meanwhile

meanwhile

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Nov 14, 2009

Comments

Total: 651, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Joseph Mama: Is it just me or do these new advantages seem really minor?

I mean, how often are you spamming shots and have a desperate need to be able to see whats going on withiin that 2 seconds before the buffer fills up?

Secondly, I guess my 179 Autofocus points was somehow insufficient on my A6000? Having 425 is gonna have a huge difference?

In the meantime, NO stabilization which seemed like a shoo-in feature considering the A7 mark 2. Also, considering many of these lenses dont have stabilization already.

I guess the good news is that I won't be tempted to "upgrade" this year...

"most people would agree" has not really been the case about many things, ever.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 06:08 UTC
In reply to:

Joseph Mama: Is it just me or do these new advantages seem really minor?

I mean, how often are you spamming shots and have a desperate need to be able to see whats going on withiin that 2 seconds before the buffer fills up?

Secondly, I guess my 179 Autofocus points was somehow insufficient on my A6000? Having 425 is gonna have a huge difference?

In the meantime, NO stabilization which seemed like a shoo-in feature considering the A7 mark 2. Also, considering many of these lenses dont have stabilization already.

I guess the good news is that I won't be tempted to "upgrade" this year...

"I mean, how often are you spamming shots and have a desperate need to be able to see whats going on withiin that 2 seconds before the buffer fills up?"

With the a6000, you kind of are just spamming. From the sounds of it (hard to know the truth of it yet) with the a6300 you will be able to accurately track it in real time. Makes it much less spray-and-pray.

"Secondly, I guess my 179 Autofocus points was somehow insufficient on my A6000? Having 425 is gonna have a huge difference?"

Pretty sure there are two main differences. One is the coverage, the a6000's are in the center third of the sensor, the a6300 covers the entire sensor. The other, from the videos anyway (hard to know in real use yet) is that it seems to use adjacent points in an intelligent way, "High-Density Tracking AF" as they call it.

How much of it is actual real-life advances, and how much is marketing bullish*t we won't know until it's out.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 00:19 UTC

Does the a6300 break the card writing speed of ~35MB/sec that all the other Sony cameras seem to be limited to?

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 00:11 UTC as 44th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

BostonC: The videos are nice. The tracking is the most impressive amoung MLI. But if in the middle of shooting video, you want to change the focus point, you have to use the thumb pad step..step left step...step down and recording all the garbage in between, w/o a touch screen to control the AF pt.

"or outright ignorance of its need altogether as is the case here"

Does that mean you discussed it with Sony and they didn't know what you were talking about?

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 10:06 UTC
In reply to:

humbala: I am confused.. Isn't a6000 can do 11 fps with continuous autofocus?

"Yes the a6000 can also do 11 fps with C-AF."-ish

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 10:05 UTC
In reply to:

meanwhile: Looks impressive.

They had time to incorporate a touch screen, and they should have. Even if it's only function is touch to focus, that would be fine.

"The touchscreen also fires the shutter on other cameras with this feature"

It's usually an option to do focus or focus+shutter, yep. Especially useful in video mode too.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 06:36 UTC
In reply to:

meanwhile: Looks impressive.

They had time to incorporate a touch screen, and they should have. Even if it's only function is touch to focus, that would be fine.

It works great on other cameras benny, you are overthinking it.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 04:56 UTC

Looks impressive.

They had time to incorporate a touch screen, and they should have. Even if it's only function is touch to focus, that would be fine.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 00:15 UTC as 38th comment | 12 replies
In reply to:

CreeDo: Glad to see a lot of people still care about the distinction between composites and actual photographs, and aren't afraid to call this cheating. It's fine to make these images, but both the photographer and people running the contest need to make it clear to viewers, without expecting them to go through the fine print or stretch their definition of the word "photograph".

It's weird to me that anyone argues against this sort of disclosure, or argue that the process is irrelevant. Getting the shot without photoshop help requires planning and waiting, or a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Doing it in PS is trivial and not particularly creative.

"Doing it in PS is trivial and not particularly creative"

Well ... there is a blurred line there (not in this example).

Did you see the moonlit landscape shots by Erez Marom in a recent DPR article? They were composites done in Photoshop, skies from one photo, foreground from another, background from another.

I'm not sure that makes the final shot any less worthy.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1562025276/behind-the-shot-prince-of-the-night

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 01:25 UTC
In reply to:

ttran88: RIP A-Mount and APSC E-mount!!

"APS-C E-mount never where profitable"

Because they kept developing and releasing body after body, new accessories, etc, etc. All that foundation is laid now, and they'll release new bodies and lenses more slowly, but they will be profitable because most of the R&D and tooling spend is done.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2016 at 23:35 UTC
In reply to:

ttran88: RIP A-Mount and APSC E-mount!!

"Seems unfair to most of APSC user if they stop producing it."

They aren't going to, they have a huge NEX user base, and there will be cameras and new lenses released this year. They just took a break. 18 months ago people were complaining about how many bodies they were releasing.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2016 at 08:19 UTC
In reply to:

ttran88: RIP A-Mount and APSC E-mount!!

"APSC is killed off by Sony."

Rubbish.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2016 at 07:57 UTC
In reply to:

ttran88: RIP A-Mount and APSC E-mount!!

APS-C E-mount hasn't gone anywhere.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2016 at 06:50 UTC

Interestingly though, profit went up, so it's not all doom and gloom.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2016 at 03:41 UTC as 66th comment
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

meanwhile: You could get a lot of 50 Jupiters on eBay for $649. This is MENTAL.

The pricing is mental. Yes, it was an exaggeration. Their price is more than an exaggeration, so to my mind that is justified. If it was multi-coated and $300, that would have been still overpriced, but reasonably so.

My guess is that is what the market will show in 12 months time, just like it did with the crazily-priced Handevision IBELUX lenses, and the even more crazily-priced "Hasselblad" A/E-mount cameras.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2016 at 00:36 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

meanwhile: You could get a lot of 50 Jupiters on eBay for $649. This is MENTAL.

The main reason the 3's are expensive is because they are rare. Yes, it's a nice Sonnar, but the new one's will *not* be rare, and should be priced accordingly.

You can also pick up a great condition Canon 50/1.5 LTM for US$200, which is as good, if not better than, the J3.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2016 at 10:06 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

meanwhile: You could get a lot of 50 Jupiters on eBay for $649. This is MENTAL.

Why are you defending this price? Do you work or advocate for Lomography?

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2016 at 09:53 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

meanwhile: You could get a lot of 50 Jupiters on eBay for $649. This is MENTAL.

Rubbish. You've already said yourself that a you can get a good J3 for $150. And there are many other options *of the same quality* that are far, far cheaper than this lens.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2016 at 09:49 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

meanwhile: You could get a lot of 50 Jupiters on eBay for $649. This is MENTAL.

Yes, the Jupiter 3 is more rare than the Jupiter 8. Big deal! There are plenty of equivalent 50mm lenses the equal of this lens for far, far, far less money. Anyone who argues otherwise has an agenda.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2016 at 02:28 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

meanwhile: You could get a lot of 50 Jupiters on eBay for $649. This is MENTAL.

lot of 12 pcs JUPITER-8M 2/53 USSR Lens for Kiev Contax Carl Zeiss Sonnar copy ... $140 ...

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 22:53 UTC
Total: 651, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »