Author Topic: What's your wishlist / purchase list for the upcoming holidays? (Read 2726 times)

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #25 on:** November 02, 2024, 12:06 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on November 01, 2024, 14:04

1. How many kg does your lens that shoots at 1.8 weigh?
2. You think in terms of the capabilities of the past millennium.
3. Only the lens that is always with you and installed on the camera is effective. And only light-weight lenses can provide this. In this case, the photographer is always ready to meet a good shot.
4. Probably old heavy lenses give better quality if they can pull out the number of megapixels that modern cameras give out. But only dinosaurs or bodybuilders walk with huge lenses.
5. Your 1200 lens is cringe! As I already wrote, Panasonic 100-400 + teleconverter = 1600. And such a lens is not heavy, weighs 1 kg and is small in size.

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 01, 2024, 13:29
I don't use IS

I see, you also carry a 6 kg tripod with you!

I use a monopod, no tripod. Yes, I could have a 600mm and 2x (no I don't have a 1200 that was wish list and just for fun, not serious) I'm not so sure about the quality of a 400mm and a 3x converter? What's the light loss on that? 2 stops or more? Oh I looked, $1,300 lens and then add a converter?

I'm not a body builder, but I do get a workout with the big old lenses.

I'm not so sure of pulling quality and pixels and all of that, but I can say, the 400mm f/5.6 I have is just fine, but lighter and not as fast or bright as the f/2.8 version. Value is important as well as travel. I like the smaller one. All the debates about can the lens match the camera is nice to think about, but the eye and the image is what matters in the end. Film is not better than digital for 35mm. Even if technically it is, it's still not. And how does that argument run into, can the lens equal the resolution of the sensor. Can a lens equal the film resolution. A lot of math mambo-jumbo.

How do you make a great lens into a good lens? Add a tele-extender.

Tools of the trade:

Sometimes there's no open photo hole, especially when it's on an oval:

Shoot through the fence.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #26 on:** November 02, 2024, 12:25 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 02, 2024, 12:06

I'm not so sure about the quality of a 400mm and a 3x converter? What's the light loss on that? 2 stops or more? Oh I looked, $1,300 lens and then add a converter?

400mm on a micro 4/3 system is equal to 800mm on a full frame. If you add a 1.4 converter, you get about 1200 mm, if you add a 2.0 converter, you get 1600 mm.
Yes, the aperture is proportionally compressed, but at such focuses you need a large depth of field.
Look at the price on eBay for used ones, $1000 is a normal price for good condition.
I'm talking about optics for a micro 4/3 system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #27 on:** November 03, 2024, 14:41 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on November 02, 2024, 12:25

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 02, 2024, 12:06
I'm not so sure about the quality of a 400mm and a 3x converter? What's the light loss on that? 2 stops or more? Oh I looked, $1,300 lens and then add a converter?
400mm on a micro 4/3 system is equal to 800mm on a full frame. If you add a 1.4 converter, you get about 1200 mm, if you add a 2.0 converter, you get 1600 mm.
Yes, the aperture is proportionally compressed, but at such focuses you need a large depth of field.
Look at the price on eBay for used ones, $1000 is a normal price for good condition.
I'm talking about optics for a micro 4/3 system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system

Field of view, not telephoto for free. 400mm is still a 400mm and you can get the same image, by cropping an image larger sensor camera. You can't fool physics. (or Mother Nature) Think about this, if the free telephoto, made the image 1200 or 1600mm, the focal plane would be different. Since it's the same, the image is identical... you are only getting a cropped portion of the projection, not a magnification.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #28 on:** November 04, 2024, 03:28 »

Uncle Pete, if you need a focal plane at 1200 focus, then of course you need to go only with huge tubes and shoot this focal plane.
As for the cameras of the micro 4/3 system, they are made in such a way that the matrices take photos in high resolution and the images are of high quality.

If you take a heavy and large lens that gives an honest 600 mm and put it on a full-frame camera, and then crop the finished photo to get 1200, I do not think that the result will be better than a photo taken with a 100-400 lens.

I started talking about the micro 4/3 system not because I am interested in the focal plane, but because you can shoot distant objects with a camera that is lighter and has much smaller dimensions.

So, micro 4/3 allows you to shoot an object at 400mm as effectively as a heavy full-frame lens with 1200 focus. At the same time, the depth of field at 400 focus will be greater than at 1200 focus, and the weight and dimensions of the 400 lens will be lighter and smaller. And that's a plus.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #29 on:** November 04, 2024, 14:35 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on November 04, 2024, 03:28

So, micro 4/3 allows you to shoot an object at 400mm as effectively as a heavy full-frame lens with 1200 focus. At the same time, the depth of field at 400 focus will be greater than at 1200 focus

Not physics or truth, but if you believe and click your heels together three times, it's going to be your own version of reality.

Just like the people who say a phone image on a sensor the size of a thumb tack is as good as a image from a DSLR as long as it says, it's the same number of megapixels.

Yes, no argument, smaller is lighter and doesn't cost as much. But a 400mm lens is always a 400mm lens.

You don't get a bigger image, you get a cropped version of the image that the lens projects. Nothing more, no bonus, no free telephoto, nothing. Full frame sensors can achieve a shallower depth of field, which is often desirable for portrait photography or when trying to isolate a subject from the background. In other words, crop sensors can't do that. Someone selling crop sensors tries to say, they have an advantage because they don't have the ability to achieve a shallow depth of field?

Turning a negative into an apparent positive. Nice marketing.

My big, heavy, fast lens, can achieve the same depth of field as the smaller lenses, plus is able to achieve a shallower depth of field.

I still like the middle, The big white lenses are too expensive for what I'd gain and the 4/3rd are too small for what I want. Crop sensor cameras are just right. Some people like full frame, for the advantages they can bring and some people still shoot medium format. It's depends on what you want to do.

The exception is the 200mm f/1.8 just because it's unusual and nice. The fastest 200mm lens ever produced, and they only made an estimated 8,000 of them. They will never be made again. It has been replaced by the 200mm f/2, which some folks say is just as good, maybe better.

Entertaining review: https://petapixel.com/2017/05/20/canon-200mm-f1-8-legendary-lens-known-eye-sauron/

Oh there at the end of the review, 50mm f/1.0, I want one of those.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #30 on:** November 04, 2024, 18:03 »

Uncle Pete, you don't surprise me. I wrote at the very beginning that you are a dinosaur!

There are many videos on YouTube where people like you compare all these huge lenses with micro 4/3 and talk about why they sold all these heavy lenses. They also compare the quality of micro 4/3 with these lenses and cameras of yours. I watched these videos, the quality of micro 4/3 is very good. Now I can't share the links, i.e. I didn't save them.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #31 on:** November 05, 2024, 12:06 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on November 04, 2024, 18:03

Uncle Pete, you don't surprise me. I wrote at the very beginning that you are a dinosaur!
There are many videos on YouTube where people like you compare all these huge lenses with micro 4/3 and talk about why they sold all these heavy lenses. They also compare the quality of micro 4/3 with these lenses and cameras of yours. I watched these videos, the quality of micro 4/3 is very good. Now I can't share the links, i.e. I didn't save them.

I'm not saying micro 4/3 isn't good, I'm pointing out, it's not as good. If good enough is good enough, sure thing. Less cost, smaller, they do a good job. I also sold my monster 400mm f/2.8 and got a 400mm f/5.6, which works just fine. NO! The 100-400 is not as good, unless you are shooting at f/8. Prime lenses are better, please don't argue that zooms are just as good. But, and I use them, zooms are Good Enough in many or most situations. I have a Ef 35-350/3.5-5.6L which until this year was my favorite all around lens. Yeah, it's a zoom.

Too late, the whole long lens was last week, now the wish list has changed. (good thing I don't buy my new tool of the week, I'd be more broke than I am.) This is more reasonable and could be very useful, as I don't actually own a 50mm prime. Not even a nifty 50. My on the camera travel lens is the 28-135. But doesn't everyone need at least one good 50mm?

Brightin Star has launched a new 50mm f/0.95 lens, with fluorescent, glow-in-the-dark focus and aperture scale markings.

But they also make a Manual 35mm f/.95 and the new 50mm is supposed to be available in EF-M for my M cameras. Yes, the small ones that fit into a pocket or a small bag. EPS-C f/.95

stoker2014 · « **Reply #32 on:** November 05, 2024, 12:32 »

I am not a photographer and I do not take portraits of people. For video shooting, I think the micro 4/3 system is ideal. I also think that it is better to buy telephoto lenses of the micro 4/3 system because they are smaller in size and lighter in weight than lenses of other systems. I don’t know what’s in Canon, but the stabilization in Panasonic lenses and cameras is so good that you don’t need to carry a tripod or monopod with you. High-aperture lenses are also produced for the micro 4/3 system.

Considering that an ordinary person cannot have two systems at once (it is expensive), it is better to sell all cameras and lenses of other systems and buy only a micro 4/3 system !!!

Zero Talent · « **Reply #33 on:** November 05, 2024, 13:44 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on November 05, 2024, 12:32

I am not a photographer and I do not take portraits of people. For video shooting, I think the micro 4/3 system is ideal. I also think that it is better to buy telephoto lenses of the micro 4/3 system because they are smaller in size and lighter in weight than lenses of other systems. I don’t know what’s in Canon, but the stabilization in Panasonic lenses and cameras is so good that you don’t need to carry a tripod or monopod with you. High-aperture lenses are also produced for the micro 4/3 system.

Considering that an ordinary person cannot have two systems at once (it is expensive), it is better to sell all cameras and lenses of other systems and buy only a micro 4/3 system !!!

I tend to agree. I already switched to a mirrorless APS-C camera, and I couldn't be happier with the reduction in the size and weight of my gear.
With the improvment in software capabilities from Topaz, Abobe, I get similar quality, if not better.

I already sold my full-frame camera and some L lenses and I am in the process of selling everything else.

I don't have a purchasing wish, but a selling wish 😁

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #34 on:** November 05, 2024, 14:53 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on November 05, 2024, 13:44

Quote from: stoker2014 on November 05, 2024, 12:32
I am not a photographer and I do not take portraits of people. For video shooting, I think the micro 4/3 system is ideal. I also think that it is better to buy telephoto lenses of the micro 4/3 system because they are smaller in size and lighter in weight than lenses of other systems. I don’t know what’s in Canon, but the stabilization in Panasonic lenses and cameras is so good that you don’t need to carry a tripod or monopod with you. High-aperture lenses are also produced for the micro 4/3 system.

Considering that an ordinary person cannot have two systems at once (it is expensive), it is better to sell all cameras and lenses of other systems and buy only a micro 4/3 system !!!

I tend to agree. I already switched to a mirrorless APS-C camera, and I couldn't be happier with the reduction in the size and weight of my gear.
With the improvment in software capabilities from Topaz, Abobe, I get similar quality, if not better.

I already sold my full-frame camera and some L lenses and I am in the process of selling everything else.

I don't have a purchasing wish, but a selling wish 😁

That's also on my wish list. Selling lenses and not buying more, that is. I know, you know this, but just for the discussion, the old lenses work on the new mirrorless, and some that wouldn't work on the DSLRs will work on the newer cameras. If someone wants a manual lens, there are some bargains to be found.

The old EF lenses work fine on the EF-R and EF-M cameras. I'm not ignoring that the same holds for Nikon, Fiji, Panasonic and Sony. There are more adapters now than before for putting older lenses on the newest cameras.

This week it's the 50mm f/.95 and that urge will pass. Next week who knows. Maybe a better GoPro? I think my lens collection, is fairly complete and I mean the good the bad and the ugly, kit lenses, pro lenses and some odd things I've collected for special uses.

Four Nikon objectives came off a darkfield metallurgy microscope that I found at an auction. They forced me to take an old reel to reel tape deck as a two part lot. $50 if I remember right, for all. SOme people wouldn't care for any of that. Nice for macro?

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #35 on:** November 05, 2024, 16:22 »

Stoker...

I used to think ALL cameras were the same. I thought a $50 camera was just as good as a $5,000 camera, and thought it was silly people would pay that much... That is, until I purchased some high end cameras myself and discovered there is a HUGE difference in quality. (Especially because one third party reseller told me I needed higher quality - and I was surprised - until they told me what to look for to see the difference).

It really depends on your usage. If you are just using it for web graphics, or making a youtube video for friends, probably the $50 camera is fine. But if you are using it for television studios, movie studios, print, and a whole other myriad of uses, then the higher end camera is much better.

You should buy (or rent) a high end camera, take pictures of the same subject, and compare for your self.

You'll notice quality differences in the following with a higher quality camera:
- Sharper images, lack of artifacts
- Greater color range (instead of it looking 'bland', colors look vibrant)
- Better night shots (so instead of blurry 'fuzzy' clouds, you can actually see all the individual 'wisps' of moisture, smoke, etc)
- Etc, etc.

HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE difference.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #36 on:** November 06, 2024, 03:31 »

Zero Talent, You lost! And you know what I mean.
My condolences.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #37 on:** November 06, 2024, 03:32 »

SuperPhoto, you didn't understand what I was writing about. The equipment I was writing about is not cheap. And this equipment is 100% suitable for the stock business, which is what this forum is about.

alan b traehern · « **Reply #38 on:** November 06, 2024, 08:44 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on November 06, 2024, 03:32

SuperPhoto, you didn't understand what I was writing about. The equipment I was writing about is not cheap. And this equipment is 100% suitable for the stock business, which is what this forum is about.

You are arguing that your toy camera with a small lens and small sensor is as good as top of the line pro equipment. Superphoto is right, if you are doing microstock or web graphics. For high quality professional images you need pro gear. If you can visually see the difference in quality over your small sensor camera, that should be enough proof that you are defending a losing argument.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #39 on:** November 06, 2024, 09:15 »

Quote from: alan b traehern on November 06, 2024, 08:44

if you are doing microstock

The forum name is microstockgroup. What other questions can there be on this forum?

What are you doing on this forum with your super professional and expensive equipment?

The price of micro 4/3 cameras is far from cheap and optics for micro 4/3 are also not cheap. But probably for you this is all garbage, good luck.

Zero Talent · « **Reply #40 on:** November 06, 2024, 19:30 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on November 06, 2024, 03:31

Zero Talent, You lost! And you know what I mean.
My condolences.

Yes, I lost. However, I do not need condolences. Rest assured, I will be fine.

Those who need condolences are the Ukrainians who are now condemned to give putler the land so many died defending... for nothing. So sad...

Anyway... you got what you wished for!
Congrats, and I'm sorry for you... Cheers!

stoker2014 · « **Reply #41 on:** November 07, 2024, 03:07 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on November 06, 2024, 19:30

Yes, I lost.

+100. And this is the main thing.

I am satisfied.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #42 on:** November 07, 2024, 03:27 »

Zero Talent, Are you the one deleting the topics I write in on the forum?

The fight against democracy leads to defeat, which is what we see.

alan b traehern · « **Reply #43 on:** November 07, 2024, 07:46 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on November 07, 2024, 03:27

Zero Talent, Are you the one deleting the topics I write in on the forum?

The fight against democracy leads to defeat, which is what we see.

Quote from: stoker2014 on November 06, 2024, 09:15

The forum name is microstockgroup. What other questions can there be on this forum?

stoker2014 · « **Reply #44 on:** November 07, 2024, 09:19 »

alan b traehern, no need to manipulate and troll.

Rage · « **Reply #45 on:** November 08, 2024, 21:45 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 05, 2024, 12:06

Brightin Star has launched a new 50mm f/0.95 lens, with fluorescent, glow-in-the-dark focus and aperture scale markings.

Most manufacturers know our weak points, they've all been pushing new launches in the last few months. From 7 Artisans to Sigma. Better glass, cheaper glass. Hopefully the new Sony body gives us some more to talk about

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #46 on:** November 09, 2024, 12:04 »

Quote from: Rage on November 08, 2024, 21:45

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 05, 2024, 12:06

Brightin Star has launched a new 50mm f/0.95 lens, with fluorescent, glow-in-the-dark focus and aperture scale markings.

Most manufacturers know our weak points, they've all been pushing new launches in the last few months. From 7 Artisans to Sigma. Better glass, cheaper glass. Hopefully the new Sony body gives us some more to talk about

I'm pretty happy with the cameras I have, but yes, I'm a sucker for a different lens or way to capture something.

alexandersr · « **Reply #47 on:** November 09, 2024, 16:22 »

I sold almost all my lens and another photography gears. Nowadays i have a Canon 60D,Canon 20D (i am selling it in $60 body only with battery, charger and a CF 256 MB),Canon PowerShot A810, lens Canon EF 50 mm f1.4, and two flashes Canon 580 EXII. Also have three little toy cameras Kodak ZX1.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: What's your wishlist / purchase list for the upcoming holidays? (Read 2726 times)

Uncle Pete

stoker2014

Uncle Pete

stoker2014

Uncle Pete

stoker2014

Uncle Pete

stoker2014

Zero Talent

Uncle Pete

SuperPhoto

stoker2014

stoker2014

alan b traehern

stoker2014

Zero Talent

stoker2014

stoker2014

alan b traehern

stoker2014

Rage

Uncle Pete

alexandersr

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors