Comments on: Roger Buys a Camera System: Finally

By: james

james — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 00:48:10 +0000

Yes Roger tells it like not many can. This can upset those who make money selling and or reviewing camera gear. I have written on DPR for years and have over 5000 posts. I have written on the Pentax forum for some years with over 500 posts. Those are just replies not threads I started. most of my writings are to help others and I have no, none, zero connections with anything photo related or make a dime off anything I write. I like how Roger has done so himself and being in the business he is he can really take it to the “excess” he can take it to a level I could only dream of.

Its obvious he speaks with genuine passion. Sometimes you have to look at why the information is interesting and where its coming from. I know nothing is perfect in this world. But for dSLR beginners and enthusiasts and PROs I can’t think of any other source so free of trying to promote ones own self interest. He just tells it like he sees it. His IMO; which carries a lot of scientific evidence to back it up with.

OK let me rap this up. After all my writings I for the first time get a flag (a warning) that linking (which I have done hundreds of times to many places) to Rogers site will get me kicked out. That really says something to me. There are some who would rather you not read the stuff here. And no its not from DPR.

Thanks Roger for giving us Pentax fans your thoughts. Thanks for the great info that would save a lot of people a lot of headaches if read. I really believe it. And I am a Pentax shooter a very rare person in the USA

By: Janet

Janet — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 02:52:24 +0000

Loved the series, Roger. You write very well. I was a long-time Nikon shooter who moved to a Canon 7D and the 100-400mm L lens last year for wildlife photography. It was the right move for me since Nikon’s offering in that range is not good or my copy wasn’t good. Lately, I have been thinking about the 6D for landscape and macro. I recently bought a Panasonic G5 M4/3 camera to see if I could get the results I want for wide angle shots. Hope you enjoy your 6D and I think I will be renting a few M4/3 from your company soon.

By: Roger Cicala

Roger Cicala — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 13:37:47 +0000

Jesse, the Nikon is a good lens, but I wouldn’t pay the difference. The Canon, although I think it’s overpriced, is much better than the other two – it is to 24-70s what the Nikon 14-24 is to wide angles. Just better than anything else.

By: Jesse

Jesse — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 06:39:31 +0000

I just got a 6D too. Love it! Curious, why did you choose the Canon’s 24-70 on the Canon side, but the Tamron over on the Nikon side? Is the Nikon 24-70 not up to par? I thought that was a stellar lens, even resolution wise, which I know you love. And, no 50 1.4 prime for a mere $350? Portrait lens? You had quite a nice budget to work with!

By: T Carrig

T Carrig — Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:41:09 +0000

I was all excited about the 6D until I noticed it didn’t have a built in flash. That’s probably not a deal breaker for most, but for me it is.

By: Roger Roehr

Roger Roehr — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 03:19:32 +0000

Roger as usual you make me rethink again where I want to go. The Rokinon caught me by surprise and now has me seriously considering it. The 400mm 5.6 was another I thought you would chose the 100-400 but knowing that you are prime nut and I am getting that way I can see why you chose it. Why do you chose a macro len over extension ring?

Thanks for a great blog! Roger Roehr

By: Donald

Donald — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:10:14 +0000

Hi Roger! I just registered in this website and it was all because of your earlier blogs about the accuracy analysis of Canon 5DIII and a bunch of new lenses.
I believe in reality and truth, and your conclusion in those blogs happened to seem real and true, haha.
Glad to see your choice about Canon 6D is the same as mine, I bought one on Jan 4th 2013.
Hope to read more of your blogs like those before, some accurate, deep and based-on-fact analysis of new techs of cameras and lenses!

By: Gordon

Gordon — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:47:27 +0000

As a bit of a gear geek I’m kinda pleased to see Roger go for the Canon 100L macro (superb lens), the 24-70 f2.8L II (also amazing), and even the Rokinon 14mm (got all three).

Other comments on here match what I’ve seen regarding the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm – a majority of reviewers indicate “it’s great”, with a number saying “I can’t see what the fuss is about”, and a small number of those who had bad ones noting that they got a replacement, and could then see what the fuss is about!

The first one I had delivered was great on one side of the frame, and terrible on the other. A second copy is pretty impressive on both sides, so, in short, if you get one and you’re not that impressed, get it replaced. The shame of course is that if it is indeed pretty badly built inside then I guess I might be playing the Samyang lottery again if it fails…

As for the Nikon-to-Canon/Canon-to-Nikon comments; I’d love to get a D800 to escape the nasty shadow banding problems on Canon sensors, but just can’t get on with the ergonomics of Nikon gear (large hands == cramp within minutes). In the end I went with the 5D3, and apart from cursing the (lack of) shadow detail on the odd shot, it’s a stunning camera (and easy to hold all day).

By: Ralf C. Kohlrausch

Ralf C. Kohlrausch — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 21:58:57 +0000

F.M. said:

“Ralf, I have just the opposite experience with the samyang 14 2.8. I find the sharpness amazing on a D800, and the distortion pretty non existent after applying PTLens. And I mean interiors. I’m a bit puzzled how can it be so good optically at that price (once distortion corrected, of course).”

Hi FM,

I don’t doubt this at all. I just think the Tok is even better. And I had ‘em both for a direct comparison. BTW, I have had amazing pictures with the Sammy 8mm. And it’s mostly plastics inside too – well, except for the lenses

Greets Ralf C.

By: Terence

Terence — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 01:31:19 +0000

Interesting series of articles, and much appreciated.

I must confess that as a longtime – and lapsed – film photographer who stuck his toe in the digital waters in 2009, my own priorities were different from yours, my mistakes were different, and what I learned sent me in a different direction. I was looking for a camera for all-day carrying, for diaristic photography and street photography, and I was looking for small size, lightness, image quality, and good autofocus (which I was new to having always used manual focus film cameras).

My first choice was the Nikon D90 (despite being a Canon FD user for many years in the 80s). Image quality was great up to ISO 1200, AF was pretty usable too, once I configured a back button to do the focusing and left the shutter button for actually taking the photos. But it was simply too big/heavy for me to carry around all day, just too bulky compared to my beloved old film cameras. I came to loathe carrying the camera around in its case for 5 hours/day.

So I migrated to the Panasonic G1 and GF1, whose image quality was only good (for me) up to ISO 800, and whose AF was slower. But I learned to prefocus for fast moving situations, and the size of the body & lenses were a definite step up. But for all-day carry (and quick retrieval) it was still too bulky.

I’ve ultimately decided to give up on DSLRs for my own needs, and am looking at even smaller cameras with better AF and image quality (technology has really improved things in the last 3 years). My next camera may well be one of the Fujis, either the X20 or the X100s. Lighter, faster, better IQ, with (acceptable?) tradeoffs in lens choices and some other things. I’d rather have a tiny, light camera with me than a heavier, more bloated camera I either left at home or hated lugging around.