barrycarie

Joined on Jul 25, 2017

Comments

Total: 31, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

barrycarie: I am pretty excited... not for the phone, but for the future. As Sony develops faster readout sensors, and as imaging processors get more powerful, computational photography will keep moving up the sensor-size and image quality ladder.

Phones bat way above their weight in image quality/size. Phones also sell well enough to put serious R&D money in. That technology will eventually trickle down to cameras. Can you imagine if Olympus or Nikon licensed google processing technology? ...and for the nay-sayers who say Google images look over-cooked... that is consumer preference... there is no reason that stacking and aligning10 images would need to be aggressively tone mapped.

I wonder if Sony will have the guts to give us an RX-100 turbo with all the processing tricks of a cell-phone, but with a full 1 inch sensor? Seems that would endanger their entry mirrorless...

...and phones may be where we see the first curved sensors used... simplifying and miniaturizing lenses...

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2021 at 15:32 UTC

I am pretty excited... not for the phone, but for the future. As Sony develops faster readout sensors, and as imaging processors get more powerful, computational photography will keep moving up the sensor-size and image quality ladder.

Phones bat way above their weight in image quality/size. Phones also sell well enough to put serious R&D money in. That technology will eventually trickle down to cameras. Can you imagine if Olympus or Nikon licensed google processing technology? ...and for the nay-sayers who say Google images look over-cooked... that is consumer preference... there is no reason that stacking and aligning10 images would need to be aggressively tone mapped.

I wonder if Sony will have the guts to give us an RX-100 turbo with all the processing tricks of a cell-phone, but with a full 1 inch sensor? Seems that would endanger their entry mirrorless...

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2021 at 15:26 UTC as 36th comment | 1 reply

when do we get the 50-100 1.7 to complete the trinity?

Link | Posted on May 25, 2021 at 15:29 UTC as 16th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: Chris and Jordan are filming the 70-200 2.8 DG DN review right now.

It is taking a while on the Pentax K-01...

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2021 at 19:54 UTC

Take this technology to the 1 inch sensor, where it would be more affordable... Sony's disincentive to do this is that then they would not sell high bodies and lenses. Google or Apple processing of a 1 inch image sensor would obsolete ILCs as we know them.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2021 at 17:51 UTC as 7th comment | 3 replies

I think Luminar will do that for you with a couple of sliders...

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2020 at 16:04 UTC as 4th comment

deleted

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2020 at 16:31 UTC as 45th comment

I really didn't see anything in there that couldn't have been shot with an iPhone.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2020 at 16:29 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

dwkyre: Now they just need a compact camera to go with it! I am a very happy Micro 4/3 Panasonic user, so I would consider their full frame offerings if they had some that were a bit smaller. Hopefully this lens is a sign that they are looking at that direction.

It is just a tool, not a trolling attempt... At base iso, you are going to get a better file than you can display on either camera, and you will be hard pressed to tell the difference. You will have to start bumping up iso a lot earlier on the S1. The 10-25 is very sharp wide open. If you want to photograph at high noon with bright sun and deep shadows, the S1 with this lens will beat a G9 with the 10-25, but there are few other places that it will be meaningfully different on screen or print.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2020 at 20:47 UTC
In reply to:

dwkyre: Now they just need a compact camera to go with it! I am a very happy Micro 4/3 Panasonic user, so I would consider their full frame offerings if they had some that were a bit smaller. Hopefully this lens is a sign that they are looking at that direction.

smaller and cheaper than the 10-25 for micro 4/3... but a G-9 with the 10-25 probably has about the same performance as the S1 with this lens.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2020 at 16:35 UTC

Not very sexy, but where is the digital rebel? For millions, this was their first DSLR... first affordable one, and opened the mass market.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2020 at 14:43 UTC as 44th comment | 1 reply
On article Hands-on with the Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 S (622 comments in total)

This lens has me really excited... for Tamron to bring their 70-180 to Z mount.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2020 at 15:50 UTC as 85th comment
In reply to:

possi: Tamron, Sony and others, I miss a really small and light AF Lens with 15...18mm focal length with great IQ (I have the Batis 18mm, an excellent Tamron optical design (buyed bei Zeiss), but is pretty big and expensive).

F/2.8...4 would be okay. Please with "not round" style aperture for great sunstars (nobody has interest in "bokeh" with this focal length).

For 24 and 35mm there are thousands options, and they are all included in the "normal zoom" range.

the slow voigtlanders might work, at least for size.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2019 at 18:13 UTC
In reply to:

possi: "Tiny" is something else. I remember the f/2 and f/1.4 lenses in the 70ties and 80ties.... e.g. Olympus OM or Pentax K...

As long as you don't mind the center not getting sharp until f4, vignetting not going away until 5.6, and the corners still not being sharp at f8, those lenses are still great. I am not sure modern shoppers would flock to such lenses now though, and they are still out there if you want to use an adapter.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2019 at 18:11 UTC
In reply to:

RobBobW: This is great. The main problem with FF mirrorless cameras has been the lenses are generally still enormous and way too heavy. These will provide for a nice light weight kit!

Agreed. These lenses may finally get me to jump from Micro 4/3 to FE, as I could have a competent, AFFORDABLE, and light weight kit that I can backpack and mountain climb with.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2019 at 18:07 UTC
In reply to:

Aegon Targaryen: These are f2.8 fixed-length lenses. That's slow, therefore not needing much relative diameter. Yet these are considered "compact" for Sony? Geez, how unnecessarily big are all the other Sony fixed-length lenses?

Aside from Samyangs, there are very few small and inexpensive options for Sony. They are not small for 2.8s. They are just small compared to other affordable options for FE. I would love to have a kit of Loxias, but a trio of would cost 4,000.00 US. For a thousand, this trio is one I would happily take on backpacking trips, where small, competent, weather sealed lenses make a huge difference.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2019 at 18:04 UTC
In reply to:

marc petzold: Guys, when you do compare this new Tamron with the Sony Zeiss 35/2.8 FE, why not also the Samyang/Rokinon 35/2.8 FE also?

The Samyang is very close to the Zeiss, at some apertures also neglible sharper, but the Bokeh/Corner Performance from the Sony is a tad better. But it was as dirt-cheap as 222 EUR into germany, i paid full price back into early 2018.

A fine Weekend, good Light.

I wonder if someone could make a living testing and reselling Samyangs for centering defects. I would love to buy Saqmyang if I knew I would get a good copy... perhaps pay a 50.00 premium for the testing. However, until then, I will happily pay a little extra for a Tamron, knowing I won't have to test-return-test-return before I get the one that lives up to the design potential.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2019 at 17:58 UTC
In reply to:

entoman: Hmmm. Maybe slightly off-topic but nevertheless relevant to people considering purchasing one of these:

The 35mm angle of view is too restricting for me. For roughly the same cost, weight and size, the Tamron 24mm F2.8 makes more sense. You get the benefit of a wider angle of view, and with modern hi-res cameras you can crop down to a 35mm angle of view if needed, with no discernable loss of image quality.

... and if you really want/need shallower depth of field, a 24mm F2 would seem a better option.

Just my opinion.

I shoot a lot in teh mountains. With a 35, the mountains stand up. With a 24, the mountains get flattened out because the base is so much closer than the summit. I tend to shoot either 35 when I am looking up a mountain or 18 when I am shooting down. Nice to have options :-)

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2019 at 17:54 UTC

Help me understand what I am seeing... Are the Canons set up with more contrast and sharpening, or are the lenses actually sharper?

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2019 at 14:31 UTC as 50th comment
On article Hands on with the Sony a6600 and a6100 (384 comments in total)

I gnashed my teeth before buying a camera with ergonomics I loved over the superior image quality of a Sony. I was just sure the next "flagship" APS-C would be a mini A9 with improved ergonomics and viewfinder... My neurosis can take a break now... They did not improve the things I care about...

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2019 at 22:33 UTC as 75th comment | 1 reply
Total: 31, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »