The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > Other Discussions > Open Mic

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #31  
Old 03-03-2019, 06:13 PM
Dirk Hofman Dirk Hofman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NOR * CAL
Posts: 4,511
Default

I donít find Fuji lenses expensive. Well... let me rather say that part of the appeal of moving to the X system is that the lenses are far cheaper (and lighter) than the L lenses I like in my Canon, and frankly (much to my surprise) they perform better.

Iím in the honeymoon phase, but so far I prefer the mirrorless experience.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03-03-2019, 06:29 PM
harpspitfire's Avatar
harpspitfire harpspitfire is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: pittsburgh area USA
Posts: 557
Default

going a step further, why i prefer a mirrored camera are because of the modifications , i had one older camera modified and it actually took a better color image then my stock camera- all the cameras come with the ir filter to shoot what the human eye sees, heres a link to what im talking about- if you also want to get into astro, ir, Ha, - http://www.imaginginfinity.com/fullspectrum.html
__________________
Fender GDC 200 S
Telecaster-(build)
Squier 51
Fender Strat Partscaster
Ibanez GRS200 bass
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 03-03-2019, 07:35 PM
robj144 robj144 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 8,163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by harpspitfire View Post
going a step further, why i prefer a mirrored camera are because of the modifications , i had one older camera modified and it actually took a better color image then my stock camera- all the cameras come with the ir filter to shoot what the human eye sees, heres a link to what im talking about- if you also want to get into astro, ir, Ha, - http://www.imaginginfinity.com/fullspectrum.html
Filters can, of course, be removed from mirrorless setups as well.
__________________
Guild CO-2
Guild JF30-12
Guild D55
Goodall Grand Concert Cutaway Walnut/Italian Spruce
Santa Cruz Brazilian VJ
Taylor 8 String Baritone
Blueberry - Grand Concert
Magnum Opus J450
Eastman AJ815
Parker PA-24
Babicz Jumbo Identity
Walden G730
Silvercreek T170
Charvell 150 SC
Takimine G406s
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 03-03-2019, 08:14 PM
Jeff Scott Jeff Scott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,400
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk Hofman View Post
...I just didn't like the feel of the rangefinder at all..
I have never bonded with a rangefinder style camera finder (I have a couple of Leicas and used/played with many other from M3 up through M9), they are just way too limiting for the kind of photography I do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbeltrans View Post
She had no interest in taking pictures and having somebody else develop them.
Same here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eatswodo View Post
It’s a picture of a camera and a lens, not a contest entry.
That reminds me of a couple of photography "contests" I've attended. Given how they work, Ansel Adams, Lee Friedlander, Ed Weston, et al, would never have won any!
__________________
(insert famous quote here)
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 03-03-2019, 08:18 PM
Jeff Scott Jeff Scott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,400
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk Hofman View Post
...WRT to optical viewfinders, well the captures from my 6D don't look like what I see in that viewfinder either, so there's translation either way.
Previsualization is such an important tool in my photography work. Always has been.
__________________
(insert famous quote here)
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 03-03-2019, 08:23 PM
Jeff Scott Jeff Scott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,400
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Birdbrain View Post
One choice, as I see is, is to invest in the Fuji model, buying excellent but pricey lenses to fit a camera body that will soon be replaced by a new one with less...
This was something we'd suggest back in the '80s when someone wanted good glass but could not afford the same in a complete system, all at one time. Usually, it was in regard to Contax/Zeiss lenses; we sell them a Yashica FX-3 body and they would later on, when finances allowed, buy a Contax RTS body.
__________________
(insert famous quote here)
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 03-03-2019, 11:46 PM
Birdbrain Birdbrain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Denver
Posts: 388
Default The difference now....

... is that lenses are not so important. Why? In the film era, the camera body had almost nothing to with image quality. Assuming your camera worked to spec (some didn't), the camera served mainly as a platform for its line of lenses. When we were shooting slide film, as serious photogs did, lenses (and filters) were the only variable that determined detail, contrast and color. Great glass really mattered then. So did fast glass, when usable ISOs ranged below 400.

Today, your camera does so much more. It's like a film store, with countless varieties of color and tonality. Fuji has its Film Simulations, actually baking characteristics of its classic films into JPEG choices. Real-world sharpness is enhanced by stabilization; I've gotten perfect hand-held exposures at 1/10 on a 100mm lens.

Top-dollar lenses do have advantages: sharpness that's plain to see in 200% enlargements, sharpness to the corners at wide apertures, where you seldom need it. For me, the most valuable trait of newer lenses is better resistance to light flare. That's difficult to touch up in post-processing, but other lens faults are easy to correct in programs like Lightroom.

Simply put, my new camera made my old lenses work better.
__________________
Guitars? A gradually changing cast, now including: Seagull SWS Maritime Mini Jumbo; Seagull S6 Folk ('02); Simon & Patrick Woodland Mini Jumbo ('07), Godin Montreal Premiere Supreme; Godin Fifth Avenue Kingpin; Ibanez Mikro Bass.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 03-04-2019, 11:37 AM
Jeff Scott Jeff Scott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,400
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Birdbrain View Post
That's difficult to touch up in post-processing, but other lens faults are easy to correct in programs like Lightroom.
Fix it in the mix? I'd rather not start with something that NEEDS fixing, in the first place.
__________________
(insert famous quote here)
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 03-04-2019, 11:41 AM
Jeff Scott Jeff Scott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,400
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Birdbrain View Post
...fast glass...
Fast lenses require a tradeoff somewhere else, usually in the form of chromatic aberration and pincushion/barrel distortion. Particularly with today's modern D-cameras that have excellent low light-high ISO capabilities, fast lenses are best for bragging rights.
__________________
(insert famous quote here)
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 03-04-2019, 12:13 PM
Dirk Hofman Dirk Hofman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NOR * CAL
Posts: 4,511
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Scott View Post
Fast lenses require a tradeoff somewhere else, usually in the form of chromatic aberration and pincushion/barrel distortion. Particularly with today's modern D-cameras that have excellent low light-high ISO capabilities, fast lenses are best for bragging rights.
Fast lenses are great for low light shooting and for creating beautiful background blur, considerations which matter a lot for how I shoot. Lots of portraits, night shooting, etc. Case in point, portrait at dusk in Sedona:



You’re ngoing to get that image without a fast lens unless you add light, and to me the light was beautiful just how it was.. Canon 50mm 1.2, shot on a Canon 6D. Don’t recall the actual f-stop but guessing 1.8-2.

On my Fujifilm, no distortion. Minor distortion corrected in post for this image, not that anyone could tell one way or the other just viewing the image.

If you mean bragging rights because the images look great, I agree. ��
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 03-04-2019, 01:01 PM
robj144 robj144 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 8,163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk Hofman View Post
Fast lenses are great for low light shooting and for creating beautiful background blur, considerations which matter a lot for how I shoot. Lots of portraits, night shooting, etc. Case in point, portrait at dusk in Sedona:



Youíre ngoing to get that image without a fast lens unless you add light, and to me the light was beautiful just how it was.. Canon 50mm 1.2, shot on a Canon 6D. Donít recall the actual f-stop but guessing 1.8-2.

On my Fujifilm, no distortion. Minor distortion corrected in post for this image, not that anyone could tell one way or the other just viewing the image.

If you mean bragging rights because the images look great, I agree. ��
I mostly agree, but with today's sensor's ISO performance, you can get a stop or three improvement just based off sensor performance.
__________________
Guild CO-2
Guild JF30-12
Guild D55
Goodall Grand Concert Cutaway Walnut/Italian Spruce
Santa Cruz Brazilian VJ
Taylor 8 String Baritone
Blueberry - Grand Concert
Magnum Opus J450
Eastman AJ815
Parker PA-24
Babicz Jumbo Identity
Walden G730
Silvercreek T170
Charvell 150 SC
Takimine G406s
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 03-04-2019, 02:49 PM
Dirk Hofman Dirk Hofman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NOR * CAL
Posts: 4,511
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robj144 View Post
I mostly agree, but with today's sensor's ISO performance, you can get a stop or three improvement just based off sensor performance.
I guess I'm wondering what you're comparing to today's sensors? ISO performance is certainly amazing today, but it's still not going to get you that shallow depth of field, and you're still going to have more flexibility with a faster lens. It makes such a difference to me that it takes me a minute to recall when the last time I used an f4 or similar zoom. Fast primes are almost all I shoot.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 03-04-2019, 08:26 PM
Jeff Scott Jeff Scott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,400
Default

Shallow DOF is great for the type of photography you do, so of course a fast lens would be needed. I'm from the Group f/64 school of photography, if you know what that is.
__________________
(insert famous quote here)
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 03-04-2019, 09:00 PM
Dirk Hofman Dirk Hofman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NOR * CAL
Posts: 4,511
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Scott View Post
Shallow DOF is great for the type of photography you do, so of course a fast lens would be needed. I'm from the Group f/64 school of photography, if you know what that is.
Huge Edward Weston fan! I chase that side of things as well.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 03-05-2019, 03:59 PM
robj144 robj144 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 8,163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk Hofman View Post
I donít find Fuji lenses expensive. Well... let me rather say that part of the appeal of moving to the X system is that the lenses are far cheaper (and lighter) than the L lenses I like in my Canon, and frankly (much to my surprise) they perform better.

Iím in the honeymoon phase, but so far I prefer the mirrorless experience.
Here's a 27 mm, f2.8, pancake lens for $165:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/BRAND-NEW-F...16.m2516.l5255

Normally close to $500.
__________________
Guild CO-2
Guild JF30-12
Guild D55
Goodall Grand Concert Cutaway Walnut/Italian Spruce
Santa Cruz Brazilian VJ
Taylor 8 String Baritone
Blueberry - Grand Concert
Magnum Opus J450
Eastman AJ815
Parker PA-24
Babicz Jumbo Identity
Walden G730
Silvercreek T170
Charvell 150 SC
Takimine G406s
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > Other Discussions > Open Mic

Thread Tools



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=