Jeff Keller

Jeff Keller

Lives in United States Seattle, WA, United States
Works as a Senior Writer, Digital Photography Review
Has a website at http://www.dpreview.com
Joined on Feb 19, 2013
About me:

I'm the former publisher of the Digital Camera Resource Page who is now writing reviews and managing new product launches here at DPReview.

Comments

Total: 284, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (238 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tobias1234: Last year I tried the Olympus TG-2 which was one of the 2013 recommendations. I was really shocked about the bad image quality compared to any other camera (e.g. S95, TZ10, RX100, FZ38, some mFT-Bodies) I have used before.
The lens of the TG-2 is fast, but it's so soft that open wide is unusable. The JPEG engine was also one of the bad ones.

I can not agree to the 2013 and this new 2014 comparison, because there is one really important feature which is a must for UW photography: RAW support. Without RAW the pictures will have heavy false colours and the UW programs will lead brownish or blueish color casts - depending on the distance to the subject.

After my bad experiences with the compact UW cameras, I tried a RX100 in a cheap housing (Meikon). The quality differences to the candidates is so big, that I can't understand what cameras like a TG-2/TG-3 are good for.

Even a cheap Canon S95 in a cheap Meikon housing (my backup) is lightyears away from UW cameras like a TG-2/TG-3.

@Greg VdB: the reason for the comments is that these cameras appeal to a broader audience than our 'regular' users. These people aren't doing pixel-level analysis- they want something their kid won't break that can be used in the pool or at the beach. When my 6-yo niece wanted a 'real' camera (Fisher Price doesn't cut it), I got her a cheap Panasonic rugged camera for that very reason.

I don't think we're defending poor image quality at all. At 100%, they're all bad - and I'm sure the manufactures know this. As long as they keep selling, I don't see why Canon, Nikon et al will put in a larger sensor or offer Raw. As someone who likes to take u/w photos, I'd love to see something like an underwater RX100. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 15:24 UTC
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (238 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: It might have been interesting to see how well the Nikon 1 AW1 performed against these cameras. Compared to the four cameras reviewed, the Nikon 1 has a "huge sensor."

We (I) did an article about using the AW1:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9476429038/swimming-with-the-nikon-1-aw1

It's also $800-$1000, which is why it's not on the "other cameras" page :)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 15:10 UTC
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (238 comments in total)
In reply to:

thx1138: This will be a race to the bottom and hopefully literally and not metaphorically. Send them all to Davy Jones' locker I say!

I reckon you should have thrown in the Nikon AW1 as a reference just to see how the tiny sensored jpg only monstrosities compare, not that the AW1 is without issues.

Sony needs to make an UW version of the RX100III.

>Sony needs to make an UW version of the RX100III.

I'd buy that in a second!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 07:27 UTC
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (238 comments in total)

Just a heads-up that we're aware that the Ricoh WG-4's ISO 200 studio test scene shot is out of focus. This should be resolved in the morning (our time).

Thanks,
Jeff

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 06:29 UTC as 80th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

Miwok: Didn't see the lens hood either...

should a get the $200 one from leica?

We did get the nice metal lens hoods, thankfully.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2014 at 16:16 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

Augustin Man: 1/16000 sec?! Sure isn't one zero too much?

It's an electronic shutter once you go past 1/4000 sec or something like that (don't have the specs in front of me).

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 14:50 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

EthanP99: what is the flash sync speed

I believe what Richard says is correct, according to the spec sheet.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 06:13 UTC
On Canon PowerShot D30 real-world samples gallery article (14 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rodrigo Ayres Bordin: Hi! Are all the underwater samples done without flash? For underwater pics, you could add the depth they were taken...

For some of the cameras the flash was used. I never needed it with the Canon, so I never forced it on.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 19:22 UTC
On Olympus Tough TG-3 real-world samples gallery article (42 comments in total)
In reply to:

ChrisAN82: dpreview staff: Did you happen to take any video with the TG-3? If so, could you hear a constant clicking noise during video playback? The TG-1 and TG-2 both suffered from this and it is believe to be caused by the microphone picking up the noise from the AF system.

We have some sample videos that will be posted soon. Just fooling around with it in the office, I didn't notice any clicking sounds.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 19:19 UTC
On Sony a6000 First Impressions Review preview (899 comments in total)
In reply to:

Paks: So wheres the review DP REVIEW?

It's coming very soon.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2014 at 03:59 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

hawat: The minimum focus range is now 30 cm on the rx100m3 instead of 5cm in the previous generation?

That sentence was not entirely correct. The min. distance at telephoto is indeed 30cm. At wide-angle it's 5cm. I've cleared it up.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 05:10 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cheng Bao: RX100m2 got bionz x too? in your RX100 Series Comparison table.
I didn't recall sony claim rx100m2 to got the lastest bionz x. Can you double check?

@dpreview

Fixed the table. Only the Mark III uses Bionz X.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 04:48 UTC
On Rumors hint at pair of new Canon lenses article (54 comments in total)
In reply to:

Antony John: Whilst there's a shortage of new products maybe DPR could:
1. Catch up on outstanding reviews (cameras and lenses).
2. Run some surveys to determine what 'real people' actually want the camera manufacturers to produce IRO cameras and lenses?
I would think that the camera manufacturers monitor these pages and perhaps it's a way of getting products onto the market that are more popular/generate more interest and increase sales?
Just a thought.

I can't speak to #2, but we are mostly certainly reviewing cameras which, as you know, takes time.

Direct link | Posted on May 13, 2014 at 02:56 UTC
On Samsung announces NX3000 mirrorless camera article (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

D1N0: ISO 2500 max? That must be a typo.

Fixed. thanks!

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 14:39 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (660 comments in total)
In reply to:

Betico: I'm happy to read the Jeff's reviews. He writes clear and to the point. I miss his comments about the battery door on his DPreview reviews. On his former website he never missed a comment regarding the bottom of the camera. His comments about the battery doors were very helpful. I guess DPreview does not allow him to write these comments now.

Pretty sure that our corporate overlords don't care about battery doors :-)

Richard and iI will discuss this tomorrow.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 00:08 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (660 comments in total)
In reply to:

Henrik Herranen: Page 3 concerning the LCD:
"Outdoor visibility was very good."

Page 11 concerning the LCD:
"The display has average outdoor visibility (meaning not great)"

This appears a bit contradictory to me.

Other than that, interesting review.

Sorry about the confusion. Page 3 was written after spending a short amount of time with the camera. I had forgotten to go back and update that section after spending more time with the G1X II.

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2014 at 22:18 UTC
On Sony SLT-A77 II First Impressions Review preview (638 comments in total)
In reply to:

PiscesNH69: DPReview shows image ratios in A77MKII are 1:1, 4:3, and 16:9 compared to A77/A65's 3:2 and 16:9. Is this accurate?

That was an error, sorry about that.

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2014 at 14:35 UTC
On Sony SLT-A77 II First Impressions Review preview (638 comments in total)
In reply to:

Juck: MAybe I missed it,,, What's the burst/buffer depth for RAW,, anyone know?

It's around 25 shots.

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2014 at 14:29 UTC
In reply to:

PiscesNH69: DPReview camera side by side comparison shows image ratios in A77MKII are 1:1, 4:3, and 16:9 compared to A77/A65's 3:2 and 16:9. Is this accurate?

Sorry, that was an error. Just 3:2 and 16:9.

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2014 at 14:28 UTC
On Updated: Creating the Leica T article (197 comments in total)
In reply to:

JonPB: Copyedit: "No one will argue that Leica cameras are expensive." (That's the lead sentence from the main page for this post.) I certainly would, but I believe what you meant is the opposite, that "No one will argue with the proposition that Leica cameras are expensive," which might be better phrased as "No one will deny that Leica cameras are expensive."

Good suggestion, thanks.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2014 at 22:34 UTC
Total: 284, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »