d3xmeister

d3xmeister

Lives in Romania Alexandria, Romania
Works as a Radio DJ
Joined on Jan 24, 2010

Comments

Total: 93, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Sorry but I have to say Sony A6000 is the best mirrorless camera for both midrange and enthusiast .

I like Sony. I like the A6000. I do own other Sony cameras, but not NEX. You can defend it all you want, it lacks too many serious lenses that I need. Adapted lenses are not a solution for me, turning a nimble wonder into a sluggish unbalanced nightmare.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 18:19 UTC
On Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Sorry but I have to say Sony A6000 is the best mirrorless camera for both midrange and enthusiast .

I did have it for a few weeks. The A6000 is a great camera. But too many lenses are missing. And FF lenses are huge and completely unbalanced, not to mentioned the lack of APSC specific focal length.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 09:43 UTC
On Real-world test: Going pro with the Samsung NX1 article (160 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Did the GH4 survive the water? It is supposed to be weather proof with the 12-35 and 35-100m F2.8 lenses. Did it have either of those lenses on it when it took the bath?

So the GH4 didn't survived ? What lens was on it ?

By the way really nice vide, keep up the good work, thank you.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 06:09 UTC
On Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Sorry but I have to say Sony A6000 is the best mirrorless camera for both midrange and enthusiast .

Paired with what ? I like the A6000 but the sistem is seriously lacking any ,,enthusiast,, lenses. And the camera have no balance with larger lenses anyway.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 05:41 UTC
In reply to:

Mike FL: I like this set of the "real-world samples" because it is kind of showing the ISO limitation.

I am not upset, I just don't get the point of your comment. ISO limitation is something every camera has, for some applications. For some, even the compact cameras are not limited in any way, and for some nothing less than a Sony A7s would do. And I would think if you know what you need you would not waste time in m43 discussions, you'd be outnere shooting a system that is not so limited for you.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2014 at 04:04 UTC
In reply to:

Mike FL: I like this set of the "real-world samples" because it is kind of showing the ISO limitation.

What did you expected ! Pentax 645Z performance ?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2014 at 03:28 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G7 X First Impressions Review preview (954 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ropo16: This blinkered obsession with sensor size and high iso is crazy. You are getting a camera hugely compromised with small size, soft lens, no viewfinder, terrible battery life all for high iso bragging rights.
The Fuji X30 is a real photographers camera and all most people will ever need. I have just returned a RX100 as it was awful to use, had a poor lens, slow software etc etc.

Actually I have the first RX100. It is the fastest compact I used in focus and operation (as long as you don't assign the ring other than manual focus) the lens is one of the best optics I've seen in 90% of the image circle. The corners does have some softness, and sometimes some color shift. But the Sony has much more useful features, plus much better video.
The X30 is a great camera but it is huge in size, might as well use the X100s and live with the fixed lens.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 22, 2014 at 04:51 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G7 X First Impressions Review preview (954 comments in total)

Any reason why I would buy this instead of a much cheaper Sony RX100 MKII ?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 22, 2014 at 01:39 UTC as 49th comment | 2 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boss of Sony: Tried it in the shop. Definitely feels nice in the hand. Pity about the 4/3 sensor.

If you do that much edit, you probably just started photography, because almost all old sensors are worse than m43, so I guess photography started for you around 2012 since before it was not possible to get acceptable photos.Don't worry, you'll learn how to shoot eventually?
Your reason why m43 will die could be exactly the same reason why ff will die, or apsc, and all our photos will be taken with camera phones.
Most mirrorless cameras cost less and give more ? More what ? Video ? C-AF ? Lenses ? Size ?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 18, 2014 at 17:56 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boss of Sony: Tried it in the shop. Definitely feels nice in the hand. Pity about the 4/3 sensor.

Obviously you have no ideea what you're talking about. You'r just inventing stuff for what sounds like a personal anger towards m43.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 13:18 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Really a very impressive camera, especially for video -- which seems to be where u4/3 shines. However, the JPEGs don't seem to be as good as the raw would allow them to be, and even raw resolution per pixel isn't awesome... perhaps this is using a heavier anti-alias filter than most cameras? The still image IQ is definitely down a couple of notches from a much cheaper Sony A6000 (which DPReview rated 5% lower), especially for JPEGs, and the price-competitive A7 blows it away.

As a GH4 owner, all you say is true. But there are other reasons for getting it, a lot of them in fact, already discussed to death here on forums.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 13:13 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

StevenE: I like this camera.
But light is like money, there never seems to be enough around. So low light performance is really important to me. Great performance at ISO 2500 and useable ISO 10,000 are big consideration. This fact alone keeps me with the 5D3. Although the A7s is really tempting, it really would just fill the 5D3 spot but with no magic lantern and fewer lens options (and the A7s is fiddly, and apparently has bizzare color artifiacts in highlights).
I'm looking forward to seeing what Canon will do with the C100 mkII (and EOS-M III for pocket-sized cam), other than that I'll consider adding the new Sony PXW-FS7.

I use m43, but if you need almost as good as it gets low light, very decent action/sports, great 1080p video, outstanding landscape, I think the D810 is the best camera outhere, and Nikon lens line-up is fantastic. I think D810 is a very underated camera for low light, but people forget the resolution it has allows for huge noise reduction to be applied compared to much lower res cameras, and also the sensor is really more sensitive at the same exposure compared to competing cameras.
If size and weight is ok, with you, I don't think there's a better camera. If you need crazy low light video, A7s for sure, but you live with lots of compromises.
For me, m43 already surpass my low light needs and sports needs, so I take the smaller size. I wish I had a bit more rsolution though.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 13:11 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

Demon Cleaner: I'm still somewhat flummoxed by DPR's obsession with performance when compared to a full-frame camera. Most people will be weighing up whether a GH4 is worth the extra expense over something like a Canon APSC. That's where the value of the GH4 ultimately lies, and I think that comparison would be far more useful to the masses.

Filmmakers made up their minds regarding the GH4/A7s many moons ago. They don't wait 12 months for DPR to release their review.

Why ? For me is very simple. I took a look at the LX100. I shoot primary portraits, casual landscapes,and rarely daylight sports. Compared to my other m43 gears, the LX100 is much worse for landscapes (due to lower res and softer lens), too short fl for portraits and sports. Decision made in the next 10 minutes after the camera was launched.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 13:04 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

Demon Cleaner: I'm still somewhat flummoxed by DPR's obsession with performance when compared to a full-frame camera. Most people will be weighing up whether a GH4 is worth the extra expense over something like a Canon APSC. That's where the value of the GH4 ultimately lies, and I think that comparison would be far more useful to the masses.

Filmmakers made up their minds regarding the GH4/A7s many moons ago. They don't wait 12 months for DPR to release their review.

First reason is the A7s does not shoot 4k. Nobody will buy an external recorder except the pros who deliver to clients and make money, and they are a minority amongst dpreview readers.
Other reason being a different still shooters target. GH4 is a much faster camera, A7s is a much higher IQ camera.
Other reason being overall size and weight of the system.

Useless discussions. When you know what you want, you know what you want. Comparing these cameras or asking which to get tells me that those people have no ideea what and how they shoot.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 11:32 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (470 comments in total)

,,No option to cqpture 1080 video from 4K crop region to minimize aliasing,,

Doesn't the 1080p ETC mode achieve that ?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2014 at 18:45 UTC as 77th comment

So the pro comes only with android, but the lower spec tablet comes with the Win 8.1 option too ? It doesn't make any sense. Shouldn't the pro have the more full featured OS ?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 11, 2014 at 17:28 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

Serious Sam: The high ISO doesn't look too bad......but consider the X-trans can do just as good or even better. I am not so sure.

Best to wait for the DPR proper review and compare under the noise SD chart.

I'm not sure the EX-2 can do much more. It lacks 4K video (Iwant 4K) but more importantly the 1080p video is a joke on the EX-2. You also get a f/1.7 lens, and it is also a zoom, covering from classic landscape to classic portraiture. You also get a much better AF system. I won't comment about iq based on a one camera jpegs. I hope it will be good.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2014 at 21:28 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (626 comments in total)
In reply to:

venancio: I got carried away by the FUJI marketing guys when they claimed that the X series is the LEICA alternative... so I waited for a LEICA full frame alternative and just got iteration after iteration of 16mp APSC... I guess what the marketing guys showed was that FUJI is the LEICA of 16 mp APSC... something that's almost as good as a full frame... so this X100T could be it... but if FUJI could only make a full frame, they can completely claim that this full frame is almost as good as a medium format camera, and that could make a lot of guys like me happier... and FUJI does not have to be pigeon-holed as a LEICA wanna be anymore...

I will only buy one when it'll have a large format sensor. FF just does not cut it for me, is too damn tiny.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2014 at 16:10 UTC
On Samsung NX1 First Impressions Review preview (914 comments in total)
In reply to:

Miki Nemeth: I'd be very much surprised, if the in-focus hit rate of this camera at 15fps on a moving subject would be better than 1 fps. Exactly like A6000, and any other mirrorless cameras. This is the thousandth announcement from a mirrorless maker that they solved the problem of efficient AF-C. Since I don't believe AF on mirrorless cameras, I wonder how efficiently focus peaking is implemented in NX1? Does it support touch-to-magnify? All during video recording? Is the screen/EVF fast enough for focus peaking ((moderately) fast) moving subjects, while shooting MF 15fps? The worst scenario would be to get an NX1 with crappy AF-C (100 fps/1000 cross AF point mean nothing) as well as crappy focus peaking for moving subjects. I hope I am wrong.

I have the GH4 and continous AF really works at 7.5 fps, I got over 90% in focus shots. There are times when it completely misses a burst, so it's not that reliable as a dslr but it does work well. And yes, that's with a telephoto lens.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 19, 2014 at 02:32 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G7 X First Impressions Review preview (954 comments in total)
In reply to:

lacikuss: Canon nailed it!

Excellent for 90% of point and shoot users (who don't care about EVF but do care about 100mm reach),

not so for 5% of users who want to take this as a dslr substitute for travel (these care about EVF and don't care about 100mm),

and meaningless for the last 5% who just can't compromise between EVF or 100mm.

That sound right. Except that those 90% P&S users don't buy this kind of camera. Even Sony told us that. This cameras are mostly step down (in size for dslrs and serious amators) than step up (for P&S shooters)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 17:05 UTC
Total: 93, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »