SteB

SteB

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

Comments

Total: 355, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
On article Hands-on with the new Laowa lens collection (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

SteB: Can I ask for clarification. Does this mean that the Laowa 100mmm f2.8 macro has auto stop down i.e. the aperture is wide open until you take the exposure?

If it has auto stop down, this is massive from a macro photography perspective. I can live without AF on a macro lens. It's a nice extra, but not essential. But especially when shooting handheld, shooting at the taking aperture with macro photography is a big disadvantage. Firstly as you are usually shooting at a small aperture, the viewfinder image is dark. However, of much more importance to me is precisely judging where the plane of focus is. It is much easier to see this when the lens is wide open. Judging the precise plane of focus, and it's orientation to the subject is the secret of all successful handheld macro photography.

@JWB Creative

Yes, this is more important to SLRs, but then most of the mounts this lens is available in are SLR mounts. More people have SLRs than mirrorless cameras. However, there are still issues with mirrorless seeing at stopped down viewing in macro photography. First the EVF has to gain up. Secondly at f11 it is much harder to judge were the precise plane of focus is than at f2.8.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2018 at 09:26 UTC
On article Hands-on with the new Laowa lens collection (102 comments in total)

Can I ask for clarification. Does this mean that the Laowa 100mmm f2.8 macro has auto stop down i.e. the aperture is wide open until you take the exposure?

If it has auto stop down, this is massive from a macro photography perspective. I can live without AF on a macro lens. It's a nice extra, but not essential. But especially when shooting handheld, shooting at the taking aperture with macro photography is a big disadvantage. Firstly as you are usually shooting at a small aperture, the viewfinder image is dark. However, of much more importance to me is precisely judging where the plane of focus is. It is much easier to see this when the lens is wide open. Judging the precise plane of focus, and it's orientation to the subject is the secret of all successful handheld macro photography.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2018 at 07:28 UTC as 14th comment | 4 replies

If some company wants to produce a unique macro lens, I'd recommend 300mm or more.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2018 at 16:27 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
On article DPReview TV: Sony 24mm F1.4 GM (63 comments in total)

Wow, I never remember this sort of launch for a 24mm lens before.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2018 at 15:31 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

SteB: I think the big question is this, will Canon and Nikon continue developing DSLRs? Especially will Canon or Nikon develop new versions of the 1Dx mkII, 5D mkVI, 5Ds, D5 and D850?

Both Canon and Nikon will have DSLRs already in development, so we are likely to still see new DSLRs for maybe a couple of years if most of the R&D has been done. But the big question is whether they would invest in any new R&D of new models with say more advanced sensors? I'm guessing not. The Sony A9 especially, and other mirrorless cameras have proven that they are capable of matching or surpassing the performance of DSLRs in tasks like high speed shooting and AF tracking etc. So what's the point of investing in the R&D of new DSLRs, when they could produce mirrorless options that would outperform them?

Once Canon and Nikon have their trinity of pro f2.8 mirrorless lenses I think that will spell the end further DSLR development. That's because they couldn't be used on DSLRs.

@Dr_Jon

Mirrorless cameras are not the same as they were in 2012 and they have considerably advanced since then. Whereas a top of the range DSLR from 2012 is only slightly inferior to the current best DSLRs. You claim that "for long lenses and tracking DSLRs are still ahead". This is no longer true, because in many ways the Sony A9 is superior. It's not a perfect camera, but is the first of it's type, and the next generation, or new mirrorless cameras by Canon of Nikon could out perform that. This would leave DSLRs in the dust, in the area of performance they're supposedly superior in.

My whole point is why would Canon and Nikon continue developing DSLRs, when they've clearly reached their nadir, whereas mirrorless cameras will carry on improving in leaps and bounds? No DSLR can do 20fps, let alone no viewfinder blackout, with full tracking, even eye tracking, and never likely will. Yet an 18 month old mirrorless camera can, and this performance is likely to increase considerably.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2018 at 09:48 UTC
In reply to:

SteB: I think the big question is this, will Canon and Nikon continue developing DSLRs? Especially will Canon or Nikon develop new versions of the 1Dx mkII, 5D mkVI, 5Ds, D5 and D850?

Both Canon and Nikon will have DSLRs already in development, so we are likely to still see new DSLRs for maybe a couple of years if most of the R&D has been done. But the big question is whether they would invest in any new R&D of new models with say more advanced sensors? I'm guessing not. The Sony A9 especially, and other mirrorless cameras have proven that they are capable of matching or surpassing the performance of DSLRs in tasks like high speed shooting and AF tracking etc. So what's the point of investing in the R&D of new DSLRs, when they could produce mirrorless options that would outperform them?

Once Canon and Nikon have their trinity of pro f2.8 mirrorless lenses I think that will spell the end further DSLR development. That's because they couldn't be used on DSLRs.

I doubt DSLRs will continue for some time, and I only use DSLRs. DSLRs outsell mirrorless because until recently, the 2 big camera companies who dominated the market only really made DSLRs and their mirrorless efforts were token. What's more in terms of functionality, mirrorless has only just caught up with DSLRs, with just a few models.

However, this is the thing, the technology is at the tipping point where mirrorless is going to outperform DSLRs in the functions they previously excelled i.e. AF tracking, high speed action etc. What's more a few months back Sony unveiled a 5.6 million dot EVF with 240fps refresh rate. Well in advance of any EVF in a production camera. Other technology means soon mirrorless cameras will be outperforming the Sony A9, which in many aspects is already ahead of the top DSLRs in many aspects of performance.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2018 at 20:20 UTC

I think the big question is this, will Canon and Nikon continue developing DSLRs? Especially will Canon or Nikon develop new versions of the 1Dx mkII, 5D mkVI, 5Ds, D5 and D850?

Both Canon and Nikon will have DSLRs already in development, so we are likely to still see new DSLRs for maybe a couple of years if most of the R&D has been done. But the big question is whether they would invest in any new R&D of new models with say more advanced sensors? I'm guessing not. The Sony A9 especially, and other mirrorless cameras have proven that they are capable of matching or surpassing the performance of DSLRs in tasks like high speed shooting and AF tracking etc. So what's the point of investing in the R&D of new DSLRs, when they could produce mirrorless options that would outperform them?

Once Canon and Nikon have their trinity of pro f2.8 mirrorless lenses I think that will spell the end further DSLR development. That's because they couldn't be used on DSLRs.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2018 at 16:22 UTC as 157th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

SteB: It will be noted that at launch Canon put the emphasis on the lenses and the system, not the camera. The also made it clear that next were the trinity of f2.8 lenses. To me this latter fact speaks volumes.

Canon would on this basis appear to be developing a 70-200mm f2.8 zoom, perhaps the most widely used pro-zoom, as there are not many categories of pros that don't use them. Yet Canon have just released a III version of their 70-200 f2.8 DSLR zoom, but it only had a new paint job and coatings, and Canon didn't even update the IS let alone the optics.

It's speculated that there will be 5D and 1D versions of the R. I'm wondering now if these might actually be the replacements for these cameras, and that in the future Canon will be putting all their resources into the RF system, and that major new cameras will be RF mount, and not EF mount i.e. whilst a few more DSLRs are likely, this might be essentially the end of the line for new top line Canon DSLRs.

Just for clarity. I'm not saying Canon won't release any more DSLRs, because it's quite likely a number of them have already been mostly developed, and will be ready for release in the next year or so. What I'm saying though, is that after that, Canon may not develop newer and more advanced DSLRs. It will be pointless if they're putting all their resources into developing a range of pro RF lenses, which outperform the current EF lenses, yet which will be incompatible with DSLRs.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2018 at 16:19 UTC
In reply to:

SteB: It will be noted that at launch Canon put the emphasis on the lenses and the system, not the camera. The also made it clear that next were the trinity of f2.8 lenses. To me this latter fact speaks volumes.

Canon would on this basis appear to be developing a 70-200mm f2.8 zoom, perhaps the most widely used pro-zoom, as there are not many categories of pros that don't use them. Yet Canon have just released a III version of their 70-200 f2.8 DSLR zoom, but it only had a new paint job and coatings, and Canon didn't even update the IS let alone the optics.

It's speculated that there will be 5D and 1D versions of the R. I'm wondering now if these might actually be the replacements for these cameras, and that in the future Canon will be putting all their resources into the RF system, and that major new cameras will be RF mount, and not EF mount i.e. whilst a few more DSLRs are likely, this might be essentially the end of the line for new top line Canon DSLRs.

What I'm saying about the Canon RF mount cameras, is that Nikon's early release of their Z system meant Canon have launched the system with a stop gap camera, but the basis of a high end lens series. It's likely that the new technology for much better mirrorless cameras is still in the pipeline, under development. However, the Sony A9 has proven that in theory a mirrorless camera can match or beat DSLRs in what they supposedly excel at.

Why for instance would Canon develop a replacement for the 1Dx mkII, if they can produce an RF mount mirrorless version, which can outperform it? Canon have put in a lot of patents for stacked sensors - necessary for fast sensor read out. Higher resolution EVFs than those in any current camera have been developed, and other developments are likely to lead to cameras with better performance than the Sony A9, which can already match or outperform DSLRs for speed. Given this, why would Canon invest in further developing DSLRs?

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2018 at 15:19 UTC

It will be noted that at launch Canon put the emphasis on the lenses and the system, not the camera. The also made it clear that next were the trinity of f2.8 lenses. To me this latter fact speaks volumes.

Canon would on this basis appear to be developing a 70-200mm f2.8 zoom, perhaps the most widely used pro-zoom, as there are not many categories of pros that don't use them. Yet Canon have just released a III version of their 70-200 f2.8 DSLR zoom, but it only had a new paint job and coatings, and Canon didn't even update the IS let alone the optics.

It's speculated that there will be 5D and 1D versions of the R. I'm wondering now if these might actually be the replacements for these cameras, and that in the future Canon will be putting all their resources into the RF system, and that major new cameras will be RF mount, and not EF mount i.e. whilst a few more DSLRs are likely, this might be essentially the end of the line for new top line Canon DSLRs.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2018 at 15:05 UTC as 170th comment | 2 replies
On article Shooting with Nikon's new 500mm F5.6E PF in Kamchatka (270 comments in total)
In reply to:

SteB: This looks like a great lens from Nikon. I just hope Canon produce something similar.

Believe me I have been tempted. I like the D500 to.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2018 at 09:10 UTC
On article Shooting with Nikon's new 500mm F5.6E PF in Kamchatka (270 comments in total)

This looks like a great lens from Nikon. I just hope Canon produce something similar.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2018 at 20:04 UTC as 16th comment | 2 replies

As a Canon user, the RF system looks good with innovative lens, and a solid first FF mirrorless body. However, I find the complete incompatibility of the RF mount and the M mount for APS-C mirrorless, a potential problem i.e lenses from each system cannot be mount on the other mount's bodies.

Many wildlife, bird and nature photographers use crop sensor bodies for the reach, not just because they're cheaper i.e. they'd have to crop to APS-C format or less if using a FF body. In fact many advanced amateurs and pros use crop bodies alongside FF bodies for this reason.

Once the RF system grows, presumably long lenses will be added to it, and it might totally supersede the EF mount and DSLR system. However, if Canon keep separate mounts for FF and crop bodies, it will no longer be possible to use FF and crop bodies on the same Canon long lenses.

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2018 at 08:52 UTC as 441st comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

TheBlackGrouse: This is the first time I seriously consider to sell my Canon gear. This is exactly what active wildlife photographers are waiting for: a lightweight tele-prime at a reasonable price. Still expensive of course, but affordable compared to the 500 f4.

@TheBlackGrouse

I use the Canon 100mm f2.8 L IS for dragonflies. I actually carry the 100mm L around with the 100-400mm all the time. When I'm just walking round I usually have the 100-400mm on because it covers a greater range of possibilities and often I aim to get records shots, before I get better close-ups. Because of situations and contexts, I never get the possibility of a closer shot with the 100mm L. This might be because the dragonfly or whatever is up a tree, on a perch in the water, or some other position where it is impossible to get closer. This year I made two significant discoveries of species on a well studied site, that I was able to document because of photographs I got at 400mm with the 100-400mm. Having the 100-400mm at the ready I've been able to get many other significant records of species. Often it has only been possible to confirm identification from the photographs, because there was only a fleeting glimpse of whatever.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2018 at 01:13 UTC
In reply to:

TheBlackGrouse: This is the first time I seriously consider to sell my Canon gear. This is exactly what active wildlife photographers are waiting for: a lightweight tele-prime at a reasonable price. Still expensive of course, but affordable compared to the 500 f4.

Yes, it got me wondering. It's not cheap, but much cheaper and lighter than a 500mm f4. It's the sort of wildlife lens I've always dreamed of, and 200g lighter than my 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS II. Big downside though is the 3m min focus distance and low magnification, as I use the zoom for dragonflies.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2018 at 12:55 UTC
On article Nikon Z7 Review (4440 comments in total)
In reply to:

SteB: Firstly, congratulation on Nikon for producing what look like well rounded mirrorless cameras. However, it also illustrates just how much Nikon and Canon have handicapped themselves by stubbornly refusing to produce competitive mirrorless cameras until now, for fear of undermining their profitable DSLR sales. Even in several years time, a camera manufacturer like Nikon, will still only have a fraction of the useful lenses in its mirrorless system, that Sony currently have. And of course by then Sony will have added many more lenses, and will probably have improved the weatherproofing and ergonomics of it's cameras in response.

In other words Nikon and Canon have left themselves with a very steep hill to climb by coming to the competitive mirrorless game so late in the day. The big question is whether Nikon and Canon will have appeal outside their current user base i.e. whether someone building a mirrorless system from scratch, would chose them and not a more mature mirrorless system.

@Kandid

Hardly fake news. I use a Canon DSLR system and I might get an M50. What's more it's only in Japan that Canon are top of the mirrorless pile. However, Canon have created an awkward situation for themselves. To really take advantage of mirrorless you need a short back flange distance. If Canon create a new mount for a FF mirrorless camera, this will mean there are 3 mounts, and there will be an incompatibility problem between FF and APS-C mirrorless.

This problem could have been avoided if they'd just created a single mirrorless mount for FF and APS-C and had been steadily creating mirrorless lenses. Ever since they brought out the first dual pixel AF they've had an AF system well suited to mirrorless, but bizarrely at first they failed to put dual pixel AF in their mirrorless system.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2018 at 21:06 UTC
On article Nikon Z7 Review (4440 comments in total)

Firstly, congratulation on Nikon for producing what look like well rounded mirrorless cameras. However, it also illustrates just how much Nikon and Canon have handicapped themselves by stubbornly refusing to produce competitive mirrorless cameras until now, for fear of undermining their profitable DSLR sales. Even in several years time, a camera manufacturer like Nikon, will still only have a fraction of the useful lenses in its mirrorless system, that Sony currently have. And of course by then Sony will have added many more lenses, and will probably have improved the weatherproofing and ergonomics of it's cameras in response.

In other words Nikon and Canon have left themselves with a very steep hill to climb by coming to the competitive mirrorless game so late in the day. The big question is whether Nikon and Canon will have appeal outside their current user base i.e. whether someone building a mirrorless system from scratch, would chose them and not a more mature mirrorless system.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2018 at 07:45 UTC as 808th comment | 6 replies

Certainly better RAW clipping warnings or RAW histograms would be a big help, because at the moment you have to use experience and guesswork to estimate where they are. However, I'm sure I'm not the only one who discovered exposing to the right a long time ago. It tends to work best in dull flat lighting where you have to seriously over-expose to clip the whites. But when there's constrastier lighting around it's a lot trickier.

With most of my macro photography I have to reduce the highlights a lot in the RAW converter. As I say though it is a lot of guesswork, and it's always annoying when you mess up an otherwise good photo by clipping the whites i.e. blowing the highlights. Sometimes you can cover it up in post-processing using the airbrush subtly to cover up where highlights are blown. Unfortunately though this isn't always possible as it looks too obvious.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2018 at 21:37 UTC as 179th comment
In reply to:

Mike CH: “If only it was half the price...”

Why do I get the feeling that - if it actually were half the price - we would get exactly the same comments?

Guys, look at the prices of specialist macro and other lenses (e.g. Canon MP-E 65, 180L Macro, the TSEs, etc) - and you will hopefully notice that this lens, for its obviously complex construction, is actually at the lower end, and a rather fair price.

Stop misrepresenting what I said. I very clearly said I need to see more user experience from good macro photographers to determine what is possible with this lens, and that I may consider getting one in the future.

I really don't see any reason to take this further with yourself because you don't seem to be a person who has got any real experience or interest in the type of photography this lens could be used with, so engaging any further with you is pointless. You haven't actually expressed any interest in owning this lens or something similar yourself.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2018 at 13:58 UTC
In reply to:

Mike CH: “If only it was half the price...”

Why do I get the feeling that - if it actually were half the price - we would get exactly the same comments?

Guys, look at the prices of specialist macro and other lenses (e.g. Canon MP-E 65, 180L Macro, the TSEs, etc) - and you will hopefully notice that this lens, for its obviously complex construction, is actually at the lower end, and a rather fair price.

Actually I clearly said I was going to buy this lens unless it was insanely expensive, before the price was released. I do consider this lens as insanely expensive for what it is. This is more expensive than the small scale products previously available from specialist suppliers.
http://disq.us/p/1uaot9k

John Hallmen created a DIY relay lens based on a Canon EF-S 24mm f2.8, which can be created with widely available parts, which cost a fraction of the cost of this lens. Yet John's set-up has auto-stop down. Also, John's sample shots from his set-up, are much, much better than any samples I've seen so far with this Laowa lens. It's quite possible that the Laowa is capable of better image quality, I just haven't seen it yet. I actually take wide angle macro photos, do you?
http://makrofokus.se/blogg/2016/9/22/diy-makro-fisheye.html

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2018 at 13:04 UTC
Total: 355, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »