DoctorJerry

DoctorJerry

Lives in United States Santa Monica, CA, United States
Works as a Instructor/Digital Photography
Joined on Mar 23, 2003
About me:

15+ years experience with digital & about 55 years with 35 SLR (Nikon, Minolta, Pentax, Olympus) plus medium format (Mamiya 645). I also teach two introductory courses for senior citizens in digital photography at Emeritus College in Santa Monica, CA. Scope of the course is buying, setting up, using a digital camera and then editing the images. I am a strong advocate for free imaging software such as Picasa and FastStone.

Comments

Total: 41, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On Shooting with the Canon PowerShot G3 X article (312 comments in total)
In reply to:

SolidMetal: Whats wrong with many people here? Canon puts down the biggest range superzoom in 1 inch class with sony sensor and still people hate it.
The problem is that it seems in 2015 its so damn trendy to hate Canon. You can hate it because it has no EVF and the lens is slower... well, you could hate others cause of the shorter zoom range. It is the same with the DSLR world, where most Nikons dont even have a damn expsim. mode but noone bats an eye.

I think that both Canon and Nikon don't want to lose DSLR sales to high quality compact cameras so they don't offer built-in EVF. Sony and Panasonic don't share that concern so their high ebd cameras have very good EVF. I own and love my FZ1000. I got rid of my collection of DSLR CAMERAS. And lenses and don't miss them at all.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 30, 2015 at 20:54 UTC
On Samsung NX1 Review preview (1226 comments in total)
In reply to:

b craw: I started as a professor of photography in 1999 (and have been a fine art photographer since '92). At the foundation of the attitudes of many students is a distortion, most dramatically perpetuated on the internet: that serious work is almost exclusively done with full frame sensors (or larger). While many 'professionals', commercial or otherwise, use FF, the prevalent perception of many others is less rooted in real understanding of difference (DoF, based on equivalence; low-light performance) and more that this is just what a 'serious' photographer does. It always seems a bit baffling to students when I produce a range of images from exhibitions shot in large format, medium format, FF, APS-C, micro four thirds, 1", and (god forbid) sensors smaller than that. Often, I follow this up showing an APS-C image shot with ~50mm (35mm equivalent) prime at f/1.8 and what results is a predictable cascade of opinions that the DoF of the image indicates that it must be full frame.

I am an instructor in the field of digital photography at a small college in Southern California. One thing I periodically do is present photos to the students shot with different sized camera sensors, different ISO levels. It is amazing how few people can see the difference if they don't know the shooting info. Of course blowing pictures up to 20x30 does reveal some differences but at smaller blow-ups very little tells the viewer which camera shot which picture. I think we automatically assign higher values to larger format cameras that are not obvious except in extreme cases. Deciding to get a full frame camera when you rarely if ever need its features is money not well spent.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2015 at 16:48 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1463 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike99999: This article makes very little sense. The upgrade path is a real marketing strategy from the two largest camera manufacturers: Canon and Nikon. And that strategy is a proven success.

The reality is that 99% of the image 'look' is produced by the LENS. If money were no object, you choose the lens that gives you the most pleasing image, and then you attach a camera with a compatible sensor size.

However, most people have a limited budget and compromise accordingly. A crop body can be one of those compromises.

I CAN'T BELIEVE HOW YOU MISSED THE POINT WHICH UNFORTUNATELY WASN'T CLEARLY STATED. So much depends upon how large a print you are going to make and if you hardly ever make large (at least 12x16) prints I doubt, seriously doubt, if you could tell prints made by FF from APS, 4:3, 1", or even some 1/1.7inch sensors. And those who think it is all in the lens seem to forget how big a part the camera's processor can play in capturing the image. Yes, if the light gets bad, really bad, MAYBE a few can see the difference but for most of us, we can only see differences in the larger prints.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2015 at 20:40 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (485 comments in total)
In reply to:

pdelux: Way to go Panasonic. 85% is a respectable score!

As an owner of both the FZ200 and the FZ1000 I can say with some authority that the IQ of the FZ200 is very good and at lower ISO levels very much on par with the FZ1000, For most people, the FZ200 is all they need. The complexity of the FZ1000 makes it unsuitable for a lot of people regardless of how good the IQ is. Yes, there is a difference when you print large images, but until you get to or above 15x20 inch you would have a hard time telling which camera shot which picture.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 27, 2014 at 17:24 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review preview (842 comments in total)
In reply to:

bimbobo: Suddendly a lot of "negative" comments, it seems a coincidence.

Comparing cameras is a personal judgement. People used to Canon, Sony and so on.. will find difficult to "adjust" and " probably tent to be more skeptical to other cams.

Sorry it's just my opinion but too often people "shoot" at something different and only see the negative sides

fI too noticed the sudden plethora of negatives. I wonder if Sony had anything to do with it? Might be a good idea if DPReview required the serial number of the camera you discussing before you can post negative comments about any that camera.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 18, 2014 at 20:12 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2132 comments in total)
In reply to:

Polytropia: This is a crock. There is no equivalence in apertures. F/2.8 is always F/2.8 no matter what the sensor size is. It projects the same brightness of light in all cases.

Point is: a speedlight (flash) that has a guide number of 100 feet will illuminate a subject 35.71 feet away at ISO 100 and F/2.8. No matter what your sensor size is, this will not change.

You cannot say that just because the sensor is bigger that changes anything because if you make the lens F/5.6 and do not change the flash guide number or ISO, then your exposure will be off.

Further, the amount of image noise generated is not exactly two stops "better" between, say, Four Thirds and 135-format. Neither is dynamic range. It varies based on the year the camera came out, how many pixels it has, etc.

DOF is also not exactly two stops different because DOF is affected by pixel density as well.

So stop LYING to people, DPReview.

The author of the article raised the exposure question and I think it has relevance which I why Tukameino was correct in pointing out the errors.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 8, 2014 at 22:43 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2132 comments in total)

Aperture equivalence
I ran a test using my Panasonic LF1 and selected sensor sizes of 12MP, 8MP, 5MP 3MP and 0.3MP. I can select those sensor sizes by using Panasonic’s EZ Zoom which trims off pixels on the perimeter of the sensor to arrive at a smaller sensor. As I read your article, I should have been needing either a higher ISO, slower shutter speed, or faster aperture as I trimmed pixels from the sensor. I found NO difference my test shots, all shot at 1/80sec, F2.0 and ISO 200, they were the same REGARDLESS of the size of the sensor I used.

Where I think you went wrong is in talking about how much less light reaches the sensor as the sensor gets smaller. What you overlooked was that the same quantity of light reached the plane of the sensor but since the sensor was smaller, it captured less light. It did NOT need all the light reaching the plane of the sensor, only enough to cover the sensor itself. According to my test f2.0 is 2.0 regardless of the sensor size.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 8, 2014 at 22:36 UTC as 220th comment | 8 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1267 comments in total)

As far as I am concerned, they can skip all the video crap and then drop the price to something more affordable. I can enjoy photography without having to worry or even use video. Would that make the camera lighter, faster? Maybe Panasonic should have 2 models, one with and one without 4k video.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 17:36 UTC as 261st comment | 2 replies
On High-end pocketable compacts 2013 roundup article (264 comments in total)
In reply to:

ftb72: Currently, the Sony is up to nearly $250 more than the LF1 ($300 at B&H) and the Canon is $100 more. Makes the contest a bit different.

At what difference in price does it make sense to buy the less expensive camera? If the diffence in image quality is almost undetectable why would you pay more? I have the LF1 and in test after test shooting with it and dSLRs you can NOT tell which camera shoot which image. And the response time of the LF1 is so damm good. And the size allows me to take that camera with me all the time, not something I would care or want to do with the dSLR. And having a f2 lens even thought it is only that at wide angle, allows me to shoot at very low ISO levels. The EVF, at least for me, sealed the deal as to which camera to buy. and now with it priced as low as $269 why in heaven would I pay $750 or more and not have anything better let alone near the same size?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 5, 2014 at 01:25 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Real-world Samples article (148 comments in total)
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: Hmmm... It's more expensive than a NEX6... I'm anticipating the full review.

And how many lenses do you really use? Studies show that way less than half the people with a interchangeable lens camera ever change their lenses. A larger sensor, such as on the NEX 6, which I have, provides far greater detail at higher ISO settings. I have had a number of 4/3 cameras each time hoping that it will produce good images in low light. I am continually disappointed. If all you every do is shoot in bright light, then even a throw away camera will work, if if low light is where you are, then the larger sensors are really a must.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2013 at 18:11 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ70 Sample Images article (69 comments in total)

Re: Panasonic FZ70- Pictures like those in the sample gallery are almost worthless. I would like to see a group of 40 CONTINUOUS IMAGES to get a better feel for how many wasted shots were needed or how many good shots one can expect getting from a bunch of shots. I also want to see the zoom expressed in 35mm figures and info about white balance.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 16:01 UTC as 36th comment | 1 reply
On File0023 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (3 comments in total)

TWA flying a prop plane? Very grainy image with the appearance of a much earlier time.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 15:55 UTC as 1st comment | 2 replies
On photo in sample gallery (3 comments in total)

TWA flying a prop plane? Very grainy image with the appearance of a much earlier time.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 15:55 UTC as 1st comment | 2 replies
On photo in sample gallery (1 comment in total)

good handling of backlighting. Sharp image indicates good IS at about 20x zoom

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 15:48 UTC as 1st comment
On P1000375 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

good handling of backlighting. Sharp image indicates good IS at about 20x zoom

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 15:48 UTC as 1st comment
On P1000361 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Just could not handle the dynamic range. Details are dropping at the higher ISO just as anticipated.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 15:44 UTC as 1st comment
On photo in sample gallery (1 comment in total)

Just could not handle the dynamic range. Details are dropping at the higher ISO just as anticipated.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 15:44 UTC as 1st comment
On photo in sample gallery (1 comment in total)

It would be nice to know the zoom range in 35mm terms

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 15:41 UTC as 1st comment
On P1000344 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

It would be nice to know the zoom range in 35mm terms

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 15:41 UTC as 1st comment
On DPReview Recommends: Top 5 Compact Cameras article (559 comments in total)

Interesting comparison but I have one comment. The Panasonic FZ200 with its constant f2.8 lens shooting at ISO 800 is like shooting at f5.6 at ISO 3200 with the other cameras. The ISO 800 shots are very good and relatively noise free. No smudging of details. It also means it will focus faster even in dim light. I just used that camera on a Baltic capital trip including Berlin and I was blown away at how fast and accurately it grabbed focus when shooting from a moving bus, even when I was zoomed out to the max and it was late and starting to get dark. It is one amazing camera. The one negative I have on the camera is how frequently I accidentally end up pressing the white balance button. I finally made a removable cover for the 4 way controller and that seems to have solved that problem.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 2, 2013 at 22:47 UTC as 26th comment
Total: 41, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »