jadot

jadot

Lives in United Kingdom Surrey, United Kingdom
Works as a Photographer
Has a website at www.alexanderleaman.com
Joined on Aug 27, 2010

Comments

Total: 272, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Andina: I too would want to see a FF with the current image quality. Despite how much we try to convince ourselves that it doesnt matter, it does. Even compared to the first Canon 5d FF kicks high gear which makes me, at least, hesitant in investing in a lens system which is expensive and to be obsolete soon. Hassie has even released a MF compact so an APC is really an outdated format, unless one wants to do Bill Cunningham type of photography.

@ecka84 - literally none of what you have spouted in this forum about FF or the cost of the XT2 makes any sense. If FF is superior to APSC (it's not, but go with this) then why has Fuji's release bothered you so much? Surely, fuji's line of cameras are beneath your standards anyway, so it wouldn't matter if they charged £$3K for it - you wouldn't buy the smaller sensor in any case!

Yet your constant protesting against the price of something you don't want seems so threatened by this news, enough for you to justify your own aggressive posts because of your choice of one sensor size over another. It seems irrelevant even to your own cause.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 09:31 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

jadot: Reading through, there are a lot of comments from people who just don't understand why Fuji have let them down by not surprising them with the full frame (presumably in the same size body) XT2.
And to vent this disappointment there's lots of talk and misunderstanding of the merits of "Full Frame" and specifically aperture equivalence.

Fuji aren't going to suddenly turn their X-system cameras into what people are referring to as full frame. It's not going to happen.

They might make a new mf style camera and build into a new category, but the X-series as we know it will continue to be the size that is so upsetting for some people.

Does this mean that apsc is not good enough, or not as good as a larger sensor camera that might have been created in order to fit lenses in already in production by Nikon And Canon? No. It does not.

If a modern digital format doesn't meet your unreal expectations, then go ahead. It literally doesn't matter if you're convinced that FF is superior.

@ecka84 - I'm not making an argument. I'm *literally* saying, if you like your Full Frame then that's what you should shoot with!

Which begs the question; Why are you trolling all over this forum about how cropped sensors are so incredibly inferior? Surely having such a dig at Fuji (or whomever else makes a camera that disappoints you) is kind of pointless, if you're that secure with your full frame camera?

Or maybe you really want the Fuji, but can't afford it? Venting?

I don't know, or care, really, but it's fairly nonsensical none the less.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 17:22 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Andina: I too would want to see a FF with the current image quality. Despite how much we try to convince ourselves that it doesnt matter, it does. Even compared to the first Canon 5d FF kicks high gear which makes me, at least, hesitant in investing in a lens system which is expensive and to be obsolete soon. Hassie has even released a MF compact so an APC is really an outdated format, unless one wants to do Bill Cunningham type of photography.

You can buy an old 5D for next to nothing so you should probably do that.

I can't see the point in not wanting a smaller sensor so bad that a state of the art camera that hasn't yet hit the shelves can be declared "outdated"

The crazy thing is that most Mirrorless cameras (apart from Sony A7s) are pushing the boundaries of smaller sensors and turning the digital sweet spot into more technological leaps forward than the more traditional, dare I say "outdated" Mirrored DSLR cams. Frames per second, Highly accurate on sensor AF (No need for Lens Calibration any more), Instant preview, superb and comparable DR, Silent Shutters, the list goes on. Technology moves forward.

A few years ago I never would have thought I could or would want to shoot through an EVF - today I use the advantages of this & hybrid optical VFs all day long.

In day to day professional use, it really *doesn't* matter what size the sensor is any more. It matters how the camera enables you to get there but that's it

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 17:05 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

jadot: Reading through, there are a lot of comments from people who just don't understand why Fuji have let them down by not surprising them with the full frame (presumably in the same size body) XT2.
And to vent this disappointment there's lots of talk and misunderstanding of the merits of "Full Frame" and specifically aperture equivalence.

Fuji aren't going to suddenly turn their X-system cameras into what people are referring to as full frame. It's not going to happen.

They might make a new mf style camera and build into a new category, but the X-series as we know it will continue to be the size that is so upsetting for some people.

Does this mean that apsc is not good enough, or not as good as a larger sensor camera that might have been created in order to fit lenses in already in production by Nikon And Canon? No. It does not.

If a modern digital format doesn't meet your unreal expectations, then go ahead. It literally doesn't matter if you're convinced that FF is superior.

Thanks @Thematic - you're too kind.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 14:53 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

@Schnapshot - agreed - the D750 can focus (AF) much faster in the dark (although the XT2 promises -3EV pickup so we'll see).

Recently I shot the D750 and The XT1 side by side in low light at a gig. The D750 was great and definitely more responsive, and the XT1 struggled to keep up when it got really dark, but when the XT1 hit the mark which was a lot, the files (RAW) that came out are much more usable and sharper than the D750 files. I was surprised at this, but the files are right here in front of me. There's nothing wrong with the D750 images - they're just not up to the same standard.

Still, I'm using images from both cameras for the client and they sit together very well.

So if it comes down to ergonomics, size, weight, and so on, there's little going in Nikon's favour here for me in this situation. All being equal IQ-wise it just doesn't make sense to shoot FF any more just because it's there.

The Hit rate is better with the Fuji & the focussing is more accurate (if slower).

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 13:18 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

cool. Thankfully I don't hang out with those murderous astro photographers. They sound like a rough bunch.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 08:52 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

Personally I saw my photography improve when I switched camera systems from a 36mm sensor to a ~24mm sensor *because* the DOF isn't as shallow at ƒ1.2 as it is on the slightly larger sensor. I get more in focus, more often, in low light, with awesome bokeh. If I want to match that low light exposure with a Canon 85mm 1.2 I'll need at least a 5Dmk3 and an 85 ƒ1.2 L lens, and as most people who've used such a set up knows, getting keepers wide open is more hit and miss than I get with my Fuji. That's not because I shoot Fuji and I want to justify my purchasing decision, it's because that's how this stuff works! I wish my Full frame Nikons would work as well for the way I shoot, but they just don't. The D750 is awesome, but the Fuji files are better (for me) for what I need it for.

So how is the 36x24mm digital sensor better again?

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 08:26 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

As I've said before - if you're so incredibly obsessed with DOF you shouldn't be looking at FF anyway, and you probably shouldn't be overly interested in what Fuji are producing in their X-Camera Professional line. You should be looking at medium format obviously, but you won't find what you're looking for in an x-series style body. Maybe the new Hasselblad would suit your need for shallow DOF? Or maybe just get a few extension tubes or a longer macro lens.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 08:26 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

@ecka84 - Not sure what you mean by "being silly"?
It's fairly simple:

ƒ1.4 1/500th ISO 200 is the same exposure on a cropped sensor as it is on a m4/3 or a full frame sensor. DOF might be *slightly* different from one case to the next, but from my experience (and many others) the difference is negligible in real world applications especially now that camera makers such as Fuji & Olympus et al are making excellent modern optics.

The light captured on a larger sensor does indeed cover a larger area - hence the need for larger lenses on larger FF bodies. (Please note there are few, if any 1.4 lenses for medium format bodies, due to the need for size & the cost of producing such glass). *(Perhaps someone could correct me if I'm wrong about this?)

"Full Frame" is a misnomer. A sensor that is ~ 36 x 24mm was arguably created to accommodate lenses that fit this standard small film format. It's a great format, but has advantages & disadvantages just like any other size of digital sensor.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 08:06 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)

Reading through, there are a lot of comments from people who just don't understand why Fuji have let them down by not surprising them with the full frame (presumably in the same size body) XT2.
And to vent this disappointment there's lots of talk and misunderstanding of the merits of "Full Frame" and specifically aperture equivalence.

Fuji aren't going to suddenly turn their X-system cameras into what people are referring to as full frame. It's not going to happen.

They might make a new mf style camera and build into a new category, but the X-series as we know it will continue to be the size that is so upsetting for some people.

Does this mean that apsc is not good enough, or not as good as a larger sensor camera that might have been created in order to fit lenses in already in production by Nikon And Canon? No. It does not.

If a modern digital format doesn't meet your unreal expectations, then go ahead. It literally doesn't matter if you're convinced that FF is superior.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 22:45 UTC as 42nd comment | 9 replies
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

Sorry, wrong answer. Try again.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 21:24 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

You're getting confused.
Exposure Value is the same at at 1.4 whether you're pointing a (size) sensor or a different sized sensor at it.
If your full frame camera is set to say 1.4 and the correct exposure demands a shutter speed of 1/500th of a second that's your quantity of light captured.
Point your crop sensor at the same scene and set your aperture to the same f1.4. Your ISO and all else are equal to your full frame exposure.
What should your shutter speed be set to on the cropped sensor camera, to get the same correct exposure?

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 20:37 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

You're not going to leave this alone are you?

Yet still you're avoiding the answer which is already there in front of you.

Look, I really don't mind if it means that much to you. If you're dead set on a bunch of rules that fit your chosen piece of hardware then that's cool. Cropped sensors are as good as "Full" frame and some mirrorless camera and lens combinations actually out-perform the slightly larger sensor in your camera. And Visa versa.

I just don't care about it that much.

Exposure is exposure. A picture exposed on either sensor is a picture exposed. You're talking it up so much as if all these crazy people who carry on shooting day by day on sensor's smaller than yours have JUST GOT IT ALL WRONG.

And there's no need to apologise.

Why so uptight?

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 18:35 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

If you can't tell which is which then how can you tell which is a "better tool for the Job"? I mean if the two different tools you refer to achieve the same result?

Fuji produce a fair few 1.4 lenses as well as one or two 1.2 lenses. In equivalent focal lengths.

I can't see that you're presuming that depth of field equivalence is such a big issue here if it's not about telling which is which, as you say.
1.4 on a crop sensor gathers the same amount of light as 1.4 on a FF sensor. The exposure's the same.

Are you worried about Bokeh? Not an issue & highly subjective.
Are you worried about Noise? Look at the RAWs from the XT2 next to the D750 at High ISO.

If you're talking about "a reasonable price" then Nikon's 1.8 lenses, for example, are excellent & fairly priced for what they do - a good budget option - but surely if you want a "better tool for the job" then you'll not be cutting such corners.

I'm not really sure what your point is but then I don't think you are either.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 15:15 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

I edit shoots from multiple different cameras all the time, and while it's hard to NOT know which camera I shot a particular picture on it's also never really something I have to think about. As I stated above, when you're looking at two pictures from different cameras side by side on a computer screen you can and will edit to taste according to what the sensor's doing at pixel level. Most people can know this.
However, my point was that a processed and finished crop sensor picture next to a processed full frame (35mm) sensor picture can be indistinguishable today from an IQ perspective. Knowing which lens was used is hard to tell.

There are pictures all over my website from a D810, A rolleiflex, a Fuji X100T, a Nikon D80(!) D700, and D300, and a D3, and an X-T1. It's close to impossible to tell which ones were shot on which camera or whether or not the Full frame pictures are better at gathering light and rendering an image than those taken with a 'Cropped' Sensor.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 14:19 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

@UnChatNoir has got it: "It doesn't matter" is the take-away here.

When comparing charts and studio tests side by side you will see differences between ANY camera based not only on sensor performance, but obviously on lens choice, processor and so on. Nikon rendering to Canon Rendering to Fuji rendering to Sony rendering will all be slightly different and visibly so.

However, in real-world shooting any differences are harder to measure or see.

I'm currently shooting a Nikon D750 alongside an XT1 for example. I knew the Nikon would be faster in use and especially in low light, which is why I wanted to test it.

The images from the Fuji hold up very well, and in some cases better, than the D750, crop sensor or not, and it's not that far behind the Nikon in speed either - it's incredibly subjective.

Try challenging yourself to look at photographs without knowing what camera or sensor was used. You might be surprised when you discover how irrelevant sensor size or DOF actually is.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 12:09 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

GregoryP: I want it!
...tbh I'd want it a lot more if it was a FF/MF camera.

Fuji new medium format camera in september?
hope the new x100 will feature FF so it will be on par with Leica Q or better

And that's all for interchangeable lens cameras - GregoryP wants the next X100 to be Full Frame, without realising the inevitable enormous price rise that would come with it. The X100 line usually launches at around £1000 which is fine. A larger sensor would push that price to probably £1500, the camera would have to be bigger, and the lens itself would be expensive, so you might want to add another £300 to that right there.

the sensor already produces awesome files, so like I said, when it comers to engineering 'Full Frame' into this line just for the sake of it? Who Needs it? Seriously.
So no, I'm not keen on unnecessarily having to spend a load of money out on new lenses just because some people still assume that 'Full Frame is something you just have to put in to make it all better.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 18:07 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

GregoryP: I want it!
...tbh I'd want it a lot more if it was a FF/MF camera.

Fuji new medium format camera in september?
hope the new x100 will feature FF so it will be on par with Leica Q or better

Maybe Terry, but my point is this:

I have an excellent system in my Fuji Set Up and arguably a much better (and definitely cheaper) line of available Fuji Lenses vs what I might buy into with Sony.
If Fuji 'Go Full frame' they will knock out any or all of that, as well as have to introduce a whole new mount, new lenses, and larger actual camera.
Why bother?
I've recently been testing the X-T1 against the Nikon D750, and the crop sensor Fuji holds up very well and in some cases better than the full frame Nikon. For Speed of use and AF the Nikon might have it, but when it comes down to the files it's hard not to like the Fuji, cropped sensor or not.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 18:07 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

GregoryP: I want it!
...tbh I'd want it a lot more if it was a FF/MF camera.

Fuji new medium format camera in september?
hope the new x100 will feature FF so it will be on par with Leica Q or better

'Full' frame? Who needs it? What do you think I am? MADE of money?

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2016 at 22:45 UTC

Would/Could Hasselblad introduce a digital x-pan now, to bridge the gap towards a more 'enthusiast' market segment? Lots of talk about getting to a larger market - this is one way they could do it.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2016 at 15:39 UTC as 77th comment | 6 replies
Total: 272, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »