Marcelobtp

Marcelobtp

Lives in Brazil Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Works as a Student/photographer
Joined on Nov 26, 2010

Comments

Total: 226, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Heavy hitter: Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM first shots (147 comments in total)

...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2016 at 11:06 UTC as 31st comment

Well, lets see if all of it is true.
I really don't believe that magicaly sony lenses will have that big jump in quality.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 17:45 UTC as 27th comment
In reply to:

Marcelobtp: color science still bad

Sorry to say but Not a sony basher by any means, people start to get blind when some reviewers make good reviews about some items. I had a canon once in my life, was superzoom one of the first that had 720p video too, the worst buy in my life, i hated so much the lens aberration and the low quality of the image, then one day the batterys started to not work anymore and i switched for a nikon d60, good camera not so good AF for tracking. Bought a nex3 as everyday camera, good image quality but the colors were off! Sold it bought a d7000 and the skin tones were off too. This is something present on all sony sensors i guess, the got better, but still has this problem. I really like Sony, but they need to solve this problem, that i don't find so bad on canon dslrs for example. Yellow greenish faces that are not that easy to make it look natural, in my humble opinion.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 19:20 UTC

This is going to be truly amazing if doesnt have side effects

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 19:08 UTC as 67th comment

color science still bad

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 11:29 UTC as 55th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Combatmedic870: What really sucks is knowing that this is the sensor they will be using for the next 2 years. I'm going to have to say that's the worst part of this announcement.

Right, i was not 100% clear, i guess i shouldn't have mentioned exclusively Megapixels, but overall, it seems is the same sony sensor from later years, maybe a little bit tweaked, but the same, not revolutionary. Well i will wait for the review to see what they achieved, DR dept, by the photos it seems pretty good in color rendition and noise characteristics.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2016 at 15:54 UTC
In reply to:

Combatmedic870: What really sucks is knowing that this is the sensor they will be using for the next 2 years. I'm going to have to say that's the worst part of this announcement.

Nothing was wrong with the 16 MP too...
But is generaly expected something more than what was already estabilished, just that, i still have a d7000 and on the sensor dpt i don't really feel the need to upgrade. But if im going to, its better be much better than what i already have, supposing that the latest fujis are using the same sensor of d7000 i expected a larger jump.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 16, 2016 at 16:13 UTC
In reply to:

Combatmedic870: What really sucks is knowing that this is the sensor they will be using for the next 2 years. I'm going to have to say that's the worst part of this announcement.

I think he and many of us were waiting for something revolutionary, like the rumors said. Sensors now are already on 28, so in 2 years will be in 50s, i kind of understand him.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2016 at 13:54 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Nikon D5 (401 comments in total)

Are you guys are really going to make a full review of it?
I don't even remember the last time that you have done a review of a flagship model.
No 1DX neither D4/s.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2016 at 00:14 UTC as 70th comment | 8 replies
On article Merry Christmas II you: RX1R II sample gallery updated (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

sh10453: Images look great until you view them full size.
For example, look at image #7, then click on the 12.3MB JPG image (in the right pane), and click to magnify to full size after the image finishes loading.
Unbelievable, horrible image quality. It is not just this image. You can see the same horrible result starting with image #1.
It reminded me of the one-half MP cameras of the mid 1990s.

I could be missing something here, but there is something wrong going on. These cannot be images from a $3,000 plus camera, or even from a $100 camera. Is it the camera? Is it the lens? Something has gone terribly wrong here and I have no clue what it is, but it is not the Sony image quality I know of.

I don't see the greenish tone on people's skins, but there is a greenish tone all over many other images (and I'm looking at images with an ultra high resolution, 24" monitor).
I think Sony engineers (and probably DPR) will be busy reviewing what went wrong here, at least I hope so.

What are you talking about?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2015 at 19:59 UTC
On article Merry Christmas II you: RX1R II sample gallery updated (138 comments in total)

default jpeg looking better in the color dept, green-yellowish skin tones are rather distracting in the edited ones.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2015 at 19:58 UTC as 13th comment
On article In Fine Detail: Canon EOS 5DS / 5DS R In-Depth Review (668 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shifter: So how many 5D cams are there?! I get lost and confused with all the models available. I need about $5K for a 5D body taxes included??? It's not good, Canon.

5d mark III, typo.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2015 at 17:42 UTC
On article In Fine Detail: Canon EOS 5DS / 5DS R In-Depth Review (668 comments in total)
In reply to:

fortwodriver: Did I miss something, or did I not see the lens used for some of these tests.
The image on the conclusion page is interesting. It was shot with a Sigma lens. That noise (the patterned banding) look like the noise I used to get on my older 7D using a Sigma lens that wasn't quite right in its head. After I sent it back to Sigma, they swapped out the circuit and I never had an issue with it again.

I don't know if it's wise to test those sorts of things with out-of-system reverse-engineered components. Canon, out of all the camera companies out there, has been the absolute worst at providing guidance to third-party lens manufacturers. By using a third party lens, you've basically poisoned the test results for some of those images - because Canon never guarantees compatibility with anything from Sigma.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if some of the worst shadow noise you found was caused by that Sigma lens.

Really interesting, i ve never though about the possibility of RF signals causing image distortion.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2015 at 17:42 UTC
In reply to:

Marcelobtp: Nice lens image quality. Surprised to see usable 1.4 aperture.

Well, pointless discussion of subjective points. This is a first and looking better than the famous Zeiss 135 1.8. at 1.4.
Bye

Direct link | Posted on Dec 14, 2015 at 17:43 UTC
In reply to:

Marcelobtp: Nice lens image quality. Surprised to see usable 1.4 aperture.

Im not talking about money, just performance...
Its a challenge to make usch a lens to have 1.4, most 1.4 lens are not truly usable at 1.4, , never saw 135 1.4, so im surprised and i have all the reasons to be, not sure what were you trying to achieve with this comment...

Direct link | Posted on Dec 11, 2015 at 18:42 UTC

Nice lens image quality. Surprised to see usable 1.4 aperture.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2015 at 03:01 UTC as 33rd comment | 5 replies

Finally!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2015 at 02:35 UTC as 7th comment
On article Canon 35mm F1.4L II: a photojournalist's perspective (86 comments in total)

Great photos!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 03:15 UTC as 11th comment
On article Got Game? Canon EF 35mm F1.4L II USM gallery updated (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fog Maker: Image 16 (man with the, uhm, Sony Camera) is full of CA. Thought that organic thing would keep it better in check.

Well, first, my wow was not because of the lens but for the coment, second talking about absolute numbers and comparisons this lens in that regard perform better than sigma, third DXo, i can't take it seriously.
No one said nothing about the price, if i would buy today i would choose sigma because of the bang for the buck...

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 00:45 UTC
In reply to:

Ed Overstreet: Exciting though 8K video is in theory, I hope that by 2018 if not sooner Panasonic will first (or at the same time at least) fix their problem with poorer continuous AF and AF tracking in their current 4K implementation -- something which Panasonic admits to and warns about in the G7 user manual, which I've noticed repeatedly in 4K video with that camera, and which I find very annoying at times especially when panning during recording of video.

I'd also like to see them figure out how to implement their in-camera image stabilization during 4K video, which currently is greyed out in the 4K setting on the GX8. In fact all their 4K video cameras that have in-camera stabilization (e.g. the FZ300) the manual warns you won't get IS in 4K though you do get it in 1080 or 720. In-lens stabilization does work in 4K in my experience, but it isn't as effective in video since it's I think two-axis instead of three or five axis for in-camera depending on who you believe.

I'm quite sure that in good light an 8k sensor will track much better than a 4k one just because its a 8k and can verify finer details of the DFD.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 00:09 UTC
Total: 226, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »