steven_k

Lives in United States park city, United States
Has a website at www.kuau.com
Joined on Sep 4, 2007

Comments

Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2457 comments in total)

Richard, excellent review. I noticed in one of you replies down bellow that you use your left eye for focusing. In general RF style camera are designed to be used with your right eye. For left eye shooters I would personally stay away from any RF camera and stick with DSLR type OV/EVF just my opinion of course

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2016 at 21:48 UTC as 131st comment | 2 replies
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2457 comments in total)
In reply to:

noflashplease: Much like the original X-Pro1, this camera looks like fun. However, as an APS-C body, it's not a serious alternative to a Leica rangefinder, even at a fraction of the price. The value just isn't here at $1,700, either, not when the first generation is on closeout at $500.

Not sure I would agree with your assessment. I own a leica M-P 240 with both a 35 & 50mm Summicron lenses. I did some careful side by side comparisons and I have got to say the Xpro2 is very close in terms of IQ to the leica for at 1/3 the cost. I used the Fuji 23/1.4 and 35/1.4 for same fov as my Leica. As my ability to accurately focus my M-P gets more difficult since I am getting older I am very tempted by the Xpro2. I wish Leica would have came out with en EVF version of the M-P as opposed to the SL.

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2016 at 21:31 UTC
On article Sony Alpha 7R II Review (2155 comments in total)

Now if Sony would just release an "A" mount version of this camera and I will fort sure purchase one.
Personally for me yes the IQ is outstanding yet I find the handling / ergonomics of the whole A7 series a huge disappointment
Just my opinion of course.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2015 at 17:59 UTC as 227th comment | 2 replies
On article Good genes: Samsung NX500 review posted (519 comments in total)

I thought Samsung was getting out of the camera business.
Why purchase this?

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2015 at 00:00 UTC as 51st comment | 8 replies
On article Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: Used A7R bodies are averaging $1300 on Ebay. I wonder where they will be in say 2 months?

I paid just under $1400 for a new A7R a few months back.
I currently own both Zeiss LOXIA lenses and I will also purchase both new Zeiss Batis lenses. As much as I want the new A7Rll $3200 is just to much for me.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2015 at 13:56 UTC
On article CreativeLive to host free one-day event with Art Wolfe (33 comments in total)

I watched the whole event and I think that anyone who really wants to enhance there vision should for sure watch this.

Art is truly a master image maker and is also an excellent instructor.. I wish I could afford one of his workshops.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 03:01 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Nikon D610 Review (404 comments in total)

I wonder why the Sony A7 does not have as good high ISO performance as compared to the D600/610 ???

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2014 at 23:36 UTC as 85th comment | 3 replies
On article Sony Alpha 7 Review (1596 comments in total)

I own both the Sony A99 and now also the A7.
I am puzzled on how the A99 IQ and high ISO is better any ideas?

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 03:31 UTC as 325th comment
On article Pentax K-3 real-world samples gallery (150 comments in total)
In reply to:

wildbild: those snaps only prove you need really good glass for 24Mpix

And a tripod using MLU

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2013 at 15:28 UTC
On article Pentax K-3 real-world samples gallery (150 comments in total)
In reply to:

Akpinxit: AA filter or not - all I can see here is the same IQ as seen on the rest of mid\high end latest D\SLR

Hence the reason why I wish Pentax would have stuck with 16MP with the new features of the K-3. Oh well market pleasure wins again. Sweet spot for AP-C is 16MP

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2013 at 15:24 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Review (611 comments in total)
In reply to:

steven_k: I love m43 even though I don't own one anymore.
I just could never get over the noise even at base ISO.
Yeah, I guess I can shoot in JPEG and have the camera apply noise reduction yet that limits the detail. Just look at any of the new m43 cameras here on DPR, check ISO 200, RAW and look at the blue square on the color checker chart, noise. For me I would have preferred m43 stayed at 12MP, I think this is / was the sweet spot for the 4/3 sensor.

Ok maybe I went a little overboard. I was looking for a small landscape kit to compliment my FF setup.
Yes I do print my images on my own HP Z3200PS and yes I noticed noise in the sky. I don't se this on my FF DSLR.
Right now I am shooting a Fuji X--E1 and looking forward to the x-E2. Of course there is a workaround for noise with m43, it's called ETTR, many articles about it especially in regards to the Olympus EM5. Is the Fuji an excellent camera? Of course not, but for me, where AF sped is a non issue and all I am interested is optimal IQ in a small package, my Fuji delivers now with much better raw support.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2013 at 14:37 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Review (611 comments in total)

I love m43 even though I don't own one anymore.
I just could never get over the noise even at base ISO.
Yeah, I guess I can shoot in JPEG and have the camera apply noise reduction yet that limits the detail. Just look at any of the new m43 cameras here on DPR, check ISO 200, RAW and look at the blue square on the color checker chart, noise. For me I would have preferred m43 stayed at 12MP, I think this is / was the sweet spot for the 4/3 sensor.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2013 at 02:22 UTC as 114th comment | 4 replies
On article Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review (2096 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: ISO noise performance is far from impressive, right from direct observation.

I don't think I've seen such a poor ISO 200 performance from a $1250+ camera in a long time.

Also, why are so many photos in the samples gallery significantly underexposed?

Again looking at the DPR comparison look at the Color Checker chart the blue square at ISO 200 RAW there should be no noise but there is. Sure if you shoot JPEG, Oly takes care of it or if you shoot RAW you can turn on NR but at base ISO one should be able to shoot RAW and process without NR and get clean results. I just don't see it.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2013 at 16:19 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review (2096 comments in total)
In reply to:

steven_k: I would have stuck with Olympus, but even with the new EM-1 at base ISO do a comparison RAW ISO 200 to the Fuji X-Pro then hover the blue square on the color checker chart. Olympus has very visible noise where as the Fuji has none.
Even at ISO 100 which basically giving the Oly one more stop of light there is still noise. What's up with that?

Don't get me wrong the Olyqmpus is an amazing over all camera, but for me a base ISO shooter, like to shot landscapes at F8, the Fuji produces a noise free image.

Charles, I print my own images on my HPZ3200 24" printer.
I printed numerous 16x20 from my now sold Oly EM-5 and for landscapes my Fuji produces a mush cleaner looking print.

Believe me I am no Fuji Fanboy, As Brett pointed out! the EVF sucks IMHO on the X-E1 but for static subjects it does the job.

I will repeat, the Oly is for sure a better al around camera yet to me does not excel at anything, it's just good at everything, which fork 99% of us is good enough.

For what I shoot I am still saving up for a used Leica M9

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2013 at 13:10 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review (2096 comments in total)

I would have stuck with Olympus, but even with the new EM-1 at base ISO do a comparison RAW ISO 200 to the Fuji X-Pro then hover the blue square on the color checker chart. Olympus has very visible noise where as the Fuji has none.
Even at ISO 100 which basically giving the Oly one more stop of light there is still noise. What's up with that?

Don't get me wrong the Olyqmpus is an amazing over all camera, but for me a base ISO shooter, like to shot landscapes at F8, the Fuji produces a noise free image.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2013 at 01:02 UTC as 175th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

J D Tranquil: As an owner of a Fuji X system camera, I would like a fast, constant-aperture, zoom lens in the lineup, 24-70mm f 2.8 to be exact. Or even f1.8 like the Sigma zoom (f18-35), that's even better.

I shoot an X-E1 with the Fuji 14, 18-55 and 60mm lenses for my small landscape kit. I mostly shoot at F5.6-F8. I have done numerous comparisons between the 35/1.4 Zeiss 32/1.8 and my zoom at F5.6 and F8, I can't really see a difference, I wanted to believe that the primes would be better yet I can not personally prove this on my own testing.
So here we go again, the new 23/1.4 will this lens yield a better result shot at F5.6 over the zoom??

I guess for me I have found the 18-55 zoom is really a great little lens and unless you shot low light and need the faster lens I just don't see it. What am I missing?

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2013 at 14:15 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100S Review (492 comments in total)

David, if you had just hanged on a little longer with you X-E1 and shot RAW, Iridient Developer transformed the X-Trans sensor into a real gem IM HO

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2013 at 13:52 UTC as 112th comment
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G6 Hands-on Preview (204 comments in total)

To bad they went with he GH-2 sensor and not the newer GH-3 sensor.
I think Panasonic blew it.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2013 at 01:17 UTC as 79th comment | 6 replies
On article Olympus m.Zuiko 17mm F1.8 first impressions and samples (255 comments in total)
In reply to:

steven_k: I purchased 2 of them hoping the first one I got was a dud, but it wasn't.
I shot the lens at F4 optimal setting for this lens at infinity focus for landscapes on my OMD and I can tell you hands down this is not a good lens for landscapes.
No where near as good as the 12, 25, 45 or 75mm lenses.
My opinion is that this lens is probably a good street shooter lens.
Not what I has hoping for.
I guess the problem is at the end of the day it is a 17mm lens, and to make a tack sharp 17mm lens for 500.00 is probably almost impossible.
Though the Oly 12 which is by far not perfect, I feel does perform better over all yet again a 700.00 lens.

Oh we'll.

on the other hand, I did try a NEX 7 with there Zeiss 24/1.8 and to be honest, very sharp in the center and yet soft corners, again not a good landscape lens. A great street shooter lens.

I think at 17mm focal length ,the designer has to choose on what it will be good for, more close subject images where corner performance is not an issue, or try to design something more flat field.

Yet at the end of the day as others have pointed out, it is a 17mm lens, not a 34mm lens. To produce a high quality 17mm lens would I assume would cost a lot more money, like the Oly 75mm, and be much large

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2013 at 14:21 UTC
On article Olympus m.Zuiko 17mm F1.8 first impressions and samples (255 comments in total)

I purchased 2 of them hoping the first one I got was a dud, but it wasn't.
I shot the lens at F4 optimal setting for this lens at infinity focus for landscapes on my OMD and I can tell you hands down this is not a good lens for landscapes.
No where near as good as the 12, 25, 45 or 75mm lenses.
My opinion is that this lens is probably a good street shooter lens.
Not what I has hoping for.
I guess the problem is at the end of the day it is a 17mm lens, and to make a tack sharp 17mm lens for 500.00 is probably almost impossible.
Though the Oly 12 which is by far not perfect, I feel does perform better over all yet again a 700.00 lens.

Oh we'll.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2013 at 12:17 UTC as 29th comment | 11 replies
Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »