Your Custom Text Here
My favourite fast 50, bar none
For more photos and perhaps even less nuance, hit up the video below. The text behind this review and the video is the same (or as close to the same as I could manage).
Read moreYes, what you see above lacks saturation, contrast, dynamic range, and is soft at near the front of the lens. I didn’t tilt the Cambo ACTUS GFX far enough forward. You see, I had intended just to take a few test shots, after which I’d cull the bad ones, save the profiles and shoot proper ones tomorrow, where focus, file quality, WB and more would be carefully set. But then family matters erupted.
Read more
This thread is raging at DPReview right now, precisely because Canon's second-tier 370$ USD F/1,8 85mm lens from 1992 draws very similarly, and certainly with less DOF than Fujifilm's top-of-the-line 1000$ USD F/1,2 56mm XF lens.
OP Stoneh Ray's camera settings are problematic, but the basic draw styles tell what needs to be told: unless cost, size, weight, and generational misalignment are ignored, equivalence never favours smaller formats.
Editor's note: this essay is written by long-time OHM IMAGE friend, and confidant, Thomas Tsai aka Mr. T, of Cymbacavum fame. You may also know Thomas Tsai from products such as OHM AIR, and The A-Team. Be sure to check out his flickr account, Thomas Tsai Photography (Facebook), and Cymbacavum. And, stay tune for more. His journey has just begun.
When it comes to photography, I’m not exactly a gear head. I’ve been using my Canon EOS 40D for the past eight years or so, and it has served me quite well. In today’s terms, however, the 40D is a stinker. The cheapest micro 4/3rds cameras best it in image quality on DxOMark, and my iPhone theoretically has the better autofocus system. It doesn’t even have video capability.
Read moreWhile now a month old, Michael The Mentor's painstaking review which pits Canon's top grip-less FF dSLR VS Nikon's latest D750, is fresh. Why it matters is that it is a user, not a benchmark review promoting external software, or performance-by-the-numbers journalism. He even describes why he pits cameras of two generations against each other.
Covered are the usual suspects: stills, video, ISO, dynamic range, etc., but rather than stopping at the numbers, Michael shows how each impacts the end user. His AF tests aren't simple statements, but practiced, gruelling metrics covered by modus operandi. And, inasmuch as his conclusions are drawn by a flawed species of mammal, they are as unbiased as I've seen. You certainly won't find their like at ohm. And While they've been around forever, yours truly has just discovered them.
“It’s interesting to note that DxO seems to be playing a lot of angles. First, they are presenting themselves as impartial, numeric oriented testers (e.g. the scores). Second, they are presenting themselves as reviewers (e.g. “If Canon could only address performance at base and low ISO, the EOS 7D Mk II would make a thoroughly convincing all-round choice, but in this category the Sony A77 II looks to be the more compelling option.”). Third, they sell their test equipment and software test suites to camera companies (Nikon, for instance, but I don’t believe Canon is one of their clients). Fourth, they present themselves as the best demosaic option, better than the camera makers’ options (e.g., DxO Optics Pro). They have some clear conflicts of interests that are not easily resolved. So be careful of just gobbling up their “results” as absolutes. ”
Thom's cracked out another great read for the measurement-reliant gearheads that have been bashing Canon's new 7DII.
DPReview reader, Horshack, tested Nikon's Df, D800, and Canon's 6D at ISO speeds from 3.200 to 102.400. The output of each camera was down-sampled to 8MP. The results are both surprising and not. It is clear, however, that Nikon's files are friendly to heavy digital pushing than are Canon's files.
When asked why he chose to test ISO speeds of up to 102.400, Horshack explained that it:
“illustrates the thermal noise issues with the active electronics on the Exmor chips pretty clearly. It would be very interesting to compare the images after performing a proper black-frame subtraction on the D800 files. It is possible to mitigate that noise, and even though it takes some extra work, the results can be very nice.
For obvious reasons, I think LENR should be an option for D600/D800 users full time.”
The below image represents what each camera is capable of at ISO 100 with a five-stop digital push.
Post purchase, most of my Canon P life was spent behind a Canon 50/1,4 LTM lens. I’m definitely not a street shooter. I like distance; I like my space. 50mm is a good insulator. It keeps me just far enough away from goddam people. But there’s this thing about lenses and cameras that attracts geeks like me. And with my purchase of the X-Pro 1, more than just the Canon P’s brilliant 1:1 viewfinder beckoned to be filled.
Read moreImage taken with the X-Pro 1 and Nikkor 10,5/2,5 PC LTM
I’m one of those boring chaps that favours the 50mm equivalent focal length. I also do a lot of free-lensing and faux-macro with normal lenses. Fuji’s excellent X lenses just don’t work well for the way I shoot, and because I have perfectly good lenses already, I'm not in the market. Two lenses I’ve had for years: the Zeiss Biogon 2/35 ZM and the 2/35 Canon LTM, are favourites of mine.
Read moreTsukuba, Japan
