Louis_Dobson

Louis_Dobson

Lives in Portugal Faro, Portugal
Works as a Computer Consultant
Has a website at www.flickr.com/photos/acam
Joined on Nov 22, 2005
About me:

Nikon D3, 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, 14, 16Fish 20, 24, 35,
50 f1.4, 105DC 105Micro 135 DC 180 300f4 TC2 SB800
Twin Head Macro Flash.

Panasonic L1, Zuiko 7-14, PL 14-50, Zuiko 35, FL50.

Oly E3, 7-14, 8 fish, 12-60. 50-200, 50 macro, EC14,
EX25

Comments

Total: 104, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)

Scary price. Otherwise, want!

Excellent modern digital camera with proper controls (and no video rubbish clagged on the top) - so far, so Fuji, but much better lens support.

Why has it taken so long?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 07:52 UTC as 862nd comment | 2 replies
On Nikon video hints at long-desired 'digital FM' article (552 comments in total)

I'll be interested in this. I love my E-M5, I loved my D3, and I love digital photography, which allows me to produce far better work than I ever could in the 70s, 80s, and 90s.

On the other hand, I hate modern controls. And I have no use at all for video.

Aperture ring and shutter speed dial please.

I'd buy the Fuji X-Pro, but they don't have the lenses I need, so on we struggle with this pesky control layout, for which I blame Canon's early AF cameras.

I've still got a big bag of lenses from my D3 days...

Direct link | Posted on Nov 3, 2013 at 12:30 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

straylightrun: Big surprise. Next is Micro Four Thirds and eventually APS-C before FF becomes the standard in a few years.

Not exactly.

The Nikon 1 and the Pentax Q have sensors small enough to severely compromise image quality.

APS-C is very bulky itself.

There are two sweet spots: if you care about system size, then MFT makes for much smaller lenses than FF and works just as well so long as you don't need high ISO.

If you don't care about system size, FF works very well.

I think the two major format survivors will be MFT and FF, although I thing the Fuji may well survive.

APS-C will become very much a budget alternative for those who can't afford FF.

I went from FF to MFT myself. As a landscape shooter I never go above base ISO, and lugging FF kit about was ruining my hobby. I've never been tempted by APS-C.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 9, 2013 at 07:00 UTC
On CP+ 2013: Interview with Olympus' Toshi Terada article (242 comments in total)
In reply to:

MatijaK: I did not buy my E-3 because it was compact - I bought it because it was just the right size and had many useful buttons available without being able to press any of them by accident.

Then I added a grip and realized I was sorely mistaken, because only with the grip is the E-3 the right size.

I don't want a compact DSLR. I want a big E-7 that can use my existing grip (or has one built-in), I want it to be heavy, sturdy, reliable and a confidence-inspiring workhorse that I can beat a wild bear with if it attacks me. I can buy an E-720 or an E-M5 if I want more compact.

I've been happily and patiently hanging onto 4/3 and my many lenses, and the only thing that can push me away is a small camera body. If they screw up by making the E-7 small, I'll have to switch systems, despite considering a 3:2 aspect ratio with a 1.5x crop factor to be the spawn of Satan (135 "full frame" being Satan itself).

The attraction of four thirds is that the lens can be better quality and smaller than those for larger sensors. I switched from FT to FF and then to MFT. I miss the FT lenses, they were the best I have ever used.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2013 at 10:05 UTC
On Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Preview preview (213 comments in total)

Preview? This has been out months now, where's the full review?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 29, 2012 at 10:16 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Preview preview (416 comments in total)

They seem to have crackes the ergos at last....

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2012 at 16:37 UTC as 123rd comment
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Preview preview (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rupert Bottomsworth: Wasn't the main selling point of m43 the small size? After looking at this camera, you might as well buy a DSLR like a Nikon D3200 or Canon 650D.

M43 lenses are much smaller. 90% of the weight f my bag is lenses, not the body...

In my view, a camera is either pocketable (like my E-PM1, which I shall be replacing with an E-PM2), or it isn't, like my old D3 and new OM-D. If it isn't pocketable, then the size is not an issue. The size of a full set of lenses IS an issue however.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2012 at 16:35 UTC

I want an E-PM2. I suspect I will use it more than the OM-D...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2012 at 10:53 UTC as 13th comment | 2 replies
On Canon issues allergy warning for EOS 650D/Rebel T4i article (176 comments in total)

There are some seriously sad, paranoid and xenophobic people here (the comments about Canon using "Chinese" parts are especially stupid and offensive).

I wouldn't touch this camera with a bargepole because of the sensor. A chemical reaction in the handgrip producing zinc, bis? Who cares! There are probably idiots out their taking that for their health!

Really, you cannot make anything any more, the world has gone mad.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 10, 2012 at 11:18 UTC as 47th comment | 6 replies

If I hadn't seen what other people were getting out of this lens, I'd not buy it.

I stand by my original point(s) - one of the standard MFT complaints is that the DoF is not shallow enough, yet here we have 75 f1.8, 150 f3.6 equivalent as people are quick to point out, causing endless trouble because of 'he difficulty of using it.

And I still don't understand why a lens test sample gallery has high ISO shots in - that's like a camera test sample gallery with a soft focus filter on.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2012 at 08:43 UTC as 25th comment | 2 replies

Amusing - everyone banging on about how MFT does not offer shallow enough DoF, and yet put this lens in the hands a (presumably) competent photographer in (presumably) a bit of a hurry and they trip over the shallow DoF all the time.

The answer being of course that very shallow DoF is a Special Effect that needs Special Care - of the type not being exercised here :-)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2012 at 09:30 UTC as 77th comment
On Just Posted: Fujifilm X-Pro1 review article (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

jenbenn: OF course this camera will be bought by hobbyists for their holiday snapshots because of its nice old-school looks. OF course you can take nice photos with it if conditions are favourable.

But for serious photography? No, sorry! If I do street or travel reportage photos (be it in good or low light) I need a fast (one-shot) AF more than I need low noise. A misfocused image is always unusable while a noisy one is in many cases very usable. In addition, the competitors are not that much noisier, that it would actually matter much in practical use .

Since MF is also very slow, I cant see how this cam can replace my dslr. (Not even talking about the slow shot-to-shot operation and slow wake up from sleep-mode).

What else? For landscape? Yes, maybe, but you dont need high iso there and other cameras are smaller, lighter and cheaper.
Actually I love the concept and I want to replace my 5D, but I have to get my shots, that's no.1 priority (low noise and IQ is a strong second)!!

If the AF was fixed it would be able to do a lot more jobs. My OM-D replaced a pro dSLR for everything except C-AF (of which I do little anyway). This is a nicer camera in many way, but too slow. It is not inherent in mirrorless cameras - the OM-D is very quick.

Hopefully the next Fuji will be too.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2012 at 21:12 UTC
On Just Posted: Fujifilm X-Pro1 review article (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

dotyman: I truly wish Fuji would hire an industrial designer/interface designer that understands how people use cameras. While the engineering in this camera is outstanding, the overall user experience is so incomplete that many potential buyers are simply not going to buy it. Especially at such a premium price. And it's SO CLOSE to being the perfect relatively-compact pro camera (which is why it's so disappointing).

The numerous quirks/performance failures of Fuji's X-series cameras is an indication that the company doesn't really care about putting out a fully refined product. Fuji's leadership still thinks like a manufacturer of mass-produced consumer-level products of compromise. What a let-down!

Get a CLUE Fuji!! The X100 was much less than it could have been because of its poor performance and half-a$$ed interface, and now the X-Pro1 is nearly as much of a let-down. And I really wanted to love this camera. It could have been a rock star!

Um, as far as I can think of, excluding odd things like Leica, nobody else does the shutter speed/A dial and Aperture/A ring, so that makes the interface the best on the market by far - shame about the quirks cutting into it, but there you go. They haven't really been allocated the resources. If this system is a big success (and it looks like it) better sorted cameras will follow.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2012 at 19:31 UTC
On Just Posted: Fujifilm X-Pro1 review article (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

Digital Suicide: This time I even didn't bother reading the review, conclusion only.
Fujifilm is on the right way. But the cr@appy autofocus, and lack of proper manual focus, putts me off totally in my considerations on this camera.
Actually, I even could live with manual focus only. But take that you S.O.B. Even manual focus is unusable.
Joy of photography is the process, not the result. So, I don't care how unreal it's images are, if I can't use it without swearing.

Should have read the review. MF works, just needs an extra (stupid) button push.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2012 at 18:47 UTC
On Just Posted: Fujifilm X-Pro1 review article (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

gl2k: Wanna real serious cam : Nikon or Canon
Wanna show off : Leica
Wanna be on budget : $299 P&S
Wanna be funny : NEX-7

But this cam ??? No idea who is the target customer ...

Well, me - but not yet, they need more lenses and to fix the AF. Still, if it had been around when I was getting rid of the D3 I'd have been seriously tempted.

What on Earth is the point of the Nex? Apart from looking like someone's idea of the future twenty years ago, there are no lenses. At least Fuji have a credible roadmap.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2012 at 18:43 UTC
On Just Posted: Fujifilm X-Pro1 review article (271 comments in total)

Well done on telling people how to use MF.

I'm surprised and interested in your IQ remarks - from samples it has always seemed to me the odd sensor adds a pleasing glow but a certain softness. Apparently not then.

Interesting review of a fascinating camera. I see myself switching to version 3 for the controls. For now, I am looking forward to the 75mm for my OM-D.

By the way, with all these tight scores, isn't it time to just drop the percentage rating?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2012 at 18:35 UTC as 101st comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

John: better look closely Sean, the alpha lens is much larger than this one. Still works well but is twice the size. I have this model for my m4/3 Panasonic and it works quite well.

Valentinain, Samyang do a native MFT fisheye.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 07:48 UTC

Silly me. I was just wondering why Samyang were wasting their time making lenses for a dead system that has no lenses when the penny dropped...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 07:47 UTC as 13th comment | 9 replies

What a lot of interest there is in Oly these days! Flaming nuisance, I can see I will have to pre-order...

Direct link | Posted on May 25, 2012 at 13:16 UTC as 45th comment
In reply to:

W.C. Green: Wow... I was set to get the OM-D and this lens this summer as my new portrait setup. This might be a deal breaker. They estimated $700-800 for this lens and I was willing to suffer, not without some griping, for 800... but that was the max. This will break it for me. I can go back to my D7000 and the 85mm 1.8 instead. Oh well... I really wanted to return to OLY. The 45mm won't cut it as I need 120 to 150 for my portraits.

That's the way I see it. The OM-D and these primes are the quality products, if you can't afford them get a poverty spec APS-C dSLR and some cheaper, slower primes to get similar results from a camera that is bulkier and less pleasant to use, but costs less.

Direct link | Posted on May 25, 2012 at 11:06 UTC
Total: 104, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »