SteB

SteB

Lives in United Kingdom North Shropshire, United Kingdom
Joined on Apr 3, 2007

Comments

Total: 355, showing: 341 – 355
« First‹ Previous15161718Next ›Last »
In reply to:

SteB: Whilst I would hope to see the price of this type of adaptor come down I'm not sure why some are pooring so much scorn over it, because if you don't want it, don't buy it. After all it's only another choice for photographers so how can it be bad? What is there to criticise? The criticisms don't make much sense. The only thing that counts is whether they work and support as many lenses as possible. The more of this type of adapter there are, the cheaper they will be.

I'm not sure why a company like Sigma doesn't produce them, because after all very few companies can have more experience with back engineering mounts. All I would suggest is making them so they can have firmware updates to get around changes to interfaces.

My only regret is that there's not a similar one for m4/3. I for one could see a real use for my MP-E 65mm, peaking and an EVF. OVFs get awfully dark at high magnification. Not sure if the peaking would work, but if it did, it would be a dream for composition.

To tell the truth I'd forgotten about the operation of this adapter jpr, although I'd read about it before. Yes the silly hotshoe thing is a problem. It's even worse on anything but the NEX-7, because they don't even have a hotshoe. I want to do some video as well, which is why I'm looking at EVF options. These adaptors are expensive but they're cheaper than getting a whole new set of lenses. What I'm not sure about yet is whether EVFs will gain up enough or if it will be too noisy to see anything. Although I'm looking to make a combined LED flash combination so that bit might not be so much of a problem.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2012 at 18:37 UTC

Whilst I would hope to see the price of this type of adaptor come down I'm not sure why some are pooring so much scorn over it, because if you don't want it, don't buy it. After all it's only another choice for photographers so how can it be bad? What is there to criticise? The criticisms don't make much sense. The only thing that counts is whether they work and support as many lenses as possible. The more of this type of adapter there are, the cheaper they will be.

I'm not sure why a company like Sigma doesn't produce them, because after all very few companies can have more experience with back engineering mounts. All I would suggest is making them so they can have firmware updates to get around changes to interfaces.

My only regret is that there's not a similar one for m4/3. I for one could see a real use for my MP-E 65mm, peaking and an EVF. OVFs get awfully dark at high magnification. Not sure if the peaking would work, but if it did, it would be a dream for composition.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2012 at 14:42 UTC as 19th comment | 6 replies

I'm confused by the wording on the website it says "Compatibility Supported Not supported" and lists lenses. Does this mean the lenses that follow are supported or not supported? Self-evidently it's contradictory.

Specifically does it support independent EF mount lenses like Sigma?

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2012 at 00:11 UTC as 41st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

rbach44: Dear Panasonic, if these lenses were being ANNOUNCED today, I probably wouldn't be selling all of my M43 stuff as we speak.

Enough with the concepts and rumors and speculation, I have pictures to take and video to shoot. Fill the few but gaping holes in your lineup.

I hate to leave M43 but unfortunately concepts of lenses we need don't pay the bills.

Going by how Panasonic previously displayed lenses like this, think the 45mm macro, 100-300mm zoom and the fisheye the release of these lenses is not that far in the future. Most likely this year, maybe 6 months or less. I don't remember Panasonic displaying anything like this which wasn't released in the near future. The vaguness is just how they do it.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2012 at 01:58 UTC

I downloaded it, had a play with it, and watched some of the tutorial videos on it. Overall it looks promising and I like stuff like the selective white balance and noise reduction. Although I wish it handled layers.

I'm slightly baffled though. On the tutorial video about handling video clips it says it handles Sony AVCHD, but it won't recognise the clips from my Sony HX9V. It read a few I'd converted to H.264 MP4m, but that was it. So I'm guessing at the moment it won't handle AVCHD 2.0. I'll ask over at Adobe when I've got time.

Has anyone idea whether it will be possible to go from LR2 to LR4 as an upgrade, or will you have to buy the full version? I was going to get LR3 but to be perfectly honest I preferred the way LR2.6 handled my files to LR3.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2012 at 20:39 UTC as 9th comment

It seems very interesting, even though I now use Lightroom. Unfortunately the video clip handling of the new LR4 beta also looks very promising. It's ages since I tried Bibble so I've forgotten most about it. There are a few things I'm not clear about having just had a look at the Corel website. What exactly is the layer support, and can you export files to an other image editor with layers? Are their masks with layers? Also what is the plugin support because now I prefer Topaz DeNoise 5 for noise reduction? I used to use Neat Image so I'm not too familiar with Noise Ninja.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2012 at 19:01 UTC as 30th comment
In reply to:

J.K.T.: I simply can't figure out what is the point of having both this and 150/2.8 OS.

Yes, I thought I remembered a Sigma 180mm f2.8 in the old film days. I think it only went to 1:2 though, and not 1:1. I had the cheaper 180mm f5.6 version which was actually a really good lens, and very compact for a 180mm lens. That definitely only went 1:2, but if I put the 1:1 converter (a close-up lens) from my Sigma 90mm f2.8 macro on it I could get well over 1:1.

Currently I have the 70mm f2.8 and the older non-OS 150mm f2.8. It's very good and with the 1.4x converter you hardly notice any difference. The 70mm f2.8 is a bit sharper wide open, but my copy of the 150mm is not that far behind. I'm tempted by these OS versions and I'm sure that eventually I'll find a way to justify it.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2012 at 12:00 UTC
On article Preview: Canon PowerShot G1 X large sensor zoom compact (767 comments in total)

I can't quite work this out. Canon could have produced this camera years ago. Okay it wouldn't have had a Digic 5 processor etc. However, there was no technological barrier to producing this type of camera before m4/3 was announced. It hasn't even got an EVF. I was waiting to see what Canon produced because I'd really ike to consolidate my gear into one system, instead of having a Canon DSLR system, and a m4/3 compact system. But without an inter-changeable lens mount, and an EVF, it's about as useful to me as a chocolate fireguard, but a lot more expensive. It's also as much as a GH2, and not much smaller.

It's clearly a camera designed to avoid any conflict with Canon's DSLR system rather than being built for a particular demand. Because of this it'll have limited appeal. Standard zooms are my least used lenses.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2012 at 18:47 UTC as 138th comment | 1 reply
On article Preview: Canon PowerShot G1 X large sensor zoom compact (767 comments in total)

"It's Canon's first compact camera to feature a large, 4:3 aspect, 14.3 Megapixel CMOS sensor measuring 18.7mm x 14mm – similar in height to the APS-C sensors used within EOS DSLR models."
I use a Canon system, but even I know that this is actually closer in size, and indeed aspect ratio to the 4/3 sensor 17.3 x 13.0 mm. The one in the GH2 is I believe 19mm wide.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2012 at 18:20 UTC as 143rd comment | 3 replies

All that's missing is a retractable flying lady on the pentaprism. Also with a camera like this Sigma clearly needs some badge engineering. A fancy moniker to appeal to those with more money than sense.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2011 at 16:40 UTC as 53rd comment

I compared the A77 to the 7D, D7000 and GH2 up to ISO 1600 in RAW. I carefully scanned all round the image, looking at various things like chroma and luminance noise, detail retention, and resolution. At low ISOs the A77 is impressive. However, by ISO 400 you are starting to see enough chroma noise on the A77 to destroy fine detail, and to make removing it difficult. The A77 again surprisingly lags some way behind the GH2, which is slightly behind the D7000 and 7D. By ISO 800 the A77 was lagging behind the GH2 even more. By ISO 1600 it was ugly enough not to want to see more. Again what surprised me was that the GH2 was closer to the D7000 and 7D, than the A77 was to the GH2. Whilst I didn't bother downloading and resizing the A77 files, it was clear that even with this slight downsizing the A77 files would have had still had more chroma noise. It's now clear why the JPEGs show such a lot of detail smudging.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2011 at 00:12 UTC as 32nd comment | 1 reply
On article Sony SLT-A77 studio comparison samples (226 comments in total)

There's a lot of chroma noise on the RAW samples. Even by ISO 800 the Panasonic GH2 is clearly performing much better, and is closer to the better APS-C DSLRs, than the A77 is to it. By ISO 1600 it looks rather rough. I don't know if this is a RAW converter issue or not. There's too much smearing on the JPEGs to judge from them where it stands.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2011 at 21:39 UTC as 87th comment | 1 reply

I find it interesting that we are now seeing the specifications of these independently manufactured image processors. Whereas previously we just used to get the manufacturer's descriptions and names for their image processors. The advertising copy implied that these image processors had been part of some top secret in house R&D only available to them, and that they had magic alchemy that sprinkled special fairy dust onto the images. Sadly the mundane reality appears to have been that they were buying off the peg image processors, available to all the manufacturers.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2011 at 16:20 UTC as 9th comment

I think this is a real breakthrough and that those critical of it are missing the point. It's difficult to understand criticising a lens like this for an inter-changeable lens system, because it means if you don't like it, you don't have to buy it or put it on your camera. The whole point is, that it's an option. Yes a cheaper version would have greater appeal and I think Panasonic and others should work on that, but there is also a niche for a premium version if it's performance is good. Anything that projects beyond a certain point from a flat camera makes it far harder to pocket/pouch.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2011 at 05:04 UTC as 16th comment
On photo Coccothraustes in the No Bulleye's challenge (4 comments in total)

What a magnificent bird and photograph. A big congrats.

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2011 at 22:29 UTC as 2nd comment
Total: 355, showing: 341 – 355
« First‹ Previous15161718Next ›Last »