Felipe Rodríguez

Felipe Rodríguez

Lives in Spain Seville/Andalusia, Spain
Works as a Almost Photographer
Joined on Oct 21, 2001
About me:

Sony A7R II
Samyang 8mm f/3.5
Canon 17mm TS-E f/4
Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II
Sony FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA Carl Zeiss Sonnar T*
Canon FD 35mm TS f/2.8
Konica Hexanon AR 40mm f/1.8
Mitakon 50mm f/0.95 Speedmaster Pro
Canon 50mm f/1.2 LTM
Sony Planar T* FE 50mm f/1.4 ZA
Konica Hexanon AR 50mm f/1.7
Sony FE 55mm f/1.8 ZA Carl Zeiss Sonnar T*
Helios 44m-4 58mm f/2
Sony FE 85mm F1.4 GM
Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro
Konica Hexanon AR 135mm f/2.5
Micro-NIKKOR 200mm f/4 AI
Nikon 500mm f/8 Reflex-Nikkor-C


Total: 56, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Donnie G: I'm so glad that I waited for these new iMacs. Thank you, Apple! 😎

For worse, mostly...

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2017 at 12:09 UTC
On article Roadtrip Review Redux: The Fujifilm X100F (173 comments in total)

Nice. I had an original X100 for many years, it served me well and sometimes it was my only camera when travelling. But I ended selling it, because my Sony A7RII with a small lens (like the Zeiss 35mm 2.8) was pretty redundant...

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 12:16 UTC as 8th comment

What about the performance of Canon lenses on Sony E bodies through Metabones smart adapters? I have a Sony a7 RII, and some Canon lenses (but they're TS ones, so I didn't need such an expensive adapter), but, as far as I know, Canon EF lenses perform decently (AF wise with the right adapter) on Sony cameras, so there is already a critical mass of users for Canon to research and think about this... I'm not meaning that a Canon adapter for their own EF lenses would be the solution (that adds size, weight and more expense), but, if Metabones is able to make the Canon AF lenses work on a Sony mirrorless, shouldn't Canon be able to do the same on their own hypothetical FF mirrorless?

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 08:48 UTC as 42nd comment | 1 reply

I've recently sold my beloved X100 (first model), because I found it redundant with the Sony A7RII and the Zeiss 35mm f2.8... Well, that's not exactly "cheaper" than a X100 (and it's also bulkier and heavier) but, heck, I already have it anyway...

Link | Posted on May 15, 2017 at 11:57 UTC as 183rd comment
In reply to:

Ian: It looks great, but like all of their products, is let down by the lousy plate system. I wish they would just go to Arca-Swiss-compatible clamps, or at least make that an option. I had one of their hydrostatic heads and it was amazing, but the clamp/plate wasn't tight and ruined an otherwise excellent product. You can replace the clamp yourself, but why not just do it right in the first place.

Agreed! It's a pity. I had to adapt one of their geared heads, which are great for architectural photography, but then again, their plates suck for sure...

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 08:09 UTC

Those are really fast lenses for a MF camera. I own the 50mm 0.95 (E mount) and I think it's a very interesting lens.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 07:10 UTC as 26th comment
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1905 comments in total)
In reply to:

User9362470513: Why are so many photography fans such repellent, one-eyed dicks?

So Sony announce an impressive camera and people revel in the thought that it might mean the end of Canon and Nikon etc. Why such delight in the possible demise of another company? The schadenfreude is appalling. Are you really so insecure about your choices in life?

I have used Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Sony and Ricoh cameras. I wish them all well. They all make exceptionally capable cameras and the more brands in the market, the better it is for consumers.

I think a world where everyone is limited to one or two camera brands would be a disaster. Weird that so many fanboys on here seem to think it would be nirvana.

Agreed. I'm now a Sony user (which includes any lens brand, by the way), but I've had Minolta, Nikon, Fuji and Canon cameras (not to mention other gear brands), and all of them where fantastic at the time of their release. Nevertheless, this new Sony camera seems utterly groundbreaking, and if I were Canon or Nikon or any other big photography company, I'd be seriously worried about it...

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 09:53 UTC
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1905 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jose G: They utterly Nailed it..... they really did, all wishes were answer and for those whom bork at the price consider the D5 or 1DX2.... this I will buy.

I can't see myself tracking anything beyond f/11, actually...

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 17:33 UTC
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1905 comments in total)

Expensive, sure, but a hell of a camera...

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 16:49 UTC as 292nd comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Minolta's prosumer DiMAGE 7 (207 comments in total)

Lots of memories. I had this camera, and used it a lot. I won a national prize with an infrared shot, and that way I was able to justify the expense of my first DSRL, a Fuji S2... And, yes, noise was awful, and the EVF was frustrating...

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2017 at 06:42 UTC as 14th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Nikon D70 (220 comments in total)

This was my second DSLR (after a Fuji S2). It was a good camera, but, honestly, the highest usable ISO was around 400...

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2017 at 06:48 UTC as 45th comment | 1 reply

Hard choice, like many others I would hesitate between 35 and 50 (closer to this one). But, perhaps, if really forced to pick just one, 40mm would be a nice compromise.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 11:21 UTC as 74th comment
In reply to:

Felipe Rodríguez: The engineer's point of view may differ from the lens user's one... My pick are two superfast primes: the 50L and the 85L (II). Having shot Canon, Nikon and now Sony (which includes virtually any lens brand), I still miss those great (if also far from perfect) lenses.
But... wait! Of course, I'd add the stellar 17 and 24 (II) TS-E lenses, which I still use, now on a Sony camera.

Yes, I could perfectly use them, but, for AF lenses, I prefer native Sony ones. The Zeiss 50mm 1.4 and the 85mm 1.4 GM are a bit slower, about as expensive, but they're stellar performers, and are able to nail the focus on people's eyes...

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 07:22 UTC

The engineer's point of view may differ from the lens user's one... My pick are two superfast primes: the 50L and the 85L (II). Having shot Canon, Nikon and now Sony (which includes virtually any lens brand), I still miss those great (if also far from perfect) lenses.
But... wait! Of course, I'd add the stellar 17 and 24 (II) TS-E lenses, which I still use, now on a Sony camera.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 12:07 UTC as 123rd comment | 2 replies

I see not a big difference with FF images, meaning that I can actually see the amazing MF look on other digital MF images (Hasselblad). But, of course, big difference = big price...

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 12:47 UTC as 51st comment
In reply to:

TerrificShot Photography: The major problems with Sony Zeiss Lens products is that focusing system on moving object is too slow.

I do own an Sony A7R2 and Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Lens that I still use on my other Canon 5dM3 body.

If this 85mm F1.8 mid-telephoto prime lens performs as Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Lens, I will definitely give it a try knowing the price is $600 versus $1,800 Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Lens.

is there comparative review already out there between these 2 lenses?

Agreed. I've been a Canon and Nikon DSRL user, and I've shot a lot of professional sports (soccer) with such gear. Now, although I'm no longer covering soccer games, I'm totally amazed by the AF capabilities of my Sony A7RII, including tracking. I find it at least on pair with my former professional DSRL (Canon 1D bodies, Nikon D4), and even best for many subjects. In fact, I bought the Sony camera just to mess around with cheap legacy lenses and, well, I must say that now, even if I enjoy a lot shooting such lenses, I'm mostly shooting with the brilliant Sony Zeiss AF ones I have...

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2017 at 10:26 UTC
In reply to:

mezastel: Would not mind an 85/1.2, since Canon seem to have one. And I'd rather they would work out the kinks and release a7R III first, without overheating and with more sensible menus.

I had the Canon 85L (both Mark I and II versions) and that was one of the best lenses I've ever had (optically both versions were the same). Not really sharp at f/1.2, but definitely a lens with a distinguishable character, pictorial, dreamy, wonderful.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2017 at 07:21 UTC
On article Gear of the Year: Richard's choice - Fujifilm X-T2 (172 comments in total)

I feel pretty much the same about my Sony A7RII (even if it is not the smaller and lighter ML camera out there). Now I've sold most of my DSLR gear (I'm a former Canon and Nikon shooter) and I'm having a lot of fun with the Sony native lenses I have and, even more, with the wonderful legacy lenses I can attach to this gem of a camera.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 12:46 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
On article Leica Noctilux: Overkill or Necessity (36 comments in total)
In reply to:

magneto shot: there is a hyperprime now, so noctilux is for those who must have "leica" name in it or perhaps resale value. If low light is the main reason, reviews so far indicates the hyperprime is a better buy. There is also the nokton 50 1.1 for great value but debatable bokeh.

Thanks for writing this article, one can sense your iron clad defense of the lens even if some of the reasons when weight against the price looks dubious to some. For leica owners, the noct is a "must try" itch simply because the price will no doubt makes the mind wonders.

Is it really worth the asking price? The author in this article clearly thinks it is and it moves him to get great pictures in his work. Inspiration is always priceless.

My Nokton was pretty sharp wide open, noticeably sharper than my Noctilux at f1 (which is soft enough and sharp enough at the same time, I don't know whether I'm exposing well my point...). However, I never fell in love with it, it is a very correct lens, with great value for the price. Regarding the Noctilux, even if I do love how it renders, I think it's way overpriced (even if its said that Leica gets no profit out of it).

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 13:41 UTC

I guess that prices will get lower than the SRP, but the lens will still be more expensive than the Canon 17. Actually, I like more 19 than 17 for most uses, since it will deliver a much more natural perspective. I currently have the Canon 17 (on a Sony camera, I am a Nikon shooter), and I took a lot of pictures with it when I was shooting Canon, and I find it too wide many times. Anyway, I'm sure the Nikon 19 will be a superb lens that will give us more choices for architectural photography...

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 06:58 UTC as 4th comment | 3 replies
Total: 56, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »