PeterTom

Lives in Slovak Republic Bratislava, Slovak Republic
Works as a programmer and part time university teacher
Joined on Apr 21, 2006
About me:

I used film SLRs since 1985.
I mainly photograph family and vacations.

Comments

Total: 32, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Photokina 2016: Canon EOS M5 quick look video (252 comments in total)
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: Pancake STM lenses, what more do you need? This is a camera for real photogs. If you can't figure out how to make great pix with this camera, take up macrame or beard growing. But stop hanging around here complaining.

I am also considering mft (like you mentioned e.g. the 45mm Oly lens).
They actually have all the lenses I would like to have and some nice bodies.
But I am afraid about the smaller sensor because I like to take pictures in low light. And the price plays also a role, I am just an amateur and completely change the system (about 4000 Euro) is hard to justify...

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2016 at 12:22 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Canon EOS M5 quick look video (252 comments in total)
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: Pancake STM lenses, what more do you need? This is a camera for real photogs. If you can't figure out how to make great pix with this camera, take up macrame or beard growing. But stop hanging around here complaining.

You are right, there is no system that would meet my criteria.
And therefore I am not buying any new body for 11 years (actually the one I bought last time was a 350D in 2005, the 450D which I use now was given to me about two years ago) and any new lens for about 9 years. Simply the lenses that I miss and I would buy (EF-S 22 f/1.8 and EF-S 15 f/2 bot with AF) do not exist at all.

Canon decided not to produce those lenses, neither EF-S (where I understand the flange problems with 15mm) nor EF-M (where it seems to be a pure marketing which arrogantly says: "you want primes? Go for full-frame!").

So I use my current equipment and I am usually happy with the results. I feel the limitations of the equipment, but I do not want to spend money on new things which have some of the same limitations.

And occasionally I am writing to forums like this one just to show that there are people like me who wait for something suitable not buying things which do not meet their needs.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2016 at 12:12 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Canon EOS M5 quick look video (252 comments in total)
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: Pancake STM lenses, what more do you need? This is a camera for real photogs. If you can't figure out how to make great pix with this camera, take up macrame or beard growing. But stop hanging around here complaining.

Samyang has no AF. I was able to manually focus on film SLRs that had special helpers in their optical viewfinders. But for EVF I need AF.

50mm STM is surely a nice lens for a DSLR (I have the older non-STM version). But with the adapter it is just too big for the mirrorless. We have different ideas about the meaning of "small".
Look, with M5 the total length of the assembly is even longer than on my old 450D:
http://camerasize.com/compact/#684.471.2,331.471,ha,t

I can do great photos (for an occasionally photographing amateur, I think) with my old 450D. I can see some limitation of it, including its size (too big to have it most of the time with me) and the lack of reasonable fast wide angle lenses designed specifically for APS-C (i.e. as small as possible, not the size of Sigma 20mm 1.8). I would like a system that removes that limitation, but the current M system just does not fulfill this dream. So I stay taking pictures with my 450D and Cannon will not see any cent from me.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2016 at 07:11 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Canon EOS M5 quick look video (252 comments in total)
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: Pancake STM lenses, what more do you need? This is a camera for real photogs. If you can't figure out how to make great pix with this camera, take up macrame or beard growing. But stop hanging around here complaining.

You are right I would not need anything else than a full set of small (smallest possible for the format and decent (non-L) IQ, not necessarily pancake) f/1.8 or f/2.0 prime lenses.
But... where are they?

There is just one: the EF-M 22mm F/2.0 and nothing else.
EF-S and EF pancakes lose their "pancakeism" at the moment you put them on the adapter.
And they are 2.8. Too dark for my uses (available light, not shallow DOF) .
And, as far as I know, there is no compatible 15mm F/2.0 lens (of course I mean one with AF) at all.

So once more: Yes, If there were, additionally to the existing 22mm f/2, also other dedicated EF-M lenses, namely 15mm f/2.0, 32mm f/1.8 IS, 60mm or 70mm f/1.8 or f/2 IS then I would not need anything else (maybe except my old EF 100mm f/2 on an adapter) and I would buy the body and the lenses and switch from my old Canon 450D (which has actually the same problem - no decent EF-S wide angle primes, even not a 22mm f/2).

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2016 at 18:40 UTC
In reply to:

PeterTom: When I sum the weight and price of these 3 lenses:
Canon 50mm 1.8 STM
Canon 85mm 1.8 USM
Canon 100mm 2.0 USM
Then I get 1044 grams and 880.24 Euro (looking at cheapest prices in reliable on-line shops around me).
The Sigma is 1490 grams and 1249 Euro.
It is about 40% more in both numbers...
Can the lens have that much better IQ (compared to the above listed ones) that you will not mind carrying 400 more grams (another lens' weight, and I usually leave the 85mm at home, 50mm and 100mm are usually enough to carry) and pay 40% more?
For me the answer is "no", but if flexibility of a zoom is highest priority, then your opinion may differ.

noirdesir:
Thanks for the other comparison.

My three points:
1) I am curious whether the limits of physics are really that hard to beat that a zoom must be so much heavier and bigger than the individual lenses (that contain 3 times the mount, 3 times the circuits, 3 motors, ...) or it is partly some marketing which assumes (maybe correctly) that if somebody pays that lot of money then he/she wants something huge and heavy.
2) My example was APS-C (even if the primes had to be full frame ones because, unfortunately, nobody produces APS-C primes in those FLs and apertures), your example is an L zoom for pros. And many people here say "pros do not use APS-C". So the examples are from two different worlds, IMO.
3) I would prefer the primes in both cases for their weight, size and price. It is because I am not a pro, I do not shoot video and I cannot justify the price of the zooms for my hobby.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 16:40 UTC
In reply to:

PeterTom: When I sum the weight and price of these 3 lenses:
Canon 50mm 1.8 STM
Canon 85mm 1.8 USM
Canon 100mm 2.0 USM
Then I get 1044 grams and 880.24 Euro (looking at cheapest prices in reliable on-line shops around me).
The Sigma is 1490 grams and 1249 Euro.
It is about 40% more in both numbers...
Can the lens have that much better IQ (compared to the above listed ones) that you will not mind carrying 400 more grams (another lens' weight, and I usually leave the 85mm at home, 50mm and 100mm are usually enough to carry) and pay 40% more?
For me the answer is "no", but if flexibility of a zoom is highest priority, then your opinion may differ.

Marcelobtp:
So let's compute the "space saving". The lens lengths on DPReview are apparently given without the mount. So my computation is based on real measurement of my 85mm and 100mm including both caps (they add 21mm to the length) and assuming the same size of caps on the other two lenses. And I assume the lenses to be cylinders with their maximum diameter:
Total length of the three lenses (without hoods but with both caps): 60+93+95 = 248mm
Length of Sigma: 192mm
Total volume of the three lenses: 1.05 liters (cubic decimeters)
Volume of the Sigma: 1.33 liters
So There is no saving in space (if I interpret "space" as volume) - the Sigma is about 27% more voluminous.
There is some 30% saving in length, but usually you can better place three shorter lenses inside a bag than one longer lens...
You are right that I am not considering video. That was the meaning of my last sentence in the original post - others may give much higher priority to the flexibility of a zoom over primes.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 16:19 UTC
In reply to:

PeterTom: When I sum the weight and price of these 3 lenses:
Canon 50mm 1.8 STM
Canon 85mm 1.8 USM
Canon 100mm 2.0 USM
Then I get 1044 grams and 880.24 Euro (looking at cheapest prices in reliable on-line shops around me).
The Sigma is 1490 grams and 1249 Euro.
It is about 40% more in both numbers...
Can the lens have that much better IQ (compared to the above listed ones) that you will not mind carrying 400 more grams (another lens' weight, and I usually leave the 85mm at home, 50mm and 100mm are usually enough to carry) and pay 40% more?
For me the answer is "no", but if flexibility of a zoom is highest priority, then your opinion may differ.

tkbslc:
I see some value in not swapping lensens, but not 369 Euro value.
And the weight and volume disadvantage makes it even smaller. Of course, for me, that's my personal opinion.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 16:12 UTC

When I sum the weight and price of these 3 lenses:
Canon 50mm 1.8 STM
Canon 85mm 1.8 USM
Canon 100mm 2.0 USM
Then I get 1044 grams and 880.24 Euro (looking at cheapest prices in reliable on-line shops around me).
The Sigma is 1490 grams and 1249 Euro.
It is about 40% more in both numbers...
Can the lens have that much better IQ (compared to the above listed ones) that you will not mind carrying 400 more grams (another lens' weight, and I usually leave the 85mm at home, 50mm and 100mm are usually enough to carry) and pay 40% more?
For me the answer is "no", but if flexibility of a zoom is highest priority, then your opinion may differ.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 13:37 UTC as 33rd comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

Boky: focus micro-adjustment?

That's my question, too.
But I do not think that Canon has put it there. In fact it is the only point that would distinguish this model from 70D...

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2015 at 10:22 UTC
On article New GF: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF7 flips for selfies (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

PeterTom: I do not shoot (many) selfies, but the flipping screen may be useful also for other purposes. It would be twice more useful (IMO) if it would not only flip but also rotate (swivel is the right word? the descriptions on DPReview name it "fully articulated").
I shot many pictures in portrait orientation and many times I would like to have them shot easily from waist level or ground level without the need of doing additional gymnastics (with my current Canon Rebel).

But many m4/3 cameras have only flip screen.
Actually, it seems that there the only m/4 cameras with "fully articulated" screen are the SLR-sized GH4 and G6 (and when I look for m4/3 I want to downsize my equipment).
Why m4/3 cameras tend ignore the portrait orientation (how many of the current)?
Would it be so much more complicated to make, for example, this screen fully articulated?

@Just Ed
My old Rebel (450D) has no tilt screen either.
So I must either use the optical viewfinder (from a squatting position) or just shoot "blindly" (from ground level) and hope for a usable result.

I am considering modernizing my gear already for a year or two.
I am considering both APS-C Canon DSLRs (700D or 70D at this moment - both have fully articulated screens) and m4/3 (Because I would like to have a smaller/lighter camera system that offers reasonably fast and reasonably priced wide angle primes).

The lack of fully articulated screens on virtually all m4/3 cameras (except the two that are not much smaller than an APS-C DSLR) is one point that keeps me from making the decision in favor of m4/3. And when looking at GF7 I find it ridiculous why they did not make the small extra step - allow the screen to rotate on its hinge.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2015 at 16:23 UTC
On article New GF: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF7 flips for selfies (398 comments in total)

I do not shoot (many) selfies, but the flipping screen may be useful also for other purposes. It would be twice more useful (IMO) if it would not only flip but also rotate (swivel is the right word? the descriptions on DPReview name it "fully articulated").
I shot many pictures in portrait orientation and many times I would like to have them shot easily from waist level or ground level without the need of doing additional gymnastics (with my current Canon Rebel).

But many m4/3 cameras have only flip screen.
Actually, it seems that there the only m/4 cameras with "fully articulated" screen are the SLR-sized GH4 and G6 (and when I look for m4/3 I want to downsize my equipment).
Why m4/3 cameras tend ignore the portrait orientation (how many of the current)?
Would it be so much more complicated to make, for example, this screen fully articulated?

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2015 at 14:40 UTC as 82nd comment | 5 replies

I have been waiting for reasonably fast wide angle prime EF-S lenses for about 5 years.

So now we have one. Do we?
1. It is just so-so inside the "wide" category. 24mm is a strange FL for aps-c. 22mm would be better (or 17 or 15).
2. Unfortunately it is also not "reasonably fast". For me "reasonably fast" starts at 2.0 in this FL.

I do not care about "pancakes". I really dreamed about a 22mm f/2 EF-S lens that would be smaller and lighter than the Sigma 20mm f/1.8 (the only other fast prime at this FL).
My Tamron is f/3.5 till 27mm, so why should I buy this lens?

I know that the flange focal distance is a technical problem for wideangles on DSLRs.
But wasn't it the idea behind EF-S that it can help to bring the rear element of the lens a few millimeters closer to the sensor?

I do not want to go fullframe. And it seems that Canon now says: "do not wait anymore, we will not make it". Any other options? Maybe the big and heavy Sigma 18-35/1.8, maybe switching to to Olympus MFT...

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 23:51 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

OldDigiman: Say what? Plug iPhone into charging cable, plug other end of charging cable into computer, on computer navigate to phone's DCIM folder, copy files. Free.

I do not own an iPhone, so I would like to ask: does it work with any other files than multimedia ones (pictures and videos)? Because DCIM is meant only for these kinds of files...

Link | Posted on May 31, 2014 at 17:03 UTC
In reply to:

Kim Letkeman: Hmmm ... I dumped Apple for Android years ago and I simply use DropBox to get automated camera uploads that appear on my machine at home pretty much as soon as the images are shot. Does that really not work on Apple iPhones? Note the price, too: $0

The price just seems to be $0.
By using any cloud solution you expose your files potentially to many people for investigating and data mining of any kind. So you pay with your data.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2014 at 17:00 UTC
On article Rumors hint at pair of new Canon lenses (56 comments in total)
In reply to:

macjonny1: Canon, no one cares about these boring lenses. Maybe do something innovative instead of a MK II version of a lens that is just fine the way it is. Spend your resources getting out of the obsolescence that you seem to be heading at light speed.

@Richard
For me 4mm and 2/3 stop is quite a big difference.
IS is seldom needed for stills with an UWA (at 10mm I can regularly use 1/15 of second with no noticeable blur).
And if it will be the same price (which was crazily high for me when I bought the 10-22 in 2005) then I would opt for 10-22 without thinking.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2014 at 00:26 UTC
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: What a refreshing feeling to see a photography awards event devoid of war photos, conflict dramas, human atrocities, suffering and unhappiness.

Call it whatever you like, Sony has got it right.

.

SirSeth: Click the "See more images" link and you will see the whole series.
Maybe DPreview could rename it to "See the whole series"...

It is really needed to see the whole series before judging.
I looked at number 1 and I thought: "Well, it's not a bad family snapshot, but why is it the the winner?".

Then after seeing the whole series I am somewhat puzzled.
I do not like that series at all.
My photographic reason is that those seems to be arranged shots with models (I doubt that the author followed the couple for several years and that she was present at the very moment when the police was taking the man, or am I wrong?).
So why is it "contemporary issues" and not "campaign"?
From human point of view I do not like the series because it promotes too much the feminist point of view of the problem.

But for some other photos the complete series are better than than the single picture chosen by DPreview.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2014 at 15:37 UTC
On article Toshiba unveils UHS-II Class 3 microSD memory cards (30 comments in total)
In reply to:

RedFox88: This makes the size of CF cards look very obsolete.

Until you drop them on the grass :)

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2014 at 21:27 UTC
Total: 32, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »