Lives in Australia Sydney, Australia
Joined on Jul 17, 2012


Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

I'd rather buy a 5Ds for that kind of cash and adapt the 17mm TSE natively...

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 22:23 UTC as 32nd comment | 5 replies
On article Juggling with one hand: Leica M10 shooting experience (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

upptick: I"m a fairly new photographer and I like reading about the different camera systems, what they offer. At the moment, I"m trying to decide if I should "upgrade" or just keep what I have (a Sony a6000), try to become thoroughly competent with it, and spend more time shooting and less time reading about shooting. The Leica threads do pique my interest though, but more for reasons of sociology and not necessarily photography. Leicas seem to be inordinately expensive cameras (costing like 5x as much as similar Fuji rangefinder, e.g.), and from what I've read they don't produce photos that are five times better than the Fuji. So, why do people buy them? Is it like a woman who has to have a Coach bag, are Leicas essentially fashion statements?

You won't buy a Leica purely for image quality. It's more a combination of life style decision, fascination about the brand history and certainly love for fine engineering. If you want a quality image, meaning perfectly sharp and no other issues like fringing etc. then any Canikon, Sony or Fuji with a top end lens would do equally well and not always much chunkier than the equivalent Leica package.

I am a Canon shooter since over 20 years now with some experience about Olympus (2 Pen models) and Fuji (X100 original). I've always looked at Leica as some sort of holy grail of photo gear, whilst I never believed the hype about the superior image quality. No doubt it's fantastic but on par with competitors top end lenses which cost in most cases less and come with AF.

What made me want a Leica most is the Q model. If this came with 35 instead of 28mm I'd be sold and this would my first Leica. Perhaps I'll wait for the Q MK2 in a few years.

To compare Leica with fashion or particularly hand bags, they are not an ordinary Coach bag but rather a classic black Chanel variant.

Btw, I was born near the Leica factory 37 years ago. Perhaps I should own one of their cameras one day :)

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2017 at 20:50 UTC
On article OPPO 5x smartphone zoom system sample images (50 comments in total)
In reply to:

Paul_R_H: Folded optics? I had a Minolta Dimage X once. Just saying.

Was immediately remembering the same. Had this cam years ago and loved the periscope like optics.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 09:09 UTC

Why would you want this over one of the already available gimbals?

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 10:45 UTC as 14th comment | 2 replies

Honestly, I think he just took a risk to take the picture of his career and not for some false duty reasons. He was in shock right there and then, his camera ready and he gambled his life for fame and it worked. Nothing good or bad about it.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2016 at 20:50 UTC as 158th comment

Hmm... don't see any urgency replacing my already excellent Sigma 85 EX. Bought mine in 2011 when it came out. Price was around AU $800 back then. Actually a bargain.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2016 at 12:17 UTC as 136th comment

Easy to carry they say? In the video the guy carries only the system but no camera. That would have needed another backpack; )
Anyway, seems a very cool system and from New Zealand!

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2016 at 21:10 UTC as 15th comment
On article Canon announces the XC15 4K video camera (155 comments in total)

This is the answers why 4K on the new 5D MK4 sucks ;)
We are supposed to buy this bad boy instead or as add on!

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2016 at 08:57 UTC as 21st comment
On article Sony a7R II versus a7 II: Eight key differences (399 comments in total)

Thanks for making this comparison available. I am on the fence getting one of the Sony A7X bodies (am a Canon shooter since many years). I didn't really get the differences between the models except the obvious difference in resolution and price.

I'll wait for Photokina and see if new models will be announced and whether it's worth for me to wait a bit longer.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2016 at 12:31 UTC as 35th comment
In reply to:

Pritzl: When I see a price like that I always wonder what proportion of it is actual "value" versus "exclusivity premium"?

It's not like they had to spend tons of money to develop a new product; it's the same lens in a different dress. A very pretty dress granted, but again, I wonder if this product would actually succeed in an objective market? i.e., at what point does the prohibitive cost become the main selling point?

I don't own any Leica products but this particular lens seems in fact exceptionally good in mechanical and image quality and is a complete new development / construction. Leica claims it is one of their most complicated lens designs to achieve the best possible image without any compromise. Hence, the hefty price tag.

Sure there is some premium but how much I cannot say. I reckon not as much as many people think.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2016 at 21:47 UTC

For $1,600 the 35/1.4 has to be better than any other 35 fr9m Canikon or Sigma.

The 28/2.0 seems to be priced fair.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2015 at 04:23 UTC as 67th comment | 4 replies
On article Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path (1624 comments in total)
In reply to:

CaPi: I am told be dealers that it is a completely different shooting experience with a fullf rame. Dont know what to think really. AM I missing out on something or is my APS-C not that different?

In normal shooting conditions the difference is not much but when you go towards the extreme ends like low light or thin DOF the FF kit stands out significantly enough to wanna spend the extra dollars.
I shoot FF since 2011 and wouldn't want to go back anymore. For other shooting styles this might not be relevant though.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2015 at 20:37 UTC
On article Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path (1624 comments in total)
In reply to:

Yuvalm: To both Carl Showalter and nerd2 : you are misleading. Why ?

"...subject distance and crop the wider shot to the framing of the other..." - this is exactly the missleading part of your argument (as well as Nerd2's) which goes:

"...b) Zoom the lens to the wider end, keep the aperture same, and take picture again ...c) Now crop the second image so that the FOV exactly matches the image of (1)..."

Cropping reduces the resolution, and enlargeing the crop diminishes the focus - this is right-out cheating, just to make a misleading point.

If on the other hand, YOU want an eye opener, try shooting with two different focal lengths on the same aperture,with the same distance from the object, no crop, and no other such BS, and see for yourself.

Here is a vivid demonstration why your bogus experiment is cheating :

Haven't decided yet which of you too has the longer p*nis. Please keep going a bit more for a final conclusion :)

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2015 at 20:27 UTC
On article A look at the Lomography Petzval 85mm F2.2 lens (185 comments in total)
In reply to:

backayonder: Amongst others one of the problems I have with Lomo is some of their pricing.

Lubitel cost around £20 in the early 1980's now they are selling it for $365

>> Not to mention the 6x6 negatives will blow away the FF at fraction of the price...

No they won't.

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2014 at 02:56 UTC
In reply to:

G3User: I agree, number 3 is a Photoshop fail. What I have noticed with recent competitions is that there is a trend towards using untrained judges. The judges here look like they man the gates taking tickets from visitors. Anyone with a half photography wit would not have chosen this one or they should have asked to see the raw file (if they know what a raw file is). Again, another example of the demise of photography, using just any soccer mom to be a judge is a joke and a discredit to the other honest photographers in this competition. Another Photoshop fail is in the first image, the boat to the right and to the distance looks totally fake.

Lol... it's water and a mirror image. That man is not walking along a mountain ridge but a long a lake you expert.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2014 at 22:27 UTC
On article Update: Olympus issues emergency firmware fix for E-P5 (21 comments in total)

Just installed the new firmware and it fixed the data display issue. I am a lot more confident with my ep5 with lower shutter speeds now. Never had a big issue with shutter shock but it's always on your mind while you're shooting.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2014 at 12:48 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Site Update: notifications (124 comments in total)

Like ! :)

Link | Posted on May 22, 2014 at 04:18 UTC as 33rd comment

Just on the edge of getting a Canon 70-200/4IS and now this announcement. I would be happy about a black lens and saving a few hundred dollars but then I saw the suggested price... If this is real I will go for the original big time. The Canon sells online for about $1,250.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 11:52 UTC as 41st comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

peevee1: Will you update the review with the mention of the fix?

Although it is a year-old overpriced camera, nobody probably will buy it anyway...

It is/was expensive but besides the shutter shock issue it is a very fine camera with fantastic features and form factor. I have mine since almost when it was released.

The shutter shock issue is a bit overrated as it occurs not very often if at all. I couldn't clearly tell on any of my slightly blurred images if it was the shock or just me a bit shaky.

Prices have come down recently and I even bought mine early days in the kit with the 17/1.8 and VF-4. After selling the 17 which I owned already the camera incl. VF-4 cost me under $1k which I found fair at that time and even today.

Actually the only flaw for me is the stupid - I repeat stupid - flash release button. It's so nervous and easily pressed and the tiny flash is very vulnerable when exposed in a camera bag. This is something that Olympus should have tested in pre-production better. How could this have been missed as even 20 years old cameras already had a clever flash release button that you cannot accidentally press...

Link | Posted on May 14, 2014 at 21:46 UTC
On article Canon announces 16-35mm F4L and 10-18mm F4.5-5.6 lenses (368 comments in total)

I purchased my 16-35/2.8L II for $1,200 new so this 16-35/4L IS has to deliver outstanding IQ to justify the price. I think if street prices drop to around $1k in a few months then this lens is a really nice alternative to the f2.8 version. Not everyone needs the f2.8 but IS will help at any aperture. Especially landscape shooters will be able to take more shots without tripod at f8.0 which they would usually have donw from tripod or f4.0 to reduce camera shake.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2014 at 03:34 UTC as 22nd comment | 1 reply
Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »