Rob de Loe

Rob de Loe

Lives in Canada Canada
Joined on Jul 11, 2019

Comments

Total: 48, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Nicolas Det: @Fujifilm. A suggestion to gain a lot of architecture/landscape photographers on board:

Produce a shift zoom lens for APS-C: XF 11-22 F5.6 R S
- at around 2000€.
- S for shift
- Manual focus
- Record the shift value and corrections in the raw.
- compact, slow but sharp wide opened.

It would unique and it is 100% doable on APS-C. Shift only mechanism ist not very complicated but need to be robust. The bigger image circle with a zoom is challenging but there are already such formula for FF (with F4).

Regards.

That would be an interesting lens. I'd want tilt because I use tilt more than zoom, but I can see the attraction.

I built a robust tilt-shift outfit around an X-T2 and Olympus OM lenses. The image circle was plenty large for as much shift as the adapter could provide (with most lenses).

Zoom lenses are interesting because it's quite common for the image circle to be quite a bit larger in the middle of the zoom range than it is at either end; the wide end tends to be the smallest, with the long end larger than wide but not as large as the middle.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2021 at 23:17 UTC
On article Leica introduces APO-Summicron-SL 28mm F2 L-mount lens (256 comments in total)
In reply to:

Horshack: "Its maximum aperture can be used without any loss of image quality"

That's an extremely bold assertion to make for a fast lens. I'm looking forward to seeing full-sized aperture-series samples that back it up.

If the MTF chart for this lens is to be believed, it's better at f/2 than f/8. That's astonishing.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2021 at 00:16 UTC
On article Hands-on with the new 100MP Fujifilm GFX 100S (197 comments in total)
In reply to:

MinAZ: Fuji markets this camera as a large format camera, but also uses "more than full frame" as a marketing line. And here, DPR says medium format. Looks like no one can make up their minds - is this large format, medium format, or full frame+?

I shot 4x5 film until recently. The 8x10 people always looked down on me and my "mini large format" camera. ;)

Mind you the 11x14 people didn't have time for the 8x10 folks, and the 16x20 shooters, well, they didn't have time for anyone!

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2021 at 00:02 UTC
On article Hands-on with the new 100MP Fujifilm GFX 100S (197 comments in total)
In reply to:

entoman: A truly stunning camera, but for my usage (landscape, macro and wildlife), I have a few reservations.

The fairly large size of the smallest AF square, would make it difficult to position the AF point accurately on small "non-eye" subject elements.

The AF speed looks to be pretty slow in the video, and will be even slower with long focal length glass. The system may be fast, but the lenses can't keep up.

The EVF, at 3.69K, is simply too coarse to visually judge sharpness of fine details in fur, feathers, insect scales etc. A 5.76K EVF wouldn't have added hugely to the cost.

The lenses, compared to FF equivalents, are simply too large and heavy to be carried around all day, especially the longer focal lengths.

Those points aside, it's superbly designed, and it will be a fantastic tool for people who like to work slowly and methodically, and tend to use short focal lengths.

@entoman, my GFX 50R has the same screen resolution. I have no trouble at all getting very precise focus. I used to use focus peaking as an aid, and still do occasionally, but in most situations I can now tell at a glance when it's in focus.

One quirk that people often miss is that you only get the highest level of magnification when you're shooting RAW if you also shoot largest JPEG. It's a very minor pain to have to delete all the JPEGs before import, but worth it to get that extra magnification.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2021 at 23:58 UTC
In reply to:

QuarryCat: For me the real fault of the Fuji GFX System:
It is no square format.
No need to turn a square camera.
4:3 is good but 1:1 would have been better for photos (not for Video).
Today it is much easier to crop to the right demension and show it in the viewfinder.
And it would be fantastic to see Pentax with mirrorless medium format...
Wishful thinking...

So why not set your GFX camera to shoot 1:1... What am I missing?

You see 1:1 in the viewfinder/LCD, you compose precisely for 1:1, and when you bring the RAF into Lightroom (or whatever), it's pre-cropped to your 1:1 aspect ratio. It's true that the the full 4:3 RAF is lurking in the background. Is that your issue?

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2021 at 23:49 UTC
On article Fujifilm GFX 100S review (922 comments in total)
In reply to:

pascal b: @Richard Butler:
Still not the mention of the 6:7 aspect ratio... (despite my mail some days ago).

Indeed. However, if you like composing for the aspect ratio you want to use (which is how I work), you can choose a different aspect ratio in the 50R, like 6x7, and that's what you see when you're shooting. Fuji then tags the RAF with that aspect ratio so when you open it in a program like Lightroom, it's "pre-cropped" to 6x7 or whatever you used. The whole 4:3 RAF is still there of course, and you can undo the pre-crop with a click.

If you're shooting JPEG, it's cropped to the chosen aspect ratio and that's that.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2021 at 13:31 UTC
On article Fujifilm GFX 100S review (922 comments in total)
In reply to:

pascal b: @Richard Butler:
Still not the mention of the 6:7 aspect ratio... (despite my mail some days ago).

Can you clarify what your concern is? The 50R has that aspect ratio available. Is it missing from the 100S? Or are you excited to discover it there too?

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2021 at 03:17 UTC
On article Fujifilm GFX 100S review (922 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adam Sharp: Nice .. fantastic landscape camera . Well done Fuji !!

@Kharan See https://www.robdeloephotography.com/Pages/Toyo-VX23D-and-Fuji-GFX-50R

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2021 at 02:39 UTC
On article Fujifilm GFX 100S review (922 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adam Sharp: Nice .. fantastic landscape camera . Well done Fuji !!

@Kharan, there are indeed lots of outstanding lenses that work well. My digital view camera outfit is built around a Fuji GFX 50R, a Toyo VX23D, and various kinds of lenses with big image circles from Pentax, Mamiya, and Schneider Kreuznach.

The problem is wide angle lenses. The Fuji GF flange distance of 26.7mm means that below 60mm you're basically limited to medium format SLR lenses. The wonderful modern technical camera lenses from Rodenstock, and most of the older Schneider Kreuznach technical camera lenses, don't work on my setup for various optical (cross-talk causing lens cast) and mechanical (can't reach infinity) reasons.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2021 at 00:47 UTC
On article Fujifilm GFX 100S review (922 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZilverHaylide: Still missing from the GFX system: a flat-field macro lens (with electronic coupling including auto-diaphram and EXIF; doesn't even have to include AF) that can image down to a 24 x 36 mm area. As far as I know, Fuji macro only gets down to a 1:2 repro ratio, which would mean imaging a 66 x 88 mm area at closest focus.

You don't have to wait for Fuji to give you what you need. There are lots of outstanding lenses designed for flat field copying that you could adapt with a simple bellows and a copy stand.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2021 at 00:37 UTC
In reply to:

mristuccia: Have a look at this article:

https://petapixel.com/2018/03/23/martin-stavars-the-one-man-in-a-web-of-online-photo-contests/

The Nonochrome Awards is one of those contexts...

Oh my. Thanks for the link. That is brutal. What scam.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2021 at 01:00 UTC
In reply to:

m oLeathlobhair: Would it be right to think a tilt-shift lens benefits from field curvature?

Flat field is ideal for shift. This is also why it's common to use small apertures when shifting.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2021 at 03:19 UTC

As always, an outstanding combination of knowledge and humour. I'm so glad you enjoy writing these pieces Roger.

I rely on lenses that have large (relative to sensor) image circles that allow for shift. Field curvature is (almost) never an advantage in this scenario. My ideal lens performs the same regardless of where the sensor is within the image circle. These ideal lenses don't exist (not in my price range, anyway!) But I have found good options that work well.

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2020 at 15:46 UTC as 28th comment
In reply to:

Verto: Unfortunately if someone took these images in 2020, they wouldn’t get any attention. It’s True.

@Alex Akai, OK, I see what you were trying to say about that point. I actually have read posts from people who didn't realize how film works...

I used to shoot 4x5 black and white film and print analogue in my darkroom. I'm on safe ground when I say there are broad similarities between that and developing a RAW file in Lightroom, but what I do with RAW files today is a long way from what I could do with a negative under the enlarger in my darkroom.

From what I've read of his thinking, Ansel Adams would have been all over digital photography and Lightroom.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2020 at 14:01 UTC
In reply to:

Verto: Unfortunately if someone took these images in 2020, they wouldn’t get any attention. It’s True.

Yes the "out of camera" picture definitely didn't look like that, because it was a negative.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2020 at 15:43 UTC
In reply to:

Chris2210: It's funny how weird some of these sample images look. There are obvious things like the overemphasised rhomboid shapes at the top of buildings, but then I look at the Bank of Montreal image. Parallel verticals, but somehow it still looks distinctly odd. It may be the edge perspective distortion - this is after all still a wide angle lens.

entoman, a couple friendly amendment to your post: First, shift doesn't increase depth of field. I believe you meant to say "tilt" (and let's not forget about "swing" -- same idea but horizontal). Second, personally I try to avoid saying that tilt increases depth of field. When you go for the
Scheimpflug effect, you're changing where the plane of sharpest focus is located, and the shape of the area of acceptable focus around that plane.

A picture says it better, and an animated picture says it even better. Here's Tim Parkins' fun little tilt calculator: http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/dslr-tilt-shift/

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2020 at 02:47 UTC
On article Leica Q2 Monochrom initial review (509 comments in total)
In reply to:

Petka: What is the target audience for this camera?

I suspect it is aimed at wealthy but ignorant amateurs who do not know how to adjust the color to grayscale mapping in Photoshop or NIK Silver Effex or similar.

That is also the reason this huge problem with monochrome sensors is not discussed here more.

No other way to understand why anybody would pay a lot of money to throw away a lot of creative post processing options.

It's not for me because I prefer to have access to the colour channels. However, to answer your question, it's for people who can put the increased resolution to good use, who benefit from the higher base ISO, and who prefer a more traditional way of making black and white photographs.

Choice is good. I'm glad it exists so people who want to work this way can.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2020 at 15:53 UTC
On article Hands on: Leica Q2 Monochrom (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

trewsbury76: Leica Q2 Monochrom makes sense as an art camera for specialist professionals. Many more "shades of grey" on Leica Q2 Monochrome as the deciding factor; more than any colour sensor.

Higher than expected sales may prove everyone wrong on this gamble. Funny how black and white movies like Dr.Strangelove 1964 became classics. Barry Lyndon 1975 in colour a commercial flop. Art needs to show things in grey like life itself.

@basleigh, exactly the same number of shades of grey are possible with a monochrome sensor and a Bayer sensor.

The folks that make Red cameras for video published a nice, plain-language explanation of the difference between monochrome and Bayer sensors: https://www.red.com/red-101/color-monochrome-camera-sensors

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2020 at 22:31 UTC
On article Hands on: Leica Q2 Monochrom (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

Docno: Interesting that the comments on this article, which talks about the advantage of a monochrome camera in theoretical (marketing?) terms, produces far more positive comments than an article (elsewhere on this site) that actually shows images taken by the camera. Perhaps that's on the photographer in that other article... or perhaps the theory doesn't quite live up to reality.

Yes, yes I do think that people who are "only posting JPEGs on the web" will buy this camera. Most people don't print. Where do you think their pictures end up?

As for the market for this camera, it's people who have $6,000 to spend on a fixed lens monochrome camera. I'm sure that some of them will have the ambition to make and print high quality black and white photographs, and perhaps show and sell them. Others just want a nice camera.

But none of that has anything to do with the point I was making, which is that you don't need a monochrome sensor to make exceptional black and white photographs.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2020 at 22:26 UTC
On article Hands on: Leica Q2 Monochrom (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

Docno: Interesting that the comments on this article, which talks about the advantage of a monochrome camera in theoretical (marketing?) terms, produces far more positive comments than an article (elsewhere on this site) that actually shows images taken by the camera. Perhaps that's on the photographer in that other article... or perhaps the theory doesn't quite live up to reality.

As someone who shoots 99.5% for black and white, using a colour sensor, and who shot, processed and printed black and white film in formats from 35mm to 4x5 for many years, I have a different view.

A monochrome display is not required. Almost without exception, all the great black and white photographs from the film era were made by people who looked through optical viewfinders or ground glass that showed the world in colour.

Colour converts to grey tones just fine. The bump in image quality that people claim makes monochrome sensors outperform Bayer or X-Trans is not photographically significant if you're only posting JPEGs on the web. Even if you're printing large, a boat load of other considerations matter more in most cases.

You also give up a lot by using monochrome, primarily the ability to decide how colours map to grey tones in post.

I'm glad monochrome sensors exist. The more tools the better. But please lets not appeal to magical thinking and wish fulfillment.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2020 at 19:22 UTC
Total: 48, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »