A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

interesting article on Sony FF mirrorless



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 11th 16, 01:52 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default interesting article on Sony FF mirrorless

In article ,
RichA wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rorless-fatal-
mista
ke/

as for the article, it's just another ignorant rant. he starts off by
refuting sony's size claim and then shows a picture of three cameras
where the sony camera is clearly the smallest.

But not when fitted with a lens.


yes when fitted with a lens.

the author of that article intentionally chose lenses that make the
sony look worse than it normally would.


I wouldn't say that. Most Sony FF users do buy into the large, professional
lens lines so they can get reasonable performance, rather than suffering with
Sony's lower-tier stuff.


which means it's the *lens* that makes it big.

f/2.8 constant aperture pro lenses are bigger than f/3.5-5.6 kit lenses.
  #12  
Old July 11th 16, 04:36 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default interesting article on Sony FF mirrorless

On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:10:29 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...ss-fatal-mista
ke/

as for the article, it's just another ignorant rant. he starts off by
refuting sony's size claim and then shows a picture of three cameras
where the sony camera is clearly the smallest.


But not when fitted with a lens.


yes when fitted with a lens.

the author of that article intentionally chose lenses that make the
sony look worse than it normally would.


That may be true but nobody has stated that in this thread before you.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #13  
Old July 11th 16, 07:13 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alfred Molon[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,591
Default interesting article on Sony FF mirrorless

In article , Eric Stevens
says...
A lens which will work closer to the sensor works to the disadvantage
of the sensor.


Why?
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
  #14  
Old July 11th 16, 09:35 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default interesting article on Sony FF mirrorless

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 08:13:14 +0200, Alfred Molon
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
says...
A lens which will work closer to the sensor works to the disadvantage
of the sensor.


Why?


Angle of attack to the sensor.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #15  
Old July 11th 16, 09:36 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Noons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,245
Default interesting article on Sony FF mirrorless

On 11/07/2016 2:05 @wiz, sid wrote:
http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rrorless-fatal
mistake/



groan

Another moron claiming the only advantage of mirrorless is weight.

When are "web-site-experts" gonna start THINKING before they start
writing?...
  #16  
Old July 11th 16, 09:37 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default interesting article on Sony FF mirrorless

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

A lens which will work closer to the sensor works to the disadvantage
of the sensor.


Why?


Angle of attack to the sensor.


myth
  #17  
Old July 11th 16, 09:43 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default interesting article on Sony FF mirrorless

In article , Noons
wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rrorless-fatal
mistake/



groan

Another moron claiming the only advantage of mirrorless is weight.

When are "web-site-experts" gonna start THINKING before they start
writing?...


they think about how to get hits. content doesn't matter.
  #18  
Old July 11th 16, 02:57 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Neil[_9_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 521
Default interesting article on Sony FF mirrorless

On 7/10/2016 7:56 PM, RichA wrote:
On Sunday, 10 July 2016 17:09:45 UTC-4, nospam wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...ss-fatal-mista
ke/

as for the article, it's just another ignorant rant. he starts off by
refuting sony's size claim and then shows a picture of three cameras
where the sony camera is clearly the smallest.

But not when fitted with a lens.


yes when fitted with a lens.

the author of that article intentionally chose lenses that make the
sony look worse than it normally would.


I wouldn't say that. Most Sony FF users do buy into the large, professional lens lines so they can get reasonable performance, rather than suffering with Sony's lower-tier stuff.

Why do you think that professional lenses have to be large? My Leica R
lenses, and even my Zeiss and Schneider medium format lenses are smaller
than those in the article (all manual focus, of course). I'd bet they'd
optically outperform those lenses, too.

--
Best regards,

Neil
  #19  
Old July 11th 16, 05:01 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
sid[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 385
Default interesting article on Sony FF mirrorless

nospam wrote:

In article , sid
wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rrorless-fatal
mistake/

the only fatal mistake is you got the url wrong.

here's the correct url:
http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...orless-fatal-m
istake/


Thanks for being so helpful, dunno what happened there, it was a copy and
paste.


linux, that's what.


The problem is much more likely sat in the chair!


as for the article, it's just another ignorant rant. he starts off by
refuting sony's size claim and then shows a picture of three cameras
where the sony camera is clearly the smallest.


Of course, your opinion is more valid than any other on the internet eh?


of course, you turn it into a personal attack.


If you think questioning if your opinion is more valid than another opinion
is a personal attack then you're clearly very sensitive.

there is a link on the page I nearly linked to that has a differing
opinion also

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/05/defe...rless-cameras/


looks like i'm not the only one with that opinion, eh?


Why should that be a surprise? I posted the link, knowing that at the end of
the article was a link to an opposite opinion. That was balanced, no opinion
offered by me either way.

--
sid
  #20  
Old July 11th 16, 05:01 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default interesting article on Sony FF mirrorless

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rorless-fatal-
mista
ke/

as for the article, it's just another ignorant rant. he starts off by
refuting sony's size claim and then shows a picture of three cameras
where the sony camera is clearly the smallest.

But not when fitted with a lens.


yes when fitted with a lens.

the author of that article intentionally chose lenses that make the
sony look worse than it normally would.


That may be true but nobody has stated that in this thread before you.


so what?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Interesting article on dla Dudley Hanks[_4_] Digital Photography 0 March 23rd 12 03:24 AM
Interesting article on Hasselblad [email protected] Digital SLR Cameras 2 June 4th 09 08:23 PM
Interesting article on Hasselblad David J Taylor[_11_] Digital SLR Cameras 5 June 4th 09 03:12 PM
Interesting Article -- The Hybrid Darkroom Summer Wind In The Darkroom 0 September 29th 06 04:11 AM
Interesting article Mike K Digital SLR Cameras 0 September 5th 05 07:07 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.