October 21, 2014, 08:11:02 AM

Show Posts

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.

Messages - sdsr

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 46

I bought the a7r when released, I'm happy with the Camera for what I purchased it for, but Lenses ?? Sony just did an abysmal job for the future of the a7r in this area, they had 3 ?? Lenses available (excluding crop lenses not made for the a7r specifically), 3 lenses, maybe they had 4, that's it, and the best of those were the ones made by Zeiss, the 35 & later the 55.

If Sony's mirrorless cameras, like their Alpha-mounts, had IBIS, there would be a fairly easy temporary (or even permanent) solution courtesy of their best Alpha-E adapter, which provides AF for both their AF mechanisms and which evidently works at least as well as the AF on their Alpha-mount cameras.  Apparently there are lots of excellent Alpha and Minolta lenses out there, but because they were designed for bodies with IBIS none of them have IS, which reduces their appeal somewhat (esp. the longer ones).  What's more, the adapter removes one of the big advantages of mirrorless cameras - on-sensor focusing, with focus points all over the image area. 

So, no matter what, unless you're happy with the small number of FE lenses, the appeal of these cameras is limited to those who are willing to fool around with adapters, manual focusing, etc.  I am (I rather like the manual process anyway, and it's far easier on mirrorless bodies), but I rather doubt many are - surely not enough to make this line a commercial success.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Any old K-mount lenses worth getting?
« on: June 09, 2014, 10:33:44 AM »
Picked up a K-mount adapter to try out a coworkers old tamron lenses, they were too fogged up and one was missing all damping on the zoom so i let him keep them.

Are there any old K lenses that I should keep an eye out for? I noticed what looks like a 50mm F2 pancake, and some 50mm F1.2 lenses.

There are quite a lot (get an M42 adapter as well for earlier Pentax manual lenses, such as the Super Takumars).  You should take a look the extensive user reviews at pentaxforums:


You'll also find useful reviews of other M42 mount lenses, including some interesting Russian ones.

(It's much easier to use these on a mirrorless camera, though....)

If I have to prove to you multi-million dollar firms conduct (effective) market research, then I give up.

I study what people/societies/companies/governments do, instead of what they say they do. My observations clearly show that Canon is marking time, because they have either absolutely no idea what the market wants, or they are incapable of providing it. Either way, a failure of effective market research.

How do you know what "the market" wants, that Canon doesn't know what "the market" wants, or that Canon knows but can't or won't comply?  Through your "observations" of what, exactly?

OK I give up! - "Why isn't Canon working on DSLRs with higher dynamic range"??????
Am I missing something? I have yet to have problems  with the Dynamic range capabilities of any Canon DSLR that I have owned.
I have used several Nikons (D800/800E + others) that are alleged to have increased Dynamic Range but, frankly, I was not too impressed wit the results, lenses perhaps? I read that they have higher DR at low ISO - perhaps they do - but I was not impressed by the overall IQ.
I am not saying that my cameras are perfect, but what I am saying is that they have yet to let me down in the DR department.
Am I just exposing properly?

There are lots of possibilities - maybe you don't take photos of situations/places with lots of high contrast, or you expose correctly for the elements in the scene that matter to you and you don't worry about or even notice or care about the rest, or when you have dark shadows you don't want to lighten them as much as others do, if at all, or when you do the resulting noise doesn't bother you, etc., etc. 

(I too wasn't wild about the images I took with an 800e when I rented one last year out of curiosity; I prefer what I can get from my Sony A7r - though like you I don't know why, exactly -  the camera, the lenses I used, not having the camera long enough to figure out how best to use it, or some mix of these.)

Above and beyond all that though - Look at how many are loving the convenience of the adapter, now think of it - if an M5d (mirrorless 5D) were sitting on the shelves, would that not be a compelling product?

YES, YES YES! That's what I am waiting for.

Everything the 5D IV should be ;-) in a mirrorless camera the size of the Sony A7.
kick-ass FF sensor
kick-ass dual-pixel AF-system
kick-ass EVF
fully electronic global shutter, no noise, no vibrations, no oil splattering,
RT-commander built-in,
WIFI built-in, properly implemented for full-featured wireless remote control apps
EF-adaptor included in box; no hit in AF-performance using it
Priced like 5D 3 now

Plus launch of new native lens-lineup with matching compact AF-only lenses.

= I want it all!  I want it now!  And I want it cheap!

Well, there's no harm wishing....  (I would buy such a thing too, for that matter - even if it were bigger)


That's part of my point --- people like it but only to a point.  Case in point is that there is a D800 and it does have an ecosystem of lenses and support but canon folks are using the A7 because it has essentially the same sensor but no lens selling has to go down.  I have no issues with using dual systems, and if I had more income I would probably have dual systems but it is a huge investment. 

Either way - a good point to really take note of is the big Q - how many canon folks are buying A7's for the DR/MP points vs how many truly want a mirrorless camera?

I haven't a clue, but I like mine for both reasons (I was won over by mirrorless with an Olympus OM-D, well before there were any FF mirrorless bodies), and hope that Canon eventually come out with mirrorless options that are better than the M; I wouldn't even mind much if they were more-or-less APS-C size.  Camera bodies which are essentially devices for attaching lenses to regardless of which system they were made for (which Sony FE mount bodies almost have to be so far, given the lack of native lenses) appeal to me, and of those I've tried Sony's conjure up the best image quality for my purposes.  This does, however, seem almost the definition of a small niche market - the proportion of the camera-buying public interested in doing this is probably even smaller than the market for vintage fountain pens and recordings of classical music (to mention a couple of other tiny minorities I belong to)!

(Incidentally, there seem to be some Nikon D800/e users who think the Sony A7r provides better image quality and have switched or at least supplemented - so they don't just appeal to non-Nikon users.) 

Lenses / Re: Canon 10-22 vs 10-18
« on: June 05, 2014, 12:01:01 PM »
I just posted this in a similar thread, but it might as well show up here too:


I want one....

Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: June 05, 2014, 11:58:59 AM »
Photozone's review is now available:


I guess I'll be buying one....

EOS Bodies / Re: Can Canon deliver a FF sensor that is class leading?
« on: June 05, 2014, 11:35:47 AM »

I doubt there's anyone on the "Canon side" of these discussions who doesn't want sensors with better imaging characteristics.  The point "that" side is making (I'm a member of that side) is that all components are trade-offs, whether for cost, profit-margin, speed, high-ISO, etc.  Also, until there's a universal lens mount system (fat chance, eh?)  we don't have the luxury of assembling our kits à la carte: we have to buy into systems.  For many people, many subjects and many compositions, the Canon "system" is better than alternative "systems."  This is a situation where I'd love to see more competition via standard APS-C and FF lens mounts like micro four-thirds.  Until then, it's entirely OK to hope for better components, be they sensors, AF modules, batteries, etc) but to troll about it endlessly is a waste of time.

That all sounds reasonable to me.  It's somewhat ironic, perhaps, that the closest we can get right now to a universal lens mount system involves a marriage of new and old technology: mirrorless body + adapters + just about any lens ever made - provided you don't mind having to take the manual route for focusing (far easier than manual focusing on a dslr) and aperture (in most cases).  This is one reason why some of us like mirrorless cameras, though presumably not enough of us to have much effect on the overall market!

EOS Bodies / Re: Debating on selling my 5D II and 35L/135L for a...
« on: June 05, 2014, 11:16:01 AM »
But I'm certainly willing to try one again - maybe I'll rent the latest one, with a prime or two.  If your rabbit photo is ISO 6400, that's not bad at all....  Even so, they seem very expensive for what they are; for the same price as a Fuji Xt1 you could buy two Sony a6000s or almost three Canon SL1s; or for a mere $200 more you could move up to a FF Sony a7r.

No, the rabbit photo was 1250 ISO but it's not even a 100% crop either.  I've attached an unedited 100% crop with intact exif from the OOC jpg.
I agree, even if the Fuji's are presenting slightly better images OOC, the price premium is NOT worth it and popular Adobe raw converters are still providing rather soft results compared to others raw processing SW.

rant - I bought an early XT1; i really like it, except for the worst buttons ever put on a camera body of any make, at any time! (Canon 60D is even better)
- /rant


That's a shame - I thought it looked rather appealing (at least in terms of the dials on top). And thanks for the extra crop.

As for the much-touted superior high ISO performance of Fuji X cameras, have you encountered this issue?  Take a look at the exchange on the June 6 entry here:


The upshot is that at the same aperture & shutter speed, Fuji images are noticeably darker than those made by  certain other cameras (e.g. Sony a6000), so that -say- the proper comparison for Fuji at ISO 3200 is ISO 6400 on a Sony a6000 (there are comparisons with other cameras too).  Presumably this gets discussed in Fuji equivalents of this forum and elsewhere too.


Yes you can crop to a 100% to see the soft and mushy lens optics on a 36mp camera. You can see your AF being slightly off, and  your camera shake being slightly more apparent. You can see all your lens defects more clearly and the real world resolution being only slightly higher than the 5DIII. Ho hum...but yes you can crop harder....

Sure; but if your focus isn't slightly off (with mirrorless cameras it's less likely to be), and camera shake isn't apparent (depending on who you are and the circumstances, this may be close to always), and the lenses are good enough (and far more are than some seem to want us to believe)....  Are you speaking from personal experience?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DOUBLE SMACKDOWN on Neuro
« on: June 05, 2014, 10:34:21 AM »


So pay attention, YOUR 1DX is the red line, note how IT'S MOSTLY AT THE BOTTOM of every chart.


Assuming those measurements are accurate, to what extent to any of those gaps in performance result in a visible difference in a photo?  I get the low ISO shadow noise thing (I've seen it myself readily enough on the few occasions it's mattered), but the rest?

I fell for the grass is greener with a higher MP sensor so bought a Sony A7R and mounted my Canon lenses on it.

My experience so far is this.
the moire of the Sony A7R is better (less) than a 5D III
the 5D mark III produces sharp images, while the Sony on the same lens doesn't. EF 70-200 F4 (non IS) at 200mm because its shutter vibrates too much (known issue on Sony fanbois websites)
I can't use Manual focus lenses like the 24mm TSE because I have failed thus far to figure out how to get EVF zoom to work so focus here is poor. it may only work with Sony Lenses
I bricked the Sony doing a firmware upgrade so waiting for it to be repaired. (trying to fix problem above)


Summary I suspect Canon will sort out the ADC noise issue they have and the IQ will leap as a consequence, just need to be patient, I have been reminded that Canon isn't so bad.

No, of course it isn't; their system is excellent (I would take it over Nikon any day - and have).  I somewhat prefer my Sony mirrorless bodies, but it's easy enough to see why someone wouldn't, and either way that's hardly a condemnation of Canon.

As for the rest (I can't comment on your speedlight issue), there's no denying the shutter-shake problem in the A7r (the A7 doesn't have it).  The best way to avoid it is to select fast enough shutter speeds, which may not always be possible.

I've no idea what your firmware update problem is, but I'm surprised you can't get manual focus magnification to work; if it's not automatically activated, you should be able to do so easily from a menu, as with focus peaking (the two work together really well), and custom set just about any button you choose to activate it (I use the middle button on the rear control wheel, which may be the default - I can't remember).  You don't need to have a Sony lens attached - both features work perfectly with Canon lenses (and any other lenses I've attached - though I've not tried it on my two Sony lenses).  Perhaps you were sold a defective one?

EOS Bodies / Re: Debating on selling my 5D II and 35L/135L for a...
« on: June 04, 2014, 03:33:32 PM »
I briefly owned a Fuji X series camera and got the impression that while it had less noise at high ISOs, this was merely because it applied aggressive noise reduction even to RAW files - its files had much less detail than equivalents from my other cameras, mirrorless and otherwise (in fact I noticed a relative lack of sharpness at any ISO, an impression confirmed by just about every photo I've seen online taken with any Fuji X-series camera).  For that and other reasons I returned it.  I really wanted to like the images it created because I find the cameras themselves very appealing aesthetically and in terms of design, but among mirrorless cameras I prefer the results from my Olympus and Sonys.  This seems to be rather a minority view, however.

Not sure what you were shooting but I've got OOC jpg output from an XM1 and kit lens that is terrifically sharp even at 6400.  Xt1 and long cheap kit lens similarly impressively sharp.  Posted one here a while back.
perhaps you were suffering blur from some non-stabilized lenses?

I used a XE1 + the much-admired kit lens, plus, via adapters, several MF lenses.  What I was seeing wasn't motion blur, and close supbjects photographed better than more distant ones.  It could, of course, be that the lens or body were defective in some way (the images I liked most were taken indoors, hand held, in very low light with MF lenses).  That said, I've looked at a lot of images online posted by admirers of Fuji X cameras and lenses to demonstrate sharpness etc. and none of them struck me as very sharp (not bad, but nothing that seems to me to justify all the claims made for them, especially given how much the equipment costs); that at least one professional photographer (soundimageplus), who claims that Fujis are his favorite cameras to use, concedes that the resulting images aren't as good as he gets from his Sony A7/r (though it's hard to tell from his photos - the images he posts are too small and I don't like the way he processes his photos); and that the comparative tool at dpreview, for whatever that's worth, confirms my impressions. 

But I'm certainly willing to try one again - maybe I'll rent the latest one, with a prime or two.  If your rabbit photo is ISO 6400, that's not bad at all....  Even so, they seem very expensive for what they are; for the same price as a Fuji Xt1 you could buy two Sony a6000s or almost three Canon SL1s; or for a mere $200 more you could move up to a FF Sony a7r.

EOS Bodies / Re: Debating on selling my 5D II and 35L/135L for a...
« on: June 04, 2014, 03:18:17 PM »

So another fun graphic!

The OP stated he had a 135mm prime he liked to use.  Let us see what native lens is on the Sony A7... Ah, the 70-200 f/4 is the only option at that focal length.  Slower, much larger, worse bokeh, etc.  Might not seem fair, but if you are going with an ecosystem that has a paltry amount of native lenses it is fair game.  One can fiddle with adapters, but that often can affect quality, autofocus speed, etc.

Is it really worth giving up the entire Canon lens and accessory ecosystem (Sony's only powerful flash pales in comparison to the 600RT, not even close) for 300g less weight and a bit less tall camera?  That btw, will be an ergonomic nightmare if you did want to use it for professional purposes with a large lens like a 70-200 f/2.8 due to lack of sufficient grip on the A7 for heavy/large lenses.

Yes, it would be "an ergonomic nightmare" - or, at least, uncomfortable; plus, I would be concerned that the mount wouldn't hold up unless you held the lens/camera combination carefully.  I'm quite happy to use my 100L and 135L on my mirrorless Sonys, but I would rather not attach anything bigger; and I'm equally sure that such a system would be terrible for many people - switching completely wouldn't make any sense at all (talking of ergonomics, the big Sony flash I bought with my A7r makes the thing so top-heavy as to be all but unusable; I doubt I'll be keeping it).  But for someone for whom smallish primes are enough, they're worth investigating (so, yes, perhaps a very small niche market).

That said, I think the concerns about adapters are overstated.  It's true that with the metabones adapter AF speed (and AF only works on some Canon lenses) seems absurdly slow compared to the blinding speed of native Canon AF.  But there's no loss of image quality (maybe a gain, depending on your use).  So far I've not tried an adapter for Sony/Minolta Alpha lenses, but I understand that there's no loss of AF speed or accuracy for such lenses - for which there's quite a large range, some of it supposedly excellent (I've never used one).

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 46