T3

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jul 1, 2003

Comments

Total: 2432, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Fujifilm X-Pro2 versus X-T2: Seven key differences (325 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jefftan: I am not trying to be a troll, but ask a serious question
Why should people buy either one and not A6300 which is $600 or $700 cheaper

if u answer lens, I disagree. There are many lens option on Sony side
seriously, why?

Different strokes for different folks. Believe it or not, people have different preferences. Why buy a Rolex when you can get a Casio that tells the time just as well, or better? Sometimes it comes down to how a camera looks and feels and handles. It's not always just about specs and price.

I have a Sony A6000 and a Fuji X-E1. Functionally, the Sony is a great camera. In many ways, it's better than the Fuji. But I still love the Fuji. I love how it handles and feels and looks. Is one necessarily better than the other? In some ways yes, in some ways no. Both have their pros and cons. In other words, there are plenty of reasons why someone might choose Sony over Fuji, and vice versa. I chose to use both.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 04:02 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-Pro2 versus X-T2: Seven key differences (325 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nikonandmore: My honest 2 cents? The X-Pro2 was just released & already looks like a dated camera. I find this all a bit too ridiculous. There are too many cameras on the market already & too more many being released too fast that are all too similar to each other. Looks like everyone just makes the same camera again & again & again with minimum invovation. The amount of cameras that are all basically the same among different brands & even models of the same brand, is astonishing. And no one knows how to name cameras anymore other than calling everything "something X". This industry becomes a mix of boredom, endless higher cost & minimal true advancements. There are more new cameras being released faster than fresh milk bottles at the supermarket. Im surprised no one is making these disposable yet to accelerate the process even more.. or cameras able to self-destruct itself a few months later so we keep buying more "same" stuff even faster.. of course, they need to be called the "D-iXposable"..

Do you want some cheese with your whine? If a company takes a longer time to update their cameras, people complain that they are asleep at the wheel. If a company updates at shorter intervals, people complain that updates are coming too often! It just goes to show that people love to complain, no matter what. I don't think the problem is with the camera companies or their update cycles. The real issue is that we live in a society of whiner, complainers, and cry-babies who throw tantrums every time something doesn't happen exactly the way they want it to.

Maybe you should spend less time tracking every new camera introduction, and spend more time taking pictures. Unfortunately, ogling new cameras has become somewhat of a sport now. A sport of the idle. When a new camera comes out, I take a quick look at it; if it's something I'm in the market for at the moment, I'll take a closer look. Otherwise, I just get on with my life.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 03:55 UTC
On article Faster flagship: Hands-on with the Fujifilm X-T2 (123 comments in total)
In reply to:

M Lammerse: A rather compact mirrorless camera....with a battery pack.

It's an option. Just like on a DSLR. Sometimes you want to keep the camera compact. Other times you want the added battery capacity and the vertical grip. It would be an issue if it were permanently fixed to the camera like on a Canon 1DX or Nikon D5.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 05:39 UTC
In reply to:

LightBug: First off, the Hasselblad manager only discussed Hasselblad's future, not camera industry's future in general as implied by the article's title.

The article's author asked if mirrorless is the future for Hasselblad, and Hasselblad's manager merely answered 'Yes, it probably is, but not for a while,' with following qualifications:

"Electronic viewfinders will need to get better though and the AF systems will need to improve to catch up with phase detection systems.'

This is hardly the endorsement of mirrorless technology that the article's title suggests. This article's sensational title is so misleading I am not sure if this article is tabloid or journalism.

Why are you getting your panties in a bunch. I don't think it's is a "sensational title" at all. He did say that "yes, it probably is" the future. I think you just reading way too much into the title. Relax. You also do have to keep in mind that Hassy still has a lot of mirrored cameras they want to sell. It would be foolish for him to be too strong in endorsing mirrorless when they are still trying to also sell mirrored cameras. It's just like Canon with their EOS M system. They don't promote that heavily, because they still have a lot of DSLRs they want to sell.

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2016 at 06:59 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: Overall, and in general, I think mirrorless cameras will eventually (I said "eventually") become the technology of choice, and overtake DSLRs, but probably not for another decade or so. There are still some things to be worked out, and in my opinion, the DSLR/SLR still has slight IQ advantages over the mirrorless. I will say that current mirrorless technology is getting better, but DSLR still wins in my opinion. I still like being able to look right through the lens as opposed to through an EVF (obviously, some type of EVF, be it through the lens via a mirror, or digitally generated from the image sensor, is better than just using a regular back panel LCD).

"but probably not for another decade or so"

I think it will be a lot less than "another decade or so." A decade is a very, very long time in technological terms. To put things into perspective for you, the first iPhone was introduced in June 2007, *less* than a decade ago! The Sony A7-series was introduced in October 2013, less than three years ago. And look how quickly those cameras are progressing. I can only imagine how much more advanced these cameras will be in just three years from now.

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2016 at 06:51 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (802 comments in total)
In reply to:

brownie314: I think this is FAR too expensive for the type of photographer this camera will appeal to. If you shoot in the studio and need a MF sensor - you probably already have pro studio equipment and can switch out digital backs to get whatever you want. If you need to shoot on-site - well the camera is not the biggest piece of equipment you will carry out into the wild (reflectors, flash systems, stands, etc.). So I think this is aimed at the VERY well healed amateur. I don't know how many of those there are that can drop $9k and just get a body with no lenses. We will see.

@brownie314 - You're the one who's getting worked up over a camera. Just because you don't understand the point of medium format, or can't afford it, doesn't mean that there's no point to this camera. Open up your mind and eyes. Hassy's H5D-50c currently sells for $14,500. It used to sell for $28,000. The X1D-50c is only $9000. That is a *significant* savings. And you're getting all worked up over the X1D-50c being "FAR too expensive"? :) Get some perspective. I think there will definitely be a market for this camera, and future subsequent models. The Hassy H#D medium format system has been very successful over the years--- at *MUCH* greater cost. This new Hassy X#D system is much more affordable, much more compact and lighter, and it even accepts Hassy's existing HC and HCD medium format lenses. Like I said, open up your mind and eyes. Broaden your perspective. I see a lot of potential in this introduction.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2016 at 20:37 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (802 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nicholalala: I used to shoot on the street with a Hasselblad, and medium format (and square) were always my preferred format. My perfect camera is probably an Alpa with a digital back. This is for all practical purposes that camera more refined. As somebody said on Luminous-Landscape, “If you don't see that as a breakthrough, then pick up a Phase XF body with an IQ350 back and three LS lenses and take a nice long hike or walk around a city for the day.” Just take the camera on a walk.

So, why would I buy a camera like this? Three things: It’s medium format and 50mp, so it has larger pixel sensors. It has 16 bit color depth. I’m sorry if color is not appreciated in photography. I look at my film images and am simply shocked by the color difference. The camera is reasonably priced for what it delivers in the package size. I paid $500 for 20x24" Cibachrome paper in 1990. Seriously, this camera will be useful for a decade.

I bet that I see a lot of these at weddings and environmental photo shoots.

@brownie314- " Who buys a $9k (body only) camera whose only advantage over a system camera from CaNikon or Sony is a marginally larger sensor"

I think you lack perspective. A Hassy H5D-50c with the same medium format sensor currently sells for $14,500. It used to sell for $28,000. With the Hassy X1D-50c priced at only $9,000, this is a significant cost savings. Plus, Hassy's HC and HCD lenses can be used on the X1D via an adapter. So compared to Hassy's previous medium format offerings, the X1D is a bargain.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2016 at 20:27 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (802 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/22/12005978/hasselblad-x1d-mirrorless-medium-format-hands-on

After this preview I feel that it's modern, stylish and fashion thing. Fun gear.
But I don't feel that it's photo tool. :)

How ridiculously vain and superficial you are to judge a tool simply by its looks. There's nothing wrong with incorporating some decent style into a camera (or any product, for that matter). Would you prefer that it looked like it looked like it was a Soviet-era artifact? Ultimately, a tool is only as good as the person using it. If you can't get past its looks, and ultimately can't use it in a manner that delivers good results because you can't get past its looks, then that's on you! Don't blame the camera for you own mental/prejudicial shortcomings.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2016 at 03:12 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (802 comments in total)
In reply to:

jaygeephoto: This camera would almost be useful with a fast, high quality zoom. Perhaps a 40~120
F 2.8 would be nice. It would likely cost around $3,000 and weigh more than twice that of the camera.

@Marko2 - "Medium format's bread and butter is fashion and product photography with an elaborated strobe/lighting system"

I think that is mainly due to the fact that medium format cameras have historically been fairly large and bulky compared to their 35mm DSLR counterparts. But this X1D is now no larger than a FF DSLR (in fact, it's much slimmer).

Here's a comparison of a Canon 5D MKIII, the Hassy X1D, and a Pentax 645D.
http://camerasize.com/compact/#312,678,211,ha,t

As you can see, the X1D is very slim and compact compared to the other cameras. This camera is definitely a game-changer for medium format. I can definitely see this camera being used out of the studio, on location, traveling, much more than conventional medium format cameras.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2016 at 02:59 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (802 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mattersburger: Waist level finder?

A flip-out LCD would take care of that. Maybe on the X2D.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2016 at 02:48 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (802 comments in total)
In reply to:

brownie314: I think this is FAR too expensive for the type of photographer this camera will appeal to. If you shoot in the studio and need a MF sensor - you probably already have pro studio equipment and can switch out digital backs to get whatever you want. If you need to shoot on-site - well the camera is not the biggest piece of equipment you will carry out into the wild (reflectors, flash systems, stands, etc.). So I think this is aimed at the VERY well healed amateur. I don't know how many of those there are that can drop $9k and just get a body with no lenses. We will see.

I hate this "you probably already have..." non-sense logic that idiots like to use. Yep, no one needs anything new because everyone who might want something "already has it". Yeah, makes total sense. Why in the world should any company produce any new products then?

BTW, well-healed amateurs do exist. In fact, I think it's the well-healed amateurs who are buying most of the high-end products out there. Who do you think are buying most of the high-end aviator/pilot watches out there? It's not really professional aviators or pilots. It's well-healed non-pilots who keep these high-end watch manufacturers in business. And do you think that the only people buying Range Rovers are people who go off-road? Hahaha! Nope, it's well-healed non-off-roaders. Open your eyes. There are *plenty* of rich people in the world. Better to go after that market than the downward spiral of lower-end products the cater to very price-conscious consumers.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2016 at 07:43 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (802 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mssimo: Who here would like to see a digital Hasselblad XPan or any brand Pano camera.

XPan and Pano cameras were a necessity in the analog era. But even then, it was very much a niche product. In the digital age, the very high resolution sensors that are available now, combined with image stitching, make things like an XPan less necessary. I think a pano crop or pano stitching from today's sensors compares quite well to images from XPan's of the past. So I think a digital pano camera would be even more of a niche than it was in the analog era, and it'd be a lot more expensive, too.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2016 at 13:47 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (802 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bruce Crossan: What king of pedigree does Nitto Koyagu have in making lenses of the standard that will be demanded by buyers of this system?

"Pedigree?" LOL. That's really old thinking. In the digital age of information and technology, knowledge is not some kind of genetic inheritance.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2016 at 13:39 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: To be honest, the big issue I have now with medium format, is that the sensor is not large enough, as they all fall far short of a full sized 645 frame.

These sensors are even smaller than the 36x48mm sensor (2xFF) I had in my Mamiya digital MF camera years ago.

Why is it that no one is offering a full 645 sized sensor?

"I understand the cost/expense issue, but given the target market (pros) an extra $1000 or two would go unnoticed in that market."

I don't think it would just be "an extra $1000 or two." It'd probably be a lot more than that. If it were so easy, and the cost differential so little, don't you think that there would be plenty of full 645 sensor cameras already in the market? The fact that there *aren't* is a pretty clear indicator of the difficulty and expense. Of course, arm-chair engineers always think that it's a lot easier and cheaper than it really is. Don't think that camera manufacturers are simply ignoring the "full 645 sensor" market because they are too lazy or stupid to go after that market.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 04:03 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

attomole: I think they have done a great Job with packaging on this, the gains for medium format loosing the mirror box are bigger than 35mm, silly that others have not made this enginerring choice before (Pentax).

Like others, I am sceptical that given the ubiquitous DSLR has better, faster technology development, and better light gathering, fast lens options. This will struggle to find its place, but with some specialist focal plane adjustment lenses, a "super wide C" lens option, as a specialist studio and field camera, and it looks like it might even work as a street shooter. It might find its spot in the market none the less.

It does look a nice rig to use, it has an "I want one" appeal.

There's bells and whistles, then there's a medium format sensor. There's definitely a place for a medium format sensor, especially in such a compact package. These camera will have no problem finding its place in the market. Frankly, I think new DSLRs having a harder time finding their place in the market, because the market is increasingly saturated, and there's less and less need to upgrade your DSLR.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 03:58 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

fmian: For such a small sensor I would have expected them to debut it with faster glass.
Compared to what has come before it, this is quite disappointing.

First of all, this is just a debut. It's not a complete system. I'm sure faster lenses will eventually be introduced. No need to freak out so soon. Secondly, I'm sure existing medium-format lenses will adapt quite nicely to this mirrorless Hassy once adapters become available. That's one of the great things about mirrorless cameras: adaptability.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 03:12 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: To be honest, the big issue I have now with medium format, is that the sensor is not large enough, as they all fall far short of a full sized 645 frame.

These sensors are even smaller than the 36x48mm sensor (2xFF) I had in my Mamiya digital MF camera years ago.

Why is it that no one is offering a full 645 sized sensor?

Expense. Larger sensors get extremely expensive. You could increase the frame size of film, and the cost didn't go up that much. The cost increase was probably fairly linear. But when increasing the size of a digital sensor, the cost goes way, way up. It's more of an exponential increase in cost. Plus, it's an issue of diminishing returns. 51mp is already an immense about of resolution. So don't hold your breath for full 645 sized sensors, or 4x5 sensors, or 8x10 sensors. Those would be astronomically expensive, and there would be little to no market for them due to the extremely high cost of such large sensors.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 03:07 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (802 comments in total)
In reply to:

zakaria: As some has mentioned before it is Pentax k01 like which dpr didn't like it.
Pentax would you please give the market your k02 with VF. The market mood is ready now to receive it with hail.

There's no point of a K02 with a VF if it uses the same flange distance as a regular DSLR. Totally pointless. The reason why this Hassy is so slim is because it uses a totally different lens register distance because these lenses are designed for the short distance of mirrorless.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 02:58 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (802 comments in total)
In reply to:

Richard Kwon: I can't wait until the new Pentax ML medium format!!! I'm sure they are studying this right now :)

But at the pace that Pentax works, it's probably a decade away.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 02:54 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (802 comments in total)
In reply to:

JackM: I'm still a fan, but on second look, there are no manual controls for aperture, shutter speed, or ISO. That's a pity.

Canon and Nikon bodies don't have "a shutter speed dial on the body, and proper aperture rings on the lenses" either. Plenty of pros and non-pros seem to *get by* with Canon and Nikon gear. In fact, most photographers overwhelmingly prefer thumb and finger-wheel dials for shutter speed and aperture control (the way Canon and Nikon have it). It's more ergonomically efficient. Shutter speed dials on the top plate require more hand movement to reach them. The same goes for aperture rings, especially when using longer lenses where you hand position may be a few centimeters from the aperture ring (which is typically located very close to the body, at the base of the lens).

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 02:53 UTC
Total: 2432, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »