Nexu1

Joined on Dec 28, 2012

Comments

Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10
In reply to:

pkcpga: Going to be a tough sell against the Nikon 85 f1.8 for $425. I know the Tamron has VC but not sure it will be technically be as optically good and it's almost double the cost. I've never felt the need for VC on that lens.

I also think it's going to be a tough sell against the Nikon f1.8 (and I assume Canon has something similar).

Sigma did the smart thing and attacked Nikon's f1.4 primes where they could win on cost and performance. I see this as a hard sell for Tamron unless there is something truly magical in that little lens.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 20:19 UTC
In reply to:

lacikuss: What a horrendous Bokeh... yay!

Would love to see a side by side shot against the Nikon 1.4 which is highly regarded for it's bokeh. I don't think the bokeh looks that bad, although a side by side would be much easier to see what type of improvement is possible.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2015 at 17:31 UTC

I agree, I think, with Mr. Butler.

Whether or not my camera has a mirror is pretty much irrelevant. It doesn't matter to me if it does or not. The only time it seems to matter is when a troll on the internet makes some sort of sensationalist comment that causes a stir (and I pretty much ignore those folks).

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 20:23 UTC as 126th comment
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2471 comments in total)
In reply to:

0MitchAG: TIL:
Full Frame is simply the best.
APS-C is the middle child who just seems out of place.
M43 is the minimum with the maximum price.
And Nikon 1 is just noisy rubbish.
....

Not only that PerL but APS-C really pulls ahead on value or price to performance ratio. I can't speak to Canon but I know in the Nikon world you can buy a relatively recent body, with high MP (16 or 24) for $300-600. Pair that with a 35mm f1.8G DX ($200) prime and an 85mm f1.8G ($400 frequently on sale) and you can get ridiculous high IQ and pretty darn shallow dof. I've rented the D610 and might still buy it, but the "value" won't be there, it'll be a luxury item. I somewhat agree with 0MitchAG about MFT being expensive. After having such good APS-C equipment for so cheap I struggle to get a little less performance (for what I use) but need to spend more money. Although there is no denying that the size advantage is very, very, very nice for MFT. Great system for it's size.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 12:56 UTC
In reply to:

Prairie Pal: Anyone that was bullying and harassing posters in the D600 oil spot threads over the last few years should be banned from this website. The threads represented exactly what this GEAR website is all about. The discussions were every bit trying to assist Nikon to trouble shoot and pin point the problem as they were to inform possible buyers to beware. The bare-faced denial and ignorance displayed by the cement heads who tried to scuttle each thread, and neutralize the whole notion that there were problems only amplified the suspicion that manufacturers not only monitor the discussion forums, but also participate under the cover or over zealous fan-boys. Nikon's true loyal fans are the ones that openly discuss issues, and challenge the company to improve.
I for one am proud to have added my few decibels to the bigger ROAR of disapproval towards Nikon. Consumes need to protect their money. Let the noobies and the feeble in character take notice that THIS is how consumers GET IT DONE!

Well said PP.

Based on one of my good friends suffering through D600 ownership I consistently backed him in post after post (since he's not the type to hang out on message boards). I consistently recommended against the D600 and would say that I wouldn't buy one for $1000 (which was true). His oil problems were a huge headache and at what price is your time, effort & stress worth.

I'm glad to post he has been the VERY happy owner of a new D610 for the past month. Completely happy. Completely satisfied with Nikon's response.

While I give Nikon a big thumbs down for launching this product with a problem I give them two huge thumbs up for giving out D610 replacements. Even to a 1 year old camera with 15,000 clicks. The remedy took a bit too long but was made right IMO. Thanks for stepping up and standing behind your products Nikon.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 21:46 UTC
On article Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R real-world samples gallery (269 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: An 85mm is not for headshots or even head and shoulder shots.

It's for head and half torso at the most.

You need a 135mm equiv minimum for headshots.

If you don't believe me then try it with your consumer zoom. It makes a huge difference.

Bond - how about 85mm on a crop sensor?

Maybe not textbook perfect but does pretty darn well IMO.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2014 at 13:07 UTC
In reply to:

Lisa Holloway: I love her images and am very inspired by them. While my post processing is very different, I can appreciate that each artist applies their own 'vision' through their editing choices. On another note, there are clearly some jealous, talentless hacks here. I had to quit reading all of the drivel.

No doubt Lisa.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 02:02 UTC
In reply to:

SHood: Maybe they will pull the Nikon 1 from the US market like Canon has started to do with their EOS M lenses.

The problem with both Canon and Nikon is that they are trying not to overlap their DSLRs as that is where their margins are coming from. Nikon decided to go with a smaller sensor and Canon crippled their product with slow AF. Neither want to make mirrorless better than DSLR as this impact their bread and butter.

Not higher IQ than anything Nikon is putting out for APS-C, including their budget models like the D3200 and D5200.

I like MFT but it's high technology cost is what leads to low margins, which is why prices are super high (higher than D3200 or D5200) yet profits are so low.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2013 at 22:24 UTC
In reply to:

SHood: Maybe they will pull the Nikon 1 from the US market like Canon has started to do with their EOS M lenses.

The problem with both Canon and Nikon is that they are trying not to overlap their DSLRs as that is where their margins are coming from. Nikon decided to go with a smaller sensor and Canon crippled their product with slow AF. Neither want to make mirrorless better than DSLR as this impact their bread and butter.

It's not that they don't want to make mirrorless better than DSLR, mirrorless is a higher cost, lower margin, lower IQ product.

Canon and Nikon will be just fine. Canon's new DSLR is showing us the path to mirrorless, the problem for m4/3 fanboys is that the future doesn't look like m4/3, it looks like a Nikon or Canon DSLR (body, APS-C sensor, lenses, etc... just some options without a mirror, maybe all without a mirror someday).

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2013 at 21:12 UTC
On photo The Old Lighthouse in the -Hidden Sunset- (Full Colours Only) challenge (2 comments in total)

Congratulations on winning the challenge! Great photo.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2013 at 15:16 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10