PIX 2015
thx1138

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: 674, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Sony Alpha 7R II: Real-world ISO invariance study article (331 comments in total)

ISO 100 and 200 are clearly worse than ISO 400+ I would stick to making no more than +3EV boost in general. It is as it has always been, Nikon gets more out of a Sony sensor than Sony and clearly have better engine. The D810 trounces the A7R at high ISO and is more ISOless than the A7R. You can't really tell at all with the Nikon if it's been pushed +5-6EV. Hopefully Nikon will get this sensor in the D900.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 01:39 UTC as 33rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

thx1138: The hyperbole over the continuous AF abilities are ridiculous. I seen several so-called amazing sequences posted and even at web size a large % of the shots were clearly not focused yet the posters were waxing lyrical about what you'd consider par for the course for entry level DSLRs. Let's see you track the eye of an eagle swooping down for the kill or a basketball player moving erratically with say at least a 75% keeper rate ie critically sharp at 100% view, not at web size of people simply walking around.

I am referring to sequences posted on several other sites that were reviewing the camera. These were true action shot sequences using the narrow AF settings, not eye AF.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2015 at 02:11 UTC

The hyperbole over the continuous AF abilities are ridiculous. I seen several so-called amazing sequences posted and even at web size a large % of the shots were clearly not focused yet the posters were waxing lyrical about what you'd consider par for the course for entry level DSLRs. Let's see you track the eye of an eagle swooping down for the kill or a basketball player moving erratically with say at least a 75% keeper rate ie critically sharp at 100% view, not at web size of people simply walking around.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2015 at 01:14 UTC as 123rd comment | 5 replies

The prices are just insane. Carbon fibre my bum, these must be made from unobtanium and the legs must be hand woven by 12 vestal virgins who can only work on a blue moon.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 19, 2015 at 13:09 UTC as 19th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Michel F: so the The EOS 7D Mark ll is a prosumer camera now ?

Is the A7R II selling yet?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 18, 2015 at 10:35 UTC
In reply to:

justmeMN: [Insert absurd anti-Canon rant here] :-)

Yes of course no one takes good photos with DSLR's any more. What were they thinking.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 18, 2015 at 00:13 UTC
In reply to:

Michel F: so the The EOS 7D Mark ll is a prosumer camera now ?

Always has been. The only pro cameras they make are 1 series, so what's your point?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 18, 2015 at 00:12 UTC

Cinema lenses are pure horn, looks awesome

Direct link | Posted on Aug 12, 2015 at 02:39 UTC as 7th comment
On Rough and ready: Olympus Tough TG-4 review article (240 comments in total)
In reply to:

CekariYH: Great supporting RAW for this kind of cameras.
I don't have an Olympus but that might change when I feel the need to ditch my other "pocket" camera.

By the standards I use to justify spending hard earned money to buy the camera myself. I look at these UW cameras with even more disdain than smartphones.

I assumed after Nikon released an UW camera with a 1" sensor others would follow, but alas nothing but the same old crap we've seen for a decade. Could someone even use a 1/1.7" sensor and stick to 10-12MP.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 11, 2015 at 04:53 UTC
On Rough and ready: Olympus Tough TG-4 review article (240 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lan: Wow, you people are curmudgeonly bunch. I think the performance is pretty amazing for a rugged underwater compact camera, particularly by the time you add in things like the wireless flash control and RAW support. No, it doesn't give D810 image quality, but you can't expect it to - it costs a small fraction of that.

It's probably the best underwater compact yet. Give Olympus some credit.

@DPR: Were the underwater shots taken using the Underwater WB setting?

Oh no, not pocketable. I don't recall using pockets underwater. So pocketable and crap or not pocketable and excellent - tough choice.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 11, 2015 at 04:49 UTC
On Rough and ready: Olympus Tough TG-4 review article (240 comments in total)
In reply to:

CekariYH: Great supporting RAW for this kind of cameras.
I don't have an Olympus but that might change when I feel the need to ditch my other "pocket" camera.

It doesn't help much, you can polish a turd as much as you like and it's still a turd. IQ is barely acceptable at ISO 100 and then it goes to hell after that.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 11, 2015 at 00:09 UTC
On Rough and ready: Olympus Tough TG-4 review article (240 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lan: Wow, you people are curmudgeonly bunch. I think the performance is pretty amazing for a rugged underwater compact camera, particularly by the time you add in things like the wireless flash control and RAW support. No, it doesn't give D810 image quality, but you can't expect it to - it costs a small fraction of that.

It's probably the best underwater compact yet. Give Olympus some credit.

@DPR: Were the underwater shots taken using the Underwater WB setting?

Nothing short of embarrassing quality out of all these UW cameras in 2015. They are a relic using a sensor size that should have been laid to rest 10 years ago. They wow on features and have failed to improve IQ one iota in 5 years.

For god's sake Sony give us an UW version of the RX100 and save us from this woeful sate of affairs.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 11, 2015 at 00:07 UTC

Wow that Batis lens is quite ordinary. Not a single sharp image. You certainly wouldn't want this to be a true indication of what to expect from the camera. I was hoping to be wowed by the landscape shots but instead you got entry level all-in-one zoom level quality. Having said that some of the images are very nice from the point of view of the photographer.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 7, 2015 at 03:53 UTC as 72nd comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: "At least for the first few years of its production, the older 24-70mm F2.8 was notorious for cracking rubber around the zoom ring, and for the zoom barrel jamming."

That's the first time I've ever heard of those issues. Sounds like hyperbole.

No such dramas with the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II.

I'm surprised to see that the addition of VR has not really jumped the price. Many Canon naysayers said the reason they left it off is because they'd want $3K with IS. I say BS and hopefully Canon who have prototype 24-70 f/2.8 IS lenses will now act and also release at a sensible price

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 04:57 UTC
In reply to:

John C Tharp: While the first two lenses are absolutely welcomed (by Nikon shooters, and by shooters of other systems that appreciate the competition), the 200-500/5.6 doesn't make a whole lot of sense given that it's priced smack dab between three great 150-600/5-6.3 options from Sigma and Tamron.

What makes it special enough to it's development and production warranted?

f/5.6 vs f/6.3, most likely better build and/or AF, possibly better IS.

It's about time Canikon offered something similar to what Sigma and Tamron have been offering for a long time. I have the Sigma 150-600C and luckily mines a very good copy, sharp wide open at 600mm, AF is quick, but if Canon offered a 200-600 f/5.6 or 150-500 f/5.6 I'd be in like Flyn if it were optically as good as the 100-400L IS mk II. Good on Sigma and Tamron for giving us affordable 600mm options and good on Nikon for also offering what seems like a nice lens at a sensible price. Canon your move.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 04:54 UTC

Just when you thought smart phone IQ couldn't get worse, Samsung admits they are trading IQ for size. Ridiculous

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2015 at 07:17 UTC as 12th comment | 3 replies
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV First Impressions Review preview (1547 comments in total)

That second photo on the last page of the train tracks is woeful, full of noise and I was shocked it was only ISO 500, not ISO 5000. What the hell went wrong with the supposed ISOless sensor.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 10:48 UTC as 123rd comment | 3 replies
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV First Impressions Review preview (1547 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mr Spocko: Nice but too expensive

I'd be happy if that price were in South sea pesos (aka the Australian dollar) but at nearly $1000USD Sony are smoking crack. $799 would have been reasonable. Somehow 4K video is to cameras as carbon fibre is to cars and adds big dollars just for the name alone.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 10:30 UTC
In reply to:

Henrikw: If only they would put a 1" sensor in this one. That would be a winner

That would mean no 600mm equivalent lens. I'd have been happy with even the 2/3" sensor format. It would have been sad if it had used a 1/1.7" sensor but still using the pathetically small 1/2.33" sensor which is is what some smart phones use from Sony, is a joke in 2015.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 09:20 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV First Impressions Review preview (1547 comments in total)
In reply to:

Slowfish: What is the true resolution at 960FPS (2 sec option) ?

Clearly very low, the bee video looks like a 30 year old VHS that's been played too many times.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 01:10 UTC
Total: 674, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »