•  Previous
  • 1
  • ...
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7(current)
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • Next 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
new Nikon gear
#61
At first: We as photogs don't get RAW data out of the cam without a lot of overhead and (fortunately) also with some sort of compression. Here are the next types of purists yelling "I only shoot uncompressed!" I'm so tired of all this purists blurb… That's why "Only the original converter converts the best out of the original RAW" in my eyes is plain bullshit. I didn't buy lenses and bodies to stay as close as possible to the limits given by the manufacturer idea of what's useful. I did that because I want to get the kind of photographs I have in mind with as less loss as possible of information. And I think the reverse engineering of the RAW is also a kind of quality control for the RAW. I don't care if camera settings like picture control, vignetting or distortion are read out by the converter. Some of those failures don't disturb me, other settings I can do better in post process. I switch to JPG only when I focus adjust a new lens, otherwise i could have bought a point & shoot.

 

So the point "only the original raw converter…" is NOT valid because Nikon and Canon and the rest of them stayed away from developing photo chemicals with a reason and they only buy converter development manpower to protect their stuff a little bit.

 

The really good thing with Pentax was DNG out of the cam, so I was pretty free to use the RAW-converter with or without DAM what suited best to my at the time learnt skills (and the ones I had to learn). One can ask, if that's one of the reason why Pentax isn't giving any CaNikon manager grey hair. Their SilkyPix converter was garbage in terms of usability.

 

There are basically few types of sensors to consider: Some Fuji, some Foveon and hundreds of Bayer pattern. All those could be done within the DNG specs. Nobody does it. And the manufacturers do feed the phantasy of being better off with a genuine format. We photogs are pretty stupid...

#62
Quote:As for image management - that's what I always hated in Lightroom. Postprocessing and image management are two completely different things altogether. Personally I just don't want to have them linked in a single application.
Yep, I fully agree. Photoshop plus Bridge and sometimes Iridient Developer here - and I manage my images the way I like it.

Good points concerning auto-correction as well.
#63
Quote: 

Vendors enjoy some form of lock-in. That's why only an open source group would have the idealistic push to do an open platform.
 

Actually I am also a software engineer in my other life. And I think that open source is the most ridiculous movement ever.

Open source as mechanism for industry-wide collaboration - yes. But open source products (Linux, Tomcat, Eclipse, etc) are completely insane. I am amazed that grown up people waste their time to code for free. No other discipline does that.  And even worse - because everything is seemingly free, it destroys businesses and as such jobs. The common perception is already that software has a low value. Fortunately this era is coming to an end soon - cloud services are closed source thus finally we are moving towards a market that is driven by performance rather than the absence of a price tag.
#64
I'm no software engineer but I would not categorize OpenSource as "most ridiculous". Think of Mozilla, Firefox, OpenOffice, all Linuxes - it's good to have options and it's also good to move away from the old super-expensive mainframes, aministrated only by Super-Checkers. OpenSource has no exclusivity on wrong decisions in software development.

 

But I would expect a good service from profit-organisations - I understand if I play around with half ready half buggy OpenSource stuff, I have to pay my own efforts and need to understand a lot. If I already paid for software, I expect good service in malfunctions, I expect good manuals and I expect somebody is listening what I want. This is quite often happening . But in case of Adobe or Apple or Micrososft - those players are very far away from consumers wishes and think they know better what we need.

 

Alright.

 

Now, please could somebody (no, Brightcolours, this question is not for you, sorry) tell me if I should stay with the already ordered Sigma 150-600 Sports or give this 300/4 PF E a go? What? "Get both, you fool!" - that'd be coward's advice, sorry... Do I benefit more of variable FL or lightweight?

#65
@Klaus Open source doesn't mean that they code for free (even though some people are actually coding for free, but they're getting paid in other ways: by means of consultancy, or by means of experience that can be showed off in the CV). In many cases, I'd say most of the popular projects, the open source project is mostly supported by paid employees, such as Google, Oracle or IBM. Openness means that the source code is available and single developers can provide patches. It's quite useful in case you need an extra feature or a bug fixed that is not very popular and thus not a top priority of the project owner. There's also a sort of insurance against vendor lock-in, even though in many cases this is more a potential point rather than an effective one.

 

In any case, I'm not seeing cloud getting rid of open source... On the contrary, many cloud systems are powered by open source software, Linux included, and Tomcat et al. are quite popular in the cloud.
stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm Æ’/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm Æ’/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm Æ’/2.8, Samyang 8mm Æ’/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm Æ’/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.
#66
Quote: 

Now, please could somebody (no, Brightcolours, this question is not for you, sorry) tell me if I should stay with the already ordered Sigma 150-600 Sports or give this 300/4 PF E a go? What? "Get both, you fool!" - that'd be coward's advice, sorry... Do I benefit more of variable FL or lightweight?
 

It's hard to answer if you don't tell us some constraints of the problem. Assuming that the IQ is similar, I'd drill the thing down to this trade off: versatility vs weigh. Clearly the Sigma is much more versatile, and the Nikkor is much lighter. For me, having back problems, weigh is the primary constraint, so I'd go with the Nikkor.

stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm Æ’/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm Æ’/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm Æ’/2.8, Samyang 8mm Æ’/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm Æ’/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.
#67
I don't expect the image quality of a zoom at 10% less of the price of the tele prime being similar, I'm just wondering how big the differnce will be? Primes like the Nikon are not made to be beaten by a comparatively mid price zoom.

 

We share the back-problems  :wacko: and a lot others do as well, so that's one part of me leaning towards the Nikon.

 

But reaching 600mm with the Nikon means fiddling around with 2× Converter and losing two stops. Okay, the Sigma is only 2/3 stops faster, so that's no big deal. I just find converters slow and inconvenient to use. However, while I don't have a problem to use my feet to get closer to a subject, this is a bit demanding with such a tele.

 

So I guess I stay with the preorder and see who delivers first  Big Grin

#68
Quote:@Klaus Open source doesn't mean that they code for free (even though some people are actually coding for free, but they're getting paid in other ways: by means of consultancy, or by means of experience that can be showed off in the CV). In many cases, I'd say most of the popular projects, the open source project is mostly supported by paid employees, such as Google, Oracle or IBM. Openness means that the source code is available and single developers can provide patches. It's quite useful in case you need an extra feature or a bug fixed that is not very popular and thus not a top priority of the project owner. There's also a sort of insurance against vendor lock-in, even though in many cases this is more a potential point rather than an effective one.

 

In any case, I'm not seeing cloud getting rid of open source... On the contrary, many cloud systems are powered by open source software, Linux included, and Tomcat et al. are quite popular in the cloud.
 

e.g. Because of open source, commercial application server software is disappearing from the market - it just doesn't pay anymore. That includes software like Weblogic which was clearly better than anything open source at its peak. Same goes for IDEs. Eclipse ? Please - what a joke of a software - essentially dumped into Open Source by IBM because nobody wanted it (typical strategy). Then it was free and killed JBuilder and, soon, IntelliJ. And now no manager is willing to pay for such software anymore. This list goes on and on and on (AIX, Solaris vs Linux). As for the argument that Open Source is created by paid employee.Thanks but no thanks regarding bugs, terrible UIs and poor governance because every manufacturer wants to push its own thing. Combine that with code provided by hobbyists. Amzon AWS, Google Cloud and Azure are all closed source cloud environments with some open source ingredients - as it should be. Finally we are seeing diversity again, finally some competition, finally innovation, finally progress.
#69
"Now, please could somebody (no, Brightcolours, this question is not for you, sorry) tell me if I should stay with the already ordered Sigma 150-600 Sports or give this 300/4 PF E a go? What? "Get both, you fool!" - that'd be coward's advice, sorry... Do I benefit more of variable FL or lightweight?


Joju, here are my take:

1. Choose the one that would be more likely to stay in your bag, rather than your closet.

2. Tell me more about intended use. So far I can only read about lens technical specifics. I believe that in this category you will need a lens to better service your needs than just buying the better lens.
#70
Quote:...I believe that in this category you will need a lens to better service your needs than just buying the better lens.
 

Valid point.

 

I wanted a strong tele to shoot some sports, at first comes in my mind an event called "Bike Days Solothurn" (nearly 24.000 visitors, half of them photographers Wink ). Part of that is a fair, various races in the woods and some show events like MTB dirt jump. I like to catch the bikers when they are at 7...8 m high in the air from a closeby city wall. Distances soemwhat between 5 and 50 meters and it's difficult to access closer points to get that perspective.

 

Also, I like to try my luck on animals, birds (but nothing rare or exotic). Moon shots would be nice, too.

 

Since I never use a car to transport my gear (instead public transport and / or bike ) I carry that stuff - so one aspect IS weight.

 

I'm no pro in aspect of sports shooting, the professional part of what I'm doing is documentation of machinery. So I'll buy the lens for fun, not for making money.

 

Without experience with long teles It's hard for me to tell if its better to have a HQ prime a little bit shorter and crop afterwards or get a better image quality framing as close as possible. If the Nikon lens always snaps AF, I save 1 ... 5/3 stop of ISO and if the crop is as good as the closer framed long tele, I could be happy with the prime. My back sure would be happier if not some subconscious devil tells the brain "now you could take two more lenses with you..."  Huh

  
  •  Previous
  • 1
  • ...
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7(current)
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • Next 


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)