole POINT of the system. You either get and can work with the compromises -- and all format sizes have compromises -- or you don't and you pick something else.

As for the lenses: SOME are more expensive than SOME of Sigma's. It's still perfectly possible to put together an inexpensive and relatively high-performance MFT system...

"Something does not make sense and I think people will start to react. I went back to Nikon!"

There are plenty of options in MFT for pretty much any user/use. If you didn't find the equipment that suited your needs at the price you were willing to pay, then fine.

But don't assume that other people are as dissatisfied. (Would Oly and Panasonic be releasing more and more high-end equipment if people didn't want it? Hmm...)

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 18:08 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (657 comments in total)
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: Man, that looks like my OM-4T. The paint is rougher, but other than that it's really close. I can't help wondering if someday we might see an OM digital camera with a big sensor.

"I can't help wondering if someday we might see an OM digital camera with a big sensor."

Hope not. The last thing Oly needs is to put its barely-profitable camera department behind yet another format.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 17:39 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (657 comments in total)
In reply to:

rbach44: Full frame user (switched from M43 once upon a time) not looking to troll but asking an honest question:

Looking at the 25mm 1.2 makes me think the same thing as when I saw the f.95 Noktons: Isn’t this just the wrong system for shallow DOF? Putting a big, heavy, and expensive lens on a system built around portability makes no sense to me…

Especially considering that the cost of this lens is the same as a used D600+50mm 1.8, which will provide similar DOF characteristics at little size/weight penalty when considering the whole combo. And that is not even considering the (at least in my opinion) poor ergonomics of a big lens on a small body, the IQ advantage of full frame, and the (presumably) poorer performance at f1.2 compared to a good ol’ f1.8.

Of course M43 has its other advantages, but doesn’t a larger format just make more sense for shallow DOF than shoehorning a very fast lens into a system that really just doesn’t excel in that area? Am I missing something here?

"Am I missing something here?"

Well, yeah. MFT isn't designed around a single intent .. just consider the exceptional range of body & lens styles -- there's something for pretty much everyone.

Anyway -- now that MFT is pretty mature, why should someone invested in the system have to go elsewhere for shallow DoF?

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 17:38 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (657 comments in total)
In reply to:

Truebar: The size of this camera&lens combo is clearly entering the dslr territory, and there I say full frame. Therefore the sensor in that camera has to be much, much bigger, otherwise what's the point? I'm sure that this camera has all the funky and fab bells and whistles, but no commercial photographer would want to touch this because of its sensor size.

"but no commercial photographer would want to touch this because of its sensor size"

Factually incorrect. Many commercial photographers have publicly announced their use of MFT for at least some of their shoots.

None of them give a toss about the sensor's _size_ ... only its performance. And in that regard, MFT gives up very little to APSC .. or, indeed, to any 35mm imager, film or digital, before six to eight years ago.

(And god knows no good images were shot with 35mm cameras before then...)

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 17:35 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (657 comments in total)
In reply to:

feritol: beautiful & stylish camera.... but(pic no 7) what a damn little sensor.just sized equal to tester's nail!

Seriously? Your impression of the physical size of a sensor is utterly irrelevant -- you might as well be comparing pants bulges.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 17:33 UTC
In reply to:

FantasticMrFox: And it's getting more and more DSLR like with every iteration - seems like it has slowly dawned on DSLM manufacturers that people actually want to be able to hold a camera without getting cramps in their hands, and that requires a certain size and decent ergonomics.

So what was the point of mirrorless again?!

"So what was the point of mirrorless again?!"

Am I really still reading this kind of crap in 2016?

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 20:36 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

dotyman: Nice job Olympus. Lens looks awesome–sharper than my 50 1.2L across the frame with good bokeh. Now to pair it with the M1II...

Roland: because DoF is all that matters!

Come on...

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 20:01 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

Androole: The quality of these images is almost enough to silence the lure of FF...

You'd have to be a rank fanboy to deny that the output from this lens is seriously impressive. You can't even say "for a Micro Four Thirds lens."

"I thought MFT was supposed to be light and affordable?"

MFT was never supposed to be "light and affordable". It was designed to be a modern digital system whose format (sensor size) is the best all-around compromise for IQ and portability .. especially as overall sensor technology continues to improve.

Think about it: in absolute terms MFT's IQ already exceeds any 35mm format (film or digital) prior to about eight years ago. Now think of the vast reams of extremely valuable photos that were taken with that older equipment...

Absolute IQ is all that matters. And on that front, MFT delivers for the vast majority of users and uses.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 18:24 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: This almost has the DoF and light gathering ability of my $100 50 1.8! Keep plugging away Olympus.... maybe one day!

"Am I missing something?"

Yes: DoF is not the only measure of a lens.

Or don't you care about sharpness, correction, and bokeh quality?

Then you'd be in the minority of photographers... though possibly not of FF-obsessed DPR members. :-)

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 18:18 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: This almost has the DoF and light gathering ability of my $100 50 1.8! Keep plugging away Olympus.... maybe one day!

Not funny -- merely obtuse.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 17:47 UTC

"The new TruePic VIII Image Processor will effectively suppress blur due to subject movement, making it possible to utilize High Res Shot Mode in a wide variety of shooting conditions, such as gently-blowing grass, tree leaves, or ocean waves."

That sounds interesting. Wonder how well it'll work...

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 17:35 UTC as 135th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

ArnoBrinkman: I really like it, get rid of those big Full frame heavy sh*t

abortabort: cameras require lenses, too -- you may have noticed them attached to the front of the bodies. Things with glass in them? You know.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 17:28 UTC
In reply to:

noflashplease: Wow, 18 FPS with AF-C or 60 FPS with AF-S? Impressive, unless you forget about that dinky 1/4 frame sensor. Big deal. The world has moved on to full frame and Olympus is stuck with the same FourThirds sensor dimensions. Sure, it's the convergence between still photography and video, but I could really care less about any 2x crop body, no matter how fast the frame rates are?

Olympus needed to bring out a full frame mirrorless body at Photokina, but instead we have yet another boring MicroFourThirds body, albeit a very expensive one. They're pushing a professional body in an amateur format. Sad, Olympus, very sad. At least now that the EM-1 II has premiered, Olympus can reassign the engineers back to the profit generating colonoscopy business.

Posts like yours are ridiculous -- as though the only important measures of image quality are relative, i.e. between formats.

Nevermind that modern MFT cameras produce sharper, higher-DR images than any 35mm film ever and any 35mm digital prior to eight or so years ago... and that this output is more than good enough in absolute terms for a significant majority of the photo-taking public...

Yours is a joke of a position. MFT quality is more than good enough in absolute terms for a huge number of people & photographic situations... relative quality is completely unimportant.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 17:26 UTC
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: ...And, in order to accomplish those things, we had to leave those tiny 4/3 sensors behind.

Don't be tiresome.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 17:04 UTC
Total: 243, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »