Welcome to our channel! We make videos about things we are passionate about and that is Photography! We make videos of our photoshoots as well as Lens reviews.
Back in my day you first focused on the subject, then you looked on your lense and it told you the distance, no guessing the distance hence all the other settings will fall into place.
Random question but do you happen to know what the outer diameter of the reflector is? I want to get a flat diffuser along with it when I buy the light.
Thanks for the comparison. I own the lumix 35-100 power OIS on a G85 and the stabalistion hand held is outstanding. Tack sharp. I think it cones down to what body you use. Its the panny for me!
Understanding the depth of field equivalence is mind bender - same when thinking of 35mm lens focal lengths and medium format on film. Thanks for the clarity and interesting video! M43 all the way!
Great review! I switched from FF to MFT in 2024, bought a Pana G9 - a brilliant camera for a little more then 500 USD. Gradually I sold all my FF system as I realized that it does not give real vesible improvement... I was mesmerized by top quality zooms mft has. Oly 12-100/4, OM 8-25/4, Panasonic 100-300 II (it replaced my Sigma 100-400)... Using my current mft setup is pure joy!
Thanks a lot for this! The MS app to allow reading the H265 format unfortunately didn’t work for me, files contine as ‘not recognized’… Tried both the paid as unpaid version. Any suggestions😅?
Hello, do you know whether it is possible to shoot infrared on Sony A7 without converting to full spectrum, ie: without removing bipass filter. I have shot infrared on my LUMIX camera without the need to convert in, but wonder whether in was possible on the Sony? Thank you for any advice
This is my first time viewing your channel. I think that you produced an excellent, and very informative video presentation. I cannot wait to see more of your content. 😊
It is not a bad choice for sure, but Sony will be very strange coming from Canon :) You will definitely need time to adjust. Picture quality will be better, AF on pair at least. But if you can, get the A7IV instead. Much better AF and just a few pixels less.
This is a really great review, thanks! It's really nice to see you using the lens in the field and explaining how you actually use it and viewing the files. Your photos are also amazing by the way! I'm so bored of lens reviews of brick walls going on about longitudinal chromatic aberration, flaring and sunstars!
Not really, as proxy files are only used at editing but the rendering happens from the original file. In this case you create a "middle man" for both editing and rendering.
Omg that moment where his is saying "what an interesting combo of green and reds" and you guys are seeing a glimpse of his undies that are green and red. Im literally crying cause im laughing so hard. oh my my what a funny. Anyways cool channel i subbed and Im really interested in this lens for about 4 days now thinking of buying. To bad it cost 250$ plus dollars for the L mount. dangit! cheers
That's a question only you can answer. If you can try some of the Olympus cameras and see how it feels, how the files are for your taste. But since Olympus is a really affordable system, you can use it to not replace, but compliment your Canon setup. I have an Olympus EM-1 Mk2, and it's a terrific camera, even though it's old and now dirt cheap second hand, but I still have my Sony setup too.
Yes, we must not forget that, for example, aperture 2.8 on Micro Four Thirds is not quite the same as on full frame, and that full frame copes better with darker environments 🤔
@@letni9506 Have you seen Sony's three small G lenses 24mm.f.2.8 and 40mm.f.2.5 and 50mm.f.2.5 plus the small ones from Sigma, and they are all no bigger than the Micro Four Thirds lenses. Together with a Sony A7CII, it is also not larger than equivalents from Olympus and Panasonic, but if we look at telephoto lenses, they are much smaller with Olympus and Panasonic, that is, apart from the latest telephoto lens from Olympus ....
100% with you. Everyone claims FF bodies are getting smaller so the size argument is moot. It's really about the lenses. Physics is physics. You need more glass to bring in light to hit the bigger sensor. I have FF, APS-C, and MFT. I grab MFT 95% of the time. Smallet, lighter, and more fun. Most folks view my photos on computers and cellphones, so I dont need maximum megapixels. Plus, those large FF pictures slow down my machine during post-processing and clog up my storage.
many years ago I saw an exhibition with A1 prints. From a Canon EOS 300D. They were amazing photos and if I watched from 30 centimetre far only then I could see some pixelation.
Hello - prices of lenses for my micro 4/3 Lumix G80/85 makes me cry. Very pricy. Is it very justified to have Lumix G80 with Lumix 100-300mm II lens or it will be good enough to have compact 1 inch sensor Lumix Fz1000mkII or Lumix Fz2500 ? What are the pros of having micro 4/3 system in this situation ? Why exactly these lenses are so expensive ? How they are different from this mechanics in 1 inches superzoom compacts ? I shoot mostly birds. I don't do portraits because I don't have people to do this.
