codyconway wrote:
A real wine connoisseur would be able to hype up a $5 bottle of wine to taste like a $100 bottle... Haven't you ever seen "Pro wine connoisseur - cheap wine challenge" I think one of those digitalrev things makes it. . .
Couldn't agree more.
I have a few acquaintances, not friends, who arrogantly asked me why I spent money for a cellar that houses wine with an average inventory cost under $30. My reply was, because by the time I drink it, it will cost 3x and outclass wine costing 5x.
justruss wrote:
To be fair: Once you get above a pretty low price threshold, the price of wine is driven far, far more by rarity and other luxury attributes than taste, as has been attested to by some of the world's top wine tasters and sommeliers...
And in certain parts of Italy, France, South Africa, or America (CA) a $20/€20 bottle could easily outclass something 5-10x the price.
(Unless we're talking about white wines, in which case: Sir or Madam, I kindly ask you to vacate the premises, as your kind are not welcome here.)
yeah, my point was more about standard wine markup at expensive american restaurants compared to italy than anything. it's also much easier to get really good really cheap wine in italy than in the US (especially if we talk about italian wine in the US). i wish going to the area where the wine was grown in the US dropped the wine price the way it seems to in europe, decent oregon pinot noir is actually more expensive here in oregon than the same stuff was in california.
sebboh wrote:
yeah, my point was more about standard wine markup at expensive american restaurants compared to italy than anything. it's also much easier to get really good really cheap wine in italy than in the US (especially if we talk about italian wine in the US). i wish going to the area where the wine was grown in the US dropped the wine price the way it seems to in europe, decent oregon pinot noir is actually more expensive here in oregon than the same stuff was in california.
I hear ya!
And at the risk of really derailing things: I'm living in a red wine black hole... Germany. So close to great red-- so much domestically produced, red-colored water. *At least our neighbor countries produce great stuff and we can get it here relatively cheaply.
Hehe thanks,
Optically this lens is superb IMO. For still shooters the AF is ok for the most part and it may get better with some firmware update.
I don't understand why people crying about this lens, for the money it is a great performer, and my copy is excellent. I've never owned the 55 zeiss, but I have seen tons of pictures taken with it, and after seeing my own pictures taken with the nifty fifty there is no way I could ever pay that kind of money for the zeiss option. It is just not worth it to me. I would additionally get the FE 28 f2 instead, and maybe some flashgun
So about the FE50 (I know nothing about wine ): The USB port of my a7 is broken so I can't update the firmware. Without the update (I am running 1.10) AF speed is awful. Now I have a hard time to get a grip on the AF speed on other cameras. Jordan reports bad performance on the a7II. Others report decent performance on a7rII and a6300. Some are even happy with the performance on the a7. It is hard to draw any conclusions from that.
Then I have a question: The FE50 is the only FE lens I have used so far which doesn't have that stupid speed dependent manual focusing were a fast small move changes focus a lot and a slow long one hardly changes focus at all. Is it the same with current firmware on other cameras?
What is most remarkable about the FE50 is the really high contrast from f/1.8. Here is a little comparisons I shot, Raw developed with LR default settings:
Bokeh is quite good for a 50mm lens but not in the same league as the FE55.
Sharpness is quite good in the center from f/1.8 and excellent in the center at f/2.8 but it drops off towards the corners much earlier than most classic 50mm lenses. Even at f/8 there is drop in sharpness at around r=14mm where my other 50mm lenses have better micro contrast.
Can't comment specifically on other lenses with the throttle, but on my Nex 5 no lenses do the focus throttle thing. I've been using it with my 16mm lately, and honestly manual focusing is not an issue at all even fly by wire. This means the throttle thing is definitely a firmware decision, which is rather disappointing honestly
trogdon wrote:
Can't comment specifically on other lenses with the throttle, but on my Nex 5 no lenses do the focus throttle thing. I've been using it with my 16mm lately, and honestly manual focusing is not an issue at all even fly by wire. This means the throttle thing is definitely a firmware decision, which is rather disappointing honestly
huh, it'd be nice if there was a setting to turn it off...
this might be a good lens for me to try a first attempt at converting it to manual focus while maintaining electronic aperture control. let me know if anybody breaks their AF motor out of warranty.
Agreed it would be nice if we could turn it off, that would make manual focus much easier. I think Sony started implementing this with the RX100, that's the first time I noticed it anyway. But yeah it would solve pretty much all my manual focus issues with native lenses
I'm guessing that the reason this 50mm 1.8 doesn't do it is because it's the first E mount lens Sony has made that isn't internal focus. I doubt they can drive the extension any faster than that
It does seem that manual focusing is more "linear" with the FE50/1.8 than with any of the other Sony lenses. I wish they would do away with the throttle effect, or at least provide a user option to disable it. My Sigma E-mount 19/2.8 focuses manually in a very linear way, I think it is the best of my focus by wire lenses.
On the FE50/1.8 the slight vibration/noise of the focus motor actually provides nice haptics for manual focusing. It gives you additional feedback that gives a feeling of greater connection between the ring and the moving glass.
): The USB port of my a7 is broken so I can't update the firmware. Without the update (I am running 1.10) AF speed is awful. Now I have a hard time to get a grip on the AF speed on other cameras. Jordan reports bad performance on the a7II. Others report decent performance on a7rII and a6300. Some are even happy with the performance on the a7. It is hard to draw any conclusions from that.
