Absolutic

Absolutic

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

Comments

Total: 194, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
On Dpreview Users' Poll: Best Camera of 2012? article (1514 comments in total)
In reply to:

Steve1307: My vote Pentax K-5IIs (not on list)

D800E nice IQ but is too expensive and too heavy
5D MkIII is just a more expensive MkII that can AF better
OM-D EM-5 pretty design but again too expensive because of the fashion statement so lower value for money.

OM-D you can have refurb for $799, and recently on Olympus Store 1 Day Sale was in $600 range, not sure what you mean by too expensive

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2012 at 04:03 UTC
On Dpreview Users' Poll: Best Camera of 2012? article (1514 comments in total)

Olympus OM-D clearly. Hopefully it wins (right now is the second)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2012 at 03:56 UTC as 620th comment
In reply to:

Absolutic: The summary of first reviews, per mu-43 forum is
Premium construction and snapshot focus like the M. Zuiko 12mm f/2 lens
Very similar MTF curves to M. Zuiko 12mm f/2 lens
Fast and essentially silent AF
Good but not superior sharpness across the frame - slightly behind the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 in terms of center sharpness
Very well controlled axial CA - meaning very little purple fringing compared to most fast wides (including the Panasonic 14mm and 20mm primes) and minimal green bokeh fringing
Very pleasing bokeh character (subjective/opinion)
Probably field curvature, optimized for medium-far working distances, thus giving poorer edge sharpness at close range with flat targets
Significant barrel distortion which will be a non-issue for most people since it is automatically addressed in camera and by leading RAW processing apps

I am personally concerned that first reviews suggest it is soft wide open unlike 45/1.8, 75/1.8 and 12/2.0, and needs to be stopped down a little

Well 12/F.2 you are talking about just a couple hundred dollars from 75/1.8.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 15, 2012 at 22:49 UTC
In reply to:

Absolutic: The summary of first reviews, per mu-43 forum is
Premium construction and snapshot focus like the M. Zuiko 12mm f/2 lens
Very similar MTF curves to M. Zuiko 12mm f/2 lens
Fast and essentially silent AF
Good but not superior sharpness across the frame - slightly behind the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 in terms of center sharpness
Very well controlled axial CA - meaning very little purple fringing compared to most fast wides (including the Panasonic 14mm and 20mm primes) and minimal green bokeh fringing
Very pleasing bokeh character (subjective/opinion)
Probably field curvature, optimized for medium-far working distances, thus giving poorer edge sharpness at close range with flat targets
Significant barrel distortion which will be a non-issue for most people since it is automatically addressed in camera and by leading RAW processing apps

I am personally concerned that first reviews suggest it is soft wide open unlike 45/1.8, 75/1.8 and 12/2.0, and needs to be stopped down a little

Yes, the photos look amazing, Now I have to think if I really need to address that focal length... I already have 25/1.4 and 45/1.8 and 7-14, so I am not sure if I need the 17/1.8

Direct link | Posted on Nov 15, 2012 at 18:08 UTC

The summary of first reviews, per mu-43 forum is
Premium construction and snapshot focus like the M. Zuiko 12mm f/2 lens
Very similar MTF curves to M. Zuiko 12mm f/2 lens
Fast and essentially silent AF
Good but not superior sharpness across the frame - slightly behind the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 in terms of center sharpness
Very well controlled axial CA - meaning very little purple fringing compared to most fast wides (including the Panasonic 14mm and 20mm primes) and minimal green bokeh fringing
Very pleasing bokeh character (subjective/opinion)
Probably field curvature, optimized for medium-far working distances, thus giving poorer edge sharpness at close range with flat targets
Significant barrel distortion which will be a non-issue for most people since it is automatically addressed in camera and by leading RAW processing apps

I am personally concerned that first reviews suggest it is soft wide open unlike 45/1.8, 75/1.8 and 12/2.0, and needs to be stopped down a little

Direct link | Posted on Nov 15, 2012 at 14:47 UTC as 40th comment | 5 replies
On Just Posted: Nikon D600 In-depth Review article (499 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gasman66: I investigated this camera thoroughly before I bought my 5DmkIII. The D800 and 5DMkIII seemed too much camera for me, and I didn't want to wait around for the 6D. I really enjoyed my day with the D600, BUT - the autofocus really does suck. For street photography it was hopeless, and I can't begin to imagine how frustrating it would be for sports. Even acknowledging this camera's market niche, it should've lost more points because of this. The gold score is too high.

"Popular Photography" magazine have just released what I would consider a more balanced review of the D600. My advice? If you are a serious amateur, and can afford it, go for a D800 or 5DMkIII.

it is not just Popular Photography. Digitalrev did their comparison of D600 vs D800 vs 5DM3 (boxing in not even low light) and found the AF performance of D600 frustrating. Here is the video - check for yourself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdqpqOoeBQM&feature=g-user-u

I guess dpreview is in disagreement with all these reviews

Direct link | Posted on Nov 14, 2012 at 07:28 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon D600 In-depth Review article (499 comments in total)
In reply to:

ron purdy: When I have tried this camera, AF has been miserably slow and inaccurate every time.
There were times when I would hold my finger down on the shutter button for a full second or two before the focus even started working at all.

There is NO WAY I would want to use this camera to shoot indoors for that reason alone.

(IQ looks very good though.)

digitalrev review of shooting in low light (boxing) tells exact same story as you are http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdqpqOoeBQM&feature=g-user-u poor AF performance, and it was not even that low of a light. D800 and 5DM3 both did much better in their real life testing

Direct link | Posted on Nov 14, 2012 at 07:25 UTC
On Metabones adds autofocus to Canon-NEX adapter article (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

AngryCorgi: 2006+??

That excludes all of the Canon 50mm Primes except the 50L...excludes the excellent 85/1.8 USM, the 100/2 USM, the 28/1.8 USM, the 135L, the 200L, the 60/2.8 EF-s USM...

Basically, just a bunch of modern superzooms and mega-expensive lenses can be used...Who wants this thing?

The Chinese ones on ebay include all the other 50s. For example, scroll down to see the list here http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-EF-EF-S-lens-to-Sony-NEX-E-adapter-AF-AUTOFOCUS-IS-APERTURE-NEX7-FS700-/360509211176?pt=US_Lens_Adapters_Mounts_Tubes&hash=item53f0060228

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2012 at 22:43 UTC
On Metabones adds autofocus to Canon-NEX adapter article (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

SHood: They say it will be slower then EOS-M. nough said.

Richard have you guys at dpreview heard anything about EOS to m43 adapter with AF??? I would love to use my L lenses on my OM-D

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2012 at 22:41 UTC
On Metabones adds autofocus to Canon-NEX adapter article (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

cseiler: $399 ????!!! Whouahahahahahahahhhhhhaaaaahahah...

What do they do? Cut the mount out of Rebel bodies?

it is less than $300 for chinese adapters that have been selling on ebay for a while already with AF. Old news

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2012 at 20:54 UTC
On Metabones adds autofocus to Canon-NEX adapter article (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Wow! Now this is a big deal if everything they say is true.

Old news, Chinese copies have been selling on ebay for a while

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2012 at 18:06 UTC
On Metabones adds autofocus to Canon-NEX adapter article (63 comments in total)

The Chinese ones on ebay have been selling for $298, a $100 cheaper FYI. Just search for EOS AF Adapter on ebay, there are several types.

My question is when are they going to make one for m43? is there less market for m43??? I'd buy one for $200 to AF my L lenses on my OM-D.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2012 at 18:05 UTC as 26th comment
In reply to:

Octane: I don't understand the obsession with who manufactures the sensor. Looking at the DxO tests Nikon has 6 cameras in the top 10 list. Canon, who makes their own sensor, has one in 10th place. And that one camera is their most expensive one, while the D600 is the most affordable full frame camera today.
Nikon is smart, they pick the best from different suppliers and put it together as an amazing camera. That's what made the difference for them in the past 6 years where people thought they were hopelessly behind to now being the top quality SLR producer.

Because Nikon loves to tell that they make their own sensors or that they' redesign sensors, which is B.S.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2012 at 18:54 UTC

Well their 50/1.4 is also huge, much larger than both Canon or Nikon counterpart, with 77mm filter size. I used to own one in Nikon frame, I think it is way too large for the 50. Now this 35 though looks quite compact. I sold off my Canon 35L on rumors that Canon was going to update it to 35L II as the old 35L is old. Are there sample pictures on the new Sigma available anywhere?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2012 at 09:55 UTC as 54th comment | 1 reply
On Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM preview article (152 comments in total)

I own the amazing 24-70 F/2.8 II, a lens which, many say, is sharper than most primes. I received it in a trade so it cost me at most $1800, but even at a listed $2299 price, those that can afford $1500 I think can squeeze $2300 for that gem of a lens. 24-105L was always clearly differentiated by its price (around $800 in a kit, about $750-850 used, $1090 new today). This new 24-70 is essentially the same weight as 24-105 so it is not much lighter. It is a little shorter. But you are losing 35mm of length!!!!!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 6, 2012 at 22:08 UTC as 30th comment

Blown highlights I see....

Direct link | Posted on Nov 3, 2012 at 04:41 UTC as 44th comment | 1 reply

once you add the price of the tripod collar, how much cheaper is it than the 2.8 version that already comes with a collar??? You can also get 70-200 F/2.8 VR I used for $1300-1400.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 04:24 UTC as 88th comment

What's the Flash X-sync rate on this camera, dpreview??????

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 04:12 UTC as 284th comment
On Coming soon: Lens Reviews to return to dpreview.com article (274 comments in total)
In reply to:

MPA1: I hope you'll be asking Ken Rockwell in as a Guest Reviewer. ;-)

wow, thank you MPA1 for a dose of laughter this morning

Direct link | Posted on Oct 3, 2012 at 16:13 UTC
On Coming soon: Lens Reviews to return to dpreview.com article (274 comments in total)
In reply to:

EmmanuelStarchild: I'm a little confused here. Dxo pretty much slammed the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II, while you guys gave it your 'gold' award. How exactly is the merging of your reviews going to rectify such a huge difference of opinion?

I for one disagree with DXO results very often. By the way I agree with Dpreview on 70-200 F/2.8 IS II that it is THE BEST 70-200 lens across all manufacturers. Andrew was right and DXO as their conclusions often are, was dead wrong.

By the way, photozone slammed the new 24-70 F/2.8L II while Roger Cicala said it was incredible.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 3, 2012 at 16:10 UTC
Total: 194, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »