Save & earn with MPB; trade-in and buy pre-loved



I hope you enjoy browsing the images in my Portfolio - all comments are welcome!
...Read More

A quick view of johnriley1uk's recent activity.

  • The Oncoming Storm by johnriley1uk

    It is the property used in Peaky Blinders. Smile
    • 4 Apr 2022 11:34PM
  • Waverley Market by mac

    The black and white version has the impact.
    • 30 Mar 2022 12:09AM
  • Mr Toad by johnriley1uk

    Thanks Ron, I had a suspicion that whichever I chose was 50% likely to be wrong!
    • 26 Mar 2022 5:05PM
  • Ramsay’s Restaurant by mac

    Mono for me. Lovely rich tones.
    • 21 Mar 2022 12:36AM
  • Spitfire by johnriley1uk

    This one is at York Air Museum at Elvington.
    • 16 Mar 2022 9:20PM
  • Working Bee by mac

    Nice image. The plant could be Purplestem angelica.
    • 29 Dec 2021 12:44AM
  • Little Grange by johnriley1uk

    Not so far as I know Ian - it might have been Edward FitzGerald's sense of humour to call this quite substantial house "little". A gentleman's requirements are very modest.......
    • 9 Oct 2021 2:41PM
  • ePHOTOzine Stars at ADAPS

    Tonight was the night that I was delighted to present slide shows showing pictures from EPZ contibuters. The photographers showcased were sueriley, icebabe, MalcolmRiches...
    by johnriley1uk | Last Post | Unread
    Replies: 0
  • Posted on: NIKKOR Z 800mm F/6.3 VR S Lens Review

    Thanks Len, it's true that testing very long lenses is a challenge, but it can be done with care, using various techniques, even a second tripod under the lens barrel to stabilise things, and certainly using the delayed action for usually a 10 or 12 second delay. Even better when this raises the mirror on DSLRs before the shutter fires. With mechanical shutters there is also shutter vibration and this can peak at certain shutter speeds, which will then potentially create anomalous readings at that point.

    Thanks again for the input, always appreciated.
    • 19 May 2022 10:09AM
  • Posted on: Canon RF 14-35mm F/4L IS USM Lens Review

    The limiting factor here would seem to be diffraction, which gradually reduces resolution as we stop down. In theory a "perfect lens" would behave in such a way. I'm not suggesting this is a perfect lens in that context, but it's unusual but what was measured. There may well be other factors in the design affecting the end result.
    • 13 May 2022 12:06PM
  • Posted on: Samyang AF 50mm f/1.4 FE II Lens Review

    Thanks for those Mistral75, we'll get that sorted ASAP. I did mean closer focusing, because although it does marginally focus closer than the traditional 0.45m it's a very small difference. Zoom lenses tend to trounce primes for close focusing and just a little more would have been nice. However, not a major point and certainly not a deal breaker.
    • 6 May 2022 11:39AM
  • Posted on: Samyang AF 135mm F/1.8 FE Lens Review

    Availability governs what camera bodies are available at any one time, so the MP counts do vary. However, the decsriptions relate the performance to the theoretical maximum for the particular model. I agree that ideally all reviews should be from the same camera body and this should be as high resolution as possible, but unfortunately that isn't practical.
    • 10 Apr 2022 9:15PM
  • Posted on: Fujifilm Fujinon 23mm f/1.4 R LM WR Lens Review

    Thanks for that, I'll pass the info along.
    • 12 Mar 2022 10:12PM
  • Posted on: Leica Vario-Elmarit 12-60mm f/2.8-4.0 Review

    It's always great to see a lens performing well and just a pity that the edges at 12mm let things down a little. In theory, we could re-test every lens with the newest and highest resolution cameras, but of course that is totally impractical.
    • 10 Mar 2022 4:57PM
  • Posted on: Samyang AF 24-70mm F/2.8 FE Lens Review

    Thanks Alan, I'll pass that along.
    • 2 Mar 2022 4:15PM
  • Posted on: Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH Lens Review

    I did realise that it might be very easy to offend Leica enthusiasts, but the objective was to make an unbiased review pitching the lens into the overall world of modern lenses. I would think that no VR was a disadvantage compared to lenses generally as it does limit the ability to hand hold. Likewise the focusing is not particularly close. Both these points may make the Leica lens seem restrictive to, say, a DSLR user who is used to something focusing right down to almost macro distances, as well as VR offering sharp images at ridiculously slow shutter speeds. Hopefully I have also covered what I perceived the strengths to be as well as any disadvantages?
    • 3 Feb 2022 12:23AM
  • Posted on: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Lens Review

    An interesting question. It might of course be that some electronic correction is happening that we are unable to switch off. It might be that there is some edge displacement of the elements so that the figures improve because the aperture is smaller and there is more depth of field and depth of focus. Field curvature could mean that the edges are slightly out but it improves as we stop down. Just a few ideas there.
    • 1 Feb 2022 3:58PM
  • Posted on: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Lens Review

    Many lenses exhibit focus breathing and it doesn't necessarily have much of an impact for stills photography, but of course it can do depending on the sort of photography undertaken. I haven't made any specific note about it for this lens, but being an IF design it is likely to show some focus breathing.

    I'm interested to know what photography you have in mind and how focus breathing will affect that?
    • 26 Jan 2022 2:58PM
  • Posted on: Sony E 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS Review

    I haven't examined both these lenses side by side, so can't directly compare them, but I would suggest reading the appropriate reviews and taking some guidance from that. Then perhaps looking wider on the web and seeing what other opinions are. It really depends on your own requirements as well. Questions such as what sort of photography will you be doing, do you need weather resistance, do you need close focusing or long telephoto reach?
    • 24 Jan 2022 10:33AM
  • Posted on: Samyang AF 12mm F/2 X Lens Review

    What I can tell you is that whatever is measured is measured, and we can't really say that any measurement "should be" lower or even higher, as the nature of a scientific measurement is we have to believe what we see. It's of course true that many scientists over the years have perhaps seen what they want to see to support a particular hypothesis, but that is an aspect of human nature and there are few absolutes. Imatest tell us that very high figures are entirely possible, and when measured they are what they are. Perhaps that supports the description "outstanding" in this case.

    We are of course measuring resolution and the resolution at the edges produces a very good level of sharpness, the centre an outstanding level. We can directly compare that to other lenses used at 26MP, and by inference to other resolutions. Other variables will be different sensors and different processing by the camera software, but there's a limit to what we can do. But the edges are still sharp. The rest will depend on the size of reproduction and the acuity of our eyes, as well as the type of subject matter and the way it is lit.
    • 8 Jan 2022 10:58PM
  • Posted on: Samyang AF 12mm F/2 X Lens Review

    I think I agree with much of what is said above, and it probably highlights the difficulty of making a genralised review that covers as many genres as possible as opposed to a more specialised review. It also highlights the difficulty of assigniing ratings based on a scale of 1 to 5. This doesn't mean we shouldn't, but it gives plenty of scope for discussion.

    Taking the rating on performance, the result moves from 4 to 4.5 partly because the lens performed significantly better than a previously tested similar Samyang optic for E mount. They couldn't be the same rating, but in any event even changing that figure wouldn't change the overall result. The central sharpness (actually resolution of course) is very high, which does eclipse the edges somewhat as a result. However, the edges are still very good and that still means a very good result. Images will be sharp edge to edge.

    Regarding manual focus, yes I was referring to zone focusing and I did have in mind the street photographer who might wish to set a distance and then rely on depth of field. This can work well, and of course there's no focusing delay. Unfortunately comparisons with specific older lenses can only sometimes be made as a lot of time comes between the reviews of such and they are not to hand to make a meaningful comment. Sometimes they are, in which case there's a bonus there that we can take advantage of.

    Hope that helps!
    • 4 Jan 2022 3:26PM
  • Posted on: Canon RF 100mm f/2.8L MACRO IS USM Lens Review

    Both AF and MF are used to shoot charts to ensure the best possible consistency. There are also several runs of results made. Hope that helps!
    • 6 Dec 2021 10:33AM
  • Posted on: Minolta AF 50mm F/1.4 With K & F Concept A To E Mount Manual Adapter Vintage Lens Review

    Thanks zimmy, there has been a glitch and it will be sorted shortly. Apologies for the incovenience.
    • 8 Nov 2021 9:27PM
  • Posted on: Zoner Photo Studio X Software Review

    Sadly not for Mac users.
    • 8 Nov 2021 2:00PM
  • Posted on: Tamron 150-500mm f/5-6.7 Di III VC VXD (A057) Lens Review

    I take the responsibility for that as I make the graphs. As you say, I usually make the graph represent the theoretical maximum, to the nearest convenient interval on the y axis. Thanks for raising the point.
    • 13 Oct 2021 9:20AM
  • Posted on: Tamron 150-500mm f/5-6.7 Di III VC VXD (A057) Lens Review

    The scale is adjusted to the required range for clarity and will vary from lens to lens and camera to camera. To clarify further, the description is added of "good", "very good" and so on. Even this has to be weighed against the characteristics of a lens - the gradation, the bokeh, and the overall "look". These have to be described in this way to try and recognise lenses that have some distinctive quality that can't be expressed as a bald measurement.
    • 11 Oct 2021 10:34PM
  • Posted on: Voigtlander 50mm F/1.2 Nokton E Lens Review

    Thanks Dave, appreciate you pointing that out. We'll get the right graphs in place ASAP!


    • 11 Oct 2021 4:07PM
  • Posted on: Nikkor Z 28mm F/2.8 SE Lens Review

    Yes Alan, because the FX camera is capable of higher resolution and lens tests are measuring the total system of lens plus camera. That's why the explanatory "excellent" or "very good" are still put in the reviews, to summarise the performance.
    • 22 Sep 2021 3:35PM
  • Posted on: Nikkor Z DX 16-50mm F/3.5-6.3 VR Lens Review

    I have just looked at the review of the Fujinon 18-55mm, which is, as you say, quite an old lens now and in fact it is one of our old style reviews, so the results are not totally comparable. As near as we can, but there are limitations. The current lens actually performs extremely well, in relation to the theoretical maximum that the camera body can resolve. I think you will find the review of the Z series 28mm f/2.8 interesting in this respect when it appears soon.

    As regards ratings, there is much more considered than just sharpness, although that is obviously a significant part of it. Overall, it deserves to be an Editor's Choice, and if I were to buy this camera I would be buying this lens along with it. It is something of a bargain, although weather sealing would be nice.
    • 17 Sep 2021 11:05PM
  • Posted on: Nikkor Z DX 16-50mm F/3.5-6.3 VR Lens Review

    Thanks, I'll look at that now.
    • 17 Sep 2021 4:15PM
  • Posted on: Olympus M. Zuiko 8-25mm F/4.0 Pro Lens Review

    Conversely, as the results were rather good, is the end result achieved anyway? Rather than quality, which has been demonstrated, the main difference just might be some minor function that only works with one marque or another. I can't think of anything offhand, but it's possible.
    • 1 Sep 2021 11:41PM
  • Posted on: Olympus M. Zuiko 8-25mm F/4.0 Pro Lens Review

    It's a fair question and the real answer is that it depends upon availability at any one time. On the other hand, it is standard MFT format and there are several partners in that system. Is it any worse than testing, say, a Tamron lens on a Nikon instead of on a Canon?
    • 1 Sep 2021 11:07PM
  • Posted on: Sony FE 50mm F/2.5G Lens Review

    That wasn't the reason for the scores, and I agree with you that would be unfair if it were. I think the lens did pretty well for itself!
    • 11 Aug 2021 10:49AM
  • Posted on: Fujifilm Fujinon XF 18mm f/1.4 R LM WR Review

    Not a problem, thanks John.
    • 16 Jun 2021 3:02PM
  • Posted on: Fujifilm Fujinon XF 18mm f/1.4 R LM WR Review

    I can see nowhere I say that John, so do please highlight the place you are looking at, it would be much appreciated.
    • 16 Jun 2021 2:29PM
  • Posted on: Fujifilm Fujinon XF 18mm f/1.4 R LM WR Review

    Quote:whereas at one time 35mm-equivalent would have been considered a “wide standard”, the 27mm-equivalent of this lens fits in very well with current image-making.

    I think this is the section that leftj is referring to. This sentence is accurate and it means that once upon a time on full frame a 35mm lens would have been considered a wide standard, whereas now the 27mm would be happily accepted as our tastes have become wider. This 18mm lens is therefore very acceptable now as a wide standard for many people, being the 27mm-equivalent referred to.
    • 16 Jun 2021 2:10PM
  • Posted on: Fujifilm Fujinon XF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 R LM OIS WR Review

    It was a close call, but this time just short of the 5 star overall award, mainly because of the lagging edge definition. For myself, that would not be a deal breaker as it also has its advantages, but the ratings are for general use rather than specific ones. It I was a Fuji user there's no doubt I would be very happy with this lens.
    • 4 Jun 2021 9:55AM
  • Posted on: Nikon Nikkor Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S Lens Review

    You take me to task indeed, and that's fine, let's have a look at the issues. One thing I like about the internet as opposed to a printed magazine is that I can't give a dismissive reply and then fail to follow up with any further response! As regards the features, the things I had in mind were thinking about lens features in general, and maybe not specifically about only 14-24mm lenses. Of course, some things would be dubious to argue as, for example, the lack of inbuilt vibration reduction is not needed as the feature is included in the camera body. So I shall give you the point and agree that I was a little harsh at 4.5 out of 5.
    VFM is much more difficult, it always is with high priced lenses. However, I assure you that I am not thinking only about price. All lenses have an overall value that includes its applications, its quality, its price yes but not exclusively. My VFM was trimmed back because it is so highly priced that the photographer needs to be very sure and specific as to why they need this lens. You are quite clearly so, and for well laid out reasons, so the VFM equation becomes irrelevant. It's the right lens for you, so if you can afford it you buy it.
    For many that equation may be different. Perhaps paying half the price and using the DSLR Nikon lens would be very satisfactory in itself. Nikon don't make bad DSLR lenses. Perhaps a lower priced third party lens will do everything needed. It will still be sharp and cover the field of view required. So VFM is a more generalised summary rather than the specialised one that you have put forward.
    In this case, there's no doubt anyway that it's a splendid lens. I would summarise VFM by saying that if you need/want it and can meet the cost, there's no further debate needed.
    • 9 Dec 2020 2:30PM

Limited to latest 30 results.

No profile comments.

Limited to latest 30 results.