thx1138

Lives in Australia Sydney, Australia
Works as a Senior Researcher - Canon Australia
Joined on Jul 17, 2004
About me:

Canon 1D X, 5D III, 17-40 f/4L, 45 f/2.8 TS-E, Sigma 50 f/1.4 Sigma 85 f/1.4, 135 f/2L, Canon 100 f/2.8L IS macro, 70-200 f/2.8L IS mk II, 300 f/2.8L IS, 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS, 500 f/4L IS mk II, 1.4x TC III, 2x TC III, 600 EX, Sigma 24 f/1.8 EX, Canon 24-7 f/2.8 mk II, Sigma 150 f/2.8 Macro EX HSM DG

Comments

Total: 829, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1000 comments in total)
In reply to:

thx1138: Interesting comparing RAW image quality at ISO 6400, we see the D500 is only marginally better than the D7200, and not much better than the 7DII. Sony A6300 is noisier than even 7DII at ISO 6400, but all are doing well. Resizing the D7200 shots to 20.7MP would yield almost no difference to D500. 12800 looks to be the limit for any of them. At 25600 the D500 is clearly best, but not useable unless downsampled. Interesting how poorly Sony sensor does as ISO goes over 6400.

Oh no Sony alert. Use your eyes and scan the entire scene. The a6300 is blotchier and has no more detail. Resampling 24MP to 20MP will make very little difference. Stop worrying about the tech and look at the results. For a supposedly god like sensor it is beaten by Toshiba's D7200 sensor and at least matched by antiquated 7D II. Note I'm am not talking DR just noise.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 11:29 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1000 comments in total)
In reply to:

thx1138: Yikes looking at the bike rider for the AF testing, maybe just one is a keeper but still not critically sharp. The rest are junk. The soccer player looks better but hard to say at such small sizes

Well why show his face at 100%. What a cop out. What sports photographer wants blurred face and sharp shirt. Are you for real. If this was Canon camera you would have laid the smack down big time.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 11:24 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1000 comments in total)

Yikes looking at the bike rider for the AF testing, maybe just one is a keeper but still not critically sharp. The rest are junk. The soccer player looks better but hard to say at such small sizes

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 01:08 UTC as 80th comment | 4 replies
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1000 comments in total)

Interesting comparing RAW image quality at ISO 6400, we see the D500 is only marginally better than the D7200, and not much better than the 7DII. Sony A6300 is noisier than even 7DII at ISO 6400, but all are doing well. Resizing the D7200 shots to 20.7MP would yield almost no difference to D500. 12800 looks to be the limit for any of them. At 25600 the D500 is clearly best, but not useable unless downsampled. Interesting how poorly Sony sensor does as ISO goes over 6400.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 01:01 UTC as 83rd comment | 6 replies
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1000 comments in total)

Clearly Nikon misspelt the name as the app was supposed to be called CrapBridge. Seriously this is not difficult stuff and I suspect they are paying the janitor 10 Yen and hour to design the app.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 00:37 UTC as 85th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

goactive: Seems like people are not taking into fact that the sample images here are not edited to taste like you would do with something you shot.

If you add sharpening and contrast and all around edit them fully i do not think they would look any better or worse then any other 85mm out their.
Now i have to get this one or the Nikon or a Sigma.
I would like to get more info on the VC to see how well it works i can see that as a big plus.

Seriously if you think the Tamron offers nothing over say the Canon 85 f/1.8 other than VC you need to take up another hobby. There has already been an extensive review of this lens and the verdict was overwhelming good. IQ is superb and a step up from the likes of the Canon. The lens is full metal construction, and weather sealed and better built than SIgma Art lenses. The VC was good for at least 3 stops. CA was very low, distortion very low, AF is better than in the 35/45 f/1.8 they recently released. The only potential issue might be images are not quite as sharp with VC enabled, but more testing needs to be done. This lens easily matches it with the best out there and the price is a relative bargain IMO. The Canon 85 f/1.8 is not in the same league at this at all especially build quality. Do you think if Canon released a new 85 f/1.8 IS it would in any way not be at least 2x dearer.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2016 at 02:18 UTC
On article Nikon D500 real-world sample gallery updated (67 comments in total)
In reply to:

thx1138: There seems to be a huge disconnect between dpreview's high ISO shots and real world shots being displayed in the forums on this and other sites. Frankly looking at these I'm underwhelmed, with plenty of noise visible even at ISO 800 in blazing sunshine. Yet I have seen images even at ISO 18000 in the forum that are amazingly clean and full of detail. Others are showing ISO 3200-6400 as very clean, far from what I'm seeing here. Not sure what's going on, but if this was my only source of information I would not buy this camera.

The images I was looking in the ISO 11000-1800 range were 100% views.
I disagree because it is APS-C it'll show noise (or that much noise) at ISO 800, especially in bright sunshine. That level of noise was the case several year ago in cameras like my 7D, but the D500 is the new benchmark.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2016 at 12:33 UTC
On article Nikon D500 real-world sample gallery updated (67 comments in total)

There seems to be a huge disconnect between dpreview's high ISO shots and real world shots being displayed in the forums on this and other sites. Frankly looking at these I'm underwhelmed, with plenty of noise visible even at ISO 800 in blazing sunshine. Yet I have seen images even at ISO 18000 in the forum that are amazingly clean and full of detail. Others are showing ISO 3200-6400 as very clean, far from what I'm seeing here. Not sure what's going on, but if this was my only source of information I would not buy this camera.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2016 at 02:41 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

photo perzon: I see a lot of noise in the samples

Shoosh, only reserve criticism for Canon products, you've been warned.

Seriously it's pretty bad when they lift the shadows even a little and lens is not that sharp.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2016 at 01:32 UTC
In reply to:

Dodge_Rock: I prefer this type of camera review above all others. Technical reviews are a snooze fest. Thanks for providing the updated samples. Looks like people pics turn out really well!

Both types of review are of importance and most welocme, but the Sony trolls get hung up on sensor specs far too often and think DR is all that matters. How on earth did all those other great photos ever get taken in high contrast situations I wonder.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2016 at 01:31 UTC
In reply to:

N135F2DC: All three cameras are incredible.

All 4 cameras

D5/D500/1DXII/K1

Link | Posted on May 8, 2016 at 09:20 UTC
In reply to:

TriezeA72: Won't be long and DSLRs will be a sinking ship

Look forward to your smartphone pictures

Said no one ever!

Link | Posted on May 8, 2016 at 09:19 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoUniverse: Nikon D810 is the best

At what?

Link | Posted on May 6, 2016 at 04:51 UTC
In reply to:

Barry Goyette: Lets be honest DPR...your love affair with the sony a7r-II sensor would fall apart if you would simply pay attention to the lack of detail that comes along with sony's noise reduction. Your constant need to show how pushing an image 4+ stops is the most important camera metric would cease to influence your minions if you acknowledged that the A7r-II shows less detail than the other cameras when pushed using your preferred method of exposure.

Yet again Roger you think the camera is all about the sensor. I'll take a sensor 95% as good in a a far better camera. If you honestly think only users of a Sony sensor can produce good photos you should take up another hobby. The gushing enthusiasm for all things Sony on dpr is ridiculous.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2016 at 01:53 UTC
In reply to:

osan: Catching up on what, with whom? Canon D1x and Nikon D5 are the only cameras in this field. On this test or the part of it we can see now, up to ISO 6400 both camera has identical noise performance. But with the new sensor Canon looks better in DR department. If you compare it to, for example, Sony A7R II then it is legitimate to ask whether Sony will be able to make a camera even remotely similar to D1X or D5. I think it will be years until Sony or other brands are caught up with Canon and Nikon in this segment. if you don't mind the cliche Dpreview seems to be comparing Apples to Oranges.

Sony will never attempt a product in this segment. Their aftermarket service is third rate and no professional could rely on their amateur approach.

Link | Posted on May 5, 2016 at 09:32 UTC
In reply to:

TN Args: I'm amazed that DPR devotes so much attention and headlining to these cameras that, one would think, are mainly of interest to heavy duty sports pros and wannabee-pros. The former group of whom, are probably never on this site. They know what they need and they just go and get it, when they genuinely need it.

Maybe it's like those car magazines that devote huge space to Ferraris, Lambos and Astons etc, when most of their readers have a utilitarian SUV.

Oh I'm so sorry dpreview doesn't orbit your star and only cover what you are interested in. Life must be pretty darn boring in your world.

Link | Posted on May 5, 2016 at 09:30 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Enthusiast Long Zoom Cameras (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

FuhTeng: I'm excited for the RX10 III - what a fun camera to rent for a vacation! Sure, it's expensive, but it's a 600 mm f4 lens! I just hope the AF is up to the task.

And if it's not, the Nikon DL24-500 sounds great too.

You mean it's 600 f/10.8. You can't quote FF equivalent FL and not FF equivalent aperture. The 1" sensor is a 2.7x crop format.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2016 at 02:54 UTC
On article The Canon that can: Canon EOS 80D Review (677 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boissez: Lackluster AF, build and a lackluster sensor (although DR is improved). Will Canon ever release a compelling midrange product like they used to in the XXD series?

Such a shame.

Lackluster reply from someone that has probably never used a Canon camera in their life and spends all day on forums talking about DR rather than mastering their craft. Easy to blame the tools for shoddy work.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 09:46 UTC
In reply to:

caravan: The D500 looks good but behold the a6300! Amazing.

The results are so close it's not even worth worrying about. The headline should be, you don't have to worry about IQ on the D500", AF performance will be the main reason you'd buy this camera and that has yet to be demonstrated.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 02:57 UTC

The gushing enthusiasm about the high ISO performance is ridiculous. The D500 is barely better than the a6300 or D7200 at 25600 and if those sensors were down-sampled to 21MP the results would be even closer. Nikon has not altered quantum physics and have only barely raised the bar. You certainly would not use ISO 51K or higher which are marketing cr@p. The really good news is that they have not made the mistake they did with the D5 and the sensor has impressive DR and is ISOless, the exact opposite of the D5, which has gone markedly backward. However yet again the D500 is only performing a wee bit better than the D7200 in the DR and ISO'lessness testing.

Leaving aside the sensor the real drawcard of this camera is the AF. And could they have just used the D7200 sensor in the D500 body and would anybody really see the difference in IQ.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 00:07 UTC as 71st comment | 4 replies
Total: 829, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »