Leaderboard

IT FUCKING WORKS. makes music and everything. transformers stone cold after 1 hour.

Polar bears move into abandoned Arctic weather station – photo essay https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/31/polar-bears-move-into-abandoned-arctic-weather-station-photo-essay

Equally small is hard for mirrorless to compete with M bodies, but lightweight they can. As mentioned above, the E mount Zeiss Loxias and Voigtlander E models, if you can deal with manual focus, are great on Sony bodies, but there are a ton of options. It’s what I used for a couple years. M-mounts versions can be adapted to anything (also mentioned above). Not small or light, but nicely balanced, I recently switched from a M240 to original Leica SL (that seven year old body) and couldn’t be happier with it. Shoot mostly M glass adapted. You may want to read around the below to find lenses, if you’re adapting. It’s Sony-Leica focused, but you could apply out. https://phillipreeve.net/blog/

You can use Voigtlander Leica M lenses on any mirrorless camera with an adapter which are also excellent and compact, so choose whichever one you like the most. There are also Voigltander FE lenses which work natively on Sony mirrorless cameras. At this point it does not matter if it is Canon Nikon Sony or Panasonic, they all use stellar glass (but they cannot make it with AF in that compact size)

Tell that to him.

Kinda funny Leica's highest resolving lenses (SL) and current highest resolution sensor (M11) don't work together.

Live at Bangor Abbey Foy Vance 2015 Example:

Weight-wise the M10-11 bodies are very close to Sony A7 III, but the thickness of the Sony is almost twice the Leica's. That's probably one of the reasons why you pay close to 5 times the price, besides branding Wondering if that Voigtlander M mount lens would yield as a good result on the M11 60MP sensor. What a resolution beast. Once again, you can't have it all. Thanks for the input, guys

That sounds fine. As long as you have adjustment still and it’s consistent the exact number isn’t that important. Going to try this stuff.

I'm lower. 14 - 15 is always too coarse. After I opened it up, cleaned it (all per the Niche video) and put it back together I was at 11-12 to the a medium dark Ethiopian bean about where it needed to be. HS

Someone asked me in PMs what I thought of the DCA Stealth so thought I'd share what I wrote here: I think this reviewer hears the Stealth more or less the same way that I do: https://www.headfonia.com/dan-clark-audio-stealth-review/2/ In particular: At first, I did honestly find the Stealth a little unexciting – I didn’t feel the urge to reach for them for some ‘fun’ time listening. However, given time, you become accustomed to their astonishing level of clarity and textbook tuning that really does become your new ‘benchmark’ in terms of tonal performance, which then makes everything else seem a little flawed. Instead of looking for the dopamine-inducing dose of mid-bass ‘shove’, you begin to become a junkie for the remarkable little world of pinpoint imaging and brilliantly separated sounds that envelop your head – all in a perfectly comfortable and outside-world-blocking cocoon. From 100hz and up they sound more or less totally neutral to me. After getting used to them I can now hear what people don’t like about the HD800s’s treble. Achieving neutrality does not "wow" me, but after I listen to other headphones I can more clearly hear their flaws. Interestingly, I think the downside to the Stealth is below 100hz. You’d think the bass would sound boosted given the harman curve adhearannce, but the opposite is the case. Stealth feels a little too light and not as anchored down there as I’d like. It is funny to compare them to the (also closed back) Apple AirPod Max which is their exact opposite. Incredible, controlled bass, but lacking everywhere else. I also wish they weren’t closed back, but that is what it is. I’m happy with them, but if I had to do it over again I’d have kept the $ in my pocket. There is a sweet-spot on the price/performance curve and these are way past it.

Don't feel bad. They originally each auditioned for the others role. I keed. Thankfully someone just uploaded the drunk reflex test. For those younger members this is how television used to look like.

Short answer is I don't know beyond I think you're fine for any 16-21-24MP designs. And plenty argue 21-24MP is where most should probably stop. Now I'm going to blab. In the Fuji world some people argue the 16 to 24 jump was when things went from analog to digital looking and argue there are downsides of even that high. Some systems change mounts enough you kinda can use it as a division (harder to do for Nikon's long compatibility back). The 16-24 designs probably start to breakdown around 40MP+ (a guess, because honestly I haven't tested to even state that - besides examples I mention), but can be a solution until you pick up "native" glass for a new resolution. Watching others debates are often a clue. When the GFX system was announced lots of people, including myself, used Mamiya M645 medium format glass. It looks great... until you compare to native GF lenses. Damn! Over time hardly anyone uses M645 lenses (unless you want character - say funky, busy bokeh). That said many still use some EF lenses and others use Sigma Art lenses to fill in focal lengths, and I bet they outperform the M645 glass (on GFX), and they're happy. Half this is like TV shopping. One looks incredible, then you glance at the colors and blacks of the model next to it. And then all the other questions - is a "portrait lens" more suitable over time than one used for landscape? Maybe. Should you consider buying new lenses if considering a doubling of resolution new body? Maybe... if perceptual resolution is the goal. The reverse question - should you stop climbing resolution if you have lenses you know and love? Maybe. Whatever the end point, does every lens eventually become a character lens? Maybe. Seems so for a ton of big cinematographers. Does sharpness/resolution over time stop being a primary goal? Also seems so for many. I'm babbling and not really answering your question, because I just don't know, but to make things even more confusing there are long term medium format film shooters that claim digital starting beating traditional MF by most measures with Micro 4/3s around 2010. If true, we're a dozen years into everything equal or larger sensor and equal or higher resolution being icing. So whatcha gonna do with that? I know it's not a very Head-Case question, but gear in the way? 🥴 EDIT: Just reread the above. Boy that’s a lot of useless text.

Johannes Brahms: Sonatas & Liebeslieder for Cello and Piano Emmanuelle Bertrand, Pascal Amoyel 2021 Example:

.