Tony wanted to switch to Nikon but Couldn't

[jrista]

Poor tony. Guy can't get no respect. I have a hard time listening to him, he sometime has a halting way of talking that kind of jerk at your years/ But in geneal I think he is a pretty nice guy, even if he isn't the sharpest lens i nthe kit.


s/[sloppywriting]/[goodwriting]/g 8)

 

[Ryan85]

Poor tony. Guy can't get no respect. I have a hard time listening to him, he sometime has a halting way of talking that kind of jerk at your years/ But in geneal I think he is a pretty nice guy, even if he isn't the sharpest lens i nthe kit.


s/[sloppywriting]/[goodwriting]/g 8)

Lol I like the not the sharpest lens in the kit.

 

[Ryan85]

This is the guy who made a video to claim that Panasonic and Olympus "cheat you" by labeling their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses.

Haven't seen that one. I think it would be nice if there was a "normalized" standard for aperture though. For folks that don't understand the relationship between f number and sensor size it can be a challenge going by f number alone. Similar to the "35MM equivalent" focal ranges. I assume that's what he was talking about but just a guess on my part.

Edit...Sorry Ryan85 didn't see your post. You beat me to it. I think you may have hit on something earlier. I have a soft spot for the 400 5.6L as does Northrup so I'm probably biased and cut him some extra slack

No worrys

 

[neuroanatomist]

I think the point he was trying to make there was that the D810 is a D800E you can actually use. It sounds like the AF is comparable to the 5D3 although I don't think it surpasses it. No it's probably not as good of a camera for tracking moving subjects.

His point was actually that the D810 had much better tracking than the 5DIII. Of course, he only managed a keeper rate slightly higher than 60% with the 5DIII in the sport of slow walking. He went in to conclude that if you have a 5DIII but you aren't a pro and you only post your pictures to Facebook, it's probably not worth switching to the D810. Yeah, that's an impartial, unbiased review. :

 

[neuroanatomist]

This is the guy who made a video to claim that Panasonic and Olympus "cheat you" by labeling their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses.

The Panasonic FZ200 has f/2.8 24-600mm printed on the side of the barrel, that's a lie.

 

[Don Haines]

This is the guy who made a video to claim that Panasonic and Olympus "cheat you" by labeling their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses.

The Panasonic FZ200 has f/2.8 24-600mm printed on the side of the barrel, that's a lie.

If the last lens element isn't 215mm across, it isn't 600F2.8......

 

[TeT]

After the release of the D810 Tony was ready to sell off all of his Canon gear and go to Nikon. Then he found out that switching to Nikon required you to also buy Nikon lenses, which are just not as good. So reluctantly he has to stay with Canon. Amazingly it turns out that Canon lenses are hands down major winners head to head. I guess the little extra DR couldn't overcome the lens issue. This really amazes me that you would sell all of your stuff as new technology comes out not knowing what is going to come next.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jva08HY6uLE

Oh its him... I would wish to have a notary and tape recorder handy any time I was in serious conversation with that guy.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Not to quible, but I think bias implies that he favored the D810 to the 5D3 prior to side by side testing.

I suspect he was biased, which is why I used the word. If a product has been on the market for a while, many potential buyers will have already become owners. Anyone who earns money through website affiliate link sales has a vested interest in recommending the newest products. Northrup is becoming the East Coast version of Ken Rockwell.

The Facebook comment, although poorly phrased, is accurate. If you primarily use electronic media the differences between the 5D3 and D810 are trivial, if you print large they are not.

If you're posting to Facebook, there's little enough difference between the D810 and an iPhone. The issue is with the corollary – if you are a pro or do more than share images electronically, it is worth switching (or maybe not, if you shoot portraits with a 70-200/2.8).

 

[neuroanatomist]

I just don't think it's a pervasive anti-Canon bias.

Nor do I, and I haven't suggested that. If a 5DIV comes out in early 2015, with a 24 MP sensor, 11.5 stops of DR, and 8 fps, I bet it would be deemed a better camera than the D810 for pros and anyone doing more than posting to Facebook.

 

[windsorc]

I don't think it matters what system you use. Can you really tell the difference between Nikon and Canon equivalent lenses?
most of the time probably not. I use Nikon for senior pics and paid work, Canon for wildlife because of the 400mm f5.6 for which there is no
Nikon equivalent and I don't want to pay 2700 for their new 80-400, yes I'm a budget wildlife shooter, and I use Fuji for hiking.
What should be embarrassing for Canon is the way that Nikon sensors (or Sony's or Fuji's) appear to be improved over the Canon one's, for years and years.
There's no excuse for that after all these years. If you can't beat them, you may as well join them and use Sony sensors like everyone else.
The Samsung nx1 comes along and everyone should be asking how Samsung can have a 15fps burst rate,
and Nikon and Canon have nothing close (for the cost).

 

[zlatko]

This is the guy who made a video to claim that Panasonic and Olympus "cheat you" by labeling their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses.

I didn't see that but is he trying to say 2.8 lenses are a little different on that sensor size compared to what it's like on ff or crop sensors? My iPhone is a f2.2 but I'm not going to get bokeh with it since the sensor is so small. Do you think that's kinda what he's trying to say?

Yes, that's what he was trying to say. But to say that manufacturers "cheat you" about this is wrong in a number of ways. No, it's preposterous and quite unfair to the manufacturers. Aperture is not a measure of depth of field or bokeh. If you input f/2.8 or any aperture on a light meter or flash, it doesn't ask how big the sensor/film is or which lens or camera you're using, or how much depth of field you want. An exposure of, say, f/2.8, 1/250, ISO 400, is the same, regardless of the capture format. Manufacturers absolutely have to label their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses (or use T-stops). To label an f/2.8 micro Four Thirds lens as "f/5.6" or "f/5.6 equivalent", because that's the effective depth of field in full-frame, would just be wrong. It's like stating distance based on how fast you want to go: a soccer field is 100 meters long if you're running, but "200 meters" long if you're walking. No, it's still 100 meters even if you're walking. So manufacturers don't cheat anyone with correct aperture labels. It's up to the photographer to know what depth/blur their lens & sensor will give — that's not the purpose of the aperture label on a lens.

 

[Ryan85]

This is the guy who made a video to claim that Panasonic and Olympus "cheat you" by labeling their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses.

I didn't see that but is he trying to say 2.8 lenses are a little different on that sensor size compared to what it's like on ff or crop sensors? My iPhone is a f2.2 but I'm not going to get bokeh with it since the sensor is so small. Do you think that's kinda what he's trying to say?

Yes, that's what he was trying to say. But to say that manufacturers "cheat you" about this is wrong in a number of ways. No, it's preposterous and quite unfair to the manufacturers. Aperture is not a measure of depth of field or bokeh. If you input f/2.8 or any aperture on a light meter or flash, it doesn't ask how big the sensor/film is or which lens or camera you're using, or how much depth of field you want. An exposure of, say, f/2.8, 1/250, ISO 400, is the same, regardless of the capture format. Manufacturers absolutely have to label their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses (or use T-stops). To label an f/2.8 micro Four Thirds lens as "f/5.6" or "f/5.6 equivalent", because that's the effective depth of field in full-frame, would just be wrong. It's like stating distance based on how fast you want to go: a soccer field is 100 meters long if you're running, but "200 meters" long if you're walking. No, it's still 100 meters even if you're walking. So manufacturers don't cheat anyone with correct aperture labels. It's up to the photographer to know what depth/blur their lens & sensor will give — that's not the purpose of the aperture label on a lens.

I agree with the point your making. He' used a poor choice of words by saying they cheat you. I didn't watch the video where he said that so I'm not sure what context he was saying it in. Your right It's up to the photographer or who ever is buying the camera/lenses to do the research and know the difference in the apperture on different camera systems and sensor sizes. I've seen a couple videos from the guy but I don't follow everything he does so I don't really get why so many people take shots at him. The times I've heard him he's given his opion and sometimes I've agreed and other times I havent. I've heard him say both good and bad things about both canon and nikon. Im just not going to take a shot at the guy for saying they cheat you, I got what he meant.

 

[neuroanatomist]

If you input f/2.8 or any aperture on a light meter or flash, it doesn't ask how big the sensor/film is or which lens or camera you're using, or how much depth of field you want. An exposure of, say, f/2.8, 1/250, ISO 400, is the same, regardless of the capture format.

Even exposure is irrelevant. The f/number is an intrinsic property of the lens, no imaging device needed. Focal length (distance from focal plane to rear nodal point at infinity focus) divided by entrance pupil diameter (iris diaphragm diameter).

Where the trouble comes in is when an arbitrary standard format is picked (generally 35mm film aka full frame) then try to define the parameters of a given lens on another format in those terms, because such definitions are rarely complete. An equivalent FoV is given, and the exposure is the same. The DoF is not the same, nor is the perspective, nor is the noise. The problem is even worse when a manufacturer prints that 'FF equivalent' focal length on the barrel of the lens.

 

[JorritJ]

I agree with the point your making. He' used a poor choice of words by saying they cheat you. I didn't watch the video where he said that so I'm not sure what context he was saying it in. Your right It's up to the photographer or who ever is buying the camera/lenses to do the research and know the difference in the apperture on different camera systems and sensor sizes. I've seen a couple videos from the guy but I don't follow everything he does so I don't really get why so many people take shots at him. The times I've heard him he's given his opion and sometimes I've agreed and other times I havent. I've heard him say both good and bad things about both canon and nikon. Im just not going to take a shot at the guy for saying they cheat you, I got what he meant.

Apparently you understand the actual point of communication, where the larger part of the internet merely bickers over the words used.

 

[Ryan85]

Yep

 

[zlatko]

I agree with the point your making. He' used a poor choice of words by saying they cheat you. I didn't watch the video where he said that so I'm not sure what context he was saying it in. Your right It's up to the photographer or who ever is buying the camera/lenses to do the research and know the difference in the apperture on different camera systems and sensor sizes. I've seen a couple videos from the guy but I don't follow everything he does so I don't really get why so many people take shots at him. The times I've heard him he's given his opion and sometimes I've agreed and other times I havent. I've heard him say both good and bad things about both canon and nikon. Im just not going to take a shot at the guy for saying they cheat you, I got what he meant.

Apparently you understand the actual point of communication, where the larger part of the internet merely bickers over the words used.

Why bicker over words? Would you mind if someone unfairly accused you of cheating?

The actual video is titled: "How Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Canon, Nikon & Fuji Cheat You". Cheating is acting dishonesty or unfairly, in order to gain an advantage. Cheating is deceiving or tricking someone.

In the video, he quotes user reviews on Amazon.com and makes fun of people who were "misled" into buying the Panasonic 12-35/2.8 lens. "They paid $1,000 and they didn't get what they thought they were getting," he says; "Shame on Panasonic for marketing the lens like this."

 

[Ryan85]

Like I said I didn't see the video. I think his videos and buying advise are targeted towards the husband shoping for his wife or people just wanting a first camera as a hobbyist. I see what he's saying the 12-35 2.8 seems like a great buy for 1000 dollars compared to what a canon or nikon would charge. So for someone starting out that may seem the better buy. The focal lengths and different sensor sizes are going to produce a different result compared to a ff or crop sensor. I don't know how they market those lenses but he's giving his opinion for free. I wouldn't have used the word cheating like he did but I get the point he's trying to make. He's entitled to his opinion even if we don't agree with him. Some things I've seen I agree with him on and others I dont. At least he's not coming across as a fan boy of just one brand.