Absolutic

Absolutic

Lives in United States Los Angeles, CA, United States
Works as a attorney
Joined on Jan 6, 2004

Comments

Total: 223, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R real-world samples gallery article (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

jackspra: Shots were so much better than we get from the seattle office.

I write this everytime dpreview bothers to shoot some samples in London, it is like photos from two different planets.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 9, 2013 at 19:42 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R real-world samples gallery article (125 comments in total)

Thank you for posting samples from beautiful and picturesque London (which I loved dpreview samples before) and not completely uninspiring Seattle pictures. Seattle pictures got old pretty quickly. Can you guys go back to do all the samples in London and not in Seattle?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 9, 2013 at 19:11 UTC as 17th comment | 9 replies
On DPReview on CreativeLIVE article (142 comments in total)

Oh what a treat for us camera-geeks, guys! To see the dpreview people and to have these great guest stars! I watched it live at work and now I am watching it again for the 2d time! How about you guys do it at least once a year, and maybe twice a year???? Everyone did a great job. Congratulations!

By the way, no Otus on hand? You guys out of all people should have at least one sample!

Also how about for the next time, show us some really expensive gear, like Leica 50 0.95 and other things most people have never seen in person.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 3, 2013 at 04:51 UTC as 29th comment
On DPReview Gear of the Year - Part 1: Fujifilm X100S article (307 comments in total)

I agree, out of all the cameras I've owned in the last few years, X100s stands out and that is the one that I am unlikely to sell anytime soon. It goes to my work bag with me and is always with me pretty much. I've taken some amazing photographs with it. Great picture quality + small size+ silent shooting = success. I wish the lens was F/1.4 instead of F/2, but hey, the camera would not be as small.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2013 at 06:27 UTC as 82nd comment
On Welcome to our studio test scene article (275 comments in total)

Also how did you guys pick whose photos to include in the scene? I see you included Richard's photo. Shouldn't Phil Askew photo be included as a tribute?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2013 at 15:38 UTC as 115th comment | 2 replies
On Welcome to our studio test scene article (275 comments in total)

great job guys as usual, lets see how many of the older cameras you can find to reshoot this. By the way how does it work, you guys at dpreview have a museum of every camera made in the last 10 years? Is there a closet with every camera and every charger? Or you borrow older cameras from friends and family members here and in England to reshoot these?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2013 at 15:35 UTC as 117th comment | 3 replies
On Welcome to our studio test scene article (275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jogger: You should list the lens that you use for each camera... e.g. its incorrect to compare tele macro primes with wide angles as has been done in the past on DPR.

I assume because 56/1.2 lens is not out yet. I guess you are saying they should have used 60/2.4?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2013 at 15:32 UTC
On Fujifilm X-M1 Review preview (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boris F: Nice camera, but... Olympus PEN camera on comparison looks better, and it is much quicker too. Plus much more lenses, definitely it is better choice, at least for my opinion.

that is why it is good to have both. Olympus m43 for serious shooting, and Fuji for those times when you can just take your time....

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2013 at 15:58 UTC
On Fujifilm X-M1 Review preview (220 comments in total)

Thank u dpreview for acknowledging the mushy green issue. I think xtrans is best for portraits and especially portraits in low light. If u shoot landscapes with lots of greenery in mid and background, get xa1 instead

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2013 at 14:19 UTC as 51st comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

nofumble: At the time I bought the X-E1, I could get an EOS-M with lens for $300.

I am afraid the X-A1 will be another mirror-less camera in crowded field with no product differentiation.

don't know about $300, but with this idea of selling it at Wallmart and Costco as they say about X-A1, I guarantee you will be able to buy the kit at $399 by Xmas. If it hits $299 I'll buy it just to shoot landscapes

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2013 at 06:53 UTC
In reply to:

limlh: A sensible product differentiation for Fujifilm, offering a budget X-series that will compete against the Ricoh GR and Nikon A with the added advantage of interchangeable lens. It looks very nice, but with a Bayer sensor and AA filter, it does not interest me.

Yep, Xtrams canot do green leaves in mid to background, we all know that, but to me personally, the strength of Xtrans is not in landscape shooting, but more in portrait photography, with its realistic skin colors, and ability to retain highlights in fine detail like blonde hair etc.... even in Jpeg. That is why I love XE1 for portrait photography. It does look from photos that Rico Pfeiizenger posted on flicker from XA1 that the 16MP Sony Bayer Sensor of XA1 can do greenery just fine. So one can buy XA1 for landscape and keep one of the XPRO1/E1/M1 for portraits and everything else.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2013 at 06:47 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review preview (2066 comments in total)
In reply to:

Absolutic: I have a question. Ming Thein in his review indicates that EM1 has 14bit Raws http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3830/9666604337_1683037770_o.jpg but Olympus own specs page talks about 12bit. Dpreview team here does not address the bits in its preview. Which is it, does EM1 finally has 14bit capability?

I agree. However, I pre-odered EM1 anyway, I think it will be an awesome camera

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2013 at 21:42 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review preview (2066 comments in total)

I have a question. Ming Thein in his review indicates that EM1 has 14bit Raws http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3830/9666604337_1683037770_o.jpg but Olympus own specs page talks about 12bit. Dpreview team here does not address the bits in its preview. Which is it, does EM1 finally has 14bit capability?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2013 at 18:30 UTC as 409th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

D1N0: Breaking: Rumors hit dpreview! How about the om-d e-m1 rumor? Not enough leaks yet?

I wrote about the same earlier, we've seen EM1 from every angle, with the lens, without the lens, with the grip, in the video, etc. I think EM1 is the most leaked camera ever officially

Direct link | Posted on Sep 7, 2013 at 00:07 UTC
In reply to:

yabokkie: I don't need low quality cameras. but I would prefer if Fujifilm can sell lenses at a little bit reasonable prices.

14/2.8, ~ USD 270, ref. C/N 20/2.8 (avg 553 at amazon.com)
18/2, ~ USD 320, ref. C/N 28/2.8 (avg 390)
23/1.4, ~ USD 390, ref. Canon 35/2 (avg 445)
27/2.8, ~ USD 90, ref. Canon 40/2.8 (199)
35/1.4, ~ USD 180, ref. Nikon 50/1.8G (217)
56/1.2, ~ USD 490, Nikon 85/1.8G (497)
60/2.4, ~ USD 400, ref. Canon 100/2.8 (avg 824)

20/2.8 lenses for SLRs are expensive to make but that's not the fault of mirrorless mounts so no correction is applied.

Yabokkie it is not entirely equivalent. Yes, 35/1.4 is equivalent in terms of depth of field and angle to a full frame 50/1.8. BUT the design of the lens is still a 35/1.4 design. You are designing a 35/1.4 len, not a 50/1.8 lens, with all the physics involved. It is that lens that is designed as 35/1.4 that results in 50/1.8 equvalent. And 35/1.4 lens from most manufacturers costs over $1000 with exception of Sigma ($899). Why do you think the 35/1.4 lens is larger and heavier and has more glass than any 50/1.8 lens for full frame?

The same for all the others. 23/1.4 still requires a design of 24/1.4 lens that are inherently expensive. On the other hand, take 45/1.8 m43 lens. it is pretty cheap to buy, about $300, right. But you get yourself a 90mm equivalent lens. Here you are getting the benefits of the same equasion, it is easy to design a 45/1.8 (or a 50/1.8 lens) so that lens is light, small and cheap

Direct link | Posted on Sep 6, 2013 at 22:55 UTC

Surprised dpreview is not talking about OMD EM1 which photos and video of use have been on the rumors site for weeks. To me it is more exciting than this XA1 release.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 6, 2013 at 21:11 UTC as 54th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Juck: A 16-70mm ZA F4? Now there's an answer to a question no-one asked. Better than nothing for Sony users I guess.

Remember how Zeiss has been telling all along "WE WILL NEVER CREATE A LENS WITH IMAGE STABILIZATION BECAUSE IT NEGATIVELY AFFECT PICTURE QUALITY" what happened?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 06:08 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Real-world Samples article (148 comments in total)
In reply to:

Absolutic: these honestly look very poor. Looks like noise reduction is eating the details like there is no tomorrow on these, I assume all Jpegs. I will reserve my judgement til I see Raw files, but Panasonic once again proves that its jpeg engine truly sucks. Just check out Olympus OMD or Fuji XE1 jpegs for a change

Chris96326, I am glad someone saw exactly the same thing I did.
Vlad, what can I say, lets agree to disagree.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 14, 2013 at 22:54 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Real-world Samples article (148 comments in total)
In reply to:

chris96326: Looks like we will have to be shooting in RAW with the GX7. These JPGs are of poor/horrible quality in the normal ISO ranges. I don't look at the gimmicky ISO ranges that sell cameras, just ISO 100-1600. I will keep my fingers crossed they were processes via software for the web and not straight out of the camera.

Image samples are always hard to decipher, was the shot done to show the camera's dynamic range, color rendering, focus accuracy, etc...?

I agree and wrote pretty much the same below, but a lot of people disagree with me. You wrote exactly the same thing I did.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 14, 2013 at 22:51 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Real-world Samples article (148 comments in total)
In reply to:

Absolutic: these honestly look very poor. Looks like noise reduction is eating the details like there is no tomorrow on these, I assume all Jpegs. I will reserve my judgement til I see Raw files, but Panasonic once again proves that its jpeg engine truly sucks. Just check out Olympus OMD or Fuji XE1 jpegs for a change

Well I will review them again on my iMac when I get home, but on my work computer (which is a PC, yes, but with a 24inch monitor). I did not look at ISO12800 photos because nobody shoots at ISO12800. However, shooting around ISO1600-3200 is relevant and I was looking at ISO2000 and ISO3200 portraits. Specifically the first two photos. I see loss of detail due to noise processing. It is hard for me to compare to OMD at ISO3200 because i don't shoot OMD at JPEG either, I don't like how it renders photographs at higher ISOs in JPEG. However I do shoot OMD in RAW up to ISO3200 and get consistently good photos with lots of detail at ISO3200 which clean up easily in Lightroom. Example http://brodsky.smugmug.com/Events/Birthdays/Lika-2012-at-Romanoff/i-LzcDhng/0/X3/_DBR0124-X3.jpg

Direct link | Posted on Aug 14, 2013 at 22:02 UTC
Total: 223, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »