No, No, No! Your Gear is ALL Wrong!

NickTrop said:
1. Yes. That company is relevant. They provide data based on rigorous testing. That data is relevant. Sorry. The sensor in your whatever brand camera does or doesn't measure up with Sony sensors in bit-depth, dynamic range, or low-light performance according to lab testing. Here's how the current crop of sensors rank based on these key metrics. This is how much each costs. Where on that "linear programming" grid is the IQ optimal and the cost minimal? There is only one point where those lines intersect. Down the road that may change. But this is where it is now...

2. Yes. Your choice is wrong because it was likely an emotion-based not reason-based decision. I provided the reason based path, which is a fairly narrow one, right down the line from body to lenses provided your goal is to maximize IQ and minimize cost.
Click to expand...

I think no one is questioning the data relevancy, rather the relevancy of that data (and the company per se) related to how it makes your photography better.

Regards

Marcelo
 
NickTrop said:
1. . . Your choice is wrong because it was likely an emotion-based not reason-based decision. . . . .
Click to expand...
Dear Nick,

And of course all art is based on reason rather than emotion...

Come to that, convenience and ease of use are not entirely based on raw, robotic pseudo-reason. DXO ratings are a bit like economics: build a grossly oversimplified model, ignoring anything that's hard or even inconvenient to incorporate, then base your arguments on the model rather than on messy reality.

Cheers,

R.
 
Yes.

And...

if a reviewing company some day will deeply influence my decision for a camera
- whatever reviewing company or camera that could be -
I would start to reflect my photography in whole whether it has went so poor.

And...

if some wants to tell me that I have to buy a mirror-slapping monster from a system that
does everything in a wrong way and where I have no chance to use my lenses the answer
would be never ever.
You read it here.

And...

the Sony A7II is a very innovative, modern and useful camera for a lot of photographers and photographic tasks.
Its sensor for me and some of my friends is just... okay.
Its full frame.
Nice :)
 
Hmmm, I'm not so sure about reason but here it's trust these people and ignore what you think and like etc. I don't know if I should trust them or not...

As for reason in general, it's a bit odd at present.

Regards, David
 
I was just browsing one of the lens review websites this morning and found an old review of one of my lenses. The conclusion was that it was a failed product because it had only average performance and a price that was too high compared to the competition. Hmm. Okay. It was kind of expensive but I really do like the way the pictures look when I use this lens. It's one of my favorites.

So much for objectivity.
 
Dogman said:
I was just browsing one of the lens review websites this morning and found an old review of one of my lenses. The conclusion was that it was a failed product because it had only average performance and a price that was too high compared to the competition. Hmm. Okay. It was kind of expensive but I really do like the way the pictures look when I use this lens. It's one of my favorites.

So much for objectivity.
Click to expand...
No, no. You're WRONG. Ask DXO!

Cheers,

R.
 
You are becoming emotional (forgivable, always -- part of the human condoition) because what I proposed isn't likely something you have or would consider. However, this wasn't really a recommendation per se. It is a solution.

This key is to follow a linear programming model. Given the available data, at what point is image quality maximized and cost minimized?

There is but one solution to this equation.

I have provided it. And in this instance it is a fairly obvious solution. It's not a case of 1.0001 > 1. It's a cast of 7 > 2 by way of analogy. The solution to this max/min propblem is clearly, thus:

A used Nikon D600.

Sensor rating 94. Average cost ~ $680.

Now that the rational body decision has been made applying data and logical reasoning, this vastly naturally narrows your lens options as this is a finish -> start task relationship. You can't select lenses until a buying decision for the body has been determined. Once that process is finished you can start acquiring lenses. I have shown the pathway for the proper order of lens acquisitions in terms of focal lengths and which lens within each focal length applying similar reasoning. You must start with a 50/1.4 with auto focus. Among the available 50/1.4's the correct decision is the AF-D model. Next, you need a wide angle prime to pair with it. That would be the Sigma Ultra Wide II (aka Quantaray Tech 10) 24/2.8 AF Macro.
 
jsrockit said:
Just so we all know, Nick used to shoot APSC and had similar threads telling us we were dumb for not using a Nikon D5XXX with 35mm 1.8DX lens (due to price / performance ratio). Once the FF came down to his price point, then of course APSC isnt good enough anymore. I`m a proud APSC user because I think it is a great balance between IQ and size. I do not like big cameras and modern APSC is great. You cannot compare it to APSC film... it is not anywhere near the same thing.
Click to expand...

APSC is quite spectacular at the moment.

I shoot FF for work and have an additional body that I use on the street sometimes, but also use the Ricoh GR/GRII for street, and because I'm quite attached to a couple of APSC lenses I have some APSC bodies, and the output is genuinely great.

Obviously there are limitations, but I've been finding that it's the APSC stuff that's getting more outings at the moment.
 
NickTrop said:
You are becoming emotional (forgivable, always -- part of the human condition) because what I proposed isn't likely something you have or would consider. However, this wasn't really a recommendation per se. It is a solution.

This key is to follow a linear programming model. Given the available data, at what point is image quality maximized and cost minimized?

There is but one solution to this equation.

I have provided it. And in this instance it is a fairly obvious solution. It's not a case of 1.0001 > 1. It's a cast of 7 > 2 by way of analogy. The solution to this max/min problem is clearly, thus:

A used Nikon D600.

Sensor rating 94. Average cost ~ $680.

Now that the rational body decision has been made applying data and logical reasoning, this vastly naturally narrows your lens options as this is a finish -> start task relationship. You can't select lenses until a buying decision for the body has been determined. Once that process is finished you can start acquiring lenses. I have shown the pathway for the proper order of lens acquisitions in terms of focal lengths and which lens within each focal length applying similar reasoning. You must start with a 50/1.4 with auto focus. Among the available 50/1.4's the correct decision is the AF-D model. Next, you need a wide angle prime to pair with it. That would be the Sigma Ultra Wide II (aka Quantaray Tech 10) 24/2.8 AF Macro.
Click to expand...

I agree on your thought train if you are only taking photos to get an impression of a visual situation with the best quality and the lower cost. Your evaluation, OMHO, is sound and logic. For this, your solution, seems logical.

However, one must ask oneself the question "why do I take photos?" Do I do it for a living (your solution surely stand) Do I do it to create the highest quality image at the lower cost? (still, your solution stand). Do I do it for the sole personal enjoyment? With all due respect, this is where your logic starts to collapse, because you see, personal taste and pleasure don't necessarily stick to logic. And it is then that there is no one unique solution.

Frankly I respect and admire your research for the equipment that make sense for you. Also respect someone that stand for his/her opinion. That is pretty admirable in our age when people just follow trends. On the same measure, I think your solution doesn't suit or work for me, for the reason I create photographs, which is for personal pleasure (both for the taking process and the picture itself).

Thanks for the great thread Nick

Regards
Marcelo
 
So much emphasis on DxO, and yet OP picks lenses without reference to objective criteria. The advice is to just use them at f8 on a tripod and not worry about it. While, as a landscape photographer, I frequently work on a tripod, from the images I typically see posted on RFF, I doubt many here do. While it may work for the OP, it is dubious value to others.
 
A question for the OP

A question for the OP

Dear Nick,

I'm curious as to whether you apply the same rigorous rules to everything that you purchase? There are tests done on almost everything you could possibly want to purchase, so it follows from the methodology used in your choice of camera equipment that you own the verified "best for the buck" car, washing machine, toaster oven, sneakers, underwear, toilet paper, etc etc.

Myself, I read reviews, often extensively, but generally buy what I want regardless. To me a great deal of satisfaction comes from discovering the way to the use something in the most effective manner for my needs. There is no enjoyment for me in starting out with "perfection." I'd much rather discover it. To me the journey is an important step, but I recognize that I'm different from many people in that regard.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

Harrisburg, PA :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom