ThomasFromBavaria

Joined on May 24, 2013

Comments

Total: 27, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

"Remember that your gear is more advanced than Ansel Adams' "

And your pictures are also better than Ansel Adams'.

They just do not stick out of the mass because most pictures are better. If Ansel Adams work was not famous and a nobody would publish his work, nobody would even take notice.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2018 at 06:43 UTC as 14th comment | 2 replies
On article Tiny micro-camera sensor is self-powered by light (75 comments in total)

The faster the lens
the more light on the sensor
the more power produced
the more frames per second.

A complete new meaning of fast lenses :)

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2018 at 08:25 UTC as 11th comment
In reply to:

Androole: It's too bad they didn't offer this in FE mount. The Sony 70-200/f4 is a good lens, but it's actually a little bit heavier than this one, and costs almost double...

In FE mount, the barrel length would be 200mm. And so 25mm longer than the Sony-G lens.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2018 at 00:22 UTC
In reply to:

evogt500: Dear Tamron, please make lenses for Fuji x-mount. Thank you.

On the Fuji, this would behave like 43-115mm / f4 Fullframe.
Too long for a standard-zoom, too short for a tele-zoom.
And a big portion of the image circle isn't captured by the sensor. So incoming light is wasted. Better ask Sigma to release their 18-35 f1.8 for Fuji-X.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2018 at 10:54 UTC
In reply to:

BostonC: Sounds much like a Panasonic Lumix 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6, that's 67x75mm at 265g.

@Thorgrem
However 140mm on MFT is equivalent to 187mm on APS-C. The Panasonic has much more reach.

Feel free to crop on APS-C

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2018 at 11:05 UTC
In reply to:

burnley_ben: From spec table above:

"Focal length 18–1325 mm"

Wow! This is a game changer :-p

Still, nice to see an APS-C addition to the line-up. As with all lenses, it will be useful for some not for others. Many are quick to judge what is needed. Some will be happy with the existing 18-200mm lenses, some might prefer a lighter more compact lens.

Don't get too excited. I am sure beyond 1000mm it's only f5.6

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2018 at 10:57 UTC
On article Nikon D850 added to studio scene comparison (452 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lotz: APS C being meanwhile more or less on par with those expensive beasts...

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=nikon_d850&attr13_1=canon_eos5dmkiv&attr13_2=pentax_kp&attr13_3=sony_a7_ii&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&attr171_2=1&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=-0.8599266544424069&y=0.2091185410334346

Pentax KP has indeed same noise level as those FF cameras. But it provides much less details. Looks like there has been a noise reduction algorithm applied that reduces noise but of coarse also detail.

Anyway - it is absolute nonsense to claim APS-C is as good as FF and m43 is as good as APS_C because the (smaller) sensors improved so much. This improved sensor-tech can always be used in a bigger sensor, gaining more light and detail.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2017 at 10:03 UTC
On article Sony FE 85mm F1.8 sample gallery and first impressions (145 comments in total)
In reply to:

benlens: How is the build quality? Is it metal or plastic?

Any opinions, how the FE85 and the Tamron 85 VC compare in terms of image quality?

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 07:56 UTC
In reply to:

ThomasFromBavaria: Does it focus breath?

And in which direction.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 15:50 UTC

Does it focus breath?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 05:39 UTC as 101st comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

kingslayer: $1200 for the 85mm? It better be way better than the tamron. Very disappointing. Waited all these years. Expected $900 max. Guess I will get the tamron for $749 instead.

The Tamron is almost a stop slower. That should explain the price difference, even with amazing VC.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 19:31 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2223 comments in total)
In reply to:

caravan: The a6300 is much,much better and less expensive,nice try though.

There is no "better" camera. Each has its strengths and weaknesses. And it's personal preference which one to choose.

IMO the A6300 advantages are
- price
- size
- fast EVF updates in 8fps-shooting for tracking
- popup-flash

X-T2 advantages are
- ergonomics (top-dials)
- lenses
- ergonomics (joystick)
- image-quality
- ergonomics
- dual card slot
- ergonomics

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 13:01 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2223 comments in total)
In reply to:

caravan: The a6300 is much,much better and less expensive,nice try though.

"6300 is legendary for its horrible wobbly rolling sh*tter. "
True - and my bet is the X-T2 has the same rolling sh*tter!

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 12:48 UTC

Hopefully tons of Apple laywers will protect and defend this patent, so no other company can copy it.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2016 at 19:47 UTC as 33rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Nick Brundle - Photography: Don't get carried away.....
Watch this first and then decide who the winner is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sT14RrsDW18

@pkcpga
Tony is a Canon professional?

LOL - he joined Canon Professional Services. This means he gets better support for his gear. And he has to pay money for it. That does not mean he is a "Canon professional". He is not paid by Canon for using Canon gear.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2016 at 09:46 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2161 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThomasFromBavaria: I have a question (maybe Richard Butler may answer):

Why had the A6300 shorter shutter-speeds in daylight-scene than the competitors?

Any competitor I have looked at (A6000 A7 D7200 XPro2)

ISO3200: 1/1600 vs 1/1250
ISO6400: 1/3200 vs 1/2500
ISO12800: 1/3200 9EV vs 1/5000 (or 1/2500 9EV)

In JPEG-mode, the difference starts at ISO400:
ISO400: 1/200 vs 1/160
ISO800: 1/400 vs 1/320
ISO1600: 1/800 vs 1/640
...

I always thought you do your tests in full manual mode to ensure ISO+Speed are identical. And then correct exposure in post.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2016 at 11:00 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2161 comments in total)

I have a question (maybe Richard Butler may answer):

Why had the A6300 shorter shutter-speeds in daylight-scene than the competitors?

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2016 at 14:42 UTC as 330th comment | 2 replies
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2161 comments in total)

@dpreview:
In sudio-comparison with daylight simulation, the A6300 has at each ISO setting shorter shutter speeds than other cameras. Can you tell me the reason, why?

thanks

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2016 at 02:35 UTC as 362nd comment
In reply to:

adengappasami: common. Car that big, even original A7 will focus them in track. Just saying.

same awful music

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 23:18 UTC
On article Readers' Choice Awards 2015: The winners (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Recount!!! Canon 5D/S should have won!!!

It is a 4 year old camera with an updated sensor.
But this year, D5mk4 will be a very good and promising candidate!!!

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 09:41 UTC
Total: 27, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »