Matthew Miller

Matthew Miller

Lives in United States Boston, United States
Works as a Open Source / Linux Doer-of-Things
Has a website at http://mattdm.org/
Joined on Aug 25, 2006
About me:

1996-1999: Casio QV10A
1999-2004: Nikon Coolpix 950
2004-2007: Olympus C-5060
2006-2006: Fujifilm F20
2007-2010: Fujifilm F31fd
2007-2007: Pentax K100D (mostly with DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited)
2007-2009: Pentax K10D (mostly with DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited)
2009-2012: Pentax K-7 (still mostly with DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited)
2009-2011: Fujifilm F200EXR
2012-2015: Pentax K-5ii (+ 15mm, 40mm, 70mm Limiteds)
2015- : Fujifilm X-T10 (+ 23mm and 56mm)
Now you know. :)

Comments

Total: 129, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Fujifilm X-T10 Review (514 comments in total)
In reply to:

Deardorff: No Optical finder, no thanks.

I tested out an XPro1 a couple of years ago. It has a magical feature where it can switch between EVF and OVF. I started out as believing in the OVF as a must-have and the EVF as a novelty, but over the two weeks I was using it, I found myself using the EVF more and more.

And the EVF in the X-T10 is much more modern and better on all counts — let alone the even larger one on the X—T1.

So, recently, I switched to the X-T10 as kind of a longer-term experiment. I'm coming from the very nice 100%-view pentaprism in Pentax cameras, and there are many things I miss from the old system and areas where Pentax definitely does things better (balanced by things where Fujifilm does other things better, of course). But the viewfinder just plain isn't something I even think about being different. The EVF is perfectly fine.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2015 at 20:59 UTC
In reply to:

Francis Carver: "The Speed Booster is essentially a backwards teleconverter... shortening the focal length of the lens.. as a 0.71x focal length multiplier lens... combined with the 2x crop of a Four Thirds sized sensor gives a net effective crop of 1.4x, so a 50mm lens becomes a 35.5mm lens when the adapter is added. Then ... this 35.5mm lens offers a field-of-view equivalent to a 71mm lens on full frame."

Wow, how wonderful, Metabones & Co. Who would give $649 for the privilege of giving up ultra wide angle perspectives? This product makes zero sense. You can get a pretty good lens, maybe even a pair of lenses, for that much money.

And, y'know. There's still also that math thing, which is just basic facts, not a justification.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 17:55 UTC
In reply to:

Francis Carver: "The Speed Booster is essentially a backwards teleconverter... shortening the focal length of the lens.. as a 0.71x focal length multiplier lens... combined with the 2x crop of a Four Thirds sized sensor gives a net effective crop of 1.4x, so a 50mm lens becomes a 35.5mm lens when the adapter is added. Then ... this 35.5mm lens offers a field-of-view equivalent to a 71mm lens on full frame."

Wow, how wonderful, Metabones & Co. Who would give $649 for the privilege of giving up ultra wide angle perspectives? This product makes zero sense. You can get a pretty good lens, maybe even a pair of lenses, for that much money.

I'm not justifying anything — like I said, I also think the price seems high. On the other hand, if someone has thousands of dollars in Canon glass and picks up a m43rds body as an addition to the system, maybe it's worth it. I guess Metabones' financial returns will tell the story.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 17:54 UTC
In reply to:

Francis Carver: "The Speed Booster is essentially a backwards teleconverter... shortening the focal length of the lens.. as a 0.71x focal length multiplier lens... combined with the 2x crop of a Four Thirds sized sensor gives a net effective crop of 1.4x, so a 50mm lens becomes a 35.5mm lens when the adapter is added. Then ... this 35.5mm lens offers a field-of-view equivalent to a 71mm lens on full frame."

Wow, how wonderful, Metabones & Co. Who would give $649 for the privilege of giving up ultra wide angle perspectives? This product makes zero sense. You can get a pretty good lens, maybe even a pair of lenses, for that much money.

Let me spell this out:

On a m43 camera, a native m43 lens with a focal length of 50mm has a focal length of 50mm — no crop. This gives a field of view approximately like that you would get on a full-frame camera with a 100mm lens.

On a m43 camera with a Speed Booster and a full-frame lens with a focal length of 50mm, the focal length actually becomes 35mm. This gives a field of view approximately like that you would get on a full-frame camera with a 70mm lens.

This is not "giving up ultra wide angle perspective" no matter how you look at it.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 12:32 UTC
In reply to:

Francis Carver: "The Speed Booster is essentially a backwards teleconverter... shortening the focal length of the lens.. as a 0.71x focal length multiplier lens... combined with the 2x crop of a Four Thirds sized sensor gives a net effective crop of 1.4x, so a 50mm lens becomes a 35.5mm lens when the adapter is added. Then ... this 35.5mm lens offers a field-of-view equivalent to a 71mm lens on full frame."

Wow, how wonderful, Metabones & Co. Who would give $649 for the privilege of giving up ultra wide angle perspectives? This product makes zero sense. You can get a pretty good lens, maybe even a pair of lenses, for that much money.

@Francis:

If you want to look at it that way, there is also no "crop" when using a non-native lens. "Crop" is just a way of normalizing focal lengths for comparison of field of view, but doesn't really change anything. However, the 70% reduction in focal length _is_ real.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2015 at 00:48 UTC
In reply to:

Francis Carver: "The Speed Booster is essentially a backwards teleconverter... shortening the focal length of the lens.. as a 0.71x focal length multiplier lens... combined with the 2x crop of a Four Thirds sized sensor gives a net effective crop of 1.4x, so a 50mm lens becomes a 35.5mm lens when the adapter is added. Then ... this 35.5mm lens offers a field-of-view equivalent to a 71mm lens on full frame."

Wow, how wonderful, Metabones & Co. Who would give $649 for the privilege of giving up ultra wide angle perspectives? This product makes zero sense. You can get a pretty good lens, maybe even a pair of lenses, for that much money.

Without commenting on the price (which I agree seems quite high for what you get), I think you're misunderstanding. Forget the full frame reference; on the camera it works on, this reduces the focal length of the mounted lens, so a 50mm lens becomes _wider_.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2015 at 22:18 UTC
On article Manfrotto adds friction arms to its accessory lineup (11 comments in total)

Nice. The price seems high, but the convenience and utility will totally be worth it. I have the Manfrotto Flex Arm in both the heavy duty and the lightweight versions, and the heavy duty one is too hard to move and not flexible enough, and the lightweight version won't stay in place and can't support more than its own weight. Basically, interesting idea, didn't work out. This seems a lot better.

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2015 at 03:29 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
On article Video Overview: Fujifilm X-T10 (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pat Cullinan Jr: The sample photos need heavy post-processing.

A lot of them _do_ seem to have a tending-towards-lower-key exposure choice — I suspect that's part of the design towards creating a specific film-like look.

I'm not a Fujifilm shooter (at least, not at present...) but I don't think there's a way to bias this other than using EV compensation or adjusting the exposure each time, which is a little bit unfortunate. You can adjust saturation ("color density") and shadow and highlight detail, but not this. With Pentax, each of the tone curves (roughly analogous to Fujifilm's film simulation) also has a "high key / low key" slider. Ah well — nothing's perfect.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2015 at 22:52 UTC
On article Video Overview: Fujifilm X-T10 (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

Karroly: All the pics in the gallery look underexposed...

I think it's mostly intentional, as part of the intended "film look". If you don't like that, expose differently.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2015 at 22:40 UTC
On article Video Overview: Fujifilm X-T10 (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pat Cullinan Jr: The sample photos need heavy post-processing.

The exposure choice looks great to me. It may be that you just have a different preference. Alternately, you may want to check your monitor calibration.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2015 at 22:19 UTC
On article Adorama launches Flashpoint Ring Li-On 400ws ringflash (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

Howard S: it looks a lot like http://flashhavoc.com/godox-witstro-ar400-ring-flash-coming/

Cheetahstand also has amazing customer service. Not that Adorama is bad in this respect either, but I've been very, very happy with the personal touch.

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2015 at 18:52 UTC
On article Flasher smartphone flash launched on Kickstarter (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

HeyItsJoel: If it's done right, it should have the ability to tilt upwards so it can bounce flash off the ceiling!

It'd have to be way more powerful for that to work.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2015 at 01:36 UTC

For what it's worth, we had this rumor for Pentax last year — http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52214695

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 23:26 UTC as 87th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

fmian: The 3-4 Metz flashes I have handled recently (modern models) felt incredibly bad. Poor component fitting. Loose door covers. Cheap feeling external materials. High price though.
If that's the first impression I got after using YongNuo and Canon flashes, then I'm sure other potential customers got the same impression.

Having said that, I've seen some old Metz flashes that were quite nice.

iudex -- look at where they're made. The Metz 36 AF5 is a licensed product, made by Tumax/Icorp http://www.icorpandtumax.com/DSL88Series.html in Hong Kong. The 44 AF and higher models are still German-made.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2014 at 21:04 UTC
In reply to:

Mike Yorkshire: Very sad news. Sadly the camera manufacturers have designed flash systems closely integrated with their cameras and then had the resulting flash made by Chinese workers. Metz would always find it difficult to keep up in this market - their products were always second to none.

For the last few years, Metz has done exactly that — all of their lower range (36 AF and down) is made in China and bears a strong resemblance to Tumax/Icorp generic rebadged flashes.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2014 at 20:58 UTC
In reply to:

ThePhilips: As cameras' high ISO performance improves, a need for a proper flash lessens.

Otherwise, as an amateur, I was always surprised by the lack of advancements in the lighting equipment. Flash designs, and the accompanying technics, are very old. The problems with them - are as old. Yet pretty much nobody tries to improve something there. Flash is still the same largish expensive-ish clunky device I have hard time to justify to buy and dedicate the space in my bag for it. As if interchangeable lenses weren't enough of the hustle.

> As cameras' high ISO performance improves, a need for a proper flash lessens.

:-/

I'd argue that the need for _proper_ flash is constant. The need for flash for taking snapshots in dim rooms may lessen, but that's basically irrelevant.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2014 at 20:56 UTC
On article Pentax launches K-S1 Sweets Collection (231 comments in total)
In reply to:

Paul Farace: In 1977 Pentax stormed the camera world with a simple SLR, the K1000, that only came in black leatherette and chrome. It dominated the lower level camera market for years... now they only seem to make pretty collectibles... sad in a way. I love my art deco box cameras but these seem to be way beyond that!

I like the one that looks like a bowl of sherbet!

Have you looked at the K-3 (or, for that matter, K-50 or K-500)? All are very highly rated as serious cameras, not just "collectables". If they want to make candy-colored models (primarily for the Japanese market, as I understand it) to bring in some money, fine by me!

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2014 at 01:01 UTC
On article Pentax launches K-S1 Sweets Collection (231 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Pentax is just doing something to set themselves apart from the competition.

They make very good APSC cameras and lenses, but so do their competitors Nikon, Canon and Sony. And it seems anything Pentax can do, their competitors can do as well or better. So they need something to set themselves apart. That something is "a mind dazzling array of color combinations."

This may sound silly, but there is a market for this. A niche market perhaps, but still a market. And if no one else wants it then Pentax will take it for themselves.

I haven't seen anyone else do prime lenses like the Limited series — that's what I'm in it for. (Possible exception of Fujifilm and their X lineup.)

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2014 at 18:04 UTC
On article Canon introduces new $78K 50-1000mm cine lens (175 comments in total)

Wait, 20× magnification? Or... 20× zoom?

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 02:13 UTC as 69th comment
Total: 129, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »