Poss

Poss

Lives in Canada Richmond Hill, Canada
Has a website at www.studiosolaris.com/blog
Joined on Dec 6, 2002

Comments

Total: 155, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
On First Impressions: Using the Fujifilm X-Pro1 article (228 comments in total)
In reply to:

Andrew Higgins: Fuji are to be applauded for creating their range of high quality X cameras. While the Leica M9 undoubtedly has a certain cachet, and very fine lenses (at a very high price), surely it is the X-Pro 1 that really delivers, and a t a more realistic price too?
For photographers who want to work with an alternative to a dSLR, this must be The camera of the moment. And just think what the X-Pro2 might be like?!

How about a FF Fuji sensor in a M (10?) series camera?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2012 at 23:39 UTC
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

Poss: Not that impressed really with the RAW output at higher ISO. Buying a D800 to down-sample 36MP to D3s level to get close to that kind of performance seems silly (and adding to the length of one's workflow). If you buy one for added cropping then you're NOT getting impressive high ISO performance at all...

Let me put this straight, I KNOW it is not a high ISO camera. My D3s is giving me the files already "down-sampled" with no extra effort needed. The D700 does that too...
And speaking of the D700, mine will have to stay a backup for a while longer till I can justify (then afford) a D4.
The D700 was a lot of camera to almost everyone. The D800 has lost some of this "universality"...Nikon will still sell a boatload of those to people thinking they are getting better then MF results (more power to those people)...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 16:51 UTC
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

Poss: Not that impressed really with the RAW output at higher ISO. Buying a D800 to down-sample 36MP to D3s level to get close to that kind of performance seems silly (and adding to the length of one's workflow). If you buy one for added cropping then you're NOT getting impressive high ISO performance at all...

For some (me, in my particular case) this versatility is more of a hindrance. One more step in post processing will take some time, no matter how minute. When you have lots to post-process (like I have) that time starts to add up and if one runs a business (Like I do) who's going to pay for that time?

I do understand D800's versatility, however it does not apply to me...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 10:35 UTC
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)

Not that impressed really with the RAW output at higher ISO. Buying a D800 to down-sample 36MP to D3s level to get close to that kind of performance seems silly (and adding to the length of one's workflow). If you buy one for added cropping then you're NOT getting impressive high ISO performance at all...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 02:07 UTC as 102nd comment | 4 replies
On Just Posted: Nikon D4 Studio Test Samples article (330 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photogaz: I'm confused. You're all saying the D4 looks better but in my view on RAW mode the D3 looks better. I've checked about 4 different places and the D4 has so much more colour noise.

I think the D3s 's DOF is slightly shifted forward and D4's slightly backward. Better said, one front focuses slightly the other back focuses slightly with the same lens. That's pretty evident (at least to me it is)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2012 at 03:15 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon D4 Studio Test Samples article (330 comments in total)
In reply to:

AshMills: So, they topped up the Martini?

Nah... just some red ink...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2012 at 03:09 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon D4 Studio Test Samples article (330 comments in total)
In reply to:

Apewithacamera: My humble prediction 1D X vs D4/D3s

When the light get really low Nikoners will pack up their gear and head home. Once home they will find a comfy corner, curl up into a little ball so to cry themselves to sleep.
Night night sleep tight. :P

Nothing humble about your prediction...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2012 at 03:05 UTC
On Nikon D4 & D800: What do the Professionals Think? article (391 comments in total)

I'm an Internationally Insignificant Photographer... Does anyone want to hear what I have to say about a camera I yet have to use and most likely won't buy ?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 3, 2012 at 18:34 UTC as 16th comment | 4 replies
On Canon EOS 5D Mark III preview (922 comments in total)

The digital EOS3 people have been praying (and harping) Canon to make.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2012 at 12:00 UTC as 301st comment
On Preview:olympusEM5 (1364 comments in total)
In reply to:

Poss: The '80s are back! In a good way !

Actually the Nikon F system was introduced in 1959...

Posted on Feb 10, 2012 at 11:45 UTC
On Preview:olympusEM5 (1364 comments in total)

The '80s are back! In a good way !

Posted on Feb 9, 2012 at 17:44 UTC as 201st comment | 5 replies
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

Poss: Haven't shot too many weddings, have you Barnaby my friend ?
Haven't got the joy of dark churches where flash use is prohibited (about the majority of them). Event and wedding photogs work in mostly poor lighting conditions where good high ISO performance is a HUGE bonus.

It might not be a bad idea to revisit that paragraph because as it is, it puts a big, Costa Concordia sized gash in this article's credibility.

I don't doubt some wedding pros will use a D800 (me excluded), but it won't replace anyone's trusty D3/D700, especially for those many times a full wedding day when the light ain't all that great.

"as in practise there is little to no correlation between pixel size and noise *for a given area*"

Ummm... what?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 17:33 UTC
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

JDT0505: I sure hope an FX 16MP D400 is in the works.

Hope is the last thing to die... :-)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 06:09 UTC
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

Poss: Haven't shot too many weddings, have you Barnaby my friend ?
Haven't got the joy of dark churches where flash use is prohibited (about the majority of them). Event and wedding photogs work in mostly poor lighting conditions where good high ISO performance is a HUGE bonus.

It might not be a bad idea to revisit that paragraph because as it is, it puts a big, Costa Concordia sized gash in this article's credibility.

I don't doubt some wedding pros will use a D800 (me excluded), but it won't replace anyone's trusty D3/D700, especially for those many times a full wedding day when the light ain't all that great.

Sure, and since we're talking among friends here, why would one need to increase his workflow time for (arguably) better noise in print.
Time = money and in this case more time does not equal more money.
That's commonly considered a bad thing.

The D800 will be picked up by many for its other qualities but won't be picked up for its awesome ISO. I think we should leave it at that.

And I still think big pixels and hi, awesome ISO are very important to most wedding photographers. I'm still one of them...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 06:04 UTC
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

Poss: Haven't shot too many weddings, have you Barnaby my friend ?
Haven't got the joy of dark churches where flash use is prohibited (about the majority of them). Event and wedding photogs work in mostly poor lighting conditions where good high ISO performance is a HUGE bonus.

It might not be a bad idea to revisit that paragraph because as it is, it puts a big, Costa Concordia sized gash in this article's credibility.

I don't doubt some wedding pros will use a D800 (me excluded), but it won't replace anyone's trusty D3/D700, especially for those many times a full wedding day when the light ain't all that great.

Barney, I don't doubt for one second it will sell in the millions, I sure hope Nikon will be able to keep with the demand on this puppy...
I doubt however Nikon's claims of "same per pixel IQ" with the MUCH larger pixel sized D700 (and even less D3s). Technology hasn't changed as much... And in terms of sensor induced diffraction D800's sensor will be , in no uncertain terms, worse.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 05:40 UTC
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

Poss: Haven't shot too many weddings, have you Barnaby my friend ?
Haven't got the joy of dark churches where flash use is prohibited (about the majority of them). Event and wedding photogs work in mostly poor lighting conditions where good high ISO performance is a HUGE bonus.

It might not be a bad idea to revisit that paragraph because as it is, it puts a big, Costa Concordia sized gash in this article's credibility.

I don't doubt some wedding pros will use a D800 (me excluded), but it won't replace anyone's trusty D3/D700, especially for those many times a full wedding day when the light ain't all that great.

So it will have the same lack of noise in print as a 3.5 year old camera... ain't progress great?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 05:33 UTC
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

Louis_Dobson: Take a 36MP file and whack on the NR until it has the same res as a 12MP file. You've just added, what, 2 stops of low light ability? It is 6AM here and my brain is too slow to do the maths. Anyway, the wedding shooters can stop worrying...

I though I'd finished with Nikon FF, smaller format cameras were giving me what I needed, and the D3 was sold last month.

Apparently I haven't finished after all. Where do I sign?

If you're two stops underexposed, no math will save that file. However a B&W conversion might...
I'm not selling my D3s... Nor my old D700...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 05:29 UTC
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

Poss: Haven't shot too many weddings, have you Barnaby my friend ?
Haven't got the joy of dark churches where flash use is prohibited (about the majority of them). Event and wedding photogs work in mostly poor lighting conditions where good high ISO performance is a HUGE bonus.

It might not be a bad idea to revisit that paragraph because as it is, it puts a big, Costa Concordia sized gash in this article's credibility.

I don't doubt some wedding pros will use a D800 (me excluded), but it won't replace anyone's trusty D3/D700, especially for those many times a full wedding day when the light ain't all that great.

Well, the wind in the Digital Wedding Forum seems to be blowing in many directions... When you're earning a living with that, one has to take into account the many hours one's workflow is increased by having to deal with bigger files. Some like the video and the increased cropping potential. Some other like their canvases will print better.... and so on. But NONE of the reactions so far seem to validate your thought that high ISO performance is not affected (along with sensor diffraction) or is NOT important in our particular photography field...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 05:01 UTC
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)

Haven't shot too many weddings, have you Barnaby my friend ?
Haven't got the joy of dark churches where flash use is prohibited (about the majority of them). Event and wedding photogs work in mostly poor lighting conditions where good high ISO performance is a HUGE bonus.

It might not be a bad idea to revisit that paragraph because as it is, it puts a big, Costa Concordia sized gash in this article's credibility.

I don't doubt some wedding pros will use a D800 (me excluded), but it won't replace anyone's trusty D3/D700, especially for those many times a full wedding day when the light ain't all that great.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 04:48 UTC as 406th comment | 13 replies

The truth is one. The lies are many.
Regardless of the medium used, be it words or pixels or whatever.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2012 at 06:01 UTC as 30th comment
Total: 155, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »