How big are you looking to print? I think if I want a big wall size print I'd just pay a pro to do it.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Holy shit, I wouldn't even know what printer to even buy to print at that size...I think the ones that can are bigger than my living space.
Edit: linked the wrong one
Yeah, even my Canon 13x19 printer is too big for my tastes right now.
This is actually one of my favorite movies.You think your boy Big Hands McGee is out here like this?
The 50-140 is essentially a 70-200F4, I like that lens, I like it a lot, but I find it useless indoors. I'm fine with the 16-55 as well. These are lenses that for the most part you don't find small in any sensor size unless you look at micro four thirds. I pretty much went mirrorless for EVF and video benefits not "size" which was honestly nothing more than a marketing ploy that people need to stop paying attention to. Glass is glass, which entails optics physics. You really can't market your way out of it. The 16-55 is at least smaller than my Nikon 2.8 24-70 even if the DOF math turns it into an F4.
I've just got the 24-105, and after getting used to the 50mm, I think I need to get back to the gym lol. That thing feels massive.
Maybe it is a result of putting it on an empty pack, but yet again I am not impressed by peak design. The capture clip leaves so much to be desired with the camera mounted in terms of how much the cam bounces around. The idea is really neat, and the dual plate works well with my older RC2 tripod ball head.
I honestly think a lens feels big for the first...two weeks? You eventually get used to it. I come from full frame DSLR land so I'm used to weight these days.
Really? I was honestly positively surprised by its size, but I also was comparing it to the 24-70 f/2.8 GM.
Last edited:
An example of Olympus Ibis, handheld, 1/25, f5.0, ISO 800, that's Mars top left. 150mm/300mm equivalent.
Last edited:
Seems kinda blurry for 1/25th and Oly ibis honestly, you can tell by how oblong Mars is.
Edit: just so you know I'm not being an ass, this is on Oly at 1/15th and it's considerably sharper, even if pretty noisy.
P7140474 by Scott Tucker, on Flickr
Edit: just so you know I'm not being an ass, this is on Oly at 1/15th and it's considerably sharper, even if pretty noisy.
P7140474 by Scott Tucker, on Flickr
Last edited:
People think mirrorless is supposed to be small and some have no frame of reference when it comes to lens sizes.
Well, this is my first zoom lens! The only thing I had to compare it was my 50mm 1.4 and my compact camera.
Seems kinda blurry for 1/25th and Oly ibis honestly, you can tell by how oblong Mars is.
Edit: just so you know I'm not being an ass, this is on Oly at 1/15th and it's considerably sharper, even if pretty noisy.
Complete dusk vs daylight, but ok. I know it's not extremely sharp but i was impressed with no tripod. It was also fucking freezing so not the steadiest of hands. I also didn't even notice Mars naked eye. I was wearing about 5x as many clothes as the person in this pic. Iirc it was about 15 degrees F. There was a lineup of other shooters and they all had pods and were remote firing, they were all looking at me like what the fuck is this guy doing. So yeah, it could be a better shot but I didn't have my pod in my car and honestly I wouldn't have even had time to grab this shot at all with bigger gear and needing a tripod. Literally a 5 minute stop after work.
Last edited:
No need to get defensive, and no my shot wasn't in the daylight. It was shot at ISO 1600 at 1/15 well into blue hour, so it's gonna look brighter than the naked eye.
Like I said, your shot looks nice when shrunk to web size. It's just not a good indicator of what Oly ibis is capable of, and that's ok, but for someone that harps on how amazing Olympus is in this thread, you should know that you're not even getting the most out of it.
I know that, if I had more time I could have got a clearer shot, it's the most liked shot I've ever had though. And I don't think 2 posts about Olympus Ibis is harping. And yeah I know you didnt know the details but I think this is a tough shot to pull off handheld given the conditions. MN is fucking cold. And at 800 iso this also quite brightened. Naked eye it was much darker. Even at f5.0 200 iso would have been more accurate but the buildings would have been very dark. There's a reason this would typically be shot on a tripod with remote even ff. It's hard to shoot when it's this cold. Go take some 15 degree night handhelds and see what you come up with.
Another thing, that shoot was at 150mm m43 or 300mm ff. Handheld. This spot is very far away from dt Minneapolis.
Last edited:
I don't think anyone is going to deny that Olympus and Panasonic have great IBIS (largely thanks to the smaller sensor size), but I agree with Menelaus that it's not the best example (although I do like the image). Here's a shot I took at 1/8 a second handheld and while it's not the sharpest image ever, I think the IBIS worked pretty well here. Some can get better results, and M43 cameras can certainly go a stop or two lower and still get good results.
44515747334_be6a527644_o
44515747334_be6a527644_o
I don't think anyone is going to deny that Olympus and Panasonic have great IBIS (largely thanks to the smaller sensor size), but I agree with Menelaus that it's not the best example (although I do like the image). Here's a shot I took at 1/8 a second handheld and while it's not the sharpest image ever, I think the IBIS worked pretty well here. Some can get better results, and M43 cameras can certainly go a stop or two lower and still get good results.
Very nice!
I think the only other Sigma FE lens I want is the 135 1.8 unless the one Sony is making is actually realistically affordable. I have the 35 Art, it's not as stupidly big as people say it is, now the 85 on the other hand is massive. I really need to stop being cheap and get that 85 1.8 already. I'm tempted to get rid of my 50 1.8 and Fuji 35 F2 since I don't use it.Just got the 24 GM, Ok this is stupidly slim and light.
Compared to FE 85 1.8
Compared to Sigma 24 1.4 FE
Sigma should be ashamed. lol.
Sorry, was using phone camera.
Was your 35 Art on Nikon? Cause in E-mount they almost similar
https://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/service/se_mount/
I have small asian hands, so our standards on size/weight might be different lol
I have the FE version, I don't find it that big, granted I'm used to the Nikon 24-70 2.8. I think the 24 and 35 have very similar lens designs. Also I'm not really of the belief that everything on mirrorless is supposed to be small. Glass is glass period, it's either good or bad. I have my own sense of size restrictions since I want something to be practical.
As long as you're comfortable using it then all is fine. Another thing I didn't like on the Sigma art is the finishing of the body. My old one had scratches already even with less use.
True, the damn thing is a finger print magnet. I think they only look clean the moment you take them out of the box.
Was going through my metadata to see how much I use 24mm. I was acting like I don't use it and during my event shoots I'm at that at every event at some point, I guess I need the 24-70GM.
Hey, that's great news. I was actually thinking about picking up a 128 uhs-1 card for slot 2, and using the 64gb uhs-2 in slot one...just have a big overflow card when/if the mirroring fills up.
Yep! That's about what I paid for it in November of 2016. Just about two years ago.
It's crazy how cheap the A7R III already is.
And minus some questionable ergonomics decisions and the one card slot it's still a damn good camera.
The 7100 and 7200 are great bargains at this point, bigger than what I'm in the mood for regarding crop sensor, but still damn good cameras.
I know it now works, but I'm not even sure who in here would even own that combo. It's probably best to check to see if anybody on DPReview would have updated impressions on this. The whole initial controversy with this put a bad taste in my mouth regarding the Z cameras.
Yeah there are a lot more Nikon Z owners in there than in here. I just couldn't with those cameras.
Just got the Sony 85 1.8. Buying Sony really just proved I'm not a fanboy...yikes. I just like good cameras...that aren't Leica or Canon. So I now have a 35 1.4 Sigma, 50 1.8 and 85 1.8 and I guess I'm just going to keep the 50 since the fucking thing is so god damn cheap that it's not even worth trading in. I might get the 24-105 but I'm not sure yet. I use 24 more than I thought I did and usually the 24-70 is my flash lens and not my natural light lens.
Last edited:
Do you want me to live on the street under a house made of my camera and lens boxes because that's what would happen. My bank account is already crying from going Sony since 2 hours ago I had to talk myself out of not raising my Best Buy credit limit to finance a 2.8 24-70GM, it only happened because the process takes too much thinking time.
I almost did something like that the other day but I too backed out. Credit is evil if you use it wrong.
I'm trying to not buy anything big financially till the X-T3 is more or less paid off. I bought the A7RII as a low risk experiment and wasn't really expecting to actually like it as much as I do. No seriously I was expecting to hate this camera but I really don't. I saw it as a "you can't pass this up" price and jumped, ended up liking the camera.
Nice get on the 85mm 1.8. It's easily one of my favorite lenses. Sharp as hell and fast/accurate focusing. Your Sigma 35mm images on Flickr are looking damn nice, by the way.
Thank you. It renders really god damn well and the AF isn't as bad as people complain about for stills. I think I'm getting to the point where it's also the crazy person behind the camera as well. Lately I think I can just get a pretty good shot out of whatever I'm carrying.