Lives in Germany Germany
Joined on Aug 15, 2003


Total: 16, showing: 1 – 16
In reply to:

Magnar W: If contrast and sharpness is as great as the sample photos indicate, this is an interesting lens.

Sharpness can not be great because it is diffraction limited in any possible setting.

The maxium real aperture is F2.8 * (1+2.5) = F10.

But this doesn't matter because other ultra macro lenses face the same physical limitations.

F2.0 would have been significantly better though.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 21:30 UTC
In reply to:

Photomonkey: AA batteries are commodities. The only way you can charge more for a commodity is to convince the consumer via expensive marketing that the product is somehow "special".

I use (Sanyo) Eneloop batteries since 10 years and even my oldest cells are still as good as new.

"Eneloop" technology is from Fuijtsu (FDK) and rumor is, that both "Panasonic Eneloop" and Ikea Ladda are made in the same factory.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2018 at 18:12 UTC
On article Canon EOS M50 Review (1244 comments in total)
In reply to:

AdrianPocea: Undeniably disappointing 4k, but it is a 800 dollars camera. Couldn't expect more from Canon. I guess if they would put all the features that we want in something similar it would have to be priced around 2500 dollars. Yes, Panasonic have their feature packed GX85 even cheaper, but this is an aps-c sensor. Anyway, bottom line is uninteresting for me, I cannot use this kind of toy as my B camera to my 5div. There is something about their image and handling and feel that still keeps me from jumping to Sony for photos(for video I am totally into Panasonic, as I consider the duo GH5-GH5s the most amazing thing that you can get on the market for the money).

Price of an APS-C with similiar technology sensor should be almost the same as the price of an 4/3" sensor. Give or take 2 USD.
Only 335mm sensors are significantly more expensive to make.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 08:05 UTC
In reply to:

Ali: My first DSLR! Moved from the Sony 707, which was no slouch, but the 10D was in a separate league image quality wise... Loved the low-light response and speed of operation as well.

Nice write-up and photos!

My first DSLR after my F717.

All was nice and shiny on the spec sheets and the price was ok vs the competition (mainly Nikon D100, Pentax *st and Olympus E-1) and it had a good sensor.

But I didn't like the 10D at all and sold it after some months with lots of frustration.

I had massive focus problems, problems with sensor dust, compatibility problems with my Sigma lens and worst of all almost all lenses suffered from back focus...
I also missed a wide angle lens and I had little interest to buy that expensive 17-40L just to get another lens that wasn't able to hit the focus.

It was the last Canon camera I bought until now.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 17:12 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: This almost has the DoF and light gathering ability of my $100 50 1.8! Keep plugging away Olympus.... maybe one day!

...and a coke bottle from the garbage bin has more "light gathering capability" than your 50/1,8 für 100USD.

But what's the point?

The Oly 25/1,2 seems to make quite nice pictures, the coke bottle is significantly worse. The EF 50/1,8 sits somewhere in the middle (I had one many years ago).

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 21:02 UTC
On article Hands-on with new Olympus PRO 8mm and 7-14mm lenses (296 comments in total)
In reply to:

StefanD: About " the new 7-14mm wideangle zoom (on the left in this picture) is considerable smaller and lighter than full-frame equivalents":

Compared to the Canon 16-35 F4, it isn't that much lighter or smaller:
Weight: 534 g. vs 615 g.
Diameter: 79 mm. vs 82.6 mm.
Length: 106 mm. vs 112.8 mm.
(a 7-14 2.8 on m43 is comparable to a 14-28 5.6 on FF)

Although I would love to see lenses that are much lighter and smaller than my full lframe Canon lenses, I don't see it happen yet...

it's a different angle of view (14mm equ. vs 16mm) and so a VERY different lens design. Just look at the front element.
Everything from 15mm and longer can be built like a "normal" wideangle, everything from 14mm and smaller has that bulky front element (until now).

So imho both lenses are not really comparable.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 15:41 UTC
On article Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review (2257 comments in total)
In reply to:

Juraj Lacko: That brushed aluminium will pick scratches like crazy.

I assume that the surface will be Aluminiumoxide and not Aluminium.

Aluminiumoxid is used in "ceramic plates" for military grade vests to stop rifle bullets (in combination with Aramid) because it is so hard.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2014 at 16:33 UTC
On article Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review (2257 comments in total)
In reply to:

Retzius: Only Leica has the balls to remove a feature like optical stabilization and tell you its a "feature" because it would degrade image quality and then charge you more for giving you less

At the same time they include scene modes like "fireworks"...

Gotta admire their hutzpah

Do you believe that a picture mode in the menu will degrade image quality?

a moveable lens does so (it's another question if this is a real problem/disadvantage)

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2014 at 16:28 UTC
On article Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review (2257 comments in total)
In reply to:

PowerG9atBlackForest: Can you imagine how a naked, clinically dead metall piece milled down from a massive block of aluminum will feel in your hands. Warm and cosy? - Cold like ice!

A cool sensor because of a huge heat sink sounds like a good thing to have.

Aluminium is very easy to recycle. There will be no waste. In Germany a large amount of Aluminium used is already recycled (because of high energy costs.

If you car about the ecological footprint of your camera just don't buy new ones so often. the largest footprint most likely comes from the sensor and the microelectronics involved.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2014 at 16:23 UTC
On article Sony unleashes Cyber-shot RX100 II with BSI CMOS sensor (174 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): At higher ISO BIS is clearly better - but is high ISO what you buy a pocket cam for? What do you use more often - low ISO or high ISO? If you have your answers, please note that at low ISO the older non BIS sensor is BETTER, the BIS architecture has some clear drawbacks at low ISO, fact.

I need high ISO in a pocket camera much more often than in a systems camera, but this is just my opinion, of course.

I use systesm camera when I know that I want to make some photographs and usually I do so when there is (good) light. My pocket camera is mostly for keeping memories and so good light is not always available...

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2013 at 08:46 UTC
On article Sony unleashes Cyber-shot RX100 II with BSI CMOS sensor (174 comments in total)

What does "40% more sensitive" translate to?

In my opnion 140% does mean 1/2 ISO step. Correct?

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2013 at 08:43 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

Timmbits: To me, this is an XZ-1.1 - not xz-2, here's why:

It has welcome improvements in the looks department. Love the handle, love the moving away from the s95-like anonymity - very nice over all design. Love that Olympus continues to set the pace with beautiful retro-like designs.

But the lens is similar. Very similar: nice, bright, reasonable zoom range.

And despite the sensor being a BSI, it is slightly smaller (1/1,7" versus 1/1,6") and with a higher pixel count - so the pixels are either the same size (at best) or may even be slightly smaller than on the previous model... which leads to the obvious question: are the images better? Or have things stayed much the same?

Definitely, it's a welcome rejuvenation as an XZ-1.1, getting an update in the marketing-hype department (12MP bsi), but...
...I can't wait to see the REAL XZ-2 (whatever they are going to call a "real" successor to the XZ-1/2).

the XZ-1 has an excellent lens and an outdated sensor.

Now the XZ-2 keeps the lens and adds a sensor that is 2-3 generations younger,it adds faster processing power (see video for example) and a tilting screen.

How much differentiation do you need?

Do you really want a new lens, when the old one is superb?

On the other side the camera got significantly larger, so for those searching the most compact camera the XZ-2 will probably not fit...

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2012 at 12:51 UTC
In reply to:

Fotogeneticist: Until an EVF has the same refresh rate and dynamic range that matches my eye, it will never replace OVFs for me. What does an EVF give me except for battery drain and shadows you can't see into? And to the poster that said an EVF needs 2MP to out-resolve an OVF, if you out resolve what your eye can see anyways, what good would that do?

to see in the dark an EVF is much better than an OVF (in theory) as many military applications already proof. Who would try to see in the dark with a pure optical device ?

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2012 at 08:18 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images (640 comments in total)
In reply to:

jonikon: This Sony RX100 is a BIG improvement over all the other truly pocketable cameras and should be well received by many. Cameras like this should have been made years ago, as the demand has been there for some time now. Although the RX100 is definitely a Canon G1X killer, it is not perfect however. I would like to see Sony add:
1. an EVF
2. Phase detection auto focus for acceptable continuous AF of moving subjects.
3. Less megapixels. 10MP is enough, but 20MP is unnecessary and results some IQ issues (like color accuracy and diffraction limiting, noise reduction smearing), that could have been avoided with a 10 or 12 MP sensor.
4. A way to remove the lens for sensor cleaning.
5. Lower price.

That said, I think the RX100 is good enough to take away a lot of sales from their NEX line of cameras that are definitely NOT pocketable with a zoom lens attached, and offer little more than lens interchangeability over the RX100.

The 20MP RX100 will make better 10MP pictures than any 10MP camera (with 1" sensor) and it will also make better 20MP pictures.

Did you ask also for bigger grain when shooting film?


imho the RX100 is a nice camera. It has the greatest light gathering on the wide end, but Olympus XZ-1 and Fuji X10 are better at the long end of the zoom despite the smaller sensors because of their much "faster" lenses.

I'm not sure about macro capabilities, a hot shoe is missing for some and also the ability to mount accessories like the XZ-1 (macro light, external microphone, EVF, etc...)

And finally there is the price difference.

On the other hand you gain sensor quality and most likely also video quality.

I don't think that cameras like X-10 or XZ-1 are obsolete now (I assume that there will be an XZ-2 sooner or later anyway) and cameras like the EX-1 or LX-5 offer a wider view which could also be a big factor for some, but the new Sony definitely is a nice addition.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2012 at 17:45 UTC
In reply to:

AnHund: Even the best EVF will never be as good as an OVF as they are implemented in the current FF DSLRs. Period.

"Digital sensors will NEVER be better than film."

Nothing new with these kind of arguments.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2012 at 19:23 UTC
In reply to:

panman55: How about a range of ultra-fast Fujinon lenses please? like f1.2, 1.4 20mm tilt/shift and f2 300mm lenses?
No-one else seems interested, and the quality of Fuji was always excellent.

Also, could we please have a 'basic' high-end digital camera with NO silly 'scene' settings, just aperture and shutter-speed controls along with high-speed autofocus? Don't need all the other expensive techno stuff, just high-quality basics - most pro photographers could cope with that couldn't they?

I'd really like a stripped-down basic camera with TOP-end quality chip, and top-end lenses please, and leave out the retro styling too, we don't need to look backwards any more - go on, you know you can!

I would be interested in a f2 300mm lens (if it is only to show it to friends on the cardboard) if someone gives me 30,000 US$ to buy one...

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2011 at 11:50 UTC
Total: 16, showing: 1 – 16