babart

Lives in United States ME, United States
Works as a Pharmacist
Has a website at www.brucebartrug.com
Joined on Jun 23, 2008

Comments

Total: 281, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

A user might be able to attach a smidgen of translucent tape to one of the LEDs?

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2016 at 22:55 UTC as 31st comment
On article Comparison Review: Sony FE 50mm F1.4 ZA vs 55mm F1.8 ZA (217 comments in total)
In reply to:

instaxmurderer: This is exactly why I moved away from Sony, premium lenses that don't quite justify their prices.

Not only (unjustified) premium cost, but big and heavy, completely canceling the main reason for having a mirrorless camera.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2016 at 12:54 UTC
On article Comparison Review: Sony FE 50mm F1.4 ZA vs 55mm F1.8 ZA (217 comments in total)
In reply to:

JP001: The first time I tried an A7, it was with a Zeiss 50 F2 ZM. I fell in love with the small size and impressive IQ. But after testing I stuck with the 55, just because it was even better. But I still yearned for smaller lenses. What I wanted was something of a modern Leica I guess, with an EVF and small but high quality lenses with AF. Alas, it's not to be. Sony's best lenses are getting bigger and bigger, and the same is happening with Leica (SL is some sort of short for Obese Camera System, System Large maybe). Still, I hope Sony will make a really fine but small 85 F2 or F2.8 to accompany my 35 F2.8. The I just have to get the Loxia 21 for a potent but small travel kit. One can always hope, can't we?

I agree, FBoneOne. I bought into the Fuji system because of its small size and weight. Very much welcome the f/2 primes. Would love to see a 16/2.8 or even 4.0.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 23:39 UTC
On article Comparison Review: Sony FE 50mm F1.4 ZA vs 55mm F1.8 ZA (217 comments in total)
In reply to:

JP001: The first time I tried an A7, it was with a Zeiss 50 F2 ZM. I fell in love with the small size and impressive IQ. But after testing I stuck with the 55, just because it was even better. But I still yearned for smaller lenses. What I wanted was something of a modern Leica I guess, with an EVF and small but high quality lenses with AF. Alas, it's not to be. Sony's best lenses are getting bigger and bigger, and the same is happening with Leica (SL is some sort of short for Obese Camera System, System Large maybe). Still, I hope Sony will make a really fine but small 85 F2 or F2.8 to accompany my 35 F2.8. The I just have to get the Loxia 21 for a potent but small travel kit. One can always hope, can't we?

Don't hold your breath. Everything right now is 10 pound f/2.8 zooms and 5 pound f/1.4 lenses. I mean, really, how many photographers would use f/1.4 with a 24mm lens (Sigma Art and Rokinon.)

The old Zeiss Contax 85/2.8 I have is 2.25 inches long and wide and weighs 8oz. The 50/1.8 is about the same. They both use 55mm filters. This new 50/1.4 weight 27 oz and uses 72mm filters. Why?

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 21:53 UTC
On article Comparison Review: Sony FE 50mm F1.4 ZA vs 55mm F1.8 ZA (217 comments in total)

"All that said, sharpness isn't everything." Well no, unless one wishes to spend an extra $500 for a lens that isn't a hell of a lot better than the 55/1.8.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 21:42 UTC as 49th comment
On article Fujifilm X-Pro2 versus X-T2: Seven key differences (327 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: X-T2 is the camera to have, unless you absolutely need the rangefinder look

What darngooddesign said......I hate smearing the LCD with sunscreen from my long nose. That said, however, the T2 is quite the camera.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2016 at 12:59 UTC
On photo Black Sea Nettle Jellyfish from west coast of USA in the Salute to Jellyfish challenge (7 comments in total)

Striking image......looks like a dragon.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2016 at 12:42 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Samyang teases 'summer blockbuster' lens announcements (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

PeaceKeeper: I'd love to see some AF lenses, but I'm not sure they would be able to compete with the Fuji AF lenses that are available for my X-T1. They'd end up priced too close I think. Maybe I will just hope for more wacky MF lenses on the cheap. Hah!

Ditto for image preferences. It's also the reason I have so many f/2.8 primes and even slower zooms. Besides the fact that these are less expensive.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 15:02 UTC
On article Samyang teases 'summer blockbuster' lens announcements (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

PeaceKeeper: I'd love to see some AF lenses, but I'm not sure they would be able to compete with the Fuji AF lenses that are available for my X-T1. They'd end up priced too close I think. Maybe I will just hope for more wacky MF lenses on the cheap. Hah!

Changing systems can be expensive, but it's difficult to go too wrong with any camera system today. One just needs to choose according to one's priorities and shooting habits. And to some extent bankroll :).

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 12:39 UTC
On article Samyang teases 'summer blockbuster' lens announcements (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

PeaceKeeper: I'd love to see some AF lenses, but I'm not sure they would be able to compete with the Fuji AF lenses that are available for my X-T1. They'd end up priced too close I think. Maybe I will just hope for more wacky MF lenses on the cheap. Hah!

Thanks. I noticed the Rokinon macro, and wondered if it wasn't super sharp and flat in image......because it seemed rather expensive for a manual focus lens. The Tamron 90 is no slouch and does sub as a 135mm auto focus lens when needed.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 11:53 UTC
On article Samyang teases 'summer blockbuster' lens announcements (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

PeaceKeeper: I'd love to see some AF lenses, but I'm not sure they would be able to compete with the Fuji AF lenses that are available for my X-T1. They'd end up priced too close I think. Maybe I will just hope for more wacky MF lenses on the cheap. Hah!

Tell me about this lens if you have one, and which other macros you have used. I currently have the Tamron 90.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 02:22 UTC
On article Samyang teases 'summer blockbuster' lens announcements (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

PeaceKeeper: I'd love to see some AF lenses, but I'm not sure they would be able to compete with the Fuji AF lenses that are available for my X-T1. They'd end up priced too close I think. Maybe I will just hope for more wacky MF lenses on the cheap. Hah!

The 12mm f/2.0 is a great lens. 18mm crop value, f/2, excellent IQ....for $300. Also weighs in at 10 ounces (300gm.) Good thing I survived the film era when all lenses were manual focus :).

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2016 at 23:43 UTC
On article Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sample Gallery (269 comments in total)
In reply to:

PB47: This is off topic but I wish 43mm had become the standard kit lens instead of 50mm. There's a Luminous Landscape article about 40mm lenses that mentions an interview with Sally Mann where she says 40mm is "about right" (she mainly shot with an Olympus 40mm for years). I love the full frame images I've seen out of that Pentax 43mm. 43mm just seems like the sweet spot. Pentax nailed it. If only Canon would make a fast 43mm 1.8 STM. That's my dream lens. But only Pentax will do something that weird.

I also must admit being a bit frustrated by the price of Sony lens. I bought a used a7 "just" to use with two shift lenses for architecture. Ever so nice to get the full field of view. After using the a7 for a while I was quite impressed. It's one of the easier cameras to use I own. But getting a couple auto-focus zooms for the a7 is a major investment. So I guess I'll stick with Fuji for a main system. Their lenses aren't cheap either, but many are a $1000 or less and the quality is superb.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2016 at 22:19 UTC

With the X series, Fuji has continued a legacy of well-built cameras with superb glass. In addition they listen to their customers and their retro firmware updates to discontinued models also indicates a company that wants the best for those who use their products. I'm staying with their small well-built cameras with great lenses. Thanks, Fuji, and thanks for your commitment to your customers.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2016 at 20:48 UTC as 17th comment
On article Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sample Gallery (269 comments in total)
In reply to:

babart: For $1000 one can acquire a Sigma 50/1.4 plus the Sigma MC-11 adapter for Sony E mount. The MC-11 allows full auto control and works with many of the Art lenses.
If one happens to shoot Fuji, their 35/1.4 (50mm crop value) is $600. If one doesn't mind manual focus a Zeiss Contax 50/1.4 in mint condition can be had for $350. Like several others here I'm not certain I get the $2000 price tag.

I have the Contax 50/1.7 and don't find it mushy at all. It's true, though, that modern coatings help a lot. Too, zooms today are much better than they were 20 years ago. I would consider a good 24-50, but can't afford one. I'm retired, and have been priced out of the market for some time. So to me the Zeiss Contax are excellent lenses I can afford. I use them for architectural photography and bought them for their sharpness and micro-contrast.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 21:54 UTC
On article Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sample Gallery (269 comments in total)
In reply to:

PB47: This is off topic but I wish 43mm had become the standard kit lens instead of 50mm. There's a Luminous Landscape article about 40mm lenses that mentions an interview with Sally Mann where she says 40mm is "about right" (she mainly shot with an Olympus 40mm for years). I love the full frame images I've seen out of that Pentax 43mm. 43mm just seems like the sweet spot. Pentax nailed it. If only Canon would make a fast 43mm 1.8 STM. That's my dream lens. But only Pentax will do something that weird.

I have a Pentax Limited 40/2.8, which is a full-frame lens. Almost makes me want to spent $240 on a Novoflex adapter with an aperture control, for use on my a7. Although now that I've looked, the old M 40mm with an aperture ring is only $100 and the aperture ring would be more convenient. The lens configuration is the same, although modern coatings do make a difference.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 13:52 UTC
On article Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sample Gallery (269 comments in total)
In reply to:

PB47: This is off topic but I wish 43mm had become the standard kit lens instead of 50mm. There's a Luminous Landscape article about 40mm lenses that mentions an interview with Sally Mann where she says 40mm is "about right" (she mainly shot with an Olympus 40mm for years). I love the full frame images I've seen out of that Pentax 43mm. 43mm just seems like the sweet spot. Pentax nailed it. If only Canon would make a fast 43mm 1.8 STM. That's my dream lens. But only Pentax will do something that weird.

Interesting you should mention this. When I had Panasonic's GF-1 microfourthirds camera, I naturally bought the 20mm 2.4 to go along with it. Smashing little (and I do mean little) lens with a 40mm crop factor field of view. Well I got tired of the (then?) noisy MFT sensors so traded everything in for a Fuji X-E2. The first prime I bought was the 27/2.8 pancake, once again giving me a very small (the 27/2.8 isn't much bigger than the Pan 20/2.4) and lightweight package with a crop factor field of view of 40mm. I've always used 50mm as a basic lens, beginning again back in the 50s, and I still prefer a lens around normal instead of most photographters' favorite, a 35mm. But the 40mm length is just as easy to use, for me, as a 50. Perhaps because it's so close to the true "normal" lens for 35mm film/sensor, 43mm. BTW, there were 45mm lenses produced way back in the middle ages (30s, 40s, 50s.)

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 00:20 UTC
On article Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sample Gallery (269 comments in total)

For $1000 one can acquire a Sigma 50/1.4 plus the Sigma MC-11 adapter for Sony E mount. The MC-11 allows full auto control and works with many of the Art lenses.
If one happens to shoot Fuji, their 35/1.4 (50mm crop value) is $600. If one doesn't mind manual focus a Zeiss Contax 50/1.4 in mint condition can be had for $350. Like several others here I'm not certain I get the $2000 price tag.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 22:03 UTC as 45th comment | 6 replies

Too expensive.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 12:44 UTC as 22nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

aarif: black please

No, I didn't read the whole article, but thanks for clarifying. I'm glad DPR is offering the choice. Thanks!

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2016 at 18:25 UTC
Total: 281, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »