john Clinch

john Clinch

Lives in United Kingdom Milton Keynes, United Kingdom
Works as a Teacher of physics
Joined on May 23, 2005

Comments

Total: 59, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (619 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: The V1 and J1 produce better IQ than this 1200 bucks wannabe Leica toy.

Hmmm maybe they need a sensor with onchip phase detect AF

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2014 at 07:36 UTC
On Surf's Up: Clark Little's incredible wave photography article (54 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gediminas 8: Superb moments indeed. As for EXIF,can we for once not turn everything into a gadget discussion? If you think you'll have a use for those settings, you can work them out yourself.

Yes and i suspect that each wave and lighting might need its own settings..

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2014 at 09:20 UTC
On Surf's Up: Clark Little's incredible wave photography article (54 comments in total)

That's an impressive set. Quite a lot of stuff that I've not seen before. Particularly waves breaking against the sand and the view towards the palm tree through the waves

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2014 at 09:19 UTC as 47th comment
On Nikon D810 Preview preview (1290 comments in total)
In reply to:

wherearemyshorts: With no optical low-pass filter, is there a cover over the sensor?

If no cover how careful must one be to clean the sensor?

Or did I miss something?

thanks

My hunch is that all FX sensors from Nikon will have exactly the same thickness of glass over them so that any one lens has excatly the same optical path to the sensor on all bodies. There was an interesting article about this. Its one of the reasons why adapting lenses between formats doesn't work well

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 20:33 UTC
On Nikon D810 Preview preview (1290 comments in total)
In reply to:

SKPhoto12: They're getting close to where I would consider changing my D700. They now just have to offer a 24MP model and I'm sold.

Maybe they could do a 24Mp RAW. But the only downside is the storage needed

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 17:12 UTC
On Nikon D810 Preview preview (1290 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: Why does anybody care about the video specifications of this high-grade stills camera? If I had $3000 to drop on this I'd do so for the amazing pictures it can take, not the Vimeo or YouTube clips it can record. It's an SLR, not a camcorder.

It appears that DSLR for video is a huge and growing sector. Its suddenly giving depth of field control at affordable prices for the first time. You should care as it probably makes the cameras cheaper. Bigger market means lower costs

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 17:09 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

xoio: $899 = approx £530 at current exchange rate, even with a bank's creaming X percent onto that, it would still be sub £600.
So where do they get the wallet raping £749 from?

Firstly don't compare recommended retail

Secondly its not just the VAT. Many aspects of employment cost more in the uk inducing employer national isurance). l premises cost more

Thirdly if its too much don't but it. That's how markets work

At least in the UK you can buy it from 28 countries without incurring any extra costs.

I saw an Olympus on Portugese Amazon for next to nothing...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 15, 2014 at 12:07 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

xoio: $899 = approx £530 at current exchange rate, even with a bank's creaming X percent onto that, it would still be sub £600.
So where do they get the wallet raping £749 from?

Ok wrong place for a health care argument.....

But on the subject of cameras I think we need to wait until its advertised retail in both countries before we get excited.

Looking at the GX7 on B&H if I convert the price to pounds and add VAT I get about 7% less than the UK price or a saving of about £50

That's close enough for me

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2014 at 18:35 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

Everlast66: This FZ1000 and the Sony RX10 are going to rule the bridge camera market in the next couple of years.

LaFonte

No they just have great image quality. Particular in good Light. Go to cameralabs and look at the real world photos. Often the fixed lens cameras have lenses with much better edge sharpness than consumer zooms

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2014 at 16:32 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Quite good IQ against other 1" sensors. When you compare to an APS-C body, this isn't as good at 100 as the A6000 is at 1600... and the A6000 isn't bigger nor more expensive (actually, the FF A7 is smaller than the FZ1000). The FZ1000 lens is fast and long, as the smaller sensor permits....

In sum, it's a very good camera, looks more than equal to the Sony RX10, but I'm not a compact user looking for a DSLR-size-and-shape camera without the IQ benefits. Is that really a big market?

Hmm I assume thats smaller than an A6000 or A7 without a lens attached. I find a lens handy...

OK that's a bit harsh but attach an equivalent focal length to either camera and they won't be small will they. The Canon 28-300 ways 1.67 Kg, the Nikon ways only 0.80 kg

Most people who buy an interchangeable lens camera only ever use the kit lens

DXO mark gives the best 1" sesnors under 2 stops benefit over the A6000. This is what you would expect based on sensor area

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2014 at 16:27 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

xoio: $899 = approx £530 at current exchange rate, even with a bank's creaming X percent onto that, it would still be sub £600.
So where do they get the wallet raping £749 from?

Pay the extra out of what you saved on health insurance....

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2014 at 16:19 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

G Davidson: I have to say, this is a seriously impressive all in one 'Bridge Camera' (I still prefer that term to compact, whatever the sensor size, for such 'all in one's). Having a decent-sized and highly evolved sensor mated with a wide zoom range could be all the camera a lot of people need.

I know it will gradually drop, but I still question the pricing, not in terms of value, but in terms of the comparisons with ILCs. A DSLR with say a Tamron 16-300mm lens has the same reach and a much larger sensor, or a u3/4 camera with a 28-300mm equivalent has almost the same reach with more dof control.

I got the feeling in the past that these kinds of cameras were just too big to compete with DSLRs and their added flexibility. Maybe this will hit just the right combination of features to succeed, but I can see it falling into the niche of being a great travel camera thats's just a bit too big to carry around every day.

Panasonic G6 and 14-140 is more in the uk

It also less range bit and its a bit slower (f5.6) so that probably takes any sensor size advantage

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2014 at 16:18 UTC
On Ricoh GR comparative review preview (34 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wira Nurmansyah: I write my personal review on Ricoh GR when traveling to Raja Ampat, Indonesia. You can see them here http://www.wiranurmansyah.com/ricoh-gr-all-the-camera-i-need

Thanks I really enjoyed your review and photos

Direct link | Posted on May 4, 2014 at 15:35 UTC
In reply to:

BorisK1: The table says 26mm equivalent FL, while the text says 28mm. That's a pretty big difference in WA coverage.

Going by 1" sensor 2.72 crop factor, 9.58mm * 2.72 = 26.0mm. That's what I'm rooting for, then :)

I wonder if these are actual focal lengths. Sony may quote different figures in the final product spec to allow good loss of coverage after distortion correction.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2014 at 20:14 UTC
On Get more accurate color with camera calibration article (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: Well said, that is quite enough.

Manufacturers of machines themselves calibrate the colour, and it is about time they all actually make the colour produced out of camera accurate.

If we can use software to correct colour, why should we have to, as the makers of the sensors and the cameras themselves have a duty to get it right.

Only when they have a single basic setting that gives acurate colour throughout the spectrum with luminance and hues our eyes see can it be called a camera at all.

The various other settings like vivid, landscape neutral Adobe RGB sRGB etcetera are of no use to us when the machine itself is colour blind, and its not our job to waste our lives and fortunes stuck in front of a monitor trying to do something a machine can do better.

Are you a branch of Boots? or Adorama?

I think it would be nice if they manufacturers provided an accurate profile. That's the only thing they would need to do

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2014 at 17:03 UTC
On Get more accurate color with camera calibration article (202 comments in total)

Do different cameras of the same make and model see color differently. If they do why? I've never heard of sample variation between cameras AF fine tune aside

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2014 at 16:57 UTC as 42nd comment | 1 reply
On Nikon D3300 Review preview (232 comments in total)
In reply to:

Black Box: Nice, light, quite interesting DSLR. Yes, there are "more exciting" cameras. However, given a choice, I'd pick Nikon any time any day. Just think about it for a moment.

In the past 2 years, Sony has started and buried a whole new line of cameras, and is now burying one of the oldest mounts.

In the past 10 years Canon has started EF-S, then EF-M, and didn't do much good with any of them.

Even Samsung already introduced NX Mini in addition to barely breathing NX mount.

The only two mounts with hundreds of legacy lenses are Nikon F and Pentax K. For better or for worse, Nikon respects their customers' habits, providing them with cameras to use their lenses with. And consistency is the sign of class.

Brandon1000

The motor issue is what it is. The consumer chooses to buy or not. It still leaves more choice than the a NEX owner by a wide margin and at lower cost too

But you take lovely photos so i forgive you

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2014 at 17:52 UTC
On Nikon D3300 Review preview (232 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: DPR, did you miss that optical viewfinder thing on the top? All the mirrorless cameras you list don't have viewfinders! The D3300 is an APS-C sensor (a good one at that) with a viewfinder. Compared to an A6000, it's priced pretty well (D3300 is $150 cheaper). If you're going to compare it against mirrorless cameras at least note that an mirrorless with a viewfinder will set you back at least as much.

You really want a reason not to get this camera, talk to people about the old A65. Same sensor, cheaper, built in wifi (and GPS if you're into that), full coverage viewfinder, faster shooting, etc

I expect Sont Nex ownership looks less exciting and cheap when you start choosing more lenses

One tele zoom and its f6.7 and how much?

How much for an f1.8 35mm?

How much for an ultra wide?

How much for a nifty 50mm?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2014 at 17:45 UTC
On Fujifilm announces 1.4x teleconverter for X100/X100S article (130 comments in total)

Well if you've got a full frame DSLR and fast 50mm lens then sure just use that

But not everyone has

Plus know one is making any one buy it

Oh and to the "why not crop lobby. Well of course you can. But you still can with the converter on, only more so. Oh and you have less depth of field as well with the converter

But its Dpreview so we've got to hate

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2014 at 13:45 UTC as 24th comment
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Review preview (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

rfsIII: In my opinion DPReveiw is leading readers down a dangerous dead-end path with all this "equivalent aperture range."
The whole silly business started with a post on one photographer's website and has now grown into a weird cult of people who are angry all the time about f/stops and love to argue with anyone who doesn't profess unwavering faith in their precepts.
And worse, it completely misses the point of the exposure triangle. To get more out of your camera you need to understand the relationship between f-stop, shutter speed, and ISO but this new religion you people have adopted throws that out and makes readers think that the surface area of the sensor is in some undefined way related. Converts go on and on about twice or four or 16 times as much light hitting a larger sensor than a smaller one as though that matters.
Unless you are dealing with bellows or other real exposure-changing variables, from an exposure point of view it doesn't matter what size sensor you use.

yes equivalent aperture is a mess. It really confuses people and I'm sure it was pushed forward by some one who wanted to sell more large sensor cameras. ISO performance is not proportional to sensor area. What we need is the review sites to figure out whether the faster lenses compensates for the smaller sensor. Looks like it doesn't for the f4 lens but does for the f5.6. But telling us that would make more sense than loads than a whole load of equivalent waffle

Oh and no the digital era is no excuse for all this equivalent idea. In the film era crop factor really was proportional to sensor performance as they all use the same sensor, just in different sizes. You couldn't say 400 ASA was fine. It was poor in 110 film but excellent in an 8 by 10 plate camera

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2014 at 20:40 UTC
Total: 59, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »