William Koehler

William Koehler

Lives in United States Alpharetta USA, United States
Works as a Software
Joined on Dec 12, 2005
About me:

Panasonic DMC-GH4
Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 lens
Pentax *ist-DL
Pentax K-x
Pentax K-01
Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 lens for K-mount
Pentax FA 35mm f.20
Pentax DA 18-55mm f3.5-5.6
Pentax DA 55-30mm f4-5.6
Pentax ZX-5n (35mm film)
Pentax K1000 (35mm film)
Sony DCR-TRV320
Sony HDR-HC9
Canon HF-S200
Canon HF-G20
Adobe Photoshop CS5.5
Adobe Lightroom 6.0
Sony Vegas Pro 13

Comments

Total: 118, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

nathantw: This is really cool. I enjoyed it.

As for using the D810 and sticking out like a sore thumb, he probably wouldn't if he decided to use a small prime lens instead of a hulking giant lens like the 24-70mm f/2.8.

The Nikon D810 is a pretty big body. Here it is compared to another FF body, the Sony A7R II: http://camerasize.com/compare/#557,624

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 21:37 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review preview (431 comments in total)
In reply to:

RingoMan: I cannot see the advantage of the electronic shutter if the noise is this bad! Not only bad noise but severely shifted colors in shadows! Further, is the flash sync limited to the mechanical shutter? And why would this low shutter speed sync make this camera attractive to the flash fill shooter?

The advantage of electronic shutter is that it is completely silent. This means you can get BTS pictures/video without disturbing a shoot already in progress. I would imagine wildlife would also appreciate silence. They usually do.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 8, 2015 at 23:24 UTC
On Canon warns about dangers of counterfeit camera gear article (153 comments in total)

I've saved a few dollars on batteries for a camera vs. buying OEM batteries, but there I relied on the reputation of the seller, B&H.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2015 at 00:11 UTC as 50th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

jabz: So can someone please tell me how I can achieve this with a Sony a7 II, which lens do I need?
thanks

The lens needed is a tad more expensive than the camera used in this article. Enjoy:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/840667-REG/fujinon_xa101x8_9besm_tk_xa101x8_9besm_pf_2_3_precision_focus.html

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2015 at 21:52 UTC
In reply to:

sdh: I saw martians building a military base - somebody warn the president!!

He'll read about it in the newspaper - just like everybody else.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2015 at 21:49 UTC
On Accessory Review: Western Digital My Passport Wireless article (81 comments in total)
In reply to:

gmarmot: I've always wondered why devices such as this and other standard external drives, are not made with solid state components. I have an Apple MacBook with solid state drive, and it's been flawless. For me, I'd pay the extra money for this feature and it's accompanying ruggedness (I assume it would not be over double the price?).

You might be willing to pay the price, but a lot of folks will not. My own inclination would be to use/buy a bunch of 32GB/64GB/128GB SDHC/SDXC cards and a SD card wallet. I end up with the storage capacity of this unit without the shock resistance/ruggedness worries. Explicit in that is offloading images/video is done only after the trip is over.

I recently did this with a two week trip to Israel. Worked great.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2015 at 21:43 UTC

Especially with the release of the new Sony A7RMII, the pricing on these is about to get blown into the weeds. I think they'll be getting rid of another CEO soon as well. I wonder what his golden parachute is?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 15, 2015 at 19:11 UTC as 7th comment
On Sony rides wave of US Mirrorless sales surge article (732 comments in total)
In reply to:

colwilliams: Mirrorless and DSLR's and compacts and cameras-on-phones will sit side by side in the marketplace.

but for sometime now the mirrorless vs DSLR arguing has been simmering, similar to the Mac vs PC and Nikon vs Canon.

But, DSLR's are not dying and mirrorless are not taking over. It is not a war or a battle.

DSLR's are still chunkier and fit my hands much better than any mirrorless I've held. Plus battery life on mirrorless is not so great when you are exclusively using EVF and LCD to frame. The optical viewfinder on DSLR's is still more user friendly with no energy usage.

All I am saying is that there will always be a demand for all format cameras, without one eradicating the other.

@Stan Chung
Battery life is highly variable. On the GH3/4 series, it really isn't a problem. The Sony A7 series on the other hand...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 8, 2015 at 03:28 UTC
In reply to:

Don Karner: Where can we buy said adapter?

The point is it isn't out yet so there is no 'where' yet.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2015 at 01:42 UTC
In reply to:

Don Karner: Where can we buy said adapter?

"The EF-MTF adapter is due to go on sale in May at a price of $285."

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2015 at 01:16 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThePhilips: "It’s important to remember that part of the story of this camera is to reduce the size, weight, and cost."

I LOLed.

All true, but given the M series is aimed at the lower end of the market, you would not have a camera Canon could try to charge $2500 for as they are attempting to do with the XC10.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2015 at 01:08 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Papi61: Let's see, for about the same price you can get this Canon thing or a Samsung NX1 with a 16-50 f/2-2.8 lens.

Gee, which one do you think would give you better quality video and stills? ;)

Not arguing your point on aps-c at all. Just adding to the available alternatives at the price.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2015 at 00:46 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

BaumBoyPhoto: This camera may be useful, and the ergonomics are intriguing to say the least. I will probably end up renting it as a B-Cam for one of my run of the mill video gigs just to see how it handles. I don't plan on buying it, though. Definitely not at this pricepoint.

I mean, Chuck repeats often that some limiting design decisions were made to reduce cost, but I fail to see him convince us that the $2,500 is worth what is offered. I just don't see it. It definitely feels like paying a premium for slightly better ergonomics, bit rate, and the Canon name tag, while sacrificing the flexibility of Interchangeable lenses.

$2,500 can get you solid photo performance.
$2500 can get you decent video performance.

If you are heart set on a 4K hybrid, just about everyone in this thread has pointed out how much $2,500 can get you in that market.

It's just not a great pricepoint for Canon.

Here's your pricing hint on the Sony PXW-X70

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1072752-REG/sony_pxw_x70_professional_xdcam_compact.html

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2015 at 00:41 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Papi61: Let's see, for about the same price you can get this Canon thing or a Samsung NX1 with a 16-50 f/2-2.8 lens.

Gee, which one do you think would give you better quality video and stills? ;)

...or for the same price a Panasonic GH4 with a 12-35mm F2.8 lens (24-70mm FF FOV).

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 15:37 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

photog4u: You'd have to be one serious Canonite to select this fixed lens frankencamera over the GH4.

I picked a GH4 last year and see nothing in this Canon to make me regret it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 15:32 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

EduPortas: I undestand most readers of this site find this camera unappealing. I would too if I were a landscape or portrait photographer, where every pixel counts.

However, I see the XC10 as a strong bet by Canon to try to get a hold of the nascent ENG industry bursting practically everywhere. Yes, there are cheaper cameras by Panasonic that do practically the same thing, but the allure of the Canon brand is very strong amongst big media organizations. If you're a small media outfit you buy what big boys buy so you can compete with them, at least with logo on your gear.

Also, ergonomics seem very nice on this new camera. That goes a long way for photogs and videographers that use their gear huge amounts of time every day.

The ENG video industry likes smooth power zooms. This camera doesn't have it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 15:25 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

ObelixCMM: It took DPReview 8 months to review Pentax K3 and 11 months for Sony A77 II, and we already have 4th article on camera that shoots JPEG stills only.

...but Hey, it's the ONLY camera on the market to shoot JPEGs only AND cost $2500.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 15:20 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

FiveForm: On the face of it, it would appear that Canon had at least some aspects of the Sony RX10 in mind when building this camera - fixed lens, video/still hybrid design, high initial price tag...

But even Sony's "High Initial Price Tag" is half of Canon's. And with a significantly faster constant aperture lens.

I keep wondering when Sony is going to release the RX10.4K. Given it's the same sensor as the AX100, you know they can anytime they choose to.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 14:58 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

gskolenda: This XC10 is a complete planned rip-off or Canon is just stupid!

I will take the Samsung NX1 and there 16-50 lens over this XC10 All Day Long!
Even though the NX1+Lens package cost $400 more!

The NX1 still ends up being cheaper. Those Cfast 2.0 cards are crazy expensive. Buy three 128 GB CFast cards and you've spent as much on them as the camera. And the file sizes on the NX1 are far less so they require less storage for shooting, editing, and backup.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 14:49 UTC
In reply to:

Harry Shepherd: I've spent several hours trying to purchase an upgrade,all to no avail every link I try takes me to a brick wall. I guess I'm a little luckier than Rbrt at least I It's not cost me any money

Actually, I went to Adobe's website and a couple of hours after I wrote my above previous comment found where to buy the standalone product.

It is now installed on my desktop & laptop.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 14:09 UTC
Total: 118, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »