neil holmes

neil holmes

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Feb 26, 2004
About me:

Just an old amatuer..live music is my passion. My photos have been used by many bands including the likes of Grinspoon and Magic Dirt. I have had photos in several newspapers including a national sporting publication..and including front page and feature.

Comments

Total: 179, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Nice scale model.

When do they start making the real full size one?

THAT I would like.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 21:32 UTC as 13th comment
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1231 comments in total)
In reply to:

neil holmes: Wonder if Canon lenses will work better on this with a Kipon AF adapter than on the Gx7?

Nah, don't need that.....some have tried it I think and not much different to an GX7.
I was just wondering about this new camera.

I have the GX7 and SOME canon lenses are actually quite good for AF ....there are other issues (down to the adapter) though.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 06:53 UTC
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1231 comments in total)

Wonder if Canon lenses will work better on this with a Kipon AF adapter than on the Gx7?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 06:47 UTC as 201st comment | 2 replies
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV First Impressions Review preview (1321 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: Wish Panasonic can make LX8 with this SONY inside, not the "HUGE" LX100 per pocket-able P&S standard.

Your opinion, not mine.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 21:37 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV First Impressions Review preview (1321 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: Wish Panasonic can make LX8 with this SONY inside, not the "HUGE" LX100 per pocket-able P&S standard.

As is FUD like saying that there are "almost zero" good lenses.

I could say there are "almost zero" good lenses for Canon because the 50 1.8ii is (for me) not great....same logic as far as I am concerned. No I don't think that.
Again, Sony lenses are just fine....including the 16-50 APSC kit lens ....for me anyway.
Don't like yours? fine sell it.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 21:00 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV First Impressions Review preview (1321 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: Wish Panasonic can make LX8 with this SONY inside, not the "HUGE" LX100 per pocket-able P&S standard.

MY 14-42 Oly ii M4/3 kit lens is not better than MY 16-50 Sony APSC kit lens.
They are fairly similar in terms of image quality but the 16-50 is more useful to ME in being wider.
I prefer the Sony over both my previous Nikon 1 and current Nikon ii VR kit lenses....others will differ.
The Sony lenses are just like any other system, some are better than others and it depends what you want/use.
Saying there are no native good lenses for the Sony A6000 is just wrong and FUD.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 20:27 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV First Impressions Review preview (1321 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: Wish Panasonic can make LX8 with this SONY inside, not the "HUGE" LX100 per pocket-able P&S standard.

Just curious what native APSC Sony E mount lenses you have used?
I only have two......the much maligned 16-50 OSS and the 50 1.8 OSS.
The 16-50 though JUST a kit lens is actually a better lens to me than most of the other kit lenses I have used...more useful too.
The little 50 1.8 OSS is an excellent lens and stabilized as well....with AF extension tubes it even can double as a AF, stabilized FF macro lens full frame.
A FAR better lens than many other 50s.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 19:25 UTC

I am sure that for those who want it the 5Ds will be a wonderful camera.

It is kinda funny that the HIGHEST scoring Canon camera gets exactly the same overall score as the LOWEST FF E mount camera.

Very different cameras with very different uses and different strengths and weaknesses. yes, the overall score should never be taken as a be all and end all.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2015 at 19:03 UTC as 132nd comment
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review preview (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: “Auto ISO is not available at all when shooting video.”

Can you clarify that statement a little bit? Surely you don’t mean that this camera cannot control ISO during video recording? How does ISO function when you hit the record button in one of the stills modes?

Ok,
yes it does work other than M up to ISO 3200.

I have had it set to M in video mode.
Thanks.
Still too limited for most uses for me but may well have its uses from time to time (a little more than before).

Direct link | Posted on Jul 6, 2015 at 22:41 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review preview (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: “Auto ISO is not available at all when shooting video.”

Can you clarify that statement a little bit? Surely you don’t mean that this camera cannot control ISO during video recording? How does ISO function when you hit the record button in one of the stills modes?

It is fixed to ISO 200 in video mode (for auto ISO...of course you can choose yourself).....I have it sitting right next to me.
Yes in stills mode it seems to not be limited.....I never use it for video much anyway and not in stills mode.....have to try this and see.
Video is limited to ISO 3200 max in video as well with a GX7 and IBIS doesn't work in video mode either.
Video quality is ok but there are too many other limitations with the GX7 for video for my liking ......no mic jack is another.
I have another camera for video.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 6, 2015 at 22:06 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review preview (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: “Auto ISO is not available at all when shooting video.”

Can you clarify that statement a little bit? Surely you don’t mean that this camera cannot control ISO during video recording? How does ISO function when you hit the record button in one of the stills modes?

That would be right on past cameras.
The GX7 in auto ISO reverts to ISO 200 in video mode.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 6, 2015 at 20:17 UTC
On Sony: An eye on focus article (758 comments in total)
In reply to:

PerL: So would this system enable Sony cameras to shot a low light indoor sports game with a 200 2.0 lens wide open at 10 fps with a higher number of keepers than a Canon 1Dx or a Nikon D4s, or is it just nerd stuff?

Not switch but I would think some of them might consider ADDING a A7Rii. More so if they shoot more than sports with long lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2015 at 23:36 UTC
On Sony: An eye on focus article (758 comments in total)
In reply to:

PerL: So would this system enable Sony cameras to shot a low light indoor sports game with a 200 2.0 lens wide open at 10 fps with a higher number of keepers than a Canon 1Dx or a Nikon D4s, or is it just nerd stuff?

On a camera gear forum, lots of people will buy ....a camera.

Define cheap.....people pay what they can afford and there are many who CAN afford an A7Rii.....I cant now ......I could if I sold my Canon DSLR and A7 and a good lens....so am close to being able to afford an A7Rii....I can not afford an D4s or 1DX at all)... I recognise lots can afford it BUT also that far fewer can afford the 1Dx or D4s......(though plenty still can).

For a lot of people, what you paid for your current Pentax or any of your previous cameras is more than they could afford for a hobby......it is all relative.
If someone GAVE me a D4s, I would sell it and buy a A7Rii and pocket the difference......because the A7Rii would be a better camera for ME.
Others would prefer the Canon.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2015 at 19:55 UTC
On Sony: An eye on focus article (758 comments in total)
In reply to:

PerL: So would this system enable Sony cameras to shot a low light indoor sports game with a 200 2.0 lens wide open at 10 fps with a higher number of keepers than a Canon 1Dx or a Nikon D4s, or is it just nerd stuff?

@ Macro Nutr.....I mean Zero Polycabonate

A D4s Body alone (at B&H now) costs about $300 MORE than a A7Rii AND an A7s......and for your $300 you can buy two or three different active adapters on the likes of Ebay.

IF you want a Metabones IV then you would have to pay $100 more for your A7Rii, A7s and adapter from B&H than a D4s.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2015 at 19:13 UTC
On Sony: An eye on focus article (758 comments in total)
In reply to:

PerL: So would this system enable Sony cameras to shot a low light indoor sports game with a 200 2.0 lens wide open at 10 fps with a higher number of keepers than a Canon 1Dx or a Nikon D4s, or is it just nerd stuff?

You need a few more clarifications...
Is that using anywhere on the sensor or just where the AF points of the D4s and 1Dx are?

Also depends on the light level.
The 1DX should always be much better if using the area covered by the AF points in the same light but the D4s will be only if the light level is EV -1 or higher.
A7Rii at EV -2 (depending how well it goes), the A7Rii will work at a lower level.
Also you would have to want the sun not to be anywhere near the OVF as well.
So, yes, the Pro Nikon and Canon will be faster to AF with each of their native lenses than the cheaper A7Rii (with Canon lenses) and better to use IF the sun isn't near the viewfinder and IF you need to focus in the middle of the frame.....and as long as the light is not too low for the D4s.....
yes, I am being silly .....who isn't?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2015 at 03:56 UTC
On Sony: An eye on focus article (758 comments in total)
In reply to:

neil holmes: I can not afford this and am happy with my A7s and A7 currently but Geez I like this new camera......and what is (I think) coming in future.

I think I will open a bank account today just to start saving for an A7sii

My experience is that as long as there is something for it to focus on it works ok.
Much better than my GX7 with a similar lens that also has EV -4.

EDIT Put it this way, I have no problem focusing with the 55 1.8 at ISO 409600 at f2 and 1/25 just now with all the light off in my kitchen in almost no light......a bit slower than normally sure but quick enough.....though not a pretty photo at that ISO.

But yes, PDAF makes big difference.

That is partly why I am really looking to see what Sony can do with an A7sii (or even a iii in a couple of years).

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2015 at 22:42 UTC
On Sony: An eye on focus article (758 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wild Light: OK so you get useless pics of sharp noses and mouths but with soft eyes with 3rd party lenses and I bet the eye detect focusses on the eye you don't want too as well.

I'll take manual focus please.

The thing is that with this camera you can HAVE manual focus and it will be better than just about anything else. for that.....
Focus peaking, magnification and stabilization still should be nice with manual focus.
Choice is great!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2015 at 19:49 UTC
On Sony: An eye on focus article (758 comments in total)
In reply to:

neil holmes: I can not afford this and am happy with my A7s and A7 currently but Geez I like this new camera......and what is (I think) coming in future.

I think I will open a bank account today just to start saving for an A7sii

But I LIKE the EV -4 AF of the A7s with (especially) the Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 and Canon EF 135 f2 L.

Hence saving for an A7sii instead.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2015 at 19:08 UTC
On Sony: An eye on focus article (758 comments in total)

I can not afford this and am happy with my A7s and A7 currently but Geez I like this new camera......and what is (I think) coming in future.

I think I will open a bank account today just to start saving for an A7sii

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2015 at 18:41 UTC as 101st comment | 5 replies
On Sony: An eye on focus article (758 comments in total)
In reply to:

J A C S: How does this work in low light? What I see there is ISO 100, f/125, f/1.4. What about light requiring ISO 3200, 1/50, wide open, for example?

The current A7ii and A7 have PDAF as well as CDAF.
In lower light they revert to CDAF and only focus to around EV 0 which is why AF is slower and tracking not as good (in lower light).
The A7R and A7s are ONLY CDAF and the A7R only focuses to EV 0 ....so the worst of both worlds.
The A7s focuses to EV -4 so it is wonderful for AF-S but not so good for AF-C.
I would expect this new camera to be much better than all for AF-C and MAYBE still be PDAF at EV -2 (I thought it gives you the choice???) For AF-S, I expect it to be as good or better than all the other A7 series EXCEPT the A7s in the lowest of light......though faster with Canon lenses at EV -4 than currently on an A7s (which while slow, is faster at that level than my Canon 7D since it can not focus at that level).

JACS, we shall know soon enough.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2015 at 18:41 UTC
Total: 179, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »