awesome bracketed shot :-)
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I dont think wedding togs would like that at all.
1. 7D is hardly a wedding grade cameraUhm, I didn't say anything about the 7D & weddings; I was talking about the X-Pro 1:
Right now, the X-Pro 1 is the smallest, least expensive, and sexiest camera with wedding-photographer grade image quality, and Fuji still has plenty of other tricks up their sleeves to roll out over the next year or so.I certainly wouldn't use it as my only camera, but with the 3 lenses they're shipping at release I think most professionals would be perfectly comfortable shooting a wedding with the X-pro 1 and 18/35/60mm trio (and maybe an adapted Nokton for posed portraits). I'd want another body like a 5D with an ultrawide on it and maybe a zoom in the bag just in case, but that would pretty much do it for me.
2. There isn't the range of lens to shoot a wedding. Fujifilm will be a bit player for some timeAF lens options will be limited for another year or so perhaps... You can be sure that there are a lot of wedding/artistic/street/travel shooters out there without the dosh for a digital Leica M that own M glass that are looking very keenly at moving up to the X-pro 1. The best adapted mirrorless options up 'till now (pana, oly, sony, ricoh, etc.) have been OK but none of them feel or handle like a rangefinder like the Fuji does, and the image quality speaks for itsself. The fact that Fuji's AF lenses cost half as much as their Canon L or Sony/Zeiss counterparts will certainly push adoption as well.
Nobody ( here on this thread ) has taken into consideration the Nikon D300S replacement.
I failed to see the purpose in the smite, it seemed to add a negative spin to the forum. I am going to look into a "like" feature, as I think that would bring more positive discussion and reward the folks that have good ideas and points.
The forum host service installed an add-on a couple of weeks ago, and it apparently messed up several things in the background. The add-on was just removed, but the removal resulted in several forum features being reset. We'll see if karma gets turned back on...
Due to popular user request, I think they should switch to a yearly cycle just like in software: 50mm/1.4/2011, 50mm/1.4/2012, ... so people will have plenty to rumor and discuss about. Or they could do it like car manufacturers: change the color, tweak the design of the af-mf button and so on :-p
This shows where the 135mm f/2L MTF chart stands against the MTF chart of Canon's top performing prime the 400mm f/2.8L IS II. Two completely different lenses, of course, but it shows just how remarkable Canon's current lens technology is, and how much the 135 could be improved. In simplified terms... the higher the lines and the closer they track each other the better the quality of the lens.
Keep in mind that the black lines show the lens wide open while the blue lines show the lens stopped down to f/8, so the closer these sets of lines are to each other the better the performance of the lens when used wide open. The very best lenses will have the black and the blue lines close together.
Generally speaking a lens whose thick lines (10 LP/mm) are above .8 on the chart should be regarded as having excellent image quality. Above .6 is regarded as "satisfactory". Below .6 is, well, below.
[...] The closer [the dotted meridonial and sagital] lines are to each other the more pleasing the bokeh of the lens. Fascinating, huh?
The meridonial and sagital lines are also used used to evaluate astigmatism and field curvature — subjects which are beyond the scope of this brief essay.