12-22-2016, 06:30 AM
Are you carrying around all the lenses you can get for Nikon, dave? Lately I read about 81 with genuine Fuji mount. Which means, Fujirumors is only focusing on numbers, not on quality by the looking for No. 100.
Like you are, dave. Sure, the more lenses around, the higher the probability to find some jewels in - but also a lot of onions.
And specialities like tilt-shift? Don't make me laugh. This things already rip around 4000 out of your pocket, so a simple adapter will not drive the costs more insane - and the whole combo is still of lower performance than a mirrorless Arca or Cambo ACTUS (btw. the latter is the better system for mirrorless). Tilt shift lenses were made for people who want occasionally doing architecture (models) without the costs and cumbersome handling of a Sinar, Linhof, Plaubel and the like - all of them already were mirrorless already and you were younger than in your forties. Don't pretend that photography started with DSLRs ^_^ It was not and will not end with it.
Wim was talking about metabones adapters, on the market for a while and improving lens quality in terms of the opposite of a crop-factor. Adapters always have downsides, I'm a bit surprised Fotodiox didn't test it better. But there are as well lenses which ruined DSLRs, so what's the point?
And there are also lots of good pictures which would be better if they were not showing front- or backfocus
See, that's the advantage: With mirrorless, some AF were so slow, you just would not have taken the pictures because it was gone before the camera achieved focus :lol:
Like you are, dave. Sure, the more lenses around, the higher the probability to find some jewels in - but also a lot of onions.
And specialities like tilt-shift? Don't make me laugh. This things already rip around 4000 out of your pocket, so a simple adapter will not drive the costs more insane - and the whole combo is still of lower performance than a mirrorless Arca or Cambo ACTUS (btw. the latter is the better system for mirrorless). Tilt shift lenses were made for people who want occasionally doing architecture (models) without the costs and cumbersome handling of a Sinar, Linhof, Plaubel and the like - all of them already were mirrorless already and you were younger than in your forties. Don't pretend that photography started with DSLRs ^_^ It was not and will not end with it.
Wim was talking about metabones adapters, on the market for a while and improving lens quality in terms of the opposite of a crop-factor. Adapters always have downsides, I'm a bit surprised Fotodiox didn't test it better. But there are as well lenses which ruined DSLRs, so what's the point?
And there are also lots of good pictures which would be better if they were not showing front- or backfocus
See, that's the advantage: With mirrorless, some AF were so slow, you just would not have taken the pictures because it was gone before the camera achieved focus :lol: