Jump to content

Snzkgb

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    48

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Snzkgb

  1. Snzkgb
    This is just insane.
  2. Snzkgb
    Well, X-Pro1 has live view. Why not having live view with X-Pro 2?
  3. Snzkgb
    Fuji lenses (I mean primes) are tiny compared to DSLR primes with the same F stops. I won't say for everyone else, but when I actually saw the Fujinon 35 mil F/1.4 with my own eyes I was shocked about how small it was. For three month I took my X-Pro1 with all three native primes with me wherever I went. And this little bag was three times smaller and like four times lighter than my photo-backpack with 5Dm2 and 28/1.8+50/1.4+85/1.8. So the size of X lenses is great for me, I don't need them to be smaller. ZEISS and Leica MF lenses are great, but the size of the ZEISS Otus 55mm/1.4 is extreme, and the cost of it and any Leica lens is just from another world. Can Fuji make MF lenses as good as Leica? I think they can. But will these lenses sell well? I think they will not.
  4. Snzkgb
    Well, who need MF lenses now? Even Leica made new T and SL cameras, both use AF lenses.
  5. Snzkgb
    The whole point of buying X-Pro1 for me was hybrid OVF, and only then the X-Trans sensor. So no, I won't buy X-Pro 2 without OVF.
  6. Snzkgb
    Your photos are so wonderfull, thanks for sharing.
  7. Snzkgb
    Very nice pictures, Jonas. But I still think that 1.4 is better, because, well, it is 1.4 and not 2.0.
  8. Snzkgb
    If you haven't got 35/1.4 - start saving. If you do - do not bother.
  9. Snzkgb
    It is hard to believe that 35/2 will be cheaper than 35/1.4, because 35/1.4 is one of the cheapest X mount lenses anyway, and because 35/2 is going to be WR and almost certainly will acquire better (newer generation) AF motor.
  10. Snzkgb
    Many people, who own a DSLR with APS-C or DX sensor bought 50mm f/1.8 or F/1.4 as the portrait lens. This is common issue. And I personally think that 50mm on APS-C or DX is a great focal length, I used to shoot with 30D and 40D and with 50 F/1.4 for a couple of years, and I was happy with what I got.
  11. Snzkgb
    Honestly I can't understand, why the first question should be "how much?". It is clear, that these kind of body can't cost less than 7000-8000$. So it is obvious that there is a small niche of people who could actually afford one. For them, maybe, it is more logical to ask "Will it be the interchangable of fixed lens camera?".
  12. Snzkgb
    This is a very good lens indeed. Loved it with a film SLR.
  13. Snzkgb
    Well, there is a new manual lens, avaliable for Nikon and Canon mounts, which is 50mm F/1.2. It is called Zenitar 50 f/1.2 and is designed for APS-C and DX sensors. It is designed in 2014 and manufactured from 2015 in Russia, and costs like 370$. Full metal construction. Here you can watch it on Nikon DSLR (it is in Russian, but you at least can see how it looks) And here is the small overview of prototype of this lens in english: http://www.4photos.de/test/Zenitar_50mm_f1.2.html Here is a bokeh sample from the lens in production:
  14. Snzkgb
    This particular test seem like misfocused Zeiss to me.
  15. Snzkgb
    Autofocus is not the argument any more?
  16. Snzkgb
    Can you please show these tests, where Samyang performed better than Zeiss?
  17. Snzkgb
    Since I didn't used anything apart from 18/2, 35/1.4 and 60/2.4 I can tell that 18/2 is optically the worse one out of these three primes. But still, it is a very good lens compared to any other wide prime of any other system. And 18/2 is still the second smallest lens for X mount, which (plust the F/2) mean that this is still on of the best street lens if you want a lightweight and compactness.
  18. Snzkgb
    Did anyone compared this lens with Zeiss Touit 12/2.8?
  19. Snzkgb
    Yes. Summilux is faster than Summicron, and more expensive. While 35/2 is slower than 35/1.4 and probably more expensive. Do you see any logic? I don't.
  20. Snzkgb
    I'm not sure that prime is ever going to be the same target marked as zoom, for obvious reasons. And I doubt that ever any lens manufacturer made the pro-grade prime, which is slower than the original. And I still cannot understand why Fuji decided to make this step instead of making 35/1.2 or 35/1.4 II
  21. Snzkgb
    And this is the point I'm trying to tell. Making the lens small and light and WR means it won't be cheap, while offering less low-light and DOF capabilities. Of course 35/2 will be selling well, there is no doubt in that. But I'll get 35/1.4 anytime over the 35/2.
  22. Snzkgb
    Of course you can make an optically superior lens at F/2, no doubt. For example, the 60/2.4 is optically better than 35/1.4. But primes are supposed to be fast in any system (with exception for Sony A7). As for smaller and lighter - there are lenses like 18/2 and 27/2.8. They are light and small already.
  23. Snzkgb
    Really, the worse lens (and F/2 is worse than F/1.4 for me) for a better and new body...doesn't make sence.
  24. Snzkgb
    When I said cheap zooms I meant the XC16-50 and XC50-230, which currently both have the version II in the market.
  25. Snzkgb

    Fuji Flowers

    Snzkgb replied to dv.'s topic in Nature & Wildlife

×
×
  • Create New...