 |  |  |
| Sunrise by Xiaomao from My Best Photo of the Fortnight | Mandarin Drake by TheDispossessed from Ducks Unlimited | As in Days of Old by Birdman50 from Down on the farm |
| | |
| Sunrise by Xiaomao from My Best Photo of the Fortnight | Mandarin Drake by TheDispossessed from Ducks Unlimited | As in Days of Old by Birdman50 from Down on the farm |
Manzur Fahim: Even with the 80mm F1.7 lens, I always shoot at F2 to prove to everyone that there is no difference with a FF system and 1.4 / 1.6 lens. Proving it to everyone means everything, not being able to shoot at F1.7 for better OOF BG or bokeh is not important at all. I only use medium format to compare full frame equivalency.
Jokes aside, I'm tired of seeing this type of tests. I do not buy a 100mp camera to crop it down to 26mp and compare with a APS-C camera. I do not buy a MF 1.7 lens and stop it down to compare it with a FF lens. If a test needs to be done, it should be with every system at their max performance / feature / potential, not dumbing down because the other systems have smaller sensors / not a good enough lens or something else. You won't race a Toyota and Ferrari at the same speed and compare how it feels.
The point is: do you really think that there is an advantage in owning a Ferrari instead of a Toyota? Or is it just a problem of show off??
I don'y find the images so exciting, after all. Noise is well visible at high iso. Is it worth investing in such an expensive tool?
Eulan13: Simply killing photography..
In Italy, theorically, I could not show any photo of people unless I have their written authorization. The only exception - whose limits are not very clear, is when you take a shot of a public place with many people (public events, shopping places, etc.) . This means that a good hundreds of my images (I usually love picturing people) are illegal, as well as thousands of photos by Martin Parr, Richard Kalvar, etc. etc.
Simply killing photography..
Eulan13: No way they can manage to engrave a proper DOF scale on their lenses. This one looks completely wrong, or, at least, extremely optimistic.
Yes, right: I also own the TTartisan 35mm 1,4: the DOF scale is completely unreliable. Possibly copied from an old 35mm for film cameras.....
No way they can manage to engrave a proper DOF scale on their lenses. This one looks completely wrong, or, at least, extremely optimistic.
Eulan13: Difficult to judge, but in spite of the different sensor size the high iso images aren't much better than those I get from my Fuji X-T3.
I am Fuji addicted, but - beside that -they are technically similar. The Zfc seems to me an attempt to follow the "nostalgic" style happily introduced by Fujifilm with the X line. IMOO the Fujifilm success is also related to their excellent lenses.
Eulan13: Difficult to judge, but in spite of the different sensor size the high iso images aren't much better than those I get from my Fuji X-T3.
My fault: I have confused the Nikon Zfc with the Nikon Z5, therefore my comment was related to the fact that I could not see improvements in a full frame. The Fuji X-T3 and the Zfc are both APS-C, and the sensor is probably the same. The quality at high iso is comparable, no winners in my own opinion.
Difficult to judge, but in spite of the different sensor size the high iso images aren't much better than those I get from my Fuji X-T3.
Rod McD: I'm glad to see Voigtlander offering lenses for Fuji - their lenses are great. It's also good to see some integration with the cameras. The article doesn't say whether the integration will offer instant aperture stop down, which is probably more important to have than AF.
The DOF scale in the photo is totally unrealistic for a 35mm lens on APSC. It grossly overstates the DOF. The hyperfocal distance for a 35mm APSC lens set to f16 is 3.86m. Just looking at the picture, with the lens set at infinity focus, there is no way that an image shot at f16 will be sharp at around 1m. Even if you set the focus to the hyperfocal distance, the near limit would still be 1.9m. Something wrong there.....
exactly what I noticed on my recent post in the Fujifilm X forum: the printed scale is a nonsense.
I cannot see the portraits, except one or two. There's documentary photography, experimental, lots of technique, little feeling between photographer and subject.
Another good reason to stop entering photographic competitions .....
A few notes (but we are not perfect): the girl has a problem with her foot nails, and has chosen a strange tattoo ( visible under the shirt) taht seems to be XVIIX, that is a nonsense in latin (X cannot follow VII) . The general attitude of the model is rather "rigid", IMOO. So, frankly, beside the nails and the tattooes, it looks not worth a 1st prize.
On the final weight comparison, the Fujifilm X-T3 lens is a 50-140 f.2,8. The teleconverter is the 2X (not the 1,4), and in any case this leads to a 100-280 f. 5,6.
Mr_Win: Upon second assessment of the guy, he’s extremely rude, and at the same time, he works very similarly to American photographer Garry Winogrand, a highly praised “Edgy” artist. Give this man a 16mm, “Edgy 2.0”.
I fully agree: a Japanese Winogrand. I don't really appreciate him, nor Winogrand. The reputation of the American photographer is based on a few dozen images chosen from the hundred thousands of shots he used to take in a year.. far too easy.