jtan163

jtan163

Lives in Australia Adelaide, Australia
Joined on Oct 25, 2010
About me:

Just another guy with a camera.

Comments

Total: 349, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (294 comments in total)
In reply to:

GPW: The Nikon and Canon 70-200 weigh that much for a reason. I have had so many people tell me that their Sigma or Tamron had to go back several times for repairs. My Nikon 70-200 F/2.8 has been through some harsh elements(weather) in the past 5 years with ZERO failures, because they are built like a rock.

Yeah the f3.5-5.6 lenses are smaller as would be a contantst f/4, but assuming the old DX sensor is a stop lower perfromance DX 70-200 equivilants realy need to be f2 or f/1.8 to get similar IQ.

Which is why the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 is so awesome (but it is huge and heavy).

This is why I have an M43 system as well as an APS-C system.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2014 at 08:40 UTC
In reply to:

jtan163: One important factor that has been ignored is cost and the effect that this may have on the professional photographer.

Death of P&S and I think the massive decline in sales on consumer DSLRs and the ubiquity in phone cameras has increased innovation and the spec of DSLRs, while reducing (I think we're just starting to see it ) the artificial differentiation oin a given company's DSLR/MILC ranges.

In return DSLRs/MILC makers are wanting to charge premiums.
In other words the camera industry seems to be returning to the days where cameras where more expensive.

This is likely good a for pros.
It increases the barrier to entry. (A D7100 or a D750 with a couple of decent lenses and strobe is way more costly than a D3300 and kit lens).
It wont ever return to the point where pros were when you had to pay for film and printing, but it will reduce the competition and maybe increase the market a bit, especially at the lower end of the pro market.

Yes you see them, but people are apparently not buying ew ones.
There were some years, when DSLRs first got affordable that threir sales were going up.
Now most people have their digital rebel or D3/5x00 and it will last them for years.
Most of these people don't feel the need to upgrade or rpelace like DPR people.
As you say, there's no real need to upgrade as DSLR's do remainperfectly useful for years.
Hence while you see piles of DSLRs (every body has one), sales aren't necessarily booming (not every one is upgrading and the original boom has declined as every one that want's one has one now).

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2014 at 08:37 UTC
On Photokina 2014: Sony stand report article (77 comments in total)

I rather expect the dog harness for the action cam is more aimed at working dogs than the family fido.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 17:30 UTC as 2nd comment
On Photokina 2014: Hands on with the Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 article (36 comments in total)
In reply to:

peevee1: Tamron is the only one making stabilized 24-70/2.8, right? And now the only one making stabilized UWA for full-frame DSLRs?
For handheld photography with modern high-res FF cameras, these are the only choices if your camera does not have IBIS. 1/FL rule made for 1.5mpix (1000 lines per picture height) does not apply anymore. And neither it is for video, of course. Or raise your ISO and shutter speed by a couple of stops from than 1/FL.
Although if you are not in a hurry, it might make sense to wain until Sigma releases competitors in these categories in their A/S/C lines, compatible with the dock and mount upgrade service. The ability to upgrade firmware is essential with camera manufacturers breaking compatibility on purpose.

For me, I'm afraid, it comes down to price.
I' like to buy brand name all else being equal.
Assuming IQ is equal then with a purchase in the $1-2K range something like a 10-20% saving is gonna probably se me going off brand. All else being equal.
And the bigger that difference or the base price is the more likely I'll go off.
I don't really earn enough to be a photographer.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 09:26 UTC
On Photokina 2014: Ricoh stand report article (147 comments in total)
In reply to:

jimrpdx: " As you can see, there wasn't a long wait for the K-3."

Sorry - was that humour? True I see no people, but I don't think anyone climbing the waterfall would get to stay long - assuming you are serious. And if you're being funny it's rather sad. Why does Pentax continue to get a disproportionate number of dismissive throwaway lines from DPR staff?

I'm not a pentax buyer and never have been.
When I spent money on a camera I bought a Nikon, because I thought Nikons were the best, based on what I now look on as pretty thin (and even then very dated evidence).

I think most people are the same, and these days Nikon and Canon are the brands most associated with pro shooters, so most people think they are the best and are not equipend to assess cameras by another criteria other than megapixels.

People may not want pentax cameras, but I don't think that's about the camera, that's about reputation and marketing.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 09:03 UTC
In reply to:

rufusrm44: This statement is false:

"Quite simply, the smaller sensor will receive less light at matched exposures (same shutter speed and aperture) and this means more noise."

It's only true if the pixel pitch is lower (meaning the pixel density is greater.) But if the number and size of the pixels are identical, that less light received on the m43 sensor is equivalent to the 'more' light gathered by full frame because the full frame requires more light to cover the larger sensor.

Imagine if you had a sensor that was cut 1/4 the size of the full frame sensor. That means it only needs the same shutter speed and aperture to produce the same quality of image, but that image would be only 1/4 the pixels of the ff sensor, and would therefore only need 1/4 the light.

Richard, I have a hard time understanding this aspect of equivalence.

What I don't get is that the amount of light projected on the APS-C area of the 35mm sensor is the same amount of light projected on the actual APS-C sensor.

That being the case if you crop the image produced by the 35mm sensor, does it have the same amount of noise as the image produced by the actual APS-C sized sensor, assuming similar technology, pixel pitch and using the exact same lens?

Or put another way if you used the same tech and pixel pitch in the D7100 and the D800e (both released early 2012) the same 50 ƒ/1.8G, would an image taken on a D810 in DX mode have as much noise as the D7100 in 1.3x mode?

If I look at the D5200, the D7000, the D800 and the 5D2 on the studio comparison tool all images RAW ISO 100 (and magnify my MacBook view iva CMD-shift-'+') I see very little difference in noise, with noticeable but not great differences in brightness and a bit more aliasing in the DX (esp the 5200).

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 05:12 UTC
On Photokina 2014: Ricoh stand report article (147 comments in total)
In reply to:

jimrpdx: " As you can see, there wasn't a long wait for the K-3."

Sorry - was that humour? True I see no people, but I don't think anyone climbing the waterfall would get to stay long - assuming you are serious. And if you're being funny it's rather sad. Why does Pentax continue to get a disproportionate number of dismissive throwaway lines from DPR staff?

Because despite being an Old Skool camera company and despite making good cameras they have relatively small market share now.

in other words, the bleeding obvious.

I have a feeling other manufacturers may be looking to put out a slightly lower cost medium format digital fairly soon and when they do I think the benefits of MF will become far more widely known and then I think maybe Pentax will find itself with more limelight with a more technically capable product for slightly more money.
BTW this is all speculation - I have no industry contacts, just noting synthesising what people who do have industry contacts have been writin..

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 04:36 UTC

One important factor that has been ignored is cost and the effect that this may have on the professional photographer.

Death of P&S and I think the massive decline in sales on consumer DSLRs and the ubiquity in phone cameras has increased innovation and the spec of DSLRs, while reducing (I think we're just starting to see it ) the artificial differentiation oin a given company's DSLR/MILC ranges.

In return DSLRs/MILC makers are wanting to charge premiums.
In other words the camera industry seems to be returning to the days where cameras where more expensive.

This is likely good a for pros.
It increases the barrier to entry. (A D7100 or a D750 with a couple of decent lenses and strobe is way more costly than a D3300 and kit lens).
It wont ever return to the point where pros were when you had to pay for film and printing, but it will reduce the competition and maybe increase the market a bit, especially at the lower end of the pro market.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 04:01 UTC as 7th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

camerosity: You forgot the Nikon Coolpix A. Typical dpreview

Typical DPR audience.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 03:52 UTC
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (294 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: Resolution is where equivalency really matters. Which means that a 16 mp m4/3 camera with a 300mm lens, will match the linear resolution of a 36mp FF camera with a 600mm lens. Likely, it will offer slightly better resolution owing to the fact a 300mm lens will suffer from less atmospheric degradation (heat waves, etc) than the 600mm lens. The qualifier being the two lenses have to be the same quality with the same aberration control, another area the 300mm has the possibility of being better. Additionally the smaller set-up is easier to keep steady and will have less shutter slap to blur the images. Of course, all of this goes out the window is the ISO rises high enough to give the FF a noticeable edge.

Agreed to see significant size/weight improvement over 35mm you need to go down smaller than APS-C.

M43 works for me too.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 03:26 UTC
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (294 comments in total)
In reply to:

babart: Interesting topic, and one that was just tossed around on DPR's Fuji forum. It seems there is a strong contingent of Fuji owners that bought the small and light angle of Fuji's mirrorless offerings. That, and the great lenses.

But Fuji's latest offerings are rather large and heavy. OK, not as heavy as f/2.8 full-frame zooms, but heavy enough that Fuji users are starting to complain.

Why can't Fuji make a 60-135 that's, say, f/3.5 to 4.5. Such a lens would certainly weigh less than a pound and be much more compatible to the excellent 18-55 zoom. Pentax currently makes a WR 50-200/4-5.6 zoom that weighs 10 ounces. With Fuji quality and focus motors, a 60-135/3.5-4.5 shouldn't be more that 14 ounces? At any rate, producing two pound zooms at $1600 and up might cause Fuji to lose favor with it's strongest followers.

Mirrorless started out light and small, and everyone loved it. Now it's becoming like small cars that grow bigger every year.

BAB

Be happy.
Nikon has any number of slow light sharp zooms.
And they suck. They;re good within their parameters, but their parameters suck.

Slow shutter speeds to get enough light is not what you want when your shooting 150-200 when you need high shutter to counteract wobble.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 03:25 UTC
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (294 comments in total)
In reply to:

GPW: The Nikon and Canon 70-200 weigh that much for a reason. I have had so many people tell me that their Sigma or Tamron had to go back several times for repairs. My Nikon 70-200 F/2.8 has been through some harsh elements(weather) in the past 5 years with ZERO failures, because they are built like a rock.

But the problem is high quality well built APS-C lenses are not lighter.

As pointed out the current Sigma 50-150 ƒ/2.8 OS is more or less the same size and weight as the 70-200,

I have the Tokina 50-1352.8 which is a reasonable size, but has ghosting and flaring issues and no OS, which bites as I like to shoot at dusk and night.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 03:21 UTC
On Photokina 2014: Hands on with the Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 article (36 comments in total)
In reply to:

peevee1: Tamron is the only one making stabilized 24-70/2.8, right? And now the only one making stabilized UWA for full-frame DSLRs?
For handheld photography with modern high-res FF cameras, these are the only choices if your camera does not have IBIS. 1/FL rule made for 1.5mpix (1000 lines per picture height) does not apply anymore. And neither it is for video, of course. Or raise your ISO and shutter speed by a couple of stops from than 1/FL.
Although if you are not in a hurry, it might make sense to wain until Sigma releases competitors in these categories in their A/S/C lines, compatible with the dock and mount upgrade service. The ability to upgrade firmware is essential with camera manufacturers breaking compatibility on purpose.

Good point Tony. I forgot about the one - but as Lassoni says - it's not as fast, though I suspect for a lot of wide use, that's not such a big deal.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 21:32 UTC

Barney - you did very well to refrain from commenting on equivalence when he started talking focal lengths, apertures and fields of views.

For what it is worth I wish you guys would start a gentle discussion with the manufacturers so they start to make their equivalence claims more sensible, especially around light gathering and aperture.

I suspect you guys are one of the few organisations with the influence, weight and audience to start that conversation with the manufacturer's.

That single sentence sale pitch was a VERY long multi full stop" sentence"!!!!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 21:24 UTC as 4th comment
On Photokina 2014: Hands on with the Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 article (36 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark Banas: Now I'm really looking forward to Barney's "things cut in half" photo essay. Given how many lenses are being announced or introduced, there should be a bumper crop of "half-frame" goodness this year!

:-) Nice one.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 21:19 UTC
On Photokina 2014: Hands on with the Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 article (36 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alphoid: I'm not sure if the premium Tamron thing will play out. Virtually all of their lenses fail with moderately heavy use, and they don't really honor warranties. That's not the kind of reputation higher-end consumers would go for. Moving up-scale from there would either involve dramatically shifting economics on their low-end craptics, and starting to make things out of materials which don't fail with a bit of use, starting to honor warranties, etc. It would break economics on everything they make, and it would take years for reputation to catch up.

Price leader is where they are, and probably where they should stay. Or a clear split in branding.

I have to agree, a firend of mine who does shoot video and take stills for a living sub contracts to a guy who has been through 3 of the 17-55 2.8 VC crop lenses - all the same fault and some were bought months after the first one, so it didin't look like later batches were getting re-designed/new parts.

It was a very nice lens though and apparently the best stabilisation for video in that range - hence they kept going back.

I have to say I have a lot more confidence in the "new" Sigma based on other people's reported experience.
They've certainly made a concious and concerted public effort to lift their game quality and service wise, which has increased their value for money proposition, considerably IMO.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 21:17 UTC
On Photokina 2014: Hands on with the Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 article (36 comments in total)
In reply to:

peevee1: Tamron is the only one making stabilized 24-70/2.8, right? And now the only one making stabilized UWA for full-frame DSLRs?
For handheld photography with modern high-res FF cameras, these are the only choices if your camera does not have IBIS. 1/FL rule made for 1.5mpix (1000 lines per picture height) does not apply anymore. And neither it is for video, of course. Or raise your ISO and shutter speed by a couple of stops from than 1/FL.
Although if you are not in a hurry, it might make sense to wain until Sigma releases competitors in these categories in their A/S/C lines, compatible with the dock and mount upgrade service. The ability to upgrade firmware is essential with camera manufacturers breaking compatibility on purpose.

Yes looks like Tamron is really going after video guys putting their (by al reports excellent) VC in everything they make these days).

It's hard to question that as it seems to me that video is on of the few places that people are still frequently upgrading and changing platforms as the video tech and standards keep moving - not to mention more ppl taking it up as paid stills work is harder to get.

I' really a stills guywill almost certiainly never be a paid shooter, and frequnetly shoot manua focus off a tripod, but I'm very happy to benefit from this and really like the idea of having a stabilised "holy trinity" - gives me hope I'll be able to get off the tripod some day!!!! (at least some times).

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 21:13 UTC
On Olympus shows camera module concept post (58 comments in total)

Some on mentioned drones.
I imagine a module like this would make an excellent camera for a drone. Small decent sensor, importantly small glass and im minimalist. I'd guess USB control would be preferable ( no need to waste battery for wifi control).

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 23:08 UTC as 18th comment
On Nikon D750 First-impressions review preview (1004 comments in total)

Did I miss it - was buffer size mentioned anywhere? I'm guessing 2 seconds or about 13 frames which is in line with the other cameras with this body, but then again some of the spec has surprised me so hopefully the buffer will too.

Anyone know anything about the buffer size/depth?

I have been conemplating full frame.
The D610 did not appeal, the D810 was more than I wanted to pay, although I was considering it anyway and I was considering the A7s as the cheap easy way in.

I think I'm pretty much going to be a D750 buyer/ fanboy now I've seen the spec, I like it, despite the 1/4000 max shutter and lack of dedicated AF-ON.
Most disappointing is the AA filter, but I guess that's part of the push for the video crowd. So sharpen in post, like I do now.
Overall I'm really looking forward to a D750.
Love the fact that there leaving the pro features of the AF module in, (e.g. f8 -3EV focus), and that they ahve added the new metering and AF - Area modes.
Lord please let the QA be good.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2014 at 09:46 UTC as 217th comment | 4 replies
On Adobe CC Announcements: What you need to know article (181 comments in total)
In reply to:

desaint: Everybody complaining,i think 10 dollar a month is a bargain for such a great software tool.

Yes my phone works without a contract.
It is unlocked and I buy a SIM card and pre pay minutes/megabytes. I did not say my phone minutes were free. I said I have no contract.
If I get peeved off with the phone company, I buy a SIM from a different company and there is no penalty apart from the loss of any unused minutes and the cost of the SIM. I think a SIM is abou $2AUD.
I pay more for my phone but am not locked in.
It's quite common as far as I know in most places, except the US and their "free" market.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2014 at 17:01 UTC
Total: 349, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »