Joined on Feb 7, 2012


Total: 605, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

tef68: Why does so many want to point out the equivalense between mft and ff? This has been debated numerous times before and is getting old and boring.
Maybe i should comment on ff lenses and euivalense to mft, i'm shure i will be popular then.

Calculating equivalence to MFT is what got me to switch to FF.

I mean, any f/4 FF zoom behaves the same as an f/2 zoom on M43. f/4 zooms for FF are cheap, small and light. I was sold!

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 16:16 UTC
In reply to:

ozturert: So how much does Zeiss 85mm f2.4 Loxia cost?

Great, that other absurdly priced lens.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 16:14 UTC
In reply to:

sonnycsc: DPR forumers as per usual ranting and complaining as the 'experts' that they are. So what that these lenses are big and pricey? Which system doesn't have them? MFT also has smaller alternatives like the 17/f1.8, 25/f1.8 and 45/f1.8 which are solid lenses. This PRO line of glass is for those who will actually use them for their work, not moan about how they compare to bricks on online forums. Go outside and use what you already have! It's all fine that you're voicing your opinions, as long as they stay as your subjective opinions and not pretending to be the voice of the community.

"Which system doesn't have them?"

I don't think there is another system which so blatantly rips off its users. f/2.4 equivalent crop lenses at these absurd prices is a new mark in the camera industry.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 16:01 UTC
On article What you need to know about Sony's a7R III (614 comments in total)
In reply to:

legokangpalla: Why is it names A7RIII instead of A9R like A7II -> A9?
Is there going to be an A9R?

Where do you get A7II -> A9?

The first is an entry-level full frame, the second a professional sports camera.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 15:57 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoCGI: Sony executives most be colour blind. They try and try to produce the best "technical" camera but continue not paying attention to the widely acknowledged fact they have the worst colours of any camera. (not to mention their automatic while balance is crappy too).
Its a real shame because they do produce amazing cameras but when you compare their colours with Nikon, Canon, Olympus and Fuji..well, you get a big dissapointment.
They don't learn, unfortunately. Have they ever wonder why Apple and others pay so much attention to the colour of the photos on their mobile devices and the quality of the screen on which we see them?
Yep. First impression do count. That's why many leave Sony and return to Nikon, Fuji or whatever when they realise their Sony camera may be "technically perfect or close to it" but results are simply not appealing.

"when you compare their colours with Nikon, Canon, Olympus and Fuji"

As a Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic owner I call a load of crap on this statement. For sure Olympus has the worst color sensitivity of the bunch. Nikon obviously the best, but Sony is quite close.

"And I am speaking from personal dissapointment"

Yeah, I get it, you just want the overprocessed JPEG look from Olympus and Fuji. Just learn how to configure your RAW processor?

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 09:29 UTC
On article Sony announces lightweight FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS lens (297 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jefftan: 663 gram is lightweight?
I guess full frame not for me

The quarter frame Olympus Zuiko 12-35mm f/2 SWD is 900 grams and only covers 24-70mm f/4 equivalent.

The half frame Fuji 16-55mm f/2.8 is 655 grams and only covers 24-85mm f/4 equivalent.

Lightweight is relative. If you can accept slower glass then there are always lighter options.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 08:42 UTC
On article Sony announces lightweight FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS lens (297 comments in total)
In reply to:

vinrouge0: G logo on lens but text states not a 'G Master'. I'm in on this one I think

"G" stands for "high-performance class optics" similar to Canon L.

"M" stands for "More Money".

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 07:29 UTC

1) This looks like an iPhoto / Photos competitor, not a Lightroom competitor.

2) Is anyone still using Lightroom? There are much better tools now such as C1.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 07:28 UTC as 21st comment | 12 replies
In reply to:

Mateus1: D850 + Milvus = best FF for landscape nowdays.

Sorry Sony.

Sony options like Batis 18/2.8, Loxia 21/2.8, Batis 25/2, Zeiss 16-35/4, GM 16-35/2.8, G 12-24/4 aren't shabby landscape options though.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 09:14 UTC
In reply to:

Indohydra: does this mean that an autofocus Batis 25mm, F1.4 for FF Sony is automatically on the way?

No. Batis 25mm f/2 is there.

Batis line is intended to be mirrorless + more compact than Milvus + autofocus.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 09:11 UTC
In reply to:

Frits Gooss: I'm not impressed ! I prefer my 100-400 Canon mark II

"My-brand-is-better-than-yours" arguments are not really productive.

The Canon 100-400 L2 is a good lens, but in real world use I've always preferred the images from the Sony 70-400 G2.

Now Sony is offering an even smaller lens which is designed to be used with the small A7/A9 bodies. When traveling or hiking, these weight savings over a DSLR system are not insignificant.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 07:41 UTC
In reply to:

Boss of Sony: The Panasonic 100-400 allows you to shoot at a 35mm equivalent focal length of 800mm while still obtaining 20MP, plus it's not too heavy.

Tha Pany 100-400 is not a very good lens.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 07:36 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Nah...

@PhotoKhan: not impressed at all by your photo. Static subject, bad composition, overdone the sharpening. Not at all why one would invest in a good 100-400.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 07:33 UTC
In reply to:

stevo23: Here we go - someone's stepping up for fe-mount finally. Sigma is losing out.

Sigma's upcoming 35/1.4 FE is supposedly more compact that this.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 16:55 UTC
In reply to:

jwasturias: Meanwhile, Sigma and Tamron could make an effort. I wonder why they are waiting so long. Sigma had the 3 small primes for aps-c, and Tamron a superzoom. I have the 30mm f2.8 from sigma, but now should mainly full frame.
They should make the 50-500 for Sony, without need for that adaptor.

Tamron makes the excellent Batis lenses - at least the 18, 25, and 85 are Tamron patented and manufactured.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 16:54 UTC
In reply to:

Bambi24: .
Sony is a tech company.
Canon is a photography company.

Sony wants to sell sensors.
Canon wants to sell cameras.

Sony users love specs.
Canon users love photography.

Sony is an insurance company and Canon is a printer company. Both are Japanese consumer electronics companies, of which one had a better marketing campaign to fool you otherwise.

If you are going to come with this "pure photography" spiel, then you should be using Leica and Zeiss exclusively.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2017 at 05:45 UTC
On article Sony FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM sample gallery (101 comments in total)

The bokeh on this lens is outstanding. I'll be trading in my 70-400 G2 for this one.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 15:05 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply
On article Sony FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM sample gallery (101 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jacques Cornell: At just $1,800, PanLeica's 100-400 is starting to look like a bargain. It's slower at the long end, but brighter at the wide end.

That PanaLeica lens is extremely soft. You get what you pay for.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 15:04 UTC
In reply to:

gbvalli: Will they offer for free a trolley to carry it ? Why cameras even more light and small, and lenses instead even more large and heavy ?

@gbvalli: Same reason why there exist ultra-thin 15" MacBooks: people want the 15" screen but they still want to shave off as much bulk as possible.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2017 at 15:50 UTC
In reply to:

aris14: I 'd like this hands-on to give me a hint on how they managed the weight reduction.

@oriomenoni: then why is the Loxia 21 so much smaller than the Milvus 21? Same story for the Batis 18 and Milvus 18. The FE 28/2 also walks circles around the Nikon 28/1.8 while being significantly smaller.

No, mirrorless lenses don't need to be retrofocal, they just need the appropriate optical corrections. Just have a look at the Zeiss Loxia 35/2 vs. 35/2 ZM to get the idea.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2017 at 15:47 UTC
Total: 605, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »