brendon1000

brendon1000

Lives in India India
Has a website at www.brendonshootspeople.com
Joined on Feb 7, 2009

Comments

Total: 1798, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Melchiorum: The price is very competitive. It's cheaper than other medium format cameras, offers better features, and knowing Fuji, it will probably have superb controls, ergonomics and image processing. I neither really need or can afford one, but I sure as hell WANT it!

I can't wait to see where Fuji goes with their G-system. Their X-system is amazing as it is and there is really no need for them to go full frame with it. Medium format, on the other hand, is exciting and if taken the right way, it may give Fuji the superiority in the top-end pro market for product, portrait, landscape and other photographers who need high-megapixel large sensors.

^^ True. The only thing Fuji will be worried about there is the Pentax 645Z which currently is close to the price offering of the Fuji and has largely the same sensor. Pentax has also more lenses currently available.

And then there is the X1D from Hasselblad which is more compact than the Fuji and IMO looks much better too.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 15:06 UTC
In reply to:

Melchiorum: The price is very competitive. It's cheaper than other medium format cameras, offers better features, and knowing Fuji, it will probably have superb controls, ergonomics and image processing. I neither really need or can afford one, but I sure as hell WANT it!

I can't wait to see where Fuji goes with their G-system. Their X-system is amazing as it is and there is really no need for them to go full frame with it. Medium format, on the other hand, is exciting and if taken the right way, it may give Fuji the superiority in the top-end pro market for product, portrait, landscape and other photographers who need high-megapixel large sensors.

^^ Hasselblad is like the Ferrari of the camera world. Yes you get Ferrari T-Shirts and key chains or watches which are cheap but their main bread and butter which are the cars are heavily sought after. Many people pick a Ferrari not for its performance cause performance per dollar you get much better options out there but for the attention to detail and brand value.

Fuji is more like Nissan. They make a lot of cheaper cars that no one will get excited about but then they also make a Nissan GTR which smokes a lot of Ferraris out there in sheer performance.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 10:08 UTC
In reply to:

arhmatic: Smart move on Fujifilm to skip full frame and go directly to medium format.

@Astrotripper - This camera with a slow 63mm f2.8 lens will cost around $8k or more. A Nikon D810 with a 50mm f1.8 lens will cost $3k for instance. If you want to go cheaper then a Sony A7 with 50mm f1.8 lens will set you back by $1300. And other than a slight IQ advantage the Nikon will massively outperform the Fuji in almost every other aspect like AF, flash selection and sync speed, lens selection, availability of accessories, service network etc etc.

So this will sell to a few discerning customers but I hardly see any large adoption as its prohibitively expensive for most people.

I would love to own a Fuji GFX 50s but only for my personal work like landscapes. For my work it is prohibitively expensive and won't even match my current kit for anything other than IQ which is not even that much better.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 10:00 UTC
In reply to:

Zoron: Good price....competitive product that all the FF owners can upgrade to.

^^ I disagree. $6500 puts it in a very very niche segment. This will sell in very limited quantities.

A Sony A7rII for comparison is #7 in the list of all mirrorless cameras sold on Amazon and it has been in the top 10 for about a year now.

This Fuji is going to sell but a fraction of that amount.

Its a niche system for a few discerning photographers. You can't use this camera for sports, action or any genre that requires excellent AF. And very limited selection of very expensive lenses.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 09:50 UTC
In reply to:

Melchiorum: The price is very competitive. It's cheaper than other medium format cameras, offers better features, and knowing Fuji, it will probably have superb controls, ergonomics and image processing. I neither really need or can afford one, but I sure as hell WANT it!

I can't wait to see where Fuji goes with their G-system. Their X-system is amazing as it is and there is really no need for them to go full frame with it. Medium format, on the other hand, is exciting and if taken the right way, it may give Fuji the superiority in the top-end pro market for product, portrait, landscape and other photographers who need high-megapixel large sensors.

Depends. People who really need MF may prefer something like the Hasselblad for a better brand name.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 08:19 UTC
In reply to:

Zoron: Good price....competitive product that all the FF owners can upgrade to.

Err no I have no use for this camera for my work. Would love to shoot landscapes with it for my hobby work but no I don't find it useful for my pro work.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 08:03 UTC
In reply to:

highwave: LOL, it's just awesome to read FF user comments on here doing their best to degrade MF.

History repeats itself. This is exactly what was happening when FF itself was released into the digital world with Canon being an exclusive manufacturer and other brand loyalists needed to come up with a reason why FF was a bad idea.

We really should all be happy for new technology arrival..

Putting it simply yes I would love to have a camera like this. But its a very limited system and it would be a hobby camera at best. It simply can't replace my current FF system for my work.

So being for a very niche segment this camera isn't going to appeal to a lot of people.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 08:00 UTC
In reply to:

Cameracist: Wonder how it works on Sony a7...

Howaboutraw has personally tested this lens and millions of other lenses on all different cameras in this known universe in his super secret test bed 10 miles below ground.

His rigorous testing method challenges other lesser methods like dpreview or dxomark as his findings are accurate to one billionth of a digit. Even nasa comes to him for testing different lenses on their telescopes.

Unfortunately his testing is so sought after that he doesn't share any data whatsoever. You have to 'trust' him and his super secret testing

So blindly believe him cause he has tested these lenses and has clicked over 1 million billion photos that you will never see since it's secret. But trust him :)

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 05:39 UTC
On article Canon EF 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS II USM sample gallery (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

sh10453: Quite a jump in price.
Current IS USM version is around $340
http://www.eglobalcentral.com/canon-ef-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-is-usm-lenses.html

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-II-USM-Lens.aspx

They found the IQ to be more or less the same though yes the 300mm end there seems to be a marginal improvement in IQ at the edges

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2017 at 17:11 UTC
On article Canon EF 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS II USM sample gallery (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

sh10453: Quite a jump in price.
Current IS USM version is around $340
http://www.eglobalcentral.com/canon-ef-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-is-usm-lenses.html

There is no jump in IQ. IQ is generally regarded as being similar to the old model. AF is however improved quite a bit and unless you don't need very fast AF the new model is the one to get.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2017 at 16:16 UTC
On article Canon EF 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS II USM sample gallery (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

OlyPent: Canonians are lucky. The m4/3rds versions of the same focal length lens, not even supporting FF obviously is $100 more and in the case of the Olympus, slower on the long end.

@arra - The only thing tiny is your thinking. :P

m43 is a perfectly capable system but it needs capable hands. If you are sucky photographer then nothing much you will be able to do.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2017 at 16:12 UTC
On article Canon EF 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS II USM sample gallery (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: Why would someone buy this over the 55-250 STM lens? (The extra 50mm on the long end isn't that much.)

I also see the opposite ! :P

I guess the article you posted conclusively shows the Canon 55-250mm STM to be superior in all focal lengths and most apertures including wide open.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2017 at 06:50 UTC
On article Canon EF 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS II USM sample gallery (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

OlyPent: Canonians are lucky. The m4/3rds versions of the same focal length lens, not even supporting FF obviously is $100 more and in the case of the Olympus, slower on the long end.

@Rajeshb - A FF 24 MP camera when cropped to APS-C is about 10 MP. So a 24 MP crop camera when cropped to 2x should also be about 10 MP. Not as good as m43 which has a lot of 20 MP sensors if you need the 'reach'.

Basically m43 adds more megapixels on the target. When birding and you need to crop then its very useful to have more MP on the target.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2017 at 06:47 UTC
On article Canon EF 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS II USM sample gallery (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aroart: I bet 90% of the non pixel peeping average person will never know the difference if you took a pic with this lens or the coveted 70-200...

Yes very true ! But IQ is only one part of a lens. How is the AF, the bokeh, the rendering, the build quality etc. They all matter to some people.

For instance I used the 70-200mm f4 some time back and the thing that really struck me the most was NOT the IQ (though it was very very good) but it was the AF ! The speed and accuracy was brilliant. No hunting, no stutter just instant lock.

The older 70-300mm IS however was a bit slow to focus and occasionally would hunt which was irritating. Once I downloaded the photos and viewed them on my PC I honestly couldn't tell what photo was taken by which lens but usability wise I preferred the 70-200mm all the way.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2017 at 06:41 UTC
In reply to:

havoc315: So a big heavy ultra wide angle lens... That really isn't too ultrawide. Equivalent of 21mm.... I don't see much of a point to this lens.

Havoc seems to be another clueless photographer who feels just because he doesn't find use for something it is worthless.

I unfortunately was quite like him before and I also never used to see any reason for fast UWA lenses till I wanted to shoot the milky way and startrails. And then my f4 lens suddenly seems to darn inadequate. :P

Now that its milky way season time in the northern hemisphere I need to borrow my friends 20mm f1.8 and head off to some nice dark place and enjoy the 1.8 goodness ! :)

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2016 at 14:01 UTC
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: Using Canon/Nikon is already a norm in the market.
Wedding photographers using second tier cameras may also get business if they quote cheaper price.

^^ Most deluded and irrational people are generally secure in their conclusions so I take it you are too ! :) Good day to you sir !

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2016 at 13:56 UTC
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: Using Canon/Nikon is already a norm in the market.
Wedding photographers using second tier cameras may also get business if they quote cheaper price.

Ok since you don't like DXOmark but still don't post anything to back up your BS. Ill go one step further and show you another website for you to check -

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a7r-ii/sony-a7r-ii-image-quality.htm

They test against the D810 and they clearly find the A7rII to be better.

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2016 at 19:06 UTC
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: Using Canon/Nikon is already a norm in the market.
Wedding photographers using second tier cameras may also get business if they quote cheaper price.

Lol so you claim DXO mark scores are useless and then go on to post stuff with zero evidence to back up your claims ? :P

Sorry but no I will disregard anything you say as total utter BS unless you have something to back up your claims.

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2016 at 19:01 UTC
In reply to:

Ruy Penalva: They are almost right. I stated this here some months ago. Indeed this is a market reality.

What samples do you want me to show ? :P

If you want to see some photographers who shoot Sony in India check out Joseph Radhik and Anirban Brahma.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2016 at 20:07 UTC
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: Using Canon/Nikon is already a norm in the market.
Wedding photographers using second tier cameras may also get business if they quote cheaper price.

It is the best available for even low light. DXOMark rates it high ISO performance better than its high MP peers.

And low light interiors are generally shot on a tripod and with lighting if required.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2016 at 20:03 UTC
Total: 1798, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »