NektonFi

Joined on Jan 11, 2012

Comments

Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

maxnoy: Looks nice, but why not get a Leica Elmarit-M 90/2.8 instead -- bit more compact, can be had cheaper, great image, and will be good forever. Will work with whatever mirrorless system or mount comes next. And a pleasure to use.

Fair points. However, Loxias have electronic contacts, which brings few advantages: Automatic magnification when focusing and IBIS works without having to set the focal length manually.

And for the record, I am not interested in buying this lens :)

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2016 at 09:50 UTC
In reply to:

RobertSigmund: An overpriced piece of glass. There are better and cheaper alternatives (Sigma and Canon are mentioned), just not for Sony E mount!

Yes, the Sigma 35mm 1.4 is a great albeit a heavy lens. Different tools.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2014 at 12:52 UTC
In reply to:

RobertSigmund: An overpriced piece of glass. There are better and cheaper alternatives (Sigma and Canon are mentioned), just not for Sony E mount!

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/12/sony-a7r-a-rising-tide-lifts-all-the-boats

"Just in case you missed that, the Sony A7R with 35mm f/2.8 lens shot at f/2.8 outresolved the Nikon D800e with either the Nikon 35mm f/1.4G shot at f/4 or the Zeiss 50mm f/2 shot at f/5.6. Stopped down to f/4 to even the playing field, the Sony was clearly higher. In fact, the only lens-camera combinations we’ve seen with that kind of MTF50 is the Zeiss Otus 55mm mounted to a D800e."

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2014 at 12:14 UTC
In reply to:

cd cooker: The CEO of Canon should be fired! How could he let this happen! T2i,T3i,T4i,T5i all use basically the same sensor!!

That's not all!
In addition to that: 100D, 7D, EOS M

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2013 at 06:13 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1 preview extended (280 comments in total)

When will you use the updated studio scene? Especially the low light setting is better than the one you're using currently.

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2012 at 08:33 UTC as 39th comment
On article Just Posted: Sony Alpha SLT-A99 samples gallery (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

JPBoden: that´s no image quality.Looks so early 2006.
This is the real deal nowadays:

http://www.imagebam.com/image/ad74fc214865919

real deal = green skin?

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2012 at 16:10 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sony Alpha SLT-A99 samples gallery (159 comments in total)

there are a few RAW files available from a Chinese web site.
This is ISO 3200 processed in LR 4.2 with default settings:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/4096871/134.jpg

and the same photo, but with a bit of added contrast and luminance noise removd by -18 and then exported to 12 megapixels.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/4096871/134-2.jpg

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2012 at 17:56 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

Shamael: NEX-6 runs without AA filter too, like NEX-7 and RX 1. Look the picture 2264079 in full size, and look how many moire pattern you find in the curbs of the leafs of the Pampa grass. They are all excellent cameras, but they have all that problem, same as D800E from Nikon.

I was unable to locate any moire on this:
http://masters.galleries.dpreview.com.s3.amazonaws.com/2264079.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=14Y3MT0G2J4Y72K3ZXR2&Expires=1350053693&Signature=sOKR0AUXqaTvdziUBcTtM5pfnUg%3d

secondly, NEX-6, NEX-7 and RX-1 do have AA-filters.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2012 at 14:40 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sony Alpha SLT-A99 samples gallery (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joes Raw Talk: It could be that the a99 will be a full-frame choice DSLR only for those well invested in the best of Sony lenses. I say this because Canon and Nikon are going to be superior in most ways in head to head comparisons, and the cost is less.

I think I would go for the RX1 before this because the IQ it produces is likely better, similar to what the Nex 7 does over the a77,65. Speaking of which, Of all the top Sony cameras, considering image quality and versatility, I still like the Nex 7 best and look forward to the follow up.

I am a Nikon D800 user and find A99 very tempting. I think EVF is superior to an OVF because you can actually see what the camera sees. Looking through an OVF gives you an idea how to frame, nothing else.

Swivel LCD screen with fast AF - I can forgive a little IQ loss for that. Besides the IQ seems a lot higher than Canon 5D3 for instance.

RX1 will have a higher IQ but they are different tools.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2012 at 17:52 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sony Alpha SLT-A99 samples gallery (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

NektonFi: Sony's JPG engine isn't very good. It would've been interesting to see RAW files also, as they are supported by Adobe Camera Raw and Lightroom 4.2. Way much better than Sony's JPG's.

Those are downsampled, but they are nice for sure.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2012 at 10:09 UTC
On article A sneak peek at our forthcoming camera test scene (320 comments in total)

This is really good. And especially I liked the low light test compared to the previous version.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2012 at 05:47 UTC as 45th comment
On article Just Posted: Sony Alpha SLT-A99 samples gallery (159 comments in total)

Sony's JPG engine isn't very good. It would've been interesting to see RAW files also, as they are supported by Adobe Camera Raw and Lightroom 4.2. Way much better than Sony's JPG's.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2012 at 05:25 UTC as 49th comment | 2 replies
On article A sneak peek at our forthcoming camera test scene (320 comments in total)
In reply to:

jcmarfilph: And when shoot this scene, please equalize the settings next time coz we are seeing inconsistencies in your studio shots in almost all cameras (within similar group).

I think normalizing the resolution would make comparisons a lot easier. After all, most of the people in the end tend to look at the photos, not at pixels. 8 megapixels like DXO would be good. I doubt any future cameras will have less than that.

Of course full resolution images would be needed also, but normalized images would be the best for comparisons.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2012 at 04:53 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1 sample images (288 comments in total)
In reply to:

JackM: Before you gag on the price, consider that to get similar performance, bare minimum you would need to spend $2100 on a Nikon D600 and $1620 for the 35/1.4. Forget the cheap 35/2, it can't keep up with this Zeiss. And then you have a big heavy bulky camera that you don't want to bring everywhere, and which puts people off when you point it at them in candid situations. And add $100 for a bag.

I'm seriously considering selling my 35/1.4 for this.

Why is 28/1.8 closer than a 35mm lens? Both are full frame cameras.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2012 at 18:01 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1 sample images (288 comments in total)
In reply to:

sadwitch: To me, images from the DP2merrill were more stunning. With the partnership in effect, think Sony should quickly harness Olympus JPEG engine and apply it to their cameras.

Surely DP2merrill is a lot sharper than any Bayer sensor camera (except for D800 when normalized to DP2 resolution). However, Sigmas are dreadful at any sensitivities above ISO 200.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2012 at 08:01 UTC
On article Just Posted: Hands-on Nikon D600 preview (376 comments in total)
In reply to:

creaDVty: Does anyone know if the D600 has micro-af adjust? That is a feature that is important to me. Thanks.

It does. I have held final production camera in my hands, and it does.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2012 at 08:23 UTC
On article Just posted: Nikon D800 test samples (423 comments in total)
In reply to:

rhlpetrus: DPR: ISO 100 settings for D800: 1/15s, f/11. For D4: 1/8s, f/11. That's one full EV difference, how come?

Typp on EXIF all over the ISO range? Seems extremely unlikely. You can download the raw files and see the same typos over there as well.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 12:33 UTC
On article Just posted: Nikon D800 test samples (423 comments in total)
In reply to:

rhlpetrus: DPR: ISO 100 settings for D800: 1/15s, f/11. For D4: 1/8s, f/11. That's one full EV difference, how come?

I was wondering the same thing. At ISO 6400 it is f/11 and 1/1000 for D800 and 1/500 for D4.

Unless lighting has changed it seems that D800 is a stop more sensitive at same ISO settings than the D4.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 11:20 UTC
On article Just posted: Nikon D800 test samples (423 comments in total)
In reply to:

plasnu: I dont understand why so much negative comments here. This is a fantastic camera and absolutely a game changer. No question about it.

I'm also very impressed how good OMD is. Do I really need FF? That's the question for me.

Ok, maybe under 10k then :) We'll have to see how D800e compares to 645D

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 07:58 UTC
On article Just posted: Nikon D800 test samples (423 comments in total)
In reply to:

Louis_Dobson: Point made that the IQ war is won. On the basis of those unless you shoot in the dark there is no point in buying that over an OM-D (or whatever floats your boat) and giving your back a rest.

Or unless you push and pull load of stops in PP at base ISO of course, which I do. So the D800 is still on my radar - but for people taking fairly un-manipulated pictures, they're just wasting money and wearing themselves out lugging round something with bragging rights.

D800 raws seem to be one of the best for manipulating as well. There is no banding at ISO 6400 even if you push it 2 stops. These studio samples are obviously easy to push, but based on other raw samples as well the D800's IQ is phenomenal.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 07:37 UTC
Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »