Lives in United States Dallas, TX, United States
Works as a Test Automation Engineer/Stock Photographer
Joined on Dec 23, 2003
About me:

Check out for SHARP
stock photography...Thank you!


Total: 13, showing: 1 – 13
On article Studio tests and samples: Leica SL (beta) (750 comments in total)
In reply to:

km25: This is Leica's first camera of this type. The zoom is not going to as sharp as the primes and remember if you are a Leica owner, say M, your lens will be less then $400.00, just use your M lens. In real world use all of these camera are in the same ballpark. Give Leica chance for firmware up grades, the RAWS of all are very close.I remember the Fuji cameras when they first came out, all the up grades to get them to where they are today. Why I put up with all the hardships was that the Fuji was made so well and gave me the operation lay out I like. Firmware up grades saved the day. They Nikon D750 is fine camera, it is a DSLR. The only good point about the Sonys are their sensors. The cameras are second rate. Shutter bounce, overheating and poor PASM, Playstation operation design. Only the sensor saves the camera. Leica may do well. Bet ya it is made in Germany.

Nicely put, km25! I have a Fuji XT-1 with some superb Fujinon optics, and can tell you that 20x30 inch poster prints are stunning, even from this 16 mpixel sensor! Quite happy with the Quality of Fujifilm!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 29, 2015 at 13:05 UTC
On article Studio tests and samples: Leica SL (beta) (750 comments in total)
In reply to:

3dit0r: I have a deep love of Leica (film) rangefinder bodies, but I have to say, on so many levels, I have no idea what Leica were thinking here.

The only plus points I can see are AF Leica lenses (eventually more than one, and primes?!), and what appears to be the world's best EVF by a long way. Those do count for something, but probably not a $4K premium over likely competitors, IMO.

The list of negatives is really too long to express. But for me, deal breakers are - real shortage of physical controls, size/weight, average sensor performance at any price by today's standards, no instant focus magnification with M lenses (or even a single button press to activate, or split screen focus like Fuji), and price, price, price.

Good luck to Leica with this one.

"world's best EVF by a long way?"...Have you experienced a Fuji XT-1 lately? Granted, I have not ever held a Leica, but it "clearly" has the best EVF I've ever used! Not to mention some of the best lenses as well. (Though I've always admired Leica's optics too.)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 29, 2015 at 13:00 UTC

As for "advantages of mirrorless systems", are we forgetting a big one, IMHO...The lack of AF Adjustment (or AF Fine-Tune, as some call it)! In other words, since the mirrorless systems focus right off the sensor itself (no reflex mirrorbox like in a DSLR), assuming the system and lens are not faulty, the Focus is always spot-on....There can be no "back-focus" or "front-focus" issues, again, assuming the system and lens are not faulty. That, to my 57-year-old eyes, is of critical importance, if "Sharpness" is a criterion of one's photography. Thank you.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 02:57 UTC as 16th comment | 2 replies
On article Consumer SLR Camera Roundup (2013) (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ciskje: In this target, movie capability are important, only 100d and A58 have acceptable performance.

I second that about the D5300 being great for video, also for stills, when paired with the superb sharp 16-85 Nikkor Zoom!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 22, 2014 at 08:04 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review (2090 comments in total)
In reply to:

rfsIII: This isn't a pro camera. It doesn't even have mirror lockup.

Didn't know mirrorless cameras needed MLU...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2013 at 03:16 UTC
On article Nikon D5200 added to our studio comparison database (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

sarkozy: why buy this camera, if there is a Pentax K-5?
K-5 = bombproof construction - completely weatherproof, etc.

Well, as a former (mostly happy) Pentax K-5 user, I did just that very recently...switching over to Nikon, for several reasons, i.e., higher resolution sensor, robust electronics, and the vast Nikon System. While I was quite pleased with the superb Pentax FA/DA * and Limited optics, and the build quality and ergonomics of the K-5, I found that the electronics of the K-5 sometimes was a bit "flakey". For example, when shooting a still life of mariachi band figurines, my K-5 would sometimes switch focus point just prior to exposure, as if I had face detection on and physically selected another face in the group (which I did not). But post processing showed the sharpest point of the image, and it wasn't the point I had manually selected. This happened more than once, under varying lighting conditions. Also, the K-5 required a fair amount of AF Micro-Adjustment for several lenses, to compensate for some back focus issues. So far, the Nikon D5200 is rendering quite sharp images consistently, which is good, since there is no provision for correcting potential back/front focus issues, just overall Sharpness. Other than those issues, I loved the Pentax System! FYI, if anyone needs a new Metz 56AF-2 flash (with 4 Sanyo EneLoops) for Pentax, please drop me a line. Thanks.

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2013 at 03:12 UTC
On article Nikon D5200 added to our studio comparison database (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

GarysInSoCal: In the hands of a competent Nikon JPEG menu adjuster, combined with someone who can edit JPEGs to perfection, while using a sharp quality lens (Nikon 17-55 or 16-85 comes to mind), I'm SURE results coming out of the Nikon 5200's sensor will render images that are superior to anything in the 4/3s format, or anything coming out of Canon's current APS-C camp. I know this because I've been shootin JPEG magazine covers with Nikon cameras for several years now (samples on my MM page). Listen to the reviewers at DPReview & DXOMark... for they have no reason to lie to you concerning the performance of this camera & sensor. They are time-tested, proficient camera & sensor evaluators, and are NOT paid by Nikon to fabricate results. I've purchased several cameras based on their reviews, and have yet to be dissapointed with any past purchase (current owner of D600). It's my opinion that those wishin to find fault in their testings are merely fanboys of another camera manufacturer.

Well stated Gary. I agree with your points, as I've owned both m4/3 (Panasonic G2 and Panny 20mm) as well as the Nikon D5200 with 16-85 and 35mm Nikkors. While the OM-D (with good Olympus glass like the 60 macro or 75) does deliver sharp results, with equally high-quality optics like the Micro-Nikkors 60 or 105, I would bet that the D5200 would trump the OM-D overall image quality, just by virtue of sensor size and processing engine. Thanks, Steve

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2013 at 02:49 UTC
On article Hands-on with Fujifilm's X100S (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kongtotoro: I wonder how the next generation of OMD will be improved.

Yes, Kono, I was wondering that too. But this Fuji X100S sure has me interested! Too bad they could'nt have weather-proofed it too (with that fixed lens, I'd have thought it easier to do.)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2013 at 08:15 UTC
On article Dpreview Users' Poll: Best Camera of 2012? (1509 comments in total)
In reply to:

RJM400: I suspect the Nikon D800/E may well be the better camera overall. I don't know and don't really care. I went out on a night shoot with a pro who used the 800 and, in my lowly opinion, I was more than pleased with how my images compared!

I am using the OM-D E-M5 camera and having so much fun.

For what I paid for the OM-D, grip, and top lenses it is about what the Nikon 800 body alone costs! (For near comparable results as far as I'm concerned)

I love the portability and whole OM-D system.

I'm so glad I didn't become a Nikon or Canon lemming.

RJM, I too, am a former Nikon film user gone digital, currently using a Pentax K-5, but seeking a smaller travel kit such as the OM-D and the superb Oly primes 12, 45, 60 macro, and 75, lenses which are much smaller, lighter than any "comparable" Nikkors, while maintaining super-high quality! Kudos to Olympus for the OM-D System! Regarding the poster who said that "m4/3 was a miscalculation", how can high quality AND portability be a bad thing?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 04:05 UTC

I too, like my equipment looking "new" as long as possible, but my BIG concern is Sharpness! If this Panny 12-35 is significantly sharper than the kit Oly 12-50 on the Oly OM-D, then this lens is a viable alternative. Otherwise, I would see no advantage to spending the extra $1,000 on this lens over the Oly 12-50.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2012 at 18:06 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

Thomas CJ: As a E-M5 user, I am very interested in these lenses. Probably I am just one of very few people who are actually NOT happy with the optical, but much more the MECHANICAL quality (or lack thereof) that all current MFT lenses have. Yes I am not happy with the 12/2, the 45/1.8 (this one has good optics, but very weak mechanics) and I returned the brand new 25/1.4 as well because it simply was not good enough for my taste.

The E-M5 needs REALLY good lenses, if you have these you can get gorgeous 24x36 prints out of it, even bigger, and IMO it also would profit very much from lenses that won't lose their quality after the first slight knock. I hope that Schneider-Kreuznach will deliver maximum quality and find enough customers to introduce all the three planned lenses to the market.

If I could change anything, I'd prefer the 14/2 to be a 17/2 or 17/1.4, though. But my main concern is the optical and mechanical quality.


Hi Thomas. I am considering the OM-D EM-5 system as my "travel" system, already having a Pentax K-5, with superbly sharp and well-made optics. I've made superb 24x36 prints from the Pentax, and am very interested in how you say about the OM-D "if you have these you can get gorgeous 24x36 prints out of it". So, you think that size enlargement can hold its own against a simialr size APS-C sensor print?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2012 at 13:48 UTC
On article Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 now available for Pentax (1 comment in total)

As a Pentax K-5 shooter primarily interested in image sharpness, I was debating between this Tamron 17-50 and the Pentax DA 17-70. Though I've read good and not so good reviews of both, the number of reviews alleging dust particles in the Tamron was alarming, and being into Quality Assurance, I cannot say that I am convinced that Tamron has reliable QC. Therefore, I will most likely go with the Pentax 17-70, which would seem to mate better with my K-5 in all respects.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2012 at 19:09 UTC as 1st comment
On article First Impressions: Using the Nikon V1 (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boris F: Very nice DP's comarison V1 to G3:
looks like the lens initialy was designed for m43.

As a Nikon admirer, I wish them luck with this system. As for myself, I am of the opinion that the target "soccer mom" buyer is not going to want to bother with either RAW post-processing or even changing lenses too often. Image Quality may be fine for them, IF they can capture the shot they want. Personally, I would opt for Image Quality over portability, but that's why I use an APS-C DSLR over even m4/3. Best of luck to Nikon though!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2011 at 02:36 UTC
Total: 13, showing: 1 – 13