PIX 2015
Pixnat2

Pixnat2

Lives in Switzerland Switzerland
Works as a Geographer / Urban Planner
Has a website at http://www.azurphoto.com/
Joined on Feb 22, 2007

Comments

Total: 76, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

samfan: It would be funny if it wasn't coming from a legendary SLR manufacturer that still offers 4/3 DSLR lenses.

Yes I know Olympus has usually made smaller (D)SLRs than the others but still. First they leave their 4/3 customers hanging, now it looks like they're making fun of them...

"now it looks like they're making fun of them..."

Self-mockery is the beginning of wisdom ;-)

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2015 at 15:10 UTC

Funny :-) (People hurted by this need a holiday. I bet they'll smile afterwards)

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2015 at 09:02 UTC as 76th comment
In reply to:

Weia: Distortion of the 7-14 seems to be better corrected than in my old Oly 7-14. Would like to read more about distortion of this beast.

Don't forget that m4/3 lenses rely heavily on software correction. We should wait for Photozone or Lenstip review before making a judgement.

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 13:15 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)

To make your own mind, you should read this :
http://www.eoshd.com/2015/04/canon-xc10-should-you-buy-one/
Canon is certainly not targetting mass maket with this camera. But nor it is targetting aspiring filmmakers or enthusiasts.
A kind of niche hybrid for multimedia journalists? I wonder if it will sell with all the competiton around...
Wait and see.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 08:40 UTC as 139th comment
On 2014 Readers' Polls: The results are in! article (376 comments in total)
In reply to:

Everlast66: The time is up, so I guess it is a tie between A7 II and D750 then.

I still think the D750 was lucky to get that position as the poll is inherently unfairly set up, probably because it was not fully thought through by DPR.

If a company makes one good product in a year (Nikon in this case) and it makes it into this final round it has an unfair advantage, because it will concentrate votes, that are to a large extent brand motivated.

Other companies (Fuji and Sony in this case) that make more good products that year, and they get to this round, will end up being at a disadvantage, because their votes will be split between several entries.

Another fact that undermines the result to some extent is that, this same product of the year, D750, was withdrawn from the market due to having faults, and even more worryingly, still not for sale in many markets, including the US.

What product of the year could the D750 be if it is withdrawn from the market for faults and currently not for sale?

What makes you think that votes are brand motivated?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 1, 2015 at 13:28 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 rumored to be out of production article (211 comments in total)

Certainly one of the most important and venerable (Olympus) camera in history. It will become a classic like the OM-1, OM-4 and E-1.
This camera alone allowed Olympus to recover in the digital business, boosted the MILC popularity, and still make the delights of thousands of photographers around the World.
A true milsetone in photography.
So I think it deserves this headline, at least.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 15, 2014 at 10:36 UTC as 43rd comment
In reply to:

timo: There's something not quite right about some of those samples. Surely the softness away from the centre can't be inherent in the lens design? Having downloaded some of the originals and looked at them on my large iMac screen, some of them are awful. And definitely there are some where one side is quite noticeably softer than the other. Just to make sure I was not imagining things, I then looked at some X20 shots I took today. Honestly, I think the X20/X30 lens performs better. Where the LX100 is sharp in the middle, it's probably better. But taking the image area overall, I am not at all sure. Oh dear. And I don't think it's only a question of jpg vs raw.

The lens has probably a huge barrel distortion that needs to be corrected by software. m4/3 owners are used to that. But it seems to be really heavy with the LX100.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 6, 2014 at 15:57 UTC
In reply to:

Realll: Just saw the review of Photographyblog. Even my LX7 does better.

http://www.photographyblog.com/previews/panasonic_lumix_dmc_lx100_photos/

That confirms the corner softness at wide angle.
It probably comes from the lens distortion correction (done by software), as with some m4/3 lenses.
Seems that the camera specs were a bit too ambitious...

Direct link | Posted on Oct 6, 2014 at 15:53 UTC

The Panasonic GF1 (2009!) gave better jpegs.
Plus the lens is surprisingly soft in the corners at wide angle.
The GM1/GM5 (or any m4/3 camera) are a much better bet for those who wants good IQ.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 6, 2014 at 13:55 UTC as 84th comment

I think this comparaison makes a lot of sense, and I welcome it.

Nowadays, IQ difference between FF, APS-C and 4/3 has become negligible. All those sensor formats are suitable for enthusiast and professional use.
The choice of a camera today should no more focus on mere "sensor size", but on camera functionalities and handling, lenses avaliable and format specificities.

So thanks DPR, articles like this would allow some people's minds to evolve.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2014 at 16:48 UTC as 181st comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

Marty4650: It may be unrealistic for anyone to expect revolutionary leaps and bounds from a mature technology.

Digital Imaging is now a mature technology, and we can expect much more of this evolutionary continuous improvement in new models. This might give us very little reason to replace last year's model, but will be wonderful for first time buyers, people switching systems, and people who upgrade every five to ten years. They will be shocked by the sum total of all the small improvements combined.

Just like with cars, no one expects the 2015 Toyota Corolla to be very much better than the 2014 Toyota Corolla, but we all know it will be much nicer (and much more expensive) than a 2003 Toyota Corolla.

John,
Furious updates cycles in mirorrless is already over. It was there from 2009 to 2012, but now all mirrorless cameras have similar IQ. The IQ difference between 1', 4/3 and APS-C sensor is small nowadays, so is the IQ difference between the best APS-C and FF
I don't think current technology can go much further in DR dept.
You have a point for video, which is THE segment where room for improvement exist. But 4K is already overkill for casual shooters, who are the frequent upgraders. Add to that the present big drop in sales due to smartphones concurrence, which means losses for traditional Photography companies, the bad state of World Economy, and you'll have all the ingredients for a big slowdown.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 30, 2014 at 18:24 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: It may be unrealistic for anyone to expect revolutionary leaps and bounds from a mature technology.

Digital Imaging is now a mature technology, and we can expect much more of this evolutionary continuous improvement in new models. This might give us very little reason to replace last year's model, but will be wonderful for first time buyers, people switching systems, and people who upgrade every five to ten years. They will be shocked by the sum total of all the small improvements combined.

Just like with cars, no one expects the 2015 Toyota Corolla to be very much better than the 2014 Toyota Corolla, but we all know it will be much nicer (and much more expensive) than a 2003 Toyota Corolla.

@ John C Tharp
Of course "this isn't it". There still will be significant leaps and bounds ahead in Photography, but at a much slower pace than in the previous 15 years. The cycle of updates has already slowed considerably, as current technology is now mature.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 30, 2014 at 08:45 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: It may be unrealistic for anyone to expect revolutionary leaps and bounds from a mature technology.

Digital Imaging is now a mature technology, and we can expect much more of this evolutionary continuous improvement in new models. This might give us very little reason to replace last year's model, but will be wonderful for first time buyers, people switching systems, and people who upgrade every five to ten years. They will be shocked by the sum total of all the small improvements combined.

Just like with cars, no one expects the 2015 Toyota Corolla to be very much better than the 2014 Toyota Corolla, but we all know it will be much nicer (and much more expensive) than a 2003 Toyota Corolla.

Well said. This maturity is wecomed IMHO.
The funny thing is that it will take some time for people used to constant upgrades to adapt this new situation.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2014 at 07:25 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3: Real-world Sample Images article (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aspenz: Don't like it, don't buy it, simple as.

The IQ is pretty decent and high iso has improved. I've never seen a difference between the M43 and N1 images anyway apart from iso, and it's more or less equal now. If anything, the Olympus cameras have sharpening haloes and M43 in general has poor rendition of highlights. It's funny when the M43 crowd equate themselves with APS-C or worse still FF, when there clearly is a difference.

And as good as these are they're still jpegs. If you know what you're doing with the raw files there's lots of details to be gotten.

Aspenz:
That's not an opinion but a fact.
Anyway, that's cool if you're happy with the N1.
The most important is not the gear, but the pictures taken with it. In the right hands, the N1 is capable of wonderful results, I have no doubts.
Cheers!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 07:56 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3: Real-world Sample Images article (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aspenz: Don't like it, don't buy it, simple as.

The IQ is pretty decent and high iso has improved. I've never seen a difference between the M43 and N1 images anyway apart from iso, and it's more or less equal now. If anything, the Olympus cameras have sharpening haloes and M43 in general has poor rendition of highlights. It's funny when the M43 crowd equate themselves with APS-C or worse still FF, when there clearly is a difference.

And as good as these are they're still jpegs. If you know what you're doing with the raw files there's lots of details to be gotten.

Aspenz, Howabout RAW:
The N1 system has made very nice jump in IQ since the beginning. But the rest of photographic industry didn't stayed still too.
The current 1 sensor have now reached more or less the level of the first 12Mpix m4/3 sensor, which is quiet an achievement (it has even better DR and resolution).
But the last m4/3 sensors have much better IQ, no contest.
The N1 system has its own strong points (AF, fps, acess to Nikon lenses,...). It's near ideal for birders.
But in pure IQ, it's behind other mirrorless systems.
More of a concern for N1 users is the Sony DSC-RX100 MIII : smaller, cheaper and better IQ.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 07:28 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3: Real-world Sample Images article (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aspenz: Don't like it, don't buy it, simple as.

The IQ is pretty decent and high iso has improved. I've never seen a difference between the M43 and N1 images anyway apart from iso, and it's more or less equal now. If anything, the Olympus cameras have sharpening haloes and M43 in general has poor rendition of highlights. It's funny when the M43 crowd equate themselves with APS-C or worse still FF, when there clearly is a difference.

And as good as these are they're still jpegs. If you know what you're doing with the raw files there's lots of details to be gotten.

That's not true. FWIW, take a look at the dpreview comparometer : m4/3 and APS-C are pretty similar, Nikon 1 is clearly behind.

Those images are good, but the Nikon 1 IQ is on the advanced compact league, not m4/3 or APS-C.

That said, Nikon 1 has a great advantage in AF and 20fps, pretty impressive.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2014 at 08:20 UTC
In reply to:

Pixnat2: My Canon 5D was plagued with dust, I had to pay to clean it.
My Nikon D600 will be forever free to clean.

Lifetime cleaning warranty, how can't I be happy? :-)

No problem, I have 2 other cameras which don't need to be cleaned, thanks m4/3 :-)
Life's beautiful ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 16:57 UTC

My Canon 5D was plagued with dust, I had to pay to clean it.
My Nikon D600 will be forever free to clean.

Lifetime cleaning warranty, how can't I be happy? :-)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 15:44 UTC as 40th comment | 3 replies
On DxOMark recommends best lenses for the Nikon D800E article (72 comments in total)

Amazing performance of the Nikon AF-S 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5G ED!
Best bang for the bucks for landscapes.

Direct link | Posted on May 22, 2014 at 17:38 UTC as 20th comment | 2 replies
On Little beauty: Nordin Seruyan's macro images article (352 comments in total)
In reply to:

DStudio: I think people are misunderstanding which ethics are important here. The treatment of the animals - while important - is a red herring. The real ethical issue is of deceiving viewers by making up stories, telling them that these fabricated pictures are journalistic in nature. Nordin used these tricks to become more popular, allowing these stories to remain in the popular press for years before saying anything.

Now that he's published a preponderance of similar images - too many to be coincidental and naturally occurring - he's got a new story. We can only presume that his "new truth" is in fact half-truths.

Yup, that's the kind of story I teach to my chidren to prevent lies.

But I say them also :
Who wants to blow another's nose must have clean fingers...

Everybody should be given a chance to redeem.

M Seruyan was honest in his replies here, that what counts. Not what he has done before.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2014 at 08:23 UTC
Total: 76, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »