Joined on Aug 12, 2011


Total: 242, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Sony SLT-A77 II First Impressions Review (681 comments in total)
In reply to:

Miguel Rodríguez: Wow, the noise at 1600 looks terrible... Fuji and Olympus are way better:

Anyways at this time the is too much speculation, so let's wait a bit.

Sony has far less in-camera noise reduction than Oly. What you gain with Sony and lose with Oly is the dynamic range. Check DXO Mark. I take my A77 RAW files into lightroom and I can selectively reduce the noise as I want and still retain far more information. But if you want out-of-camera JPEGs then Oly is the easier workflow solution.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 21:40 UTC
On Sony SLT-A77 II First Impressions Review (681 comments in total)
In reply to:

sabink: No GPS??? Typical! Thanks, but no thanks!
I will stay with my current Sony camera until Sony produces something better without "forgetting" some of the options I currently have and if this does not happen soon I will switch systems to a company that invests in software/firmware upgrades rather than new models with different limitations!!!

The same battery last 10% less time. Presumably the WIFI and NFC are eating battery power so that might have caused them to toss the GPS. Stupid.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 21:35 UTC
On Sony SLT-A77 II First Impressions Review (681 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kane1972: The thing that seems to get missed on any Sony SLT camera is the fact it had TRUE Live View, which is something Canikon cannot say. In other words, what one sees in the EVF is the image they end up with. No more checking your shot, adjusting the settings and taking another, just adjust first and then shoot!

Also focus peaking. Has this been improved at all? Not sure it needs to be any better, but more colour options would be nice. This feature is invaluable to manual lens shooters.

Although I LOVE my A77 and the live view, your stament is not accurate. Try looking through your A77 viewfinder at night. Ya, you won't see much. Kind of useless for low light shooting and since there is no optical viewfinder you have to take a shot and then review it to see what the camera is seeing.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 21:31 UTC
On Sony SLT-A77 II First Impressions Review (681 comments in total)
In reply to:

Simon jackson: dumb question but vs a6000?

I agree. I suspect the a6000 might be better AF since they used the same sensor but omitted the on-sensor phase detect AF capability in the A77ii. So the phase detect sensors in the A77ii may be better but they only have 1/3 of a stop of light to work with. Why wouldn't they use both systems ni combination?

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 21:27 UTC
On Sony SLT-A77 II First Impressions Review (681 comments in total)

Top of page 4 - the SLT mirror does NOT redirect 1/3 of the light. It is about 1/3 of a stop of light.

Interesting that they would NOT have included the on-sensor phase detect AF from the a6000 in this camera in addition to the SLT AF sensors. I have about 7000+ actuation shooting action with my A77 and the AF tracking is actually very poor even with fast lenses and SSM / HSM.The only reason I would have spent an extra $400 on the new A77ii was for the same AF system as the a6000. I wonder why they would not have included this on the A77ii? If it is the same sensor why can't they combine the information from both AF systems? But I guess we will have to see how they compare.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 21:22 UTC as 55th comment | 7 replies
On Preview:canon-powershot-g1-x-mark-ii (451 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vitruvius: Looks and appears to be just like the Olympus E-P5 but no interchangalbe lens and much worse specs.

WOW!!! Bitter crowd! Ya, you need to win the lottery to afford those 49mm variable ND filters! Because someone like you wouldn't know what to do if the camera didn't have one built in.
What totally ignorant comments.

Posted on Apr 17, 2014 at 23:37 UTC
On Preview:canon-powershot-g1-x-mark-ii (451 comments in total)

Looks and appears to be just like the Olympus E-P5 but no interchangalbe lens and much worse specs.

Posted on Apr 17, 2014 at 13:44 UTC as 52nd comment | 12 replies
In reply to:

Alphoid: Wow! For just $600, I'll be able to get ugly photos all the way from 16mm up to 300mm for months, maybe even years, until the lens breaks!

Thanks, Tamron!

I see people post mind blowing images taken with $300 P&S cameras. Judging by your comment, your problem isn't the equipment.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 00:17 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4: a quick summary (471 comments in total)

I doubt that it can record 200 Mbps without the additional DMW-YAGH interface unit with the 4 raid card slots - $$$. So it isn't really a feature included with the camera. It is like saying that my DSLR has a flash guide number of 54 when I buy and attach an additional external flash not included with the camera.
Perhaps if they had actually added a second card slot to the camera?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2014 at 14:11 UTC as 77th comment | 3 replies

The EXIF data has been scrubbed from the samples at

but appears to be a Canon 60D.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 26, 2014 at 20:59 UTC as 9th comment
In reply to:

mrc4nl: as a m43 user a rectininear 10mm is great, the question for me is which mount should i choose.

a "native" m43 mount may yield better results (because a adapter will introduce small misalignments)

Or i choose i Nikon mount, so i can use it on a nikon body, but also on a speedbooster gaining one stop and perhaps even better sharpness.

@ Peksu - Yes, Speedbooster WILL work with APS-C lenses on M43 full sensor coverage. I checked with Metabones.

@ Francis - Yes, by compressing the image coming into the Speedbooster it also increases sharpness and MTF.

This info is easily available if you actually want to look for it. Or you can be ignorant and post dumb comments.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 26, 2014 at 20:44 UTC

Interesting that this arrangement is also much closer to the human eye with semi random arrangement and sizes of sites. Should reduce moire.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 25, 2014 at 03:24 UTC as 19th comment

Ha ha, I guess the "gaudi wood retrofitted uglified Sony camera for some insane price" could not continue forever.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2014 at 18:44 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

Sarge_: As a professional photographer who shoots a lot of architecture and landscapes, I wish someone would come out with something affordable in medium format. No pricing, but I'm guessing this is not the product I'm wishing for...

It is called Giga Pan or Autopano. Under $1,000 and virtually unlimited resolution. Unless your buildings are running away on you.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2014 at 18:40 UTC
On Nikon Df Review (1627 comments in total)

I have never touched this camera and never plan to, but it does seem arrogant for Nikon to lower the specs on a camera and give it a retro look and then charge a fortune for it. No wonder it isn't selling well. It really seems like it wants to be one of those "look at me, I have too much money" kind of pompous cameras. I mean why else wouldn't you get a D800.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2014 at 01:14 UTC as 71st comment | 23 replies
In reply to:

SteveNunez: Considering the worldwide growth of m4/3, surprised they don't offer this len for that system- it would easily be the largest focal length available and would surely be popular with m4/3 shooters....ashame.

@ Jogger - "it wasn't designed for contrast detect AF" ???? What are you talking about??? Are you saying that this won't work with the Canon 70D or any other DSLR in live view mode?
MTF charts are still around 10 to 30 lpmm and the new digital sensors are around 250 lpmm. Who designs lenses specifically for contrast detect AF?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2014 at 15:55 UTC
In reply to:

koolbreez: If the IQ is up to par, and the VC works good, this will make a nice addition connected to my Nikon D7100, set on the 16mp 1.3 crop setting, essentially making it a 300mm-1200mm at F5-6.3 and then in focus at 2.7meters away, decent macro shooting comes to mind at a good working distance. Now that is a respectable "reach out and grab it" wildlife optic. It even makes it more enticing at 1680mm at F8 with a 1.4 tele-converter attached, although manual focusing hand held might have to be completely reconsidered depending on the VC quality...hehehe.

Never figured out why anyone would set their camera to crop mode. Why not just crop in post? Exact same IQ and focal length translation but you get more image around the perimeter in case you need it. Kind of a really dumb feature.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2014 at 15:48 UTC
In reply to:

Leandros S: Yeah, well, we need a Pentax mount version of this lens. Whether it be from Tamron or Pentax, same difference really.

@ Tonio - I think brendon means that if Pentax made a lens with the same specs it would be more expensive.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2014 at 15:44 UTC
In reply to:

dlkeller: B&H doesn't list VC as one of the features in the Sony version. If this is true Sony A mount users are being screwed again. Hope it isn't true as it looks like a lens I would buy--but not if VC is left of my version.

I agree. I have the A77 and I have to pay the same price for every lens if I want the most recent optics even though I don't get the VC in the lens. In general Optically Stabilised lenses are much more than the non-OS. It is implied that this cost it most due to the VC and the VC technology. So if the Sony version doesn't include any of this then why is it the same price. I agree, we are kind of getting screwed. At least I have added a custom edited EXIF AF confirm chip to my manual focus lenses for about $20 and they become image stabilized. Something Canon and Nikon users can't do. So you got to take the good with the bad.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2014 at 15:27 UTC
In reply to:

hires: $1069. This thing is going to get wriiten up in no time. The low price could mean that it can't stand up against a Canon 400L. Maybe it will put a little pressure on Canon to stabilize the 400 5.6L.

Looks like it kicks the Canon L butt even without the VC turned on here:

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2014 at 15:14 UTC
Total: 242, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »