nawknai

nawknai

Lives in Australia Australia
Works as a Medical physicist
Joined on Oct 30, 2007

Comments

Total: 250, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On Real-world samples: Sony Alpha 7 II in Kauai article (227 comments in total)
In reply to:

Uncle Nug: Can you explain please, why there are no "live" sample photos of people, street, children, animals... Any scene when camera demonstrates how quick it is. And here I can see only static - landscapes, etc. Is Sony so uncomfortable to make photos in of daily life?

What does Sony have to do with these sample photos?

They were taken by DPR, probably when one of the staff members took a vacation to Hawaii, no?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 20, 2015 at 02:03 UTC
On Budget X: Hands-on with Fujifilm's new X-A2 article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

dpr4bb: Lots of complaints here about the fact that the X-A2 does not use an X-Trans sensor, just like X-A1 didn't. Must be a big drawback, obviously...

Be that as it may, how come the X-A1 photos from DPR's new studio comparison scene look so good, JPEG or RAW, compared to the other Fuji cameras that do use the X-Trans sensor?

I said that. Please read again "before posting nonsense".

The X-A1 is, by design, an X-M1 without an X-trans sensor, so why would someone ask for an X-A1 with an X-Trans sensor when such a camera already exists?

If someone wants an X-A2 with an X-trans sensor, then they just need to wait for an X-M2.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2015 at 09:37 UTC
On Sony a5100 First Impressions Review preview (581 comments in total)
In reply to:

IKnowin: Sony treat us like idiots again. Having bought the A7s and A6000 I now find only a very few months after the brand new A6000 , the same processor and sensor but given the professional 50mb video codec !

This is like buying a new Porsche model and finding three months later a slightly difference version comes out with twice the horse power. Nothing wrong with that until you find out is cost 30% less !. You could say this is just progress but its not. The A6000 and A5100 have the same components required for the 50mb video codec so it's just a matter of firmware and marketing.

A camera claimed to be aimed at the less serious user gets the professional codec and the more serious user gets the out of date AVCHD codec.

.. And you also have to question a company that claims the A7s is great for video and gives you no option but to use a button the size of most camera's reset button to stop and start recording! Oh and just to make things worse they disable the big button in video!

Did you write a reply post to agree with yourself? That's messed up.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 18, 2015 at 06:20 UTC
On Budget X: Hands-on with Fujifilm's new X-A2 article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

dpr4bb: Lots of complaints here about the fact that the X-A2 does not use an X-Trans sensor, just like X-A1 didn't. Must be a big drawback, obviously...

Be that as it may, how come the X-A1 photos from DPR's new studio comparison scene look so good, JPEG or RAW, compared to the other Fuji cameras that do use the X-Trans sensor?

It doesn't use an X-Trans sensor by design. It's an X-M1 without an X-trans sensor.

That's like buying a Yaris and complaining that it's not as big as a Camry.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2015 at 05:38 UTC
On Budget X: Hands-on with Fujifilm's new X-A2 article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

Manizkrishnan: I sold my X-A1 with XC 16-50 lens for $250. X-A1 was the best entry level camera i have ever used. It was far better than Olympus E-PL5 and Sony A5000 in terms of IQ and handling. But no EVF or Adding one was deal breaker for me. Bought X-E1 with XF 18-55 and kept XC 50-230 lens from the X-A1 bundle. But I still miss punchy JPEGs from X-A1 :(

He did say "no evf or adding one", which, while written poorly, implies that you can't even add an EVF to the camera if you wanted, while perhaps you can with the Sony a5000.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2015 at 05:33 UTC
On Budget X: Hands-on with Fujifilm's new X-A2 article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

greypixelz: How come Fuji are not capable of creating small bodies? That thing looks chunky!

Sony is great at making small bodies and big lenses.

Fuji makes medium-sized bodies and medium-sized lenses.

This is the same reason why I never considered Sony to have a "real" size advantage, even if their bodies are smaller.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2015 at 05:31 UTC
On Budget X: Hands-on with Fujifilm's new X-A2 article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sannaborjeson: I wish Fuji would think of FF one day.

Huh? Fuji's lenses aren't small, but when compared to FF lenses, they are actually (slightly) smaller if you're considering lenses of the same equivalent focal length (e.g. Fuji's 35 mm vs some other 50 mm lens of the same image quality).

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2015 at 05:29 UTC
On Budget X: Hands-on with Fujifilm's new X-A2 article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Good price but hate it that Fuji purposely strip away X-tans and direct-dial controls. I like my X-E1 but since I never use the EVF, I could easily see this as a smaller/lighter alternative.

You hate that Fuji, which have decided to release a version of the X-M1 without the X-Trans sensor, didn't include an X-Trans?

Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2015 at 03:53 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: The best Samsung lenses are already better than Fuji lenses.

And then there are just very good Sam NX lenses which equal Fujis.

I guess every other reviewer must be "doing it wrong".

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2015 at 00:51 UTC
In reply to:

lcf80: Samsung: and what about AF performance in low light situations? Any chance it will be improved by future firmware updates?

My problem with saying "Did they test ____ with the new FW?" is that firmware is continuously being updated, and improvements are constantly being made, so there's never a perfect time to properly test and review all aspects of a camera.

I find the firmware arguments pretty flimsy.

Having said that, I think camera reviews should always be performed using firmware v1.1 (or the 1st updated firmware), because lets face it, this update is usually released early on.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2015 at 00:49 UTC
In reply to:

jukeboxjohnnie: Pathetic! This is because Samsung cant do a DSLR people want. My mirrorless system is only for casual shooting when I don't expect to be taken seriously and I'll never feel differently

I never took you seriously. Does that help?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2015 at 00:45 UTC
In reply to:

nerd2: Samsung has the best APS body yet (28MP BSI sensor, 240fps sensor readout, 15fps continuous shooting with AF tracking) AND they have a very solid lens lineup already, and they are not terribly overpriced like fuji or m43 offerings. See.

10mm f2.8 fisheye - $299
16mm f2.4 pancake- $269
20mm 2.8 pancake - $263
30mm f2 pancake - $299
45mm f1.8 prime - $256
60mm f2.8 macro - $469
85mm f1.4 prime - $763
300mm f2.8 prime - coming

Oh they have enough zoom lenses too - 16-50 f2.0-2.8, 50-150 2.8, 12-24, 18-200 etc.... Why still people don't consider samsung seriously?

@ChowMonkey: Panasonic is another "TV brand", as is Sony, and yet they're both doing fine. Also, dismissing that bit of information regarding Samsung's history with cameras, is just stubbornness.

I don't buy Samsung cameras because their image quality isn't great. I don't know about the NX1. It's newer, and I haven't tried it. Before selling off my Nikon gear, I had considered Samsung before pre-ordering my Fuji X100 (original) due to their selection of prime lenses, but they didn't seem like very good lenses. That, and the JPEGs I took home on my memory card didn't look great.

To dismiss a product because they make TVs is preposterous. Sony makes cameras now. Yes, they bought Minolta, but nobody buys an Alpha, particularly not an E-mount mirrorless camera, because of some tie with Minolta's heritage.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2015 at 00:39 UTC
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: When consumers (not professionals) consider SIZE as a major factor: MIRRORLESS will kick in.

Oops! It already has!

PROS: big and bulky

CONSUMERS: small, comfortable, and wise. (smart too)

.

If a camera is a bit smaller, you're to continue using it. If you're an adult, then within reason, you can't wear children's shoes at all.

I'm sorry if you still think your post made any sense.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2015 at 02:31 UTC
In reply to:

vscd: ...sitting for hours in the snow, waiting for a Bird to sit down 50 metres away from my 400 f2.8 will teach you the disadvantages of an EVF/Mirrorless concept (batteries changing every 20 minutes? Heating up the sensor...).

I could tell him more disadvantages, but he's stuck on his product and has to promote it.

"As for changing batteries every 20 minutes, the GH4 will run switched on with live-view for 6 hours off one charge. So it helps to get your facts right in the first place too."

Actually, he does have a point.

In really cold conditions, batteries drain like crazy. You don't get many shots off at all. Leaving your camera on live view for 4 hours may be possible (haven't tested that) at above freezing, but if you're a wildlife photographer and intend on shooting wildlife, DSLRs are much better. That, and the high-ish end DSLRs have better battery life than mirrorless to begin with.

And all this crap about Wifi and waiting in your car is complete nonsense.

"What percentage of Photographers are sitting fo hours waiting to take a shot or rapid fire shots! C'mon, Really!"

Then buy an entry level DSLR or mirrorless and be done with it.

If you make a high-end DSLR or mirrorless product, you can't question consumers when they ask to do something demanding.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2015 at 02:21 UTC
In reply to:

LWW: What's been going on here? I was out taking photos and just got in, thought I may have missed something - but doesn't look so :-)

While you were acting smug, we were reading an interview with Byungdeok Nam, Samsung's imaging department's Senior Vice President.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2015 at 02:08 UTC
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: When consumers (not professionals) consider SIZE as a major factor: MIRRORLESS will kick in.

Oops! It already has!

PROS: big and bulky

CONSUMERS: small, comfortable, and wise. (smart too)

.

@Lee Jay:

That's one of the most nonsensical things I have ever read by anyone, posting on any forum, on the internet.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2015 at 02:06 UTC
In reply to:

Maklike Tier: Wow, that 28mm f2 is TINY. The bayonetted extensions look very clever.

Fuji's X100 converters are awesome. With them attached , the "cost of IQ" isn't observed as I would have expected.

I have an X100, and am skeptical of converters, but so far, from everything I've seen and read, I haven't seen evidence of performance degradation.

Sony may have achieved the same.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2015 at 03:28 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T real-world sample gallery posted article (85 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dougbm_2: Still prefer my original X100 images.

Why include the X-Pro1 and X-E1 in the "good" category?

He only said he prefers his original X100 images, as do I. I have an X-Pro1, and my main reason for preferring the X-Pro1 images have everything to do with the lens, and nothing to do with the quality of the images themselves. I like my X100 images more.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2015 at 05:48 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1454 comments in total)
In reply to:

toni2: Full frame it's the best because have best image quality. That's all. It's so simple as why some photographers use fixed lens (not zoom). Best image quality. That's all. Do you want best image quality? go with full frame and fixed lens. It's simple!!
Do you think that aps-c or m4/3 have good enough quality? it's ok. But it's not the best. Your thought it's not a fact, it's only an opinion.

That used to be true, but there are plenty of new zooms that are just as sharp as primes, and very well corrected for distortion.

IMO, the only reason to choose a prime over a zoom is for the larger apertures they're often capable of. Don't choose a prime because you think you'll get sharper photos, and don't buy a prime with a max aperture of f/2.8, because as I said, this negates the main advantage that primes have over zooms.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2015 at 04:42 UTC
On Fujifilm announces XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR lens article (295 comments in total)

If they shortened the range, could it have lead to a smaller lens, or perhaps a similar sized lens with OIS? It seems like an odd focal range for an APS-C camera system, and Fuji doesn't have a FF film camera legacy to protect.

Personally, I don't need OIS. It's nice to have, but I think the high price is justified or a general focal length f/2.8 zoom lens if the optics are fantastic. Fuji does tend to get that right, so I'd give them the benefit of the doubt. However, lots of people are going to complain that it doesn't have OIS, and would have rather paid even more for an OIS version.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 05:45 UTC as 53rd comment
Total: 250, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »