Entropius

Entropius

Lives in United States Tucson, AZ, United States
Works as a Physics PhD Candidate
Joined on Jul 17, 2006

Comments

Total: 141, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Ricoh to offer limited edition Pentax Q7 Premium Kit news story (89 comments in total)
In reply to:

Smokymtnhiker: Check out the Studio scene for the Q7 before ragging on it.

Look at the page of text lying under the bottle of Baileys. You can actually read the text on the Q7 shot which is something you can't say for either the D7100 or Fuji X-Pro1. Text does look better on the X-100s though.

So the Q7 isn't bad for an over-priced little toy after all.

Shooting a D7100 at f/32 will degrade the image due to diffraction exactly as much as shooting a Q7 at the aperture that achieves the same depth of field.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 4, 2014 at 05:26 UTC
On Ricoh to offer limited edition Pentax Q7 Premium Kit news story (89 comments in total)
In reply to:

Smokymtnhiker: Check out the Studio scene for the Q7 before ragging on it.

Look at the page of text lying under the bottle of Baileys. You can actually read the text on the Q7 shot which is something you can't say for either the D7100 or Fuji X-Pro1. Text does look better on the X-100s though.

So the Q7 isn't bad for an over-priced little toy after all.

That's because the Q7 has so much more depth of field at the same f/number because of the bigger sensor. A D7100 can be shot at f/32 to get the same effect.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2014 at 01:48 UTC
On Apple applies for dual-sensor camera patent post (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

joyclick: Apple likes to put its name on everything under the sun and make money from it.Android is the answer.

Samsung will be sued no matter what. If Apple can sue over rounded rectangles, it can sue over anything.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 28, 2014 at 02:30 UTC
On Pentax K-3 preview (961 comments in total)
In reply to:

jon404: I am shocked at the low pricing for this excellent camera -- and for those from other mfgrs -- and also how fast the value depreciates. Scary, scary business. Great times for the consumer, but you wonder how much longer this can go on.

If Pentax made the lens I wanted (a 400 f/5.6) I'd have gotten one in a heartbeat. When it comes to the camera itself they seem to consistently get all the features right.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 27, 2014 at 04:52 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 Review preview (270 comments in total)
In reply to:

techmine: Don't Samsung/Fuji/Sony (MILC line) provide better alternatives?

Perhaps they make better cameras. Olympus makes great lenses, and that's sort of the draw of Micro Four Thirds. Just off the top of my head, the lenses that are known to be quite good:

7-14/4, 9-18/4-5.6, 12/2, 14/2.5, 20/1.7, 25/1.8, 25/1.4, 12-40/2.8, 45/1.8, 45/1.2, 60/2.8 macro, 75/1.8, 35-100/2.8, 100-300/4-5.6, 75-300/x-6.7, exotic f/0.95 MF things, upcoming 300/4 and 150/2.8...

If you want to do it, there's probably a lens for it.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 20:12 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 Review preview (270 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Jacal: For any body who feels like whining about bokeh, or in case others may be taken in by the shills here, look at this:

http://admiringlight.com/blog/fuji-56mm-f1-2-vs-panasonic-leica-42-5mm-f1-2-nocticron/

Admittedly, a cople of high end lenses, but the same difference is the same at all levels between the two formats.

The go-to affordable portrait lens on m4/3 is the Olympus 45/1.8, which is a few hundred bucks. It is wicked sharp wide open and gives nice bokeh.

What else do you want?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 19:38 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 Review preview (270 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeStern: I returned my A7r for the oly em1. And I am sooo pleased with this decision.

Some here talking about m4/3 vs. apsc vs. full frame. I would rather concentrate on olympus rather than m4/3 in general. Because 5 axis ibs is out of this world. 3 axis is also very good. And it's not just my opinion, everybody who try it will agree with me.

I have not taking a single blurry picture yet. Including 1/3 of a second exposures.

Olympus IBIS has always been quite good (all the way back to my first DSLR, the E-510). I agree with your assessment of the E-M5; I rented one once and was blown away, and would probably have one if Olympus made the telephoto options that I wanted. It just does so many things right.

Nikon VR has caught up, though: I can handhold 1/30s at 400mm with the 80-400.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 19:36 UTC
In reply to:

photofan1986: 1000 bucks for a 70-300 4.5-5.6 lens? What exactly do they smoke at Nikon's? I might be interested...in what they smoke, that is :D

Smaller format lenses are only easier to make if they're wideangle. Making a 300mm for CX is not much easier than making a 300mm for FX. (Actually, it's harder, if you want the same resolution in lp/ph; compare the size, weight, and cost of the Olympus 300/2.8, designed for 4/3, to the Nikon one for FX. Both are stellar lenses; the 4/3 one is a bit bigger and pricier, since it's got to be more highly corrected.)

A 70-300 f/2.8 is a beast for any system; you'll need an aperture diameter of 107mm, for instance.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2014 at 16:43 UTC
In reply to:

oeriies: The sample images from this lens posted by Nikon are soft to my eye:
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Nikon1-Lenses/3345/1-NIKKOR-VR-70-300-f%252F4.5-5.6.html#!/media:image:3345_sample-photo_01.jpg

So if you're not going to close the door because of the price the question is going to be how much of a hit in IQ you're going to be willing to accept in exchange for great portability in the super telephoto range..

The Olympus lens is also substantially slower (f/6.7, isn't it?)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2014 at 16:39 UTC
In reply to:

slncezgsi: Interesting lens, but I am wondering whether -in spite of the IS - the lens will be handhold-able. The magnification at the long end will be very hard to keep pointed towards the subject.

Nikon is very very good at making IS systems. I have the 80-400 AFS. Used on a 24MP DX body, the pixel-level magnification is nuts -- yet I can handhold shots down to 1/50 at 400mm consistently.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2014 at 16:38 UTC
In reply to:

lacikuss: What is Mr. Olympus going to do when Full frame dslr becomes small and cheap?

it is happening already...

It's not the full frame DSLR's that need to be small and cheap; it's the lenses that feed those huge sensors. Olympus makes some incredibly good, reasonably priced, and pretty small lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2014 at 23:51 UTC
In reply to:

Mahmoud Mousef: Dear Olympus engineers
Thanks for Pixel Mapping.

I first used Pixel Mapping about 15 years ago and I say thanks for giving this to the public so early in the digital camera revolution. I can't believe I bought a Nikon DSLR last year that didn't have it. What's worse, it came with bad pixels from the factory. I feel like I have been transported to some prehistoric place.

Thanks for dropping SmartMedia too :)
I have some great memories of Olympus cameras (C-4000 and E-520, which I still use)....so thank you to all involved.

Thanks for this too :)
http://www.olympus.com.au/Products/Digital-SLR/Lenses/Standard/35mm-f3-5-Macro.aspx

Another 35 f/3.5 fan!

It's one of the sharpest lenses I've used; it's still incredibly sharp with a 2x teleconverter, wide open (at f/7), at any focus distance; it's small and light and does precisely what it says on the tin.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2014 at 23:50 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 First Impressions Review preview (622 comments in total)
In reply to:

Retzius: I know all the Olympus shooters think they have something to complain about but you don't. At least Olympus actually creates lenses, announces them, release them, and continues to provide you with usable products.

Meanwhile, in Nikon land, we have been waiting for a wide angle DX prime lens for about 10 years or so. That right, not an improved lens or a better lens, just A LENS period.

Meanwhile, in Nikon land, we have been waiting for the D300 to be updated for about 6 years or so. Thats right, SIX YEARS.

Meanwhile, in Nikon land, this years updated camera bodies are the same ones from last year just without a OPF filter. The Liveview still focuses slower than an 80s camera, there is no live view histogram, you can't change aperture while shooting video because that would require a new part, and the viewfinders on the low and midrange bodies are like tiny tunnels.

If you want the right to complain, come to Nikon land. There is much to actually complain about :)

Meanwhile I switched from Olympus to Nikon waiting on a proper telephoto... if Olympus made a 300 f/4 I'd be using m4/3.

Olympus, for all of its marketing bloopers, has always made nice equipment.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2014 at 17:24 UTC
On Nikon D7100 In-Depth Review preview (31 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bud Robertson: Just upgraded to the D7100 from the D7000. I'm finding it a very capable camera, so far. Could someone tell me if there is somewhere to increase the sharpness in camera? I was sure the D7000 had that option somewhere.

There is; it's in the Picture Controls settings.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 05:53 UTC
In reply to:

Keytsa: What's the fastest ultra telephoto lens on market, regardless of mount, and still acceptable in price? This one is F5...

There is a 50-200 f/2.8-3.5 in Four Thirds mount (so the crop factor helps you), available used for $500ish. It's an excellent lens.

There are 300 f/4's for both Canon and Nikon for around $1000.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2013 at 17:09 UTC
In reply to:

racketman: Wonder when it will be available in rip off Britain at £1069, they always just change the $ to £ as do Canon and Apple.

Isn't the high VAT included in those prices? That makes up some of the difference.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2013 at 17:07 UTC
In reply to:

Jogger: I dont understand the focal range selected.. esp. at those apertures.

For wildlife work, maybe 300-600 would have made more sense.. .there are plenty of lenses that cover up to 300mm.. esp. if speed isnt a concern.

There's a stunning shot of an elephant charging through a river shot at ~80mm hanging in the Smithsonian right now, printed taller than I am. I don't remember what lens it was taken with (their exhibit includes EXIF), but if that situation arises unexpectedly, you get that shot with something like an 80-400, and miss it with a 200-400.

Sometimes the critters get close, and that's when the very best opportunities happen. You get screwed if all you have is your prime.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2013 at 17:04 UTC
In reply to:

Ikeepem: I'm going with the old saying if it sounds too good to be true...well you should know the rest...

People said that about the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8, too.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2013 at 17:00 UTC
On Mid-range Mirrorless camera roundup 2013 article (209 comments in total)
In reply to:

TN Args: So the winning camera has:

- POOR video (just like you rated the E-P5 video)

- DODGY image stability (a percentage of E-M5 owners report the same 'shutter shock' issue that you were so unhappy with in your review of the E-P5)

- NO INBUILT FLASH (!)

- an INADEQUATE GRIP, that necessitates the purchase of tacky third party add-on grips or a large and expensive Vertical Grip that renders the camera NOT SMALL AT ALL

- baby dSLR design that sports an unnecessary, illogical and widely criticized 'prism hump', which makes the camera bigger than it needs to be, and results in a form factor that suits nobody but dSLR wannabees; and....

- antiquated non-connectivity to the owner's online presence (a big issue for pros and semi pros, and even the general modern person).

Given that you could have chosen at least one camera with none of these faults and flaws, I'm speechless.....

Have you ever shot with an E-M5?

I don't own one (I shoot Nikon), but I've used it, and it's fantastic. The hump is necessary -- the viewfinder electronics and IBIS-related accelerometers live in there. Who cares what it looks like, anyway? I want pretty prints, not a pretty camera. The "shutter shock" issue is blown out of proportion. There's a flash included which does basically the same as a built-in flash, or you can use a real flash. The video is fine -- if you want absolutely top end video get a GHx, but the E-M5 video is still very high quality. Holding the thing is fine.

And the lenses -- especially the sort that make sense on a camera of this size -- are great.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 25, 2013 at 05:40 UTC
On Pentax K-3 real-world samples gallery news story (150 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pheonix: Well I'm finding the camera has too much resolution which is making my portraits less flattering!

I'll have to start down sampling!

Or working out how to flatter non perfect skin with off camera lighting

If you have Lightroom, a negative adjustment to the "clarity" slider achieves this.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 11, 2013 at 15:49 UTC
Total: 141, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »