jonpais

Just a simple question: why is it that every Fuji owner recommends the fastest primes, like the 56mm f/1.2 and the rest, saying they are brilliant from wide open, when MTF charts show this is clearly not so? The 56mm barely meets decency levels wide open. And the autofocus of some of the earlier faster lenses is much slower as well. Because whether you purchase a 16mm f/1.4 or a 23mm f/1.4, you'd have to use it often at wide open to justify the cost, as the slower f/2 or zoom options probably perform just as well by say f/4. Just wondering...

@Vesku are you prepared to spend upwards of $2000.000 USD to upgrade from the GH4? And what if the dynamic range, continuous autofocus and low light performance were no better than the G85? Excessive noise reduction, oversharpening to the point of destroying detail? Come on, you've been going on about this forever, I'm on your side now. ???

GH5 will ship March 4th according to one source at 43Rumors. Since I already purchased the G85 and XT2 my enthusiasm is somewhat dampened. The 4K 60p is interesting because, like everyone else, I like slo mo; 10 bit 4:2:2 less so because I never do any heavy grading, just some color correction and a little LUT, usually no more than 15%. I'm not expecting any great shakes re: continuous autofocus or low light performance. And Panasonic colors have been consistently meh. Is anyone else seriously expecting Panasonic to rock your world?

And since Cinegain brings up cost, I'm at work on yet another off-putting post ? that examines the vetting process that every new piece of photographic equipment goes through in most Internet forums, from initial announcement to the first beta testers, speculation about features, reaction to the first reviews, and the relationship between economics (purchasing power) and user opinions about gear. I'm finding recently that gear costing in the range of $700 USD gets many more favorable posts than gear in $2,000+ territory. Many users are interested in 'bang for the buck', not just the very best money can buy. I often read statements like 'it is 90% as good as this... [insert name of product], but in my opinion, it is that 10% that makes the difference between cameras and lenses that just meet expectations and those that blow your mind.

Also, I don't see anybody crying. I see thousands of creative professionals - graphic designers, photo editors and film editors - who have been faithful to Apple for years, who realize that Tim Cook does not understand or care about what we want. He believes we should be able to work on an iPad Pro.

Sure millions of people around the world use the MBPr to look at FB, or to be seen at Starbucks. But a machine costing $4,200 + Apple Care should be optimized for video and photo editing, don't you think?

Testing is deeply flawed. He also says this is a problem with all 18-35 lenses, but does not give any supporting evidence of this. Plus, the TouTuber only tests with the Nikon 7200. Does he only own one camera body? Why doesn't he try the lens on other bodies? And not a piece of paper, but an actual real world test. One test with a single ruled sheet of A4 paper at an angle does not a test make. The video I shared that was shot with the Sony a6500 maintains focus on the subject even at the extreme edges of the frame, and apparently works better than other adapted lenses. That's another issue: adapted lenses will never work better than OEM lenses in autofocus. You say the problem is widely known but you share a video with a mere 63 hits. Not quite what I expected from you. Edit: Google any of the lenses you recommend and add 'autofocus problems', and you'll get hundreds of articles about autofocus issues as well, including your beloved Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L.

In this test, the Sigma with MC-11 adapter outperforms both the Canon and Zeiss lenses for continuous autofocus performance on the a6500.

Let's try to stay on topic.

This was shot with both the Samsung S and PZ lenses. Looks pretty good to me. I think you'd better chill.

okay, you win

Actually, not that far! There must be at least twenty different criteria that distinguish a cine lens from a stills lens, but resolution isn't one of them.

absolute rubbish Again, rubbish! First of all, you need more caps and bold typeface to make your point. Secondly, if you introduce an ADAPTER into the mix, you're introducing another variable. Spellcheck is your friend.

3rd party ultra-sharp lenses with multiple elements? Just at random, I checked the Zeiss Otus 50mm f/1.4 and chromatic aberrations are extremely low. Likewise with my favorite lens, the 23-element Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8, and while not a 3rd party lens, it exhibits negligible chromatic aberration. Of course, when using OEM lenses, distortion and vignetting are corrected by the camera's own firmware. What disturbs me is this pervasive misconception that the new multiple element lenses are somehow inherently worse, which is simply not the case at all.

May I ask why the Sigma is unusable for wideangle stills? I don't shoot stills, but I've read everywhere that chromatic aberrations are easily corrected in editing software.

how can you like something twice?

If you can just forget about IBIS, you should go with your heart and get the Fuji X-T2, the VPB and one or two lenses, then decide.

Excellent. I glanced through the manual, but didn't see that information.

The only perfect products ever made: the safety pin and the paper clip. Incidentally, no one single issue with any of those cameras ever prevented talented individuals from going out and making fabulous images.

First of all, thanks for responding. Secondly, that's sensational. Aren't these the same batteries that were used in the GH2? Panasonic certainly has some sorcerer making these things! Lastly, if the G85 can shoot 4K for a couple of hours on one battery, isn't that like a selling point or something? Isn't that something reviewers might tell readers? But again, not a single reviewer that I know of has even tested battery life for video. Anyhow, I'm very happy (for a few seconds - that feeling never lasts very long!)

I like that - 'compared to its pears'. I believe I already said I would never own an a6300. The point of my post is not that people should run out and buy a Sony, it is that there are far too many discussions about specs and too much squinting at charts. And if someone of undisputed talent does share something shot with one of these newer cameras, it generates 250 pages of pixel peeping comments. Well, actually, the point of my post is first, that people don't trust their own eyes, or don't have the discernment to tell good from bad, and that there are too few people of talent doing these reviews. And then there are the legions of reviewers and readers who instantly shout 'fail!' if a camera doesn't have IBIS or a touch screen - complete and utter nonsense! Almost every single one. "Did you know that Voigtlander came out with three lenses for MFT, but they don't have OIS or AF? Isn't that a joke? Fail!" It makes me recall the MBPr 2016. I'll come out and say it, I think Tim Cook is an ass. But in practically every single forum, readers called the new MBPr a complete failure, blah, blah. Almost every video on YouTube did the same. Max Yuryev was the first I believe who actually tested the laptop specifically with video in mind, and it whupped butt. And now, one of the best stills photographers active online has posted a review of the 13" MBP, and heresy - claimed it was perfect for use out in the field. Meanwhile, the Fuji X-T2 thread slips quietly into obscurity.

@EyeSoul Precisely why I won't buy a Sony mirrorless. The handling, ergonomics, UI and reliability of the Panasonics are much better. But as far as image quality goes, the colors of both cameras are meh.

@John Matthews We are not discussing price or ergonomics, just image quality. And the Sony has better image quality than the Lumix. BTW, I carry a tripod with me every day. I've used a tripod for almost every shot I've uploaded over the past two months in fact. And not a single person pointed out, "Oh my god, your images are too steady. They need some camera shake!" Just to be 100% clear, I don't own, nor do I have any intention of owning a Sony mirrorless. I have owned four Panasonics: the TMC-900, the GM1, the GH3, the GH4 and now the G85. Now, if someone were to ask me which they should buy, the GH4 or one of the newer Panasonics with IBIS, I'd recommend one of the newer ones, because I've been struggling with camera shake ever since I got the GH3. However, if the choice was between two cameras of similar price, one a u43 and the other an APS-C, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the larger sensor.

@Cary Knoop Are you denying that Sony's a6300 has superior continuous autofocus performance, greater low light sensitivity and more dynamic range than the Lumix? Incredible! There have already been numerous tests, too many tests, too many words, and not enough talent.