sportyaccordy

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Aug 1, 2010

Comments

Total: 940, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Bruno E: I wonder what these 8K arguments are about? 8K is around 33 MP, so if you don't just point your camera somewhere and hope to crop a tiny detail out later, most FF cameras have enough resolution for this already. And to me 8K brings even less perceived gain than 4K did compared to Full HD. Maybe for really large TVs, there may be a difference, but how many people will actually buy one?

HDR is the actually interesting stuff (if the industry finally gets around knowing which format they want), not even more pixels crammed into the same space.

The benefits I cited have nothing to do with video.....

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 19:08 UTC
In reply to:

Bruno E: I wonder what these 8K arguments are about? 8K is around 33 MP, so if you don't just point your camera somewhere and hope to crop a tiny detail out later, most FF cameras have enough resolution for this already. And to me 8K brings even less perceived gain than 4K did compared to Full HD. Maybe for really large TVs, there may be a difference, but how many people will actually buy one?

HDR is the actually interesting stuff (if the industry finally gets around knowing which format they want), not even more pixels crammed into the same space.

No DSLR can do 33MP at movie framerates. 8k is going to be a game changer for sports and wildlife photography.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 12:20 UTC

Hopefully they add a slot for a 2.5 SSD

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2017 at 17:49 UTC as 67th comment | 1 reply
On article Sigma's new 16mm F1.4 will cost $450, ships this month (359 comments in total)
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: Don't get me wrong. I am happy to see all these fast lenses coming out. Mostly just because it gives Photograghers more choices. However I don't really see the need. Seems to me it is just more marketing than anything. I could be wrong.

I was not aware that all lenses had to be designed to your specifications Terry.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2017 at 01:30 UTC
On article Sigma's new 16mm F1.4 will cost $450, ships this month (359 comments in total)
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: Don't get me wrong. I am happy to see all these fast lenses coming out. Mostly just because it gives Photograghers more choices. However I don't really see the need. Seems to me it is just more marketing than anything. I could be wrong.

You can get the same shots with slower lenses, but they will have 2-3 stops more noise. And at this wide angle of view, DoF wide open is irrelevant; you will always have enough, particularly in low light where you're probably focusing on close subjects anyway.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 15:53 UTC

Heck, this would be pretty useful just for self-portraiture or blogging. Maybe they can come up with a slower, cheaper one to that end.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 13:07 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
On article Sigma's new 16mm F1.4 will cost $450, ships this month (359 comments in total)
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: Don't get me wrong. I am happy to see all these fast lenses coming out. Mostly just because it gives Photograghers more choices. However I don't really see the need. Seems to me it is just more marketing than anything. I could be wrong.

Hobbies are by definition not about need. If this makes someone's photography more enjoyable, it's worth it.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 01:53 UTC

Man, imagine how awesome this camera would be with a good sensor. Seems like every manufacturer has something missing.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 12:53 UTC as 150th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

(unknown member): A complete and total joke of an optic, they appear to have lost touch with reality. The whole point now of APS-C and M4:3 is only that they are neat small formats in the mirrorless world. I mean this is a catastrophe. As the Nex and "a" series lack a decent 16mm of any aperture, it normally would be most welcome, but for almost everything except stuff requiring night vision f2.0 is usually plenty, and half the size. They also need to consider the risks involved in so long a protuberance with such a grotesque lens hood for reportage, because the hood on the lens will get you banged into and knocked about more than usual, and it seems to me that the trick is to do what Nikon did with their very neat small 35mm f1.4 AI lens: it was designed to be actually used, rather than cuddled: These days the hood should not be necessary.... I mean , IF its designed that big for the optimum performance , it should be so good, you dont need a hood in the 'hood!

A solar charger or high efficiency battery solution............... or a bunch of cheap, light and pre-charged batteries. The new battery is only good for twice the charge of the old one- if that's all you need, packing an extra battery should be no problem.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2017 at 22:40 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): A complete and total joke of an optic, they appear to have lost touch with reality. The whole point now of APS-C and M4:3 is only that they are neat small formats in the mirrorless world. I mean this is a catastrophe. As the Nex and "a" series lack a decent 16mm of any aperture, it normally would be most welcome, but for almost everything except stuff requiring night vision f2.0 is usually plenty, and half the size. They also need to consider the risks involved in so long a protuberance with such a grotesque lens hood for reportage, because the hood on the lens will get you banged into and knocked about more than usual, and it seems to me that the trick is to do what Nikon did with their very neat small 35mm f1.4 AI lens: it was designed to be actually used, rather than cuddled: These days the hood should not be necessary.... I mean , IF its designed that big for the optimum performance , it should be so good, you dont need a hood in the 'hood!

No system is perfect. If battery life is a priority for you, leave the system. There are probably D40s still taking photos on their first charge. External chargers and batteries are cheap. I have a high current USB charger connected to a 2 battery charger... I can usually go from dead to a full charge in like 1 hour. I'm pretty sure that same charger works at the same rate with charging through the camera as well. It sucks but if you want to wait for Sony to do something that is as simple as a quick Amazon purchase you are part of the problem. Because I'm certain that if Sony did do something, it would cost more than the aftermarket's solution, which you would also complain about.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2017 at 16:49 UTC
In reply to:

Internet Enzyme: It should cost the same as the 30mm F1.4. I see no reason why it would be more expensive.

Considering most 24s cost twice or more than 50s of similar speed, doubling the price would not be unreasonable

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2017 at 14:08 UTC
In reply to:

Internet Enzyme: It should cost the same as the 30mm F1.4. I see no reason why it would be more expensive.

You first said out has to cost the same. Now it can cost 100 more. Do you have any intellectual integrity whatsoever?

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2017 at 14:07 UTC
On article Hands-on with Zeiss Milvus 25mm F1.4 (119 comments in total)
In reply to:

ShatteredSky: So, still any complaints about the size and price of the new Olympus primes? (not that I don'tappreciate lower prices, weight and size)

1.2 lenses just seem like a waste on MFT. This lens will generate results that can only be replicated in medium format

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2017 at 13:41 UTC
In reply to:

Internet Enzyme: It should cost the same as the 30mm F1.4. I see no reason why it would be more expensive.

Same reason a Nikkor 24 1.8 costs more than a Nikkor 50 1.8. Further you get from a normal lens, the bigger its gonna be and the more its gonna cost

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2017 at 12:43 UTC
In reply to:

SHood: I find it interesting how the size of this lens seems acceptable to many, while the Olympus 17mm f1.2 is considered huge even though it is faster, lighter and smaller.

Lens weight and size are proportional to, among other things:

Angle of view
Image circle
Max F-stop

Comparing a normal lens to a near ultra wide angle is ridiculous. How big would a 12 1.2 be?

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2017 at 01:44 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): A complete and total joke of an optic, they appear to have lost touch with reality. The whole point now of APS-C and M4:3 is only that they are neat small formats in the mirrorless world. I mean this is a catastrophe. As the Nex and "a" series lack a decent 16mm of any aperture, it normally would be most welcome, but for almost everything except stuff requiring night vision f2.0 is usually plenty, and half the size. They also need to consider the risks involved in so long a protuberance with such a grotesque lens hood for reportage, because the hood on the lens will get you banged into and knocked about more than usual, and it seems to me that the trick is to do what Nikon did with their very neat small 35mm f1.4 AI lens: it was designed to be actually used, rather than cuddled: These days the hood should not be necessary.... I mean , IF its designed that big for the optimum performance , it should be so good, you dont need a hood in the 'hood!

OK, you go design your dream lens then. I feel like people get into photography to have another thing to complain about.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 23:28 UTC

Pretty forward thinking considering they don't have working autofocus.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 12:51 UTC as 15th comment

Is this lens stabilized?????!??

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 20:30 UTC as 47th comment | 3 replies

Compared to the A7RII and D850 it's not that big of a difference. The D850 pretty much matches it on all metrics but high ISO stuff...

Speaking of which, not sure how they arrived at that score, considering it looks like the 'blad is capped to ISO1600 at the high end. Hopefully that gets rectified in firmware, but that's pretty interesting. Overall though.......................................

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 20:07 UTC as 59th comment
In reply to:

johnami: 42.4MP? Seriously very few people here are ever going to need or use so much definition. Yes you can zoom into the image, crop....but most of the time you won't imo. So don't waste your money on buying technology.

johnami since when is a hobby about need? Do I need a racing license to enjoy a Porsche? Do I need to be a professional diver to enjoy a Rolex? Do I need to be a professional chef to enjoy a nice oven? Key here is enjoyment, not need. And no, you don't need expensive glass to get the most out of this sensor; just modern sharp glass. Hell, the kit zoom will get corner to corner sharpness from this sensor once you stop down.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 02:08 UTC
Total: 940, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »