Joined on Dec 13, 2012


Total: 133, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

MauriceRR: Pffff.
Arca-swiss p0, guys.
Even less expensive, and you have the original.
It's time saver for who need panoramas or shooting leveled. One of my best investment.

The p0 is one of the best photography items I've ever invested in. I can't see myself ever going back to a traditional ball head where any panning requires an entire re-positioning.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 22:10 UTC
In reply to:

Everythingis1: In these comments: People who have no idea what an STF lens is.

William Krusche Bokeh smoothing is proportional to light loss, so bokeh on the 100mm should be even smoother than the 135mm.

This is a completely different lens than the 70-200 or even the 85mm. It's basically the definition of a one-trick-pony lens. But if you shoot portraits or weddings and want the super-smooth look, there really isn't any alternative to STF.

Also, I'd argue that "creamy" from a regular lens is still qualitatively different from the STF "look"...

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2017 at 19:16 UTC
In reply to:

jor23: ok. with these big lenses, why not just buy a d810 and use Nikon lenses?

The 85mm 1.8 is 370g and slightly shorter than the Nikon 85mm F1.8 - not big by any measure (unless you compare it with manual Voigtlander and Leica lenses).

The 100mm is a STF lens which means significantly more complex construction. Nikon simply doesn't have anything that approaches what STF offers - while DC is nice, it's not quite as good at making perfectly smooth bokeh.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2017 at 18:06 UTC
In reply to:

Mike99999: 100mm T/5.6 GM at $1,500 and 700 grams is outrageous. The 90/2.8 Macro is $900 and 600 grams and an optical marvel. I'm not sure why this lens was a priority.

The FE 85/1.8, on the other hand, comes at a good price, a good weight (370 grams), and supposedly an excellent dual-motor focusing system. I'm looking forward to see how the IQ compares to the Batis.

A 90mm Macro is a very different lens from a 100mm STF. I used to own the 135mm F2.8 STF and IMO it's hands down the single best portrait lens across major brands. I'd buy this at $1,500 in a heartbeat.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2017 at 17:33 UTC
On article Sony announces FE 50mm F1.4 ZA prime lens (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chaitanya S: that size and price, thats sore point for a system that lacks good 1st party lens choices. While fanboys are in denial over lack of choice and the fact that these lenses are not smaller or lighter compared to DSLR brethren and infact sometimes are more expensive than DSLR lenses.

Canon's 50mm F1.4 is not at the same performance point as this lens. It's just not very good at all. Nikon's 58mm F1.4 is impressive but also on the large side. Sigma's excellent 50mm ART is both larger and heavier.

Canon doesn't really even have a standard lens that performs well wide open. The 1.2 has impressive bokeh but you won't want to put one on a 5DS.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 16:57 UTC
On article Sony announces FE 50mm F1.4 ZA prime lens (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

whyamihere: This lens is emblematic of what I find wrong with Sony: they make brilliant products that are marred by confounding business decisions.

This is, what, the 6th lens that covers this focal length from Sony and/or Zeiss? (I count 4 primes and 2 zooms.) Were users really clamoring for this lens? Why didn't they consider other focal lengths? Even if it's a high quality optic, does Sony expect people are willing to spend $1500 for a 50mm f/1.4?

There's also the question of branding. Why is this a Zeiss and not a GM, other than the blue badge and the T* coating, and perhaps the exclusion of the XA element that makes the bokeh slightly different? Should we expect yet another 50mm that is a GM, which will make for a 5th 50mm prime? Why can't Sony just make GM and G lenses while Zeiss just makes their own brand products? Right now, we have Sony G & GM, Zeiss Batis and Loxia, and Sony/Zeiss. That's 5 lens brands from only two companies.

Sony needs to pick a direction and stick with it.

Sony probably believes (quite correctly) that people using these cameras are mostly shooters who stay inside the 20-135mm space. You don't need fancy SWs or teles for most event/street/portrait work.

As for spending this much on a 50mm, speaking for myself I think my most used lens should be my most expensive one. I'd be happy to drop this much on a truly good 50mm.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 16:46 UTC
In reply to:

RedFox88: Wow , $250 for a small bag that holds little gear and too many little pockets to hold cds and little paper pads.

Depends on your definition of "little". The Messenger is actually my "large" bag for two-camera, three-lens kits. If I'm carrying only one body I go with the Billingham Hadley. If I have to carry more gear for some reason, I'll go with a full backpack or suitcase.

The pockets are actually quite neat. Filters go in the large divides, and the small ones I use to separate full cards from empty ones. IMO Peak Design really thought the whole design through.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2016 at 14:54 UTC
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Just one photo? What does the rest of the camera looks like? The EVF seems to be right behind grip which wouldn't be too comfortable I think.

Also, I think the APS-H sensor is wasted. It still will be poor in low-light and the resolution increase from 39 to 51 isn't that big for people already shooting Foveon.

Yes. Between this and the DP Quattros (yes, I have held one of them), I wonder whether Sigma employs human beings when testing these cameras. Shame, since I appreciate the X3 output.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 19:04 UTC
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Just one photo? What does the rest of the camera looks like? The EVF seems to be right behind grip which wouldn't be too comfortable I think.

Also, I think the APS-H sensor is wasted. It still will be poor in low-light and the resolution increase from 39 to 51 isn't that big for people already shooting Foveon.


The EVF positioning is terrible - the edge of your palm will squish into your face if you're a right eye shooter, and heaven forbid if you shoot with your left eye.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 18:45 UTC

The ergonomics is quite inexplicable. The EVF is not only not on center but also not in a place where either eye can use it comfortably. And if you're not going with an articulate screen anyways, why not put the iso button on the screen's right side? And then there's the bottom...

But I suppose this is Sigma, and they have a tradition of weird designs. I'd buy it - if it came in E-mount.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 18:43 UTC as 196th comment | 4 replies
On article Ultra-compact: Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II review (571 comments in total)
In reply to:

DualSystemGuy: Another Sony reviewed in record time, before the D810, D4, D4S, 1DX haha.

Has it occurred to you that this might be of interest because it's the first high MP body at this size/first variable OLPF compact? If you're looking at an 1DX or D4S, you probably already know what you want. Reviews are most useful when the camera is an unknown quality.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2016 at 20:34 UTC
On article Studio tests and samples: Leica SL (beta) (754 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: DPR, can you answer the speculation about this lens mount being big enough to cover a Leica S sized MF sensor? Kind of goes with it that the lens they released also covers Leica S sized dimensions. I think nobody's doubting the sensor in the SL is FF, just that some future Leica body might feature a larger sensor for this mount...

The Leica S sensor isn't that big. 45*30 is a smaller step up from 36*24 than FF is to APS-C.

I can understand the logic, but at that point there's no reason to not directly go for an S body or, at 1/3rd the price, a Pentax 645Z

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2015 at 19:31 UTC
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1495 comments in total)
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: Well I see the trolls are out in force today. I am also willing to bet that 99+% of the naysayers couldn't afford this camera anyway.

Not to worry folks, it's a Leica, aimed at and for those that can appreciate Leica, and like the opening blurb says, have high credit limits.

Okay. I have 6 M lenses, including the 21mm Summilux and Noctilux ASPH. The Noctilux alone is close to the price of the SL kit. I don't have a digital M but I do own a Bessa R3M.

This camera is hideous and huge. I don't want to be caught dead on the street with this thing in my hand. The SL is as "Leica" as a Dodge charger is of European lineage. Aside from the fps and high-res EVF I don't see a single reason that this camera is better than an A7rII. You can get the A7rII with 4 Zeiss primes for how much this thing is.

The whole kit is not much lighter or cheaper than the 645Z with the 45-85. And if the SL uses the Q sensor, the 645Z's image quality is nowhere close to it. I rest my case.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 05:45 UTC
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1495 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rooru S: Good size. One of my main issues with a7 series is that the only way to handhold it confortably is by buying the vertical grip. Sony must stop their obsession with small bodies and start taking into consideration offering larger bodies (specially since their latest lenses, with the exception of the SEL28F20, are bigger than SLR counterparts.)

If the camera is big by design, there's no way of making it small. The small camera's handling can however be much improved by adding a vertical grip, as you said.

Some of us don't have big hands, and would prefer they keep the cameras small and light. And FE lenses are not generally bigger than SLR lenses. Almost none of the Sony-Zeiss primes are bigger than the SLR equivalents (Yes, Canon has a 40mm F2.8, but it doesn't perform as well as the 35mm FE). The only zoom that's bigger than the Canikon counterpart is the 70-200.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2015 at 19:37 UTC
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1495 comments in total)

Has anyone handled a 2nd gen Sony body with the 16-35 or 24-70 FE? The combination actually balances pretty well. The 55mm FE balances *amazingly* on the A7rII. The package feels great, almost as if designed specifically for each other.

This is basically magnifying everything by 1.5x. The 24-90 is faster but much, much heavier than the 24-70 FE. The 50mm F1.4 is absolutely massive and I doubt how much better it can be compared to the FE 55. At this size and cost, the SL compares unfavorably to the 645Z on image quality...why would anyone buy it? Leica glass?

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2015 at 18:44 UTC as 493rd comment | 2 replies

I honestly don't get the "too expensive" comments in this post. The A7rII alone is $3,200. The Sony 35mm F2.8 is another $600-800, which brings the total price to close to $4,000. For the price of the A7rII body you get effectively the same sensor, with amazing sync speeds, minus IBIS and 4k, and a great F2 Zeiss lens. Sure, it's not for everybody, but neither is any other FF camera.

I've handled the Leica Q and found a lot to be desired. The sensor is okay but not brilliant, dynamic range at low ISO cannot compete with the A7rII and the files are distinctly more noisy than the A7rII files downsized to 24MP. The body is almost as heavy as an M, and operations are just a tiny bit slower at each turn than the new E-mount bodies. Leica's flash system is also pretty miserable compared to Sony. So there are trade-offs...Not to mention the fact that you can't seem to buy a Leica Q anywhere right now. At least you can know for sure that you'll have an RX1II by November if you pre-order now.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 19:13 UTC as 115th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

CaPi: - 3299$ + tax
- viewfinder like that?

What will Europe be paying 4000+€ ?

First time I am actually angry.

Is this a supposed to be funny, Sony?
First The A7x II updates pushing into the super luxury segment - now this?

Who is supposed to pay for that? Is there a market you kept hidden? Will this compensate for all the low and mid-end market lost to smartphones?

This is continuosly moving in the wrong direction. Leica to my mind isnt thriving or leaving a huge market unserved.
This is developed for a chosen few who barely kept this segment alive.

I seriously fear Sony is driving this branch of their corporation into the same mess they did with televisions and smarthphones.
Dont die on us.

How is $3,200 "super-luxury"? A decent super-tele is almost certainly twice as expensive, and the Leica 35mm F2 alone is upwards of $3,000. Photography is an expensive hobby, and much more so for full frame systems.

This is catering to the market who cares about compact, high-performance digital. The low-end is being cannibalized by phones, so this is most likely a pretty smart strategy.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 18:17 UTC
In reply to:

ColdViking: Betteridge's law of headlines: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."

So, no.

There are a few reasons, and a far, far, far better alternative. Reasons:

1/ It runs a mobile chip, the chip will never be able to do what a laptop or desktop chip can do. Want to do RAW? Forget about it. Never going to happen. There is no way the ARM chips are going to be able to power through that.

2/ It runs an operating system designed for a phone. It shows. It doesn't work.

3/ The apps are not there, and due to (mostly) hardware and software limitations of the device, they're never going to be there either.

The alternative, if you want to use a tablet, is a Microsoft Surface Pro. It's a real PC. It blows anything ever created by Apple out of the water for real work. It also isn't all that much more expensive than the iPad pro.

The iPad "Pro" is for those easily separated from their money.

@rkumar These are short tests (and mostly browser-based). The peak processing output of the 6S might be 50% of the SP3, but the SP3 will be able to sustain that level over a much longer session.

The reviewer also didn't specify which model of the SP3 was used. I suspect the figures are from the 2g/i3 or 4g/i3 versions, which would largely explain the lower browser-test scores.

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2015 at 23:24 UTC
In reply to:

Mister Roboto: Not sure if this is a joke review or not. iPad for serious imaging pro? Even Surface Pro 3 and then 4 are much better yet I wouldn't use them for editing purposes.

This is just an oversized crippled Candy crush playing device nothing more, nothing less. Oh wait, there is more.. some use this for taking photos and selfie too. =D

I actually use my SP3 regularly for processing on-the-go. It's perfect for working on a plane or train, and the screen is good enough for editing for displaying online...Post calibration mine reports ~99% sRGB, and the i7 version is powerful enough to push most raw files.

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2015 at 23:18 UTC
Total: 133, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »