Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Joined on Nov 4, 2010


Total: 149, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Panasonic's Post Focus feature arrives November 25 (210 comments in total)
In reply to:

agaoo: GH4 is not on the list. May be it's not free for GH4 users since they don't want free :-D

Why not also for the FZ1000 which is `supposed` to be Panasonics top bridge camera? yet the FZ300/30 gets this feature, this would suggest to me that a replacement is coming perhaps soon for the FZ1000, i cant understand why this firmware is not available for the GH4 either!!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 22, 2015 at 15:58 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review (860 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: Both fail. I have had to return an RX10 for an obvious reason-when you film it insists in recording all focussing and zooming sounds to your footage. Optically the lens is good despite very heavy distortion at 24mm that can only be corrected in software-easily more than 5% barrel. As you get to 200, at f2.8 the one I had was very sharp in the centre, but only a narrow circle in the centre beyond which the fall off was rapid- think adjacent trees in a row of trees equidistant from camera, or a line of people. Even in good light you need that f2.8 but it is of limited use given most of the picture is at a lower resolution.

This is ALL deliberate of course since the zoom for size is underdesigned: at 24mm it certainly does not cover the sensor. That said the Leitz lens on the Panasonic is far worse, and I do mean a LOT worse. So wait for the next models and curse the people who lead you up the garden path to nowhere but frustration

Nope, mines ok there!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2015 at 17:31 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review (860 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: There are comments about the RX10 having a weather-sealed body, but this is not Sony's claim, they just say "weather- resistant".

I take issue with all such claims as microphones , especially those on the top of bodies cannot exactly be waterproof, and even were they so, the water collecting inside the mic grills would surely stop them working (and probably everything else). If these machines were waterproof there would be ads on TV with footage glorifying in the fact, but other than a few AW compacts there is no such footage available from anyone-including Nikon and Canon pro "weather-sealed" bodies, and apparently it is a fact that the D800 is NOT weatherproof, and though the Canon is more so, the corrosion from water-especially salt water affects them as well. That RX10 isn't waterproof, or dustproof. Sony have not ever said it was and will not refund you or do a free repair on one, I bet, if it gets a soaking over the winter outdoors. The FZ1000 has no such pretences.

Good comment Munro.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2015 at 17:28 UTC
On photo 1/72nd Scale TA-4J in the Toys for big boys I challenge (2 comments in total)

I love it, very well done!!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2015 at 17:20 UTC as 1st comment
On article 2015 Roundup: Long Zoom Compacts (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

Polacofede: Is there any statistics about the amount of people that gets this cameras for video purposes? ( Or even any camera being compact or DSLR )
Honestly from all the people I know there is a very small bunch of them that ever uses it. I know this is not representative by any means. Just asking to determine also how much video performance should weight in a camera review.

I have the fz1000, i bought it for mainly video which is in my opinion `superb`next, its a new 4k telly, and more powerful computer for me, the clarity of this camera`s HD video is fantastic, but the 4k is incredible, my old digital camcorder took its trip to E-Bay last year, the fz1000 is now the `best` camcorder i have ever owned to date!!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2015 at 17:01 UTC
On photo Motorbike Mechanic in the Its Occupational-Mechanics challenge (14 comments in total)
In reply to:

papa natas: AWESOME...!!

This is a superb hdr image, i am a fan of hdr stuff, i think it is brilliant and very well done indeed.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2015 at 16:46 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T1 Review (654 comments in total)
In reply to:

arhmatic: While video is secondary and probably sees little use, it's still unacceptable to see it falling so far behind every other camera out there.

I see that the video mode scored the lowest in this review. Needs a major step up for for X-T2

How can you not have great video? Thats tosh!! loads of other Camera Brands out there have `great quality images` and `stunning` video, for this camera to have such poor video is a `Major bummer`!!!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 04:58 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T1 Review (654 comments in total)
In reply to:

CNHT: I bought Fujiflim X-T1 on 24 Dec 2015, and I love this camera. but recently say in Feb 2015, I found that the rubber skin on the surface and on the camera lens zoom ring started to loosen up. The lens is 18-135mm the rubber sufface had shows sign of detachment so are the rubber sufface on the Camera.
Then come last month in early April 2015 the Camera Flash fail to fire. I had try to shoot in forced flash to test it but the Flash that came along with the X-T1 failed.

The last problem i found is the Shutter Speed Dail had also show its problem As i move to dail to adjust shutter speed. The metering dail also follow to move. The Shutter Speed dail seems to had also failed.

Can I have my X-T1 replaced? Just bought Dec 24th 2015 and now all these problems pop up.

Can Fujiflim make their flag ship camera tougher..? and easier to hold on too, ? Why must we bought extra handle for such so called well designed camera?

Thank you.

CNHT, R ya sure ya bought the camera on 24th december 2015???? or did ya buy a time-machine??

Direct link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 04:47 UTC
In reply to:

brownie314: Yikes! In P1000169 the red umbrellas are pretty bad. Looks like the DR of the sensor/processor can't handle that pretty tame scene.

Yikes! I think these pictures look great, colors, contrast and sharpness are all superb for a small sensor, this will be a brilliant camera for taking macro and birding shots, and with that stunning lens, wow!!!!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2015 at 14:53 UTC
In reply to:

perry rhodan: Is planet earth flat? Waste of resources IMHO.
The FZ1000 beats both by a large margin.

Agreed Perry.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2015 at 16:27 UTC
In reply to:

MrTaikitso: I'm surprised no one has commented on how terribly noisy this pictures are! And at ISO 100 too. Anyway, this article has just validated why paid sports photogs use the still Canon 1D or on a lesser scale, the Nikon D3/4. You don't see those white lenses dotted around the edges of a sports arena for nothing.
All said, I had a Sony NEX 5R a year or so ago, and the 10fps shooting mode did get me a few very good sharp in focus clean shots, but I had to preplan the shots, which were of some canoeists, not football players.
We all know as photogs that LIGHT is the key to it all, and if you don't have a large hunking fast zoom lens and a large hunking sensor, you're never going to be able to get tack sharp CLEAN pictures of a moving object. The laws of physics are not negotiable! :)

Mr TaiKitso, I`did` second comment from top!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2015 at 16:15 UTC
In reply to:

SteB: It's the game called football in the rest of the world.

Aye, weel said John ma freen. lol

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2015 at 15:52 UTC
In reply to:

tom1234567: Rx10-11 still a 1inch sensor and image quality is not very good
don't know why DPR would want to waste time on this camera,
The FZ1000 beats the pants off the RX10ii

so its one of the worst cameras Sony has ever brought out and the monies
£1000 is a joke ,
maybe £300 more realistic price for such a cr-ppy sensor
Tom G

Has anyone noticed the picture noise on the first picture taken with the RX10II? i note it was taken at iso 1000, the noise in the picture is terrible, even the FZ1000 is better than that, as i said in an earlier forum, the RX10II `fails` in picture quality, and i stand by that!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2015 at 14:43 UTC
In reply to:

mikey fried: Not too good, unless you need slow-mo then I think the FZ1000 has much better image quality at half the price.

I dont give a crap about video, although its more than capable and sufficient on the FZ1000 if needed, in my dpt its still image quality that matters to me and the FZ1000 is the winner here compared to the RX10 MK II, build quality is a non-issue the FZ1000 may be plastic, so-what! its pretty sturdy enough, as i said its pic quality that matters and again i say it, this new Sony `Fails` to deliver in that respect, oh, and we all know you are a Sony `defender` nobody is denying the new Sony is terrible, so you don't need to `defend` its features and getting upset, just its pic quality could be a bit better that's all, the original RX10 MK 1 even has better pic quality than the newer model, most of the posters here are all saying that, oh yea, i almost forgot, even the Sony fans!!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2015 at 16:40 UTC
In reply to:

Adamant: Based on still IQ, I can see absolutely no reason to prefer the RX10 II to its (now substantially cheaper) predecessor. The Mk I looks cleaner at low ISO. High ISO rendering on the Mk II is different, but not appreciably better.

I would say after looking at the comparison chart that the RX10 mark 1 has the edge in pic quality over the newer mark II version, its pictures look a tad softer to me, nice camera though!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 11, 2015 at 01:44 UTC
In reply to:

mikey fried: Not too good, unless you need slow-mo then I think the FZ1000 has much better image quality at half the price.

I would agree with Jacques, yes, the FZ1000 has superior pic quality, the RX10 II has a bit better build and some extra features that Panasonic has still to catch up with, i think when Panasonic finally release an upgraded FZ1000 it will simply blow this Sony out of the water, i don't care if a camera is made out of putty, at the end of the day its all about picture quality and this new Sony `fails` in that respect, i will stick with the, as some say, i.e. the plastic built FZ1000, its build is spot-on for me, and its at the end of the day `Superior` Picture Quality `that` is the `most` important item on `my` menu with top-range Bridge Cameras`!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 11, 2015 at 01:16 UTC
In reply to:

El Chubasco: I own the first version of this camera and its performance is rock solid. I share the views of this review and confirm that is the best all-in-one camera in the market. The image quality is excellent and the 24-200 2.8 lens is superb. This camera is so good that I am debating what to do with the rest of my gear.

I encourage all who criticize to go to the nearest store and try the RX10. Rent it if you can. You will be pleasantly surprised.

No! not `the best` all in one, yes a great bridger, but FZ1000 is better than the Rx10 mark1

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2015 at 17:40 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review (478 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am still trying to understand, yet I cannot, as the format itself is so poor. The published samples here are worse than any 16MP APS-C camera, and are certainly not as good IMHO, as I get from an FZ1000: they do not have a photographic quality.

I try to be generous, I try to make allowances, but in a medium in which the lenses now cost as much as full-frame lenses do, why should anybody?

There is no comparison between the results here and those you can get from ANY full-frame SLR, and my ancient 20D and D200 both do better.

The mediums limitations have it stuck at 16MP as well, so it appears that nobody possessing excellent Olympus, Leitz and Panasonic lenses has any possibility of enlarging their work to match other more competent media, and I feel sorry always for people who have bought into the system when I see them.

As noted in the review several pictures show shake they ascribe to shutter shock I dont get ever with 10 year-old equipment. And certainly not with an FZ1000

Munro, i too find the FZ1000`s pics looking better than most micro 4/3 cams, i had a Panny G6 and still have loads of pictures i took with it, on a comparison bases, yes the FZ1000 seems to have better color, sharpness, etc, i find it amazing how good the 1" sensor really is, i believe it is of Sony manufacture!

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2015 at 21:00 UTC
In reply to:

photo perzon: Horrible skin tones. Bad high ISO results. Large obese camera.

photo perzon Thats `RUBBISH` ya `FOOL`!!!

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2015 at 18:20 UTC
In reply to:

photo perzon: Horrible skin tones. Bad high ISO results. Large obese camera.

`RUBBISH` ya `FOOL`!!!!!

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2015 at 17:45 UTC
Total: 149, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »