Absolutic

Absolutic

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

Comments

Total: 230, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
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
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Real-world Samples article (148 comments in total)

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

Direct link | Posted on Aug 14, 2013 at 20:35 UTC as 29th comment | 12 replies
On Just posted: Pentax MX-1 review article (101 comments in total)

Boy...these were the most how should I say it nicely.... uninspiring samples ever from you guys. What happened to gorgeous London samples of yester years. Seattle is just not that picture-friendly? If there are no more interesting subjects to shoot, at least find some attractive people to take pictures of!!!! Sorry if I sound harsh, but I used to love the samples when they came from London. These days I don't even want to open the samples anymore.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2013 at 01:35 UTC as 25th comment | 5 replies
On Just posted: Olympus Tough TG-2 iHS Review preview (106 comments in total)
In reply to:

Albino_BlacMan: Has DPR reviewed a camera that hasn't gotten at least a silver award in the last 2 years?

Awards lose their meaning a bit when everyone gets them...

I only pay attention to gold awards, not to silver awards. By the way, Dpreview, I think it is time to institute platinum awards for absolutely exceptional cameras and lenses (Score 85 and higher)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2013 at 22:32 UTC

yep, the million dollar question if, did they fixed the AF to make it like 14/2.5 which is very fast and silent. I don't see why not, if they can do 14/2.5 that way, they surely can do 20/1.7. If AF is fast, I am buying it 100%, it is a no-brainer.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 27, 2013 at 04:46 UTC as 45th comment

read in imaging-resource.com preview, a site i generally trust:

"Worryingly, we're led to believe that the Fuji X-M1's autofocus system will not be as fast as that in the X-E1. Hopefully that will turn out not to be the case"

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/fuji-x-m1/fuji-x-m1A.HTM

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2013 at 02:44 UTC as 36th comment
In reply to:

Chaitanya S: I was expecting this lens to cost twice as much. But kudos to Sigma for such an aggressive pricing.

Sigma is moving in a right direction unlike Leica with its latest fiasco

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2013 at 06:24 UTC
In reply to:

technotic: Did dpreview miss off a zero?

This can ironically help Nikon and Canon to sell more crop-sensored cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2013 at 06:22 UTC

crop crowd just had an orgasmic moment

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2013 at 06:18 UTC as 124th comment
On Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Preview preview (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

wansai: There is no way this is coming in at $1000. I'm going to guess around the $1800+ mark, possibly in the $2000 range.

yep $799, you can preorder at B&H already

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2013 at 05:37 UTC
In reply to:

ppastoris: Just to put that into perspective, Olympus 45 f/1.8 on a m4/3 camera gives you comparable capabilities (90 f/3.6 equiv.) for half the price. :)

more like a third of the price.

Direct link | Posted on May 14, 2013 at 04:42 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon D7100 in-depth review article (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

driftnomore: look at the high ISOs, it does not fall short off the competition, DPR. you just publish the images in the gallery...look again at those high ISO images... time to upgrade my venerable
D90.

That is incorrect because your 24mp camera is not noisy at pixel level at base ISo and close to it and u can easily print large and sharp photos and u can pixel peep all u want. Ur 8mp camera won't be able to do it. It is at high isos only that ur argument about down sampling may make sense. Do u always shoot in low light only ? U don't shoot outside or with a flash? Then I suggest u need a full frame body

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2013 at 14:18 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon D7100 in-depth review article (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bram de Mooij: I wonder if the 51 point AF system is any better or equivalent to the system in my D300. I still wonder if it is worth 'upgrading' my D300 to D7100.

I bought a D5200 recently because of the swivel LCD and low weight compared to the D300, but I am in doubt of buying a D600 or D7100.
(Also own OM-D plus prime lenses).
Build in GPS and proper wifi remote options would mean a lot to me, but that seems a bit besides the point, since D5200, D600 and D7100 are all the same in this respect.

Well not just AF system. I used to own d300 and shot EVERYThing with it from weddings to vacations and thought it was the best thing since sliced bread. About 6 month ago I had an opportunity to pick up a used d300 and it was a revelation: the noise in low light is so high comparing to modern bodies! I could not believe it. What was amazing in 2007 is not as good in 2013. I sold off that body very quickly. Even d7000 has much better sensor And obviously d7100

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2013 at 14:12 UTC
In reply to:

RudivanS: Which camera and lenses?

They have always used Canon 40D and Sigma 8-16 combo on all their previous adventures, so I assume they used the same this time. You can actually see it in some of the videos of their previous climbs

Direct link | Posted on Mar 27, 2013 at 14:12 UTC
Total: 230, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »