pink fish media

Go Back   pink fish media > discussion > photo

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #61  
Old 05-09-17, 10:35 PM
Cesare Cesare is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe P View Post
Cesare,


Sure, lots of other choices are available, and many of them far cheaper, but few SLRs look as nice as an F2 Titan. There's no logic in buying one today, especially at the typical asking price.

But they're sought after because they look cool and are rare -- and, importantly, because Nikon isn't in italic font.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...itan/index.htm

Joe
Ah, ok, sorry, when you said 'best manual SLR' I thought you were referring to the features, not the aesthetics ;-) I know where you are coming from, having fallen for a number of cameras just on their looks.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 05-09-17, 11:02 PM
paulski paulski is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by canonman View Post
Cough. Whilst the F2 is a undoubtedly a very nice thing, back to the matter at hand.

The above link is largely pointless until they've actually tested it. Oddly, Nikon claim DR is 'as good as or better than the the D810'. You'd think they'd know which it was although it could be that it is a match at certain (lower) ISO settings and batter at (higher) settings. Also since Nikon haven't release RAW support yet there's probably an element of trying to optimise DR performance.
__________________
Paul
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 07-09-17, 12:45 PM
paulski paulski is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,234
Anyone got one yet?
__________________
Paul
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 08-09-17, 11:40 AM
paulski paulski is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,234
Proof that the D850 is actually awful.

__________________
Paul
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 08-09-17, 02:57 PM
Lefty Lefty is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,630


It's 3159 at Digitalrev

Lefty
__________________
www.amarsoodphoto.com
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 08-09-17, 11:50 PM
Mr Perceptive Mr Perceptive is offline
Perceptive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefty View Post


It's 3159 at Digitalrev

Lefty
I think with Nikons recent QA problems, (600 oil, 750 - 3 recalls, anniversary cosmetics), it would be a very brave man who would buy an early D850 as a grey import. You really want to know that any issues will be fixed.

It's an amazing spec camera though, and my little local camera store has already sold several, so there are certainly no supply issues.

But Lefty you know that really you want MF, so just save a bit more and buy the GFX50S, I had a play with one yesterday, I was genuinely shocked at how light it was and with the 32-64 lens no heavier than say a Canon 6D with Tamron 24-70.
__________________
David Yeoman Photography
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 09-09-17, 05:28 AM
Lefty Lefty is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,630
That's a fair point Mr P! Let's hope (for Nikon's sake) that there are no more QA problems wth the D850. It deserves to do well.

The GFX50S is great in principle, but the cost of both the body and lenses puts me off. On a side note, have you seen the price of Fuji's long awaited 1:1 macro - the 80mm f2.8? 1250! I'm sure it's a good lens, but that's a bit rich. They have also finally added a telephoto prime to their lineup in a 200mm f2. I bet that will be tasty (and expensive!)

As for me, I am feeling totally deflated at the moment. Just can't motivate myself to set the alarm and get out....

Lefty
__________________
www.amarsoodphoto.com
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 09-09-17, 05:36 AM
Mr Perceptive Mr Perceptive is offline
Perceptive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,728
I agree the Fuji glass is 'getting' expensive, but its all very good quality, you only have to look at Sigma Art prices and the Sony G Master lenses to see where glass prices are heading.

The Macro is not for me, more interested in the forthcoming 8-16mm, but that will need to have a sensible filter adapter, not a bulborous lens element like the Olympus Pro wide angle. The 200mm F2 will carry a large price ticket (and be a big lens), but with the TC's gives Fuji shooter some options.

As for deflation, put the X100T over your shoulder and just head out of the house, thats what I'm about to do........
__________________
David Yeoman Photography
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 09-09-17, 02:48 PM
Lefty Lefty is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,630
Yes, I fear you may be right re: glass prices. This hobby isn't getting any cheaper! I'm thinking that older glass is the way to go. (small, light, manual focus primes).

I'd be very surprised if the 8-16mm wasn't a bulbous front element lens. Do you know if it will be rectilinear?

You're right about deflation - the only way to get out is to get out and take photos without putting any pressure on yourself. I managed a short outing with the camera today (I've posted an image on the PAW thread). I'm trying to build up for my trip to The Lakes in Oct...

Lefty
__________________
www.amarsoodphoto.com
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 10-09-17, 09:59 AM
MartinC MartinC is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefty View Post
Yes, I fear you may be right re: glass prices. This hobby isn't getting any cheaper! I'm thinking that older glass is the way to go. (small, light, manual focus primes).

I'd be very surprised if the 8-16mm wasn't a bulbous front element lens. Do you know if it will be rectilinear?

You're right about deflation - the only way to get out is to get out and take photos without putting any pressure on yourself. I managed a short outing with the camera today (I've posted an image on the PAW thread). I'm trying to build up for my trip to The Lakes in Oct...

Lefty
Luckily Nikon still sell some excellent quality 'old generation' lenses that work very well on newer high end bodies. For sports the 300mm F4 (non PF) and the 80-200 F2.8 give great results. The lack of VR I don't feel is an issue since sensors now can be pushed up speed wise, and certainly for sports VR isn't really a benefit anyway. Both these lenses focus quickly on a D500. Price new for these lenses is around half that of the later iterations.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 10-09-17, 11:17 PM
Cesare Cesare is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,280
I think the combination of limited lens resolution and diffraction limiting will limit the appeal of the 50mp sensors. I think it's just a numbers chase at this point, and i'd probably say 15-25mp or something around there is the sweet spot for 35mm lenses. Still, there will always be situations where more pixels comes in useful.

I think with older lenses, you'll be tempted to stop them down to achieve the sharpness for the sensor, but you'll become diffraction limited instead.

Best thing about older lenses is that they work on the film cameras too ;-)
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 11-09-17, 12:50 AM
Mr Perceptive Mr Perceptive is offline
Perceptive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cesare View Post
I think the combination of limited lens resolution and diffraction limiting will limit the appeal of the 50mp sensors. I think it's just a numbers chase at this point, and i'd probably say 15-25mp or something around there is the sweet spot for 35mm lenses. Still, there will always be situations where more pixels comes in useful.

I think with older lenses, you'll be tempted to stop them down to achieve the sharpness for the sensor, but you'll become diffraction limited instead.

Best thing about older lenses is that they work on the film cameras too ;-)
Good Post
__________________
David Yeoman Photography
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 11-09-17, 08:31 AM
Joe P Joe P is offline
certified Buffologist / mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 23,893
I'm not looking to upgrade my old Nikon to a D850 or to swap systems to the Fuji GFX, but the results from either are impressive and, dare I say, similar. I was expecting the Fuji to be in a league above the 850, but I'm not seeing it.

A couple of comparisons, if you're interested in pixel peeping.

High ISO 850 vs GFX

And the 850 sample gallery at DP Review.

Joe
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 11-09-17, 09:48 AM
paulski paulski is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cesare View Post
I think the combination of limited lens resolution and diffraction limiting will limit the appeal of the 50mp sensors. I think it's just a numbers chase at this point, and i'd probably say 15-25mp or something around there is the sweet spot for 35mm lenses. Still, there will always be situations where more pixels comes in useful.

I think with older lenses, you'll be tempted to stop them down to achieve the sharpness for the sensor, but you'll become diffraction limited instead.

Best thing about older lenses is that they work on the film cameras too ;-)
Not really. Consider the Nikon D500 which has the exact same pixel pitch as the D850 sensor, it does require decent glass (and technique of course) but there's little suggestion that with that camera that you need to upgrade your lens collection to take advantage of its resolution.
__________________
Paul
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 11-09-17, 10:00 AM
Mr Perceptive Mr Perceptive is offline
Perceptive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe P View Post
I'm not looking to upgrade my old Nikon to a D850 or to swap systems to the Fuji GFX, but the results from either are impressive and, dare I say, similar. I was expecting the Fuji to be in a league above the 850, but I'm not seeing it.

A couple of comparisons, if you're interested in pixel peeping.

High ISO 850 vs GFX

And the 850 sample gallery at DP Review.

Joe
I don't think this tells the whole story, images I have seen from the GFX are just beautiful, there is something about the way the colours are rendered, and results are very very sharp.

I don't really think they are comparable, the D850 really is a Swiss Army Knife of DSLR cameras, and will suit a multitude of applications, whereas the Fuji is much more suited to a slower pace of photography. They really are different beasts.

Having 'fondled one' in a shop last week (the Fuji), it is also surprisingly light, that defies it's 'bulk' (Calm down Lefty, my cards stayed very firmly fixed in my wallet), its quite a bit lighter than the D850, but stilkl far too bulky for me.
__________________
David Yeoman Photography
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
pink fish media