Comments for Admiring Light http://admiringlight.com/blog Photography Reviews, Photos, News and Musings Fri, 25 Apr 2014 01:41:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9 Comment on Review: Fujifilm Fujinon XF 10-24mm f/4 R OIS by Anurag http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-fujifilm-fujinon-xf-10-24mm-f4-r-ois/#comment-202025 Fri, 25 Apr 2014 01:41:20 +0000 http://admiringlight.com/blog/?p=3369#comment-202025 I find heavy barrel distortion in the first photo and so I found on many other photos on other posts. The only reason I am holding back my purchase of this lens is that I have Canon 10-22mm which has much lower barrel distortion than this lens and as per my knowledge, it has the lowest distortion amongst all superwide lenses available in the world in this focal length range.

Also, you no where mentioned whether in-camera correction (or correction in post processing) was applied or not. Fujifilm corrects distortion in-camera which keeps you from knowing the real distortion level of the lens.

]]>
Comment on Fuji 10-24mm vs Fuji 14mm f/2.8 and Fuji 23mm f/1.4 by Hochzeitsfotograf Essen http://admiringlight.com/blog/fuji-10-24mm-vs-fuji-14mm-f2-8-fuji-23mm-f1-4/#comment-201944 Wed, 23 Apr 2014 14:10:59 +0000 http://admiringlight.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-201944 Nice review!
As a former Canon user I can say (and compare) that the 10-24mm impresses me and is in my opinion a better lens than my already sold 16-35mm II.
The image stabilisation of the Fuji rocks!

]]>
Comment on Review: Rokinon (Samyang) 8mm f/2.8 Fisheye (Fujifilm X-Mount) by Denis http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-rokinon-samyang-8mm-f2-8-fisheye-fujifilm-x-mount/#comment-201926 Wed, 23 Apr 2014 07:18:40 +0000 http://admiringlight.com/blog/?p=2901#comment-201926 Circle are projected into ovals if the tow planes (the circle and the camera sensor) are not parallel.
my two cents ;)

]]>
Comment on Fuji 10-24mm vs Fuji 14mm f/2.8 and Fuji 23mm f/1.4 by Mike V http://admiringlight.com/blog/fuji-10-24mm-vs-fuji-14mm-f2-8-fuji-23mm-f1-4/#comment-201698 Sun, 20 Apr 2014 07:05:46 +0000 http://admiringlight.com/blog/?p=3350#comment-201698 I just picked up the x-t1 and in the process of getting rid of my Nikon DSLR gear. I have the 56mm f1.2 and X100 right now and thinking of what makes sense. Right now the options are to get the 10-24 and the 35mm. the other option is the 14 and 23. I’d get a nice small normal lens in the 35 f1.4 and a good zoom. I’m not one for alot of landscape but will be traveling to south africa for a safari at the end of the year.

In general I like primes, but I’m wondering if the 10-24 is good enough to replace the 23 (35mm) and wide angle range with the IS, or if I should just get the primes and eat the additional cost

]]>
Comment on Review: Fujifilm Fujinon XF 10-24mm f/4 R OIS by 2014-04-16 | NEWSGRAPHY http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-fujifilm-fujinon-xf-10-24mm-f4-r-ois/#comment-201673 Sat, 19 Apr 2014 23:11:53 +0000 http://admiringlight.com/blog/?p=3369#comment-201673 […] To Go Kit by Joe Farace at shutterbug.com // Fuji Fujinon XF 10-24 mm f/4 R OIS Jordan Steele by at admiringlight.com // Fuji FinePix S9400W by Mark Goldstein at photographyblog.com // Nikon Coolpix P7800 by Mike Lowe […]

]]>
Comment on “Full Frame Equivalence” and Why It Doesn’t Matter by Robert Mark http://admiringlight.com/blog/full-frame-equivalence-and-why-it-doesnt-matter/#comment-201648 Sat, 19 Apr 2014 14:33:46 +0000 http://admiringlight.com/blog/?p=1541#comment-201648 You’re mistaking corner softness of the 35mm lenses compared to the corner sharpness of the Micro Four Thirds lenses.

]]>
Comment on “Full Frame Equivalence” and Why It Doesn’t Matter by Robert Mark http://admiringlight.com/blog/full-frame-equivalence-and-why-it-doesnt-matter/#comment-201647 Sat, 19 Apr 2014 14:30:42 +0000 http://admiringlight.com/blog/?p=1541#comment-201647 You’ve completely discounted the 5 axis IBIS that is a huge advantage of the OM-D bodies. I’m getting shots at ISO 1600 on my OM-D that used to require 6400 on my 5D3 (combination of faster lenses and slower shutter speed).

]]>
Comment on “Full Frame Equivalence” and Why It Doesn’t Matter by Robert Mark http://admiringlight.com/blog/full-frame-equivalence-and-why-it-doesnt-matter/#comment-201601 Sat, 19 Apr 2014 01:20:08 +0000 http://admiringlight.com/blog/?p=1541#comment-201601 Words mean things, which is why I object to the terms “full frame” and “crop sensor” as commonly used.

When referring to the 35mm sensor format, it is always more accurate and descriptive to simply say “35mm”.

“Full frame” simply describes a sensor which captures the maximum possible size image from a given sensor size and lens combination. Of course, a Canon 5D Mark III with EF mount lens fits this description. But a Canon 7D with its APS-C size sensor is also a full frame camera when paired with an EF-S mount lens, because EF-S lenses (which are few) create an image circle that is optimized for the APS-C size sensor. There is no crop of the image circle in any way with this combination.

However, since Canon chooses not to make a full line of EF-S lenses, and since it is physically possible to mount the larger EF lenses on APS-C sensor cameras (everything from Rebel to 7D), one only uses a portion of the image circle, hence the derisive term “crop sensor”. A more accurate term would be “oversize lens”, as there is no cropping of the APS-C size sensor in any way, but one loses about half the image-making power of a lens designed for the 35mm format.

Micro 4/3 never fits the “crop sensor” designation, because every Micro Four Thirds lens has been specifically designed with an image circle that matches the sensor size. Micro Four Thirds is most definitely a “full frame” sensor.

Fuji’s excellent cameras use the APS-C format, but because all their lenses are designed specifically for the format, it is as surely a “full frame” format as 35mm is.

The same confusion exists in other sensor formats. Medium Format is both larger than so-called full frame yet also a crop sensor in the current vernacular. Medium format lenses are designed for the 60x60mm film format, yet the best current sensors measure 44x33mm — most definitely a “crop” sensor if we use the term as it’s been applied to the smaller-than-35mm-size-sensor cameras.

Let’s stop the “full frame” and “crop sensor” nonsense. A camera is simply 35mm, APS-C, Micro Four Thirds, etc.

]]>
Comment on Review: Metabones Speed Booster (Canon FD to Fuji X) by Edo http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-metabones-speed-booster-canon-fd-to-fuji-x/#comment-201461 Thu, 17 Apr 2014 00:53:33 +0000 http://admiringlight.com/blog/?p=2580#comment-201461 Seems I turn it wrong. I turn counter clock wise and now it could reach focus further.
But yet not until infinity. I could turn it further but then it could not be mounted
Any idea?

]]>
Comment on Review: Metabones Speed Booster (Canon FD to Fuji X) by Edo http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-metabones-speed-booster-canon-fd-to-fuji-x/#comment-201456 Wed, 16 Apr 2014 23:09:33 +0000 http://admiringlight.com/blog/?p=2580#comment-201456 Hi Jordan
I just bought canon fd Fuji x speed booster.
When it’s arrived the back is protruding way inside. So even could not be attached to Fuji x pro 1 body.
That’s why I adjust the infinity.
I used it on canon FL 55/1.2 and FD 135/2
On FL 55/1.2 I adjust the infinity, even until the speed booster optic element meet with the lens back element, it still can’t reach infinity.
When I use the regular adapter this lens work well.
I could not achieve infinity on 135/2 also with 55/1.2 setting.
But actually I could adjust more on 135/2 since the back of the lens is deeper.

Since you also using the same lenses, do you achieve infinity especially for 55/1.2 ?
Do you have any ideas how to resolve my case?
Thanks a lot Jordan

]]>