kadardr

kadardr

Joined on Jan 22, 2012

Comments

Total: 300, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Fujifilm announces X-A2 with selfie-friendly LCD article (132 comments in total)

Fujifilm X-A1/A2 with a Zeiss Touit lens is as good as a Leica X. With a kit lens its like an X Vario. May be better. But no one buys Leica for image quality so whatever.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2015 at 12:20 UTC as 21st comment | 12 replies
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1458 comments in total)

There is difference between FF and APS-C in use, which was not mentioned in the article. FF cameras has better high ISO performance and better DR. In general FF DR is one stop better than DR of APS-C cameras. High ISO can be 2-2.5 stop better with FF (ISO 12800 is good with FF, but APS-C can show the same quality at ISO 3200 at best). FF sensors can show less chroma noise in deep shadows, when elevated.
The color sensitivity/depth is better at least one stop favoring FF. Better subject isolation you can get with FF size. In general, bokeh is function of absolute and not relative focal length, absolute and not relative aperture setting and the subject distance. With APS-C cameras you can have the same image quality if you know, what you are doing, but you need more light.
APS-C may give you better reach, smaller lenses for the same angle of view, and generally less total weight of gear.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2015 at 18:33 UTC as 107th comment | 1 reply
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1458 comments in total)
In reply to:

kadardr: Difference between FF and APS-C:
In favor of FF:
One stop better DR. ISO 12800 with FF is fine, ISO 6400 with APS-C can be rescued if you have to.
Less than one stop better color sensitivity/depth.
Better subject isolation (bokeh is function of absolute not relative focal length, absolute and not relative aperture setting and subject distance.
In favor of APS-C: better reach (300mm FF lens = 450mm relative focal length in APS-C). In other words smaller lenses/focal length for the same angle of view.
That is all. FF and APS-C can coexist. A combo of Canon 7DMII/6D or Nikon D400/D750 (just a dream) are very viable options with well selected 5-8 lenses altogether (by combo). These are missing sorely from the article.

@SirSeth: Please refer to Ming Thein's blog before you make up on your dream combos.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 14:30 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1458 comments in total)
In reply to:

kadardr: Difference between FF and APS-C:
In favor of FF:
One stop better DR. ISO 12800 with FF is fine, ISO 6400 with APS-C can be rescued if you have to.
Less than one stop better color sensitivity/depth.
Better subject isolation (bokeh is function of absolute not relative focal length, absolute and not relative aperture setting and subject distance.
In favor of APS-C: better reach (300mm FF lens = 450mm relative focal length in APS-C). In other words smaller lenses/focal length for the same angle of view.
That is all. FF and APS-C can coexist. A combo of Canon 7DMII/6D or Nikon D400/D750 (just a dream) are very viable options with well selected 5-8 lenses altogether (by combo). These are missing sorely from the article.

There are arguments in favor of both, as above. This tool myth is attractive for some, but without explanation it is worthless. Watchmakers and railway constructors use different sized screwdrivers. There is a place for large format technical cameras too. It is not a comfortability decision but a necessity decision if you are pro.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 08:17 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1458 comments in total)

Difference between FF and APS-C:
In favor of FF:
One stop better DR. ISO 12800 with FF is fine, ISO 6400 with APS-C can be rescued if you have to.
Less than one stop better color sensitivity/depth.
Better subject isolation (bokeh is function of absolute not relative focal length, absolute and not relative aperture setting and subject distance.
In favor of APS-C: better reach (300mm FF lens = 450mm relative focal length in APS-C). In other words smaller lenses/focal length for the same angle of view.
That is all. FF and APS-C can coexist. A combo of Canon 7DMII/6D or Nikon D400/D750 (just a dream) are very viable options with well selected 5-8 lenses altogether (by combo). These are missing sorely from the article.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 06:44 UTC as 255th comment | 4 replies
On Nikon D750 Review preview (1928 comments in total)

If it was up to the meticulous flawseekers, no camera would be sold at all. Light leak, shuttershock, cooked raw, flarebands, light orbs you name the rest. There was no major camera launch without major countercampaign (FUD). Rest assured the D750 issue will also go away (one way or the other). Nikon historically did not handle these well by trying to create nonissue from the issue and vice versa. IMO this D750 issue is a nonissue, and whoever experience this banding as a serious hindrance in their creative process should return it, and use some flare oriented camera instead. The community should also have to find a way to say no to shills in general.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 30, 2014 at 14:05 UTC as 225th comment | 5 replies
On Nikon D750 Review preview (1928 comments in total)

What do you think about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LynWn0DvdO0&feature=youtu.be

This is the D750 dark band/shading issue. Personally I think it is not a special problem and/or irrelevant.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 22, 2014 at 12:34 UTC as 305th comment | 1 reply
On Nikon D750 Review preview (1928 comments in total)
In reply to:

davids8560: I would like to own this camera, and also some very nice lenses to go with it, too.

Your wish is called D810.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2014 at 17:22 UTC
On Nikon D750 Review preview (1928 comments in total)
In reply to:

En Trance: Also, if I rest my camera on a good tripod at the beach, 1/4000 does not cut it due to the wind alone. (Especially with a tele lens) After that, I begin to think of exposure. Why is Nikon limiting their shutter speed so severely?

With film cameras diffraction was not a real issue. F22, F32 was fine

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2014 at 14:47 UTC
On Medium well done: Two takes on the Pentax 645Z article (249 comments in total)

If you are seriously into the 645Z, the must read review is this:
http://blog.mingthein.com/2014/06/27/review-the-pentax-645z-part-i/
which is in three parts actually.
Some additional info is this:
http://blog.mingthein.com/2014/12/08/the-format-matters-but-not-in-the-way-you-might-think/#more-9198

Direct link | Posted on Dec 9, 2014 at 14:08 UTC as 64th comment
On Sony Alpha 7 II real-world sample gallery posted article (244 comments in total)
In reply to:

Serious Sam: Since the previous A7 II thread has quiet down, I decided to write this here.

Just read another detail review from another site, some key points

1) The 5 axis IBIS will only work on lens that provide "Focus Distance information" which mean most FE and E mount lens. The other lens will run with only 3 Axis result to only 1-2 stop IBIS not 4.5.

2) IQ has not change much. that is expected as its the same processor. if you want improved noise performance you can almost forget about it.

3) The PDAF .....still sucks at 2.5 FPS. If you are looking to do a lot of action shots. This is not for you.

Got to go party now....more on this later :-)

The bigger sensor needs much more efficient IBIS than the one quarter of its size m43 sensor. Therefore Oly will beat Sony in this regard. I rather consider this iteration as just a correction of the faults of the first one.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 5, 2014 at 11:44 UTC

In my understanding it may work for static subjects only. Am I right?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 5, 2014 at 07:48 UTC as 62nd comment | 1 reply
On Real-world test: Nikon D750 at the Museum of Flight article (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

locke_fc: Impressive camera indeed, and certainly ahead of anything Canon has to offer (and I'm a 6D owner).

Still, I don't get the fuss about the dynamic range and shadow recovery ability. My almost 5 year-old Pentax K-x, which had one of the first iterations of these amazing Sony sensors, was already capable of such impressive feats. We've known for ages what these sensors can do, are we going to make a fuss about it every time a new camera with a Sony sensor comes out?

You can do the same with D4, D4s, Df sensor for sure.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 3, 2014 at 09:16 UTC
On Real-world test: Going pro with the Samsung NX1 article (369 comments in total)

Many live through an AHA EXPERIENCE here. Me too. Possibly my next camera will be a Samsung NX1 and not a Canon? Looks like it.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 1, 2014 at 15:26 UTC as 29th comment
On Real-world test: Going pro with the Samsung NX1 article (369 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vignes: only 144 comments and it's day 2. when the A7II was posted, the count was in hundreds and it hit 1000 mark within day2. This is the problem with Samsung brand, maybe they need to change their camera name to something else. Similar to Toyota with Lexus name. At the end of the day, it's all marketing and how you portray yourself in a particular market space.

Brand loyalty and reliability are two things hard to earn. No one (may be Sony buyers only) buys cameras for the sensors only. Buying Samsung is equivalent with giving them credit. But many gave credit to the Fujifilm X100, the Nikon D600, and the first iteration A7 series.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 11:14 UTC
On Real-world test: Going pro with the Samsung NX1 article (369 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vignes: only 144 comments and it's day 2. when the A7II was posted, the count was in hundreds and it hit 1000 mark within day2. This is the problem with Samsung brand, maybe they need to change their camera name to something else. Similar to Toyota with Lexus name. At the end of the day, it's all marketing and how you portray yourself in a particular market space.

Samsung has no choice: they have to make their name as a camera manufacturer. For choosing another name is already too late. It also takes time. It may take 10 years and outstanding products. This is the first one, a really founding one.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 09:39 UTC
On Real-world test: Going pro with the Samsung NX1 article (369 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ontario Gone: Good video, but I question the "pro" guy about one thing. He's shooting the dead fish and just about breaking his own back to get the shot. Why not just use the flippy LCD to compose?

DSLR guy

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 11:45 UTC

Why don't they (or anybody) sell the grip only for say a $100?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 26, 2014 at 05:20 UTC as 80th comment | 1 reply
On Enthusiast compact camera roundup (2014) article (185 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tungsten Nordstein: I can't take this seriously. Just the big names. No Ricoh. No Sigma.

I own the CP-A. It was cheaper than a GR when I bought it. Cp-A (for me) does not serve as one camera. If I take with me only the A I feell miising something. So for a shooting session (meaning almost always) I have a DSLR or a Nikon 1 V2 with me with a normal or tele zoom lens. But in the 28mm domain the CP-A is simply gorgeous. I know photographers who are satisfied with a GR alone. But that can be a minority.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 26, 2014 at 05:13 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (2696 comments in total)
In reply to:

40daystogo: Why would anyone carry a 910 gram Canon 7DII, when the latest Sony A7II slightly over half that, and is close to getting the same fast focus, maybe not in this A7 iteration but certainly in the next.

For users that need only a narrow range of lenses, the mirrorless solution seems better, and even that factor will be a moot point in a few years when given enough time to develop Sony's growing range of Sony and Zeiss lenses.

If you carry several lenses of min. 4 kg each the 910g of the 7D is not the problem. And you need 1Dx class AF to use them right. Sony A7 II can be appropriately handled with small prime lenses IMO. 28-35-55mm are available or about to be, 85-100-135mm are not even on the horizon. You are right: it would seem inappropriate to put a 40 mm pancake on the 7DII. (but the 24-70mm zoom looks OK)

Direct link | Posted on Nov 22, 2014 at 04:48 UTC
Total: 300, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »