kadardr

kadardr

Joined on Jan 22, 2012

Comments

Total: 227, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

I don't have a Sony right now, I just have a question: why do have the A7s and the two other A7's different mounts. Why the s version is heavy duty and the others are not? Something is not adding up here.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 18, 2014 at 17:22 UTC as 43rd comment | 9 replies
On Nikon D750 real-world samples gallery posted article (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: How about using this 20mm on a DX body?

Like 30 mm on a FF body. (roughly like 28mm) For DX the 13mm lenses are equivalent with FF 20mm.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2014 at 15:25 UTC
On Nikon D750 real-world samples gallery posted article (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

SkilakDeZoo: I cannot see anything I would say WOW e.g. based on D750-DSC_1434-ISO_100.acr picture, full size, which was taken with a prime 200mm at F2.0, I hardly can say where the AF point was hold or even notice the DoF. The pictures taken with F8 -11, a time wasting to comment. Most of the pictures are what I can get from D7100 except the size. I only perceive FF better with regards to DoF / frame size ratio over APS-C and somehow noise, is there anything else? If the AF point array is the same as D7100 then nothing to rave about.

You are right. FF does not give you an advantage just in shadow noise and high iso noise. Very shallow DOF can even have a negative effect on your composition.
Focal length was 20 (twenty) mm at F2 aperture.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2014 at 15:04 UTC
On Nikon D750 real-world samples gallery posted article (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

kadardr: I just would not dare to use a 20mm lens extensively in such subject matters. 20mm can be addictive though, but I hate to see human bodies distorted in any ways.

Thanks Rishi, you are a great educator. I carefully read all your comments and found them very useful. I recommend everybody to read all Rishi's comments in this thread. Although I still prefer human bodies only in the middle of images taken with UWA lenses, and in a lesser distorting distance (as a compromise to what I wrote above).

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2014 at 11:33 UTC
On Nikon D750 real-world samples gallery posted article (316 comments in total)

I just would not dare to use a 20mm lens extensively in such subject matters. 20mm can be addictive though, but I hate to see human bodies distorted in any ways.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2014 at 04:41 UTC as 34th comment | 3 replies
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1661 comments in total)
In reply to:

samhain: It escaped me at first, what the 'see impossible' phrase reminded me of.
But now i remember: sony's 'Make.Believe'.
Is it just me or is Canon's new catch phrase clearly a bad knock-off?

What about 'Think different.'?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 8, 2014 at 20:31 UTC
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1661 comments in total)
In reply to:

biza43: I think that a message that aims to inspire and challenge people to boost their creativity in imaging, is lost amongst the techno nerds and equipment focused inhabitants of Dpreview...

Have people actually seen the work that is featured in the microsite? Quite inspiring, but that's me, I much prefer to see the work of other photographers and imagers, than discussing frustrations and blaming equipment for my failures...

@falconeyes: the campaign reminds me the "Think different" campaign of Apple, just without the beef (so far to put it positively). The real problem must be at the executive level decisions at Canon. Actually the zero tolerance development (no fail) means no development at all. They have to show up with something and now.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 8, 2014 at 09:48 UTC
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1661 comments in total)

When the management of a corporation approves such campaign, that is is a strong signal for the shareholders (and for the customers), that it needs a major fundamental reorganisation. Advertising as core value which is clearly not, means they are losing their core values.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 8, 2014 at 03:47 UTC as 166th comment
In reply to:

jackspra: Some shots look way out of focus to me.The cork being one.

You do not know what you are talking about. Have you heard about the concept of bokeh?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 17:48 UTC

1. This is a fixed lens compact, nothing to compare to a MILC with any prime.
2. Judging preproduction jpegs as a serious quality measure does not provide justice to any camera.
3. It seems that Lumix cameras are generally underrated, or as another explanation: Olympus cameras are generally overrated.
4. LX100 must have a very good handling, it seems like a joy to use.
5. If you want physical control and usable LCD size you cannot miniaturize more. Or buy a Google Glass.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 17:45 UTC as 121st comment | 3 replies

At amateur level you buy an LX100 and an FZ1000 and you have everything you can imagine. The problem comes with large prints only.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2014 at 13:51 UTC as 66th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

mosava: I bought aSony A6000...

And you will miss the handling of the LX100

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2014 at 08:05 UTC
On Photokina 2014: Quiet but significant article (165 comments in total)
In reply to:

G1Houston: I am a long time Nikon user and have incorporated m4/3 into my system for its good IQ and compact size. However to photograph my kids, I am now mostly using the almost 3 year old D7100 which is just a blast to use — it is fast, with excellent IQ, and its focus tracking is outstanding. Now Nikon has put a state-of-the-art FF sensor in a body that is even lighter than the D7100 with even better AF and metering system, all for just a little bit over $2,000. I thus wonder what is the advantage of the mirrorless system that dpreview and others seem to promote it as the future of photography? Take A7 as an example, you can make the camera only that small before handling becomes a real problem and its lenses are not substantially smaller than those of Nikon/Canon, and are certainly very expensive. What is the advantage of the mirrorless — why does IT have to be the future?

All I was saying: Do not believe the hype. Do not think that the one holy grail is this or that. Do not think that there is one and only one camera system that solves everything. Try out several systems and use them what they made for. Accept that with the newest systems you also buying into their problems. And firesales show the real cost structure of mirrorless: A7 for 999, nex 6 for 400 bucks. That is the time when you should buy. Cameras are disposable now like smartphones.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 28, 2014 at 05:43 UTC
On Photokina 2014: Quiet but significant article (165 comments in total)
In reply to:

G1Houston: I am a long time Nikon user and have incorporated m4/3 into my system for its good IQ and compact size. However to photograph my kids, I am now mostly using the almost 3 year old D7100 which is just a blast to use — it is fast, with excellent IQ, and its focus tracking is outstanding. Now Nikon has put a state-of-the-art FF sensor in a body that is even lighter than the D7100 with even better AF and metering system, all for just a little bit over $2,000. I thus wonder what is the advantage of the mirrorless system that dpreview and others seem to promote it as the future of photography? Take A7 as an example, you can make the camera only that small before handling becomes a real problem and its lenses are not substantially smaller than those of Nikon/Canon, and are certainly very expensive. What is the advantage of the mirrorless — why does IT have to be the future?

@mcslsk: Blurry answer. The real answer: MILC manufacturers invest a lot into concept PR, and it has an effect. Maybe not enough effect in your view. I have MILC and DSLR. And I heard a million times that MILC is the future. Everybody starts to believe it. IQ-wise no difference. Cost wise: MILCs are cheaper to produce: that is why it is the future.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 27, 2014 at 06:20 UTC

There is really important information in this interview:
1. On sensor PDAF is difficult to improve to the level of present DSLR modules. My bet is on algorithms and processing power as problems, but there could be other hurdles too.
2. The new high megapixel sensor generation is upcoming next year.
3. Mirrorless development is ongoing and new camera(s) is also shortly upcoming (hopefully more serious than an M3 would be)
4. From his comments on sensor technology it seems Canon is proud of its color rendering more then low ISO DR. They have no other choice so far. Looks like a manufacturing hurdle .
As we all know the Japanese culture is more about continuous bit by bit improvements than about disruptive innovation. The latter is generally not coming from Japan.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 08:20 UTC as 63rd comment | 2 replies
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (612 comments in total)
In reply to:

kadardr: A new market segment would be if Fujifilm put a 24Mp Sony sensor in it. Also the sensor could be tested by DxOMark, and could be used with ACR processing after raw shooting. I wonder how many would sell of which...

Thanks for the answers. It was worth to ask the question.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 04:01 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (612 comments in total)
In reply to:

kadardr: A new market segment would be if Fujifilm put a 24Mp Sony sensor in it. Also the sensor could be tested by DxOMark, and could be used with ACR processing after raw shooting. I wonder how many would sell of which...

That's the point. I meant the 24-mp sensor with Bayer array. Would solve the headache for many fence sitters.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2014 at 10:56 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (612 comments in total)

A new market segment would be if Fujifilm put a 24Mp Sony sensor in it. Also the sensor could be tested by DxOMark, and could be used with ACR processing after raw shooting. I wonder how many would sell of which...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2014 at 09:48 UTC as 28th comment | 11 replies
In reply to:

Zeisschen: So finally a DSLR that is almost on mirrorless standards in terms of AF accuracy and FPS. If it wouldn't be 2 times the size and weight to achieve that, it would actually be an exiting camera...
But sorry, it's 2014 Canon!! If you didn't have the large user base and lens selection, nobody would buy it for that prize!

Sony is just about to abandon A mount system altogether. They are tried and trusted on abandoning.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 03:37 UTC
On Nikon D750: What you need to know article (107 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stephan Def: Thanks I really enjoyed your "cheet sheet" its good to have concise summarys like that one.

You say:
"but judging by the amount of energy Nikon is putting into creating affordable FX optics" ...

Which affordable FX optics are you talking about? And can you say a word or two about their quality. It would be good to have kind of a quality index for FX lenses. The only FX lens that comes to my mind is the 24-70 2.8, which is kind of expensive, However it does not have OIS, which is a shame for a lens in that price range. If Nikon wants to convince people to move to FX they need to get much more serious about their lens lineup in that area. Alternatively Nikon could put OIS into their bodies, which would solve most of those issues and other Vendors are just that.

As example, what about the 1.8G prime line? Or 70-300 VR?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 12:12 UTC
Total: 227, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »