Astrotripper

Astrotripper

Joined on Jul 12, 2013

Comments

Total: 82, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Great video. Very well done and informative at the same time. Nice to see the camera in action.

Great job. Hope to see more videos of this quality from you guys.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 24, 2015 at 15:57 UTC as 30th comment
In reply to:

Astrotripper: "We also want to add some more reasonably-priced lenses for entry-level users, similar to the 45mm F1.8 - we’re looking into this now. "

Yeah, that'd be nice, but I wonder if it's not too late for that. MFT has already earned a reputation for being on the expensive side, at least in some regions. Excluding body caps, 45/1.8 and 17/2.8 are the only affordable primes here. From zoom lenses, 40-150 is the only good value proposition. All other lenses are either expensive (some rightly so) or just ridiculously overpriced.

And there's still no middle ground zoom in MFT. You either stay with the kit lens, or have to pay serious money for large and heavy f/2.8 PRO zoom. I still can't understand why we don't have a f/2.8-4.0 zoom.

Not here where I live, and that's the point. I don't care what Americans pay for those lenses, I'm not in US. That's why I wrote "at least in some regions".

Direct link | Posted on Mar 23, 2015 at 20:49 UTC
In reply to:

Astrotripper: "We also want to add some more reasonably-priced lenses for entry-level users, similar to the 45mm F1.8 - we’re looking into this now. "

Yeah, that'd be nice, but I wonder if it's not too late for that. MFT has already earned a reputation for being on the expensive side, at least in some regions. Excluding body caps, 45/1.8 and 17/2.8 are the only affordable primes here. From zoom lenses, 40-150 is the only good value proposition. All other lenses are either expensive (some rightly so) or just ridiculously overpriced.

And there's still no middle ground zoom in MFT. You either stay with the kit lens, or have to pay serious money for large and heavy f/2.8 PRO zoom. I still can't understand why we don't have a f/2.8-4.0 zoom.

@Impulses

Yes, I'm only talking about Olympus here. 25/1.8 is around 60% more expensive than 45/1.8 here where I live. Not something I'd call a good deal, especially considering that DSLR users get 50/1.4 for less money. So, instead of buying Olympus 25/1.8, I bought Sigma DP2 Merrill just to have the "standard" focal length. Paid roughly the same.

And my use of words "good value" was unfortunate. I meant affordable. I actually think Olympus provides good value at the high-end, with PRO lenses for example. Those are expensive, but for what they are, they are worth it. But I'm not a pro and I can't justify such huge expenses on lenses. And Olympus does not offer me much.

And note I wrote "at least in some regions". I can see that the prices in US for example look a bit differently.

And I don't particularly care for other systems. I know Fuji is expensive, that's why I never considered buying into it. I'm using MFT and I just wished I'd had a bit more choice of affordable lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 23, 2015 at 19:53 UTC

"We also want to add some more reasonably-priced lenses for entry-level users, similar to the 45mm F1.8 - we’re looking into this now. "

Yeah, that'd be nice, but I wonder if it's not too late for that. MFT has already earned a reputation for being on the expensive side, at least in some regions. Excluding body caps, 45/1.8 and 17/2.8 are the only affordable primes here. From zoom lenses, 40-150 is the only good value proposition. All other lenses are either expensive (some rightly so) or just ridiculously overpriced.

And there's still no middle ground zoom in MFT. You either stay with the kit lens, or have to pay serious money for large and heavy f/2.8 PRO zoom. I still can't understand why we don't have a f/2.8-4.0 zoom.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 23, 2015 at 18:26 UTC as 38th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

John C Tharp: Why make a 'UV' filter at all? Why not start with a protection filter without coatings that rob light?

Without coatings, you'd have much lower light transmittance, reduced contrast, ghosting and flaring. I'm pretty sure there's not many people that would pay for that.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 18, 2015 at 08:51 UTC
On samsung_nx500_ISO-2000_SAM_0353 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (3 comments in total)

Wow, the noise in the sky is just horrible in this shot, even when downscaled to fit the screen. And that's just ISO 2000. I'm surprised.

But I guess you could get a lot nicer effect from RAWs.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2015 at 20:41 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

jonathanj: On the 645Z.... "some of the demand comes from professionals, but some comes from people who want to *look* like professionals"
A surprisingly honest description of your customers there, Mr Saiki!

Before Canon and Nikon introduced 6D and D600, it was Full-Frame DSLRs that served those customers. Perfect choice for people not wealthy or hipstery enough for a Leica, but wanting to stand out. But now everyone and their sister can have FF :)

So, a surprising consequence of FF DSLRs going mainstream. Good for Ricoh :)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 8, 2015 at 16:59 UTC
In reply to:

MayaTlab0: "Technically of course it’s possible but it depends on the demand, and such a camera would probably match perfectly to some of our core customers. And we’re promoting black and white capture via our film simulation modes. So I think a monochrome model might represent a sales opportunity for Fujifilm."

If there's a market for an astrophotography dedicated camera, I suppose there could be one for a monochrome camera. And I don't think Leica's disappointed by the Monochrom sales, are they ?

Interestingly, I think monochrome mirrorless camera might be a much better proposition for astrophotography than something like D810a. And it could double as regular camera, too :)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2015 at 12:12 UTC
In reply to:

J A C S: "He said that users of sensors with a similar number of pixels to 40 million had to use a tripod all the time to make their images look sharp, but that OM-D users could switch between using a tripod and not, according to the resolution mode set on the camera."

BS. FF users with high res sensors do not need a tripod all the time for sharp images, and they have the lower resolution option as well (Canon has lower res "RAW"s in-camera, for example).

Are you sure that you did not interview an m43 forum member posing as an Olympus representative?

Also, don't forget that Canon makes the best sensors in the industry (according to Canon of course)

:)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 14, 2015 at 21:00 UTC

24-28 Mpx sensor without AA filter and resolution enhancing sensor shift tech would be a winner. It should still be capable of fast burst shooting, as well as super high res studio shots.

And of course, AA filter simulation, like in K3 (and all other nice sensor shift features, like star tracking).

And I really hope the LCD is articulating, a camera without one is a cripple in my mind. Once you get used to having it, it's really hard to switch back.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 13:55 UTC as 116th comment
In reply to:

Stefan Sobol: DJI is already updating the firmware in their drones to restrict where they can fly or limit the drone's altitude. If you install the latest "mandatory" firmware update your Phantom will not fly within 15.5 miles of Washington DC.

I'm sure there will be more updates that will further limit where the drone will be allowed to fly.

@badi

Well, you can thank idiots that fly drones around airports, crash them into the White House, drown them in hot lakes in national parks and so on.

It's like those morons that blind plane pilots during take off and landing. I wonder why those green lasers have not been banned yet or have mandatory dispersion lens installed or something.

Anyway, my point is: people's stupidity knows no bounds. So we get what we get.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 07:25 UTC
On Sigma dp0 Quattro announced with 14mm F4 lens article (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

Astrotripper: "Better high ISO performance with one to two stops of improvement"

Compared to what?

I am aware of high ISO limitations, I was just curious about that little statement there. And I've seen some examples of Merrills clearly outperforming Quattros at high ISOs, so it's not all clear cut as well.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 12:56 UTC
On Sigma dp0 Quattro announced with 14mm F4 lens article (138 comments in total)

"Better high ISO performance with one to two stops of improvement"

Compared to what?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 08:59 UTC as 28th comment | 6 replies

They've also changed the ISO range, so it looks like it's optimized for high ISO shooting. Nice.

Too bad it doesn't have swiveling (or at least articulating) screen.

Frankly, I'm surprised they choose D810 for this, and not D750, which I think might be a better fit (and easier to justify the purchase vs dedicated astro camera).

Also, what I can't really comprehend. Is is that hard to allow user to select exact time for long exposure? Why are we always limited to a certain set of times? It seems like such a simple feature to add.

Anyway, good job Nikon. That's kind of a brave move I'd say.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 08:41 UTC as 75th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Sammy Yousef: Terrible timing. Most who want to do astro are drooling over the innovation on the A7R of being able to see the Milky Way in real time at ISO 409,000.

Sony for astrophotography? With their lossy compressed "RAW" files? That's a no go for astrophotography, where most of the detail in in deep shadow. A7S might be nice for wide field nightscapes with starry sky, but that's probably as far as Sony and astrophotography can go.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 08:32 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1393 comments in total)
In reply to:

photo perzon: Seems like a lot of electronic wizardry and less IQ focus. Better video, new faux hi res, lots of tricks. For the right person a real gift. But not a core improvement. More like edge technology improvements into video, electronic wizardry, tricks. I would like to see a Ricoh GR or Nikon A equivalent with 28, 40 and 75mm f1.8 compact camera from Olympus. With a bounce flash and a tight EVF. Or a mini PM2 with built in EVF and flash. Like a GM1 with better DXO. But a great bit of work to be commended.

This is still a much significant update than what you usually get in DSLR world nowadays. Can you even tell the difference between Canon 650D vs 700D, or between 1100D vs 1200D? What breakthrough technologies were introduced in Nikon D5500?

No breakthroughs here, but a very solid refresh of a very solid camera.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 11:16 UTC
In reply to:

Snikt228: Just in time for the DSLR market itself to start to soften and shift mirrorless.

Shift to mirrorless? I'm not so sure about that. Less cameras are sold every year. Most of that loss is probably in the entry level of the market (that's why some companies shifted their efforts towards higher end products and cut down the cheapest models).

I would bet that DSLR sales lost due to jumping to mirrorless are still pretty low.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2015 at 23:19 UTC

Seeing how their new FA lenses do not have optical stabilization, I think it's safe to bet that the camera will sport an in-body sensor stabilization that Pentax is known for.

Unfortunately for Ricoh, they will not be able to claim first on full-frame sensor stabilization, as Sony beat them to it.

I have to wonder though. What will they show with this camera that will make it more attractive than the competition? Being full-frame doesn't mean much nowadays. Both Nikon and Canon have a whole lineup of such cameras, ranging from entry level toys to professional workhorses. And they'll probably announce new models at CP+, too.

Here's hoping they'll come up with something impressive. And they better be already working on lens lineup as well (judging by the new lens announcements, they started that already).

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2015 at 22:44 UTC as 169th comment | 1 reply
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Review preview (437 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peter Bendheim: Well, it's exactly the same sensor as the OMD series, so is DPR saying that all those products are now dated too?

It's not the same sensor as OM-D cameras. Even OM-Ds don't share the same sensor, as E-M1 has different sensor from the rest.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2015 at 20:13 UTC

Not surprised to see poor performance on wide end. But I am surprised how well it handles harsh backlight and flares. This is where my Olympus kits fall apart completely. And this Tamron seems to correct for chromatic aberrations pretty well, too. I'd say it looks decent for a super zoom, too bad about the wide end.

But at $600? I think I'd rather shell out another $200 and get Panasonic FZ1000.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 18, 2015 at 09:50 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
Total: 82, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »