Dennis

Dennis

Lives in United States CT, United States
Works as a Software
Joined on Oct 25, 2002

Comments

Total: 168, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Rare Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM goes on sale in UK article (218 comments in total)

Ken Rockwell says the FZ70 is just as good.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2014 at 17:36 UTC as 74th comment | 2 replies
On Fujifilm updates X-mount lens roadmap to end of 2015 article (170 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: For wedding photographers, that should have been a 16-55 F2 lens.

"Haven't you been taking notes from Sigma's recent zoom f1.8?"

Haven't you ? It's only 18-35.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 24, 2014 at 16:30 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2071 comments in total)
In reply to:

LTZ470: Question: SO you are telling me that shooting an m43 at f/8 I get an f/16 DOF with double the shutter speed and can shoot at a lower ISO as well?

Read the article. Several examples answer your questions precisely. (Although I think you want to decide whether you're really interested in doubling the shutter speed or halving it).

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 13:09 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2071 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fygaren: As you probably never frame your photos using diagonal AOV, to get the equivalent of FF 3:2 with mFT 4:3 or the other way around, you need to do some cropping.

FF 100mm f4 = mFT 48mm f1.9 and then crop vertical AOV to get a 3:2

mFT 50mm f2 = FF 92mm f3.7 and then crop horizontal AOV to get 4:3

Horizontal crop factor of mFT is about 2.1 while vertical is about 1.85

Cheers!

So you think people who switch from m43 to 3:2 or from 3:2 to m43 start regularly cropping their photos instead of adapting to the new format ? It's possible, I guess ... but I wouldn't jump to that conclusion. When I pick up a p&s I just work with its 4:3 sensor; I don't crop my photos to 3:2 because that's what I'm used to with my DSLR.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 13:03 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2071 comments in total)
In reply to:

LTZ470: f/1.2 = f/1.2 = f/1.2 = Shutter Speed...f/1.2 w/ f/2.4 DOF gives faster Shutter Speed which is THE critical factor...I'll say it again faster shutter speed with increased DOF which is advantageous in many applications... ;-)

And why can't you get the same shutter speed at f/2.4 on a larger sensor ?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 12:59 UTC
On Beyond the ordinary: Tim Dodd's Everyday Astronaut article (102 comments in total)

Wonder if he got the idea from Scott Listfields paintings:

http://astronautdinosaur.com/

Direct link | Posted on Jul 5, 2014 at 16:47 UTC as 40th comment | 1 reply
On Step into Edgar Martins' Time Machine article (34 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roadrunnerdeluxe: Great photos, but No. 10 is the standout for me. What a shot!

http://500px.com/Autobahn66

Yup - definitely #10. I'll have to search for more of his work.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2014 at 14:29 UTC
In reply to:

Rooru S: fifth af lens for eos-m in two years? it's hard to believe people are complaining about lack of lenses in sony e-mount (both fullframe and aps-c)

Perspective is necessary. People are complaining about lack of e-mount lenses when looking at it as an alternative to DSLRs. Nobody complains about lack of EOS-M lenses, because nobody ever took it seriously to begin with.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 18:13 UTC
In reply to:

h2k: "In a week of unparalleled excitement for EOS M owners..."
---
I need a tranquilizer indeed.

Priceless quote !

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 11:25 UTC
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: woot! Some EOS-M love.

I stumbled on an EOS-M with the excelent 22mm/F2 for $199 and could not resist. Gosh am I happy, what a fun little camera. It's my around the house and out and about camera. Sure it's slow as nails but I knew that going in.

I've been dragging my feet on buying other lenses though. I'm tempted by the 18-55 (cheap!) or the 11-22 but then I'm destroying the three advantages the M has over my T2i ($199, size! and a 35mm FF equiv fast prime).

IQ from even the old canon sensor is better than anything M43 and with the 22mm F2 prime it's a nice little package and (for what I paid for it) tremendous bang for the buck. There is no way that $200 could get you a better "New in the box" fast prime performance with large sensor IQ.

Slow AF or not, I'd snatch one up for $200 ! It's tempting at $350, but I just don't need another camera.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 15:49 UTC
In reply to:

Dennis: Watch out micro 4/3 ! The juggernaut is coming at you !

Coming next year: the EF-M 18-55mm II

I can actually understand it outselling any single model of m43 cameras. It offers some degree of compatibility with Canon EOS lenses, apparently, making it more appealing than other ILCs to the legion of EOS users out there. Beyond that, it's been selling for $350 with an f/2 pancake prime - a steal ! (I'd be tempted if it weren't for reports of dog-slow AF). M43 on the other hand has rolled out lots of bodies and regular upgrades. And a lot of m43 cameras are fairly expensive, and early models had subpar IQ for the sensor size.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 15:48 UTC

Watch out micro 4/3 ! The juggernaut is coming at you !

Coming next year: the EF-M 18-55mm II

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 11:48 UTC as 17th comment | 10 replies

I like these a lot. I would not call them "family portraits" any more than I'd call Julie Blackmon's photography "family portraits". I always wonder about stuff like that, particularly when looking at trendy wedding photography ... thinking that 40 years from now, when these kids look through their family portrait album, they'll be looking at pictures of themselves conducting chickens on a sculpture or looking up at trees in the fog ... just like 25 years after a wedding, looking back at a picture of the bride running down the middle of the street in the rain and looking back at the photographer, for absolutely no reason whatsoever other than to create a contrived photo. Don't get me wrong - like I said, I like these a lot. I think they just cross over from "family photos" into "photographic art using the family as models". I don't get the impression that any of these represent what the family actually DOES when not being asked to dress up and pose for dad.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 13:02 UTC as 27th comment | 1 reply
On A GoPro Hero's journey into a dishwasher article (167 comments in total)

Clever, and impressive to see that the GoPro can withstand that. But "surprisingly entertaining" ? Maybe if edited down to 90 seconds. Or maybe if it showed some really dirty dishes actually getting cleaned. Maybe I skipped over the good part ?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 5, 2014 at 15:28 UTC as 46th comment
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2962 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lederhosen: Again with the complaints about the clickless wheel? Get over it, DPR. Some people like it, others don't. Your obsession with it is blinkered, subjective, and completely out of proportion. "The wheel does not click, therefore I cannot love this camera!" Please.

I expected to dislike the clickless ring on the RX100 ... largely based on dpreviews comments. But I have no problem with it. I don't use it for aperture; maybe I'd prefer it if I did. But I do use it for ISO, which has discrete values, and it's just not a big deal to turn until I select the ISO I want.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2014 at 20:30 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2962 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jun2: I would buy Sony a6000 with kit lens (16-50mm f/3.5- 5.6) at the same price. The two combo have similar light gathering ability. BTW, light gathering ability of 8.8-25.7mm f1.8-2.8 doesn't equal 24-70mm f1.8-2.8.

And what does an A6000 with 16-50 get you ? A mid-sized camera with a lousy lens. Not too big, not too small, not too bad, not too good.

Most RX100 owners already own a DSLR. They don't want another system camera that you have to carry around on a wrist strap.

As for "big and heavy" pockets, I put mine in my jeans pocket all the time. And that's with a rubber add-on grip attached.

Call it a luxury toy if that makes you feel better about so many other people buying it. I like my luxury toy (original RX100).

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 13:55 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2962 comments in total)
In reply to:

tecnoworld: Once again sony is leading in the innovations field. And they exactly understand what customers want.

Almost anybody so 'serious' about photography to get a dedicated camera over a smartphone would also need an evf. They got it in a great way.

I've never been a sony user, but they are leaving competitors into dust, lately.

They're showing signs of starting to understand what customers want. They've got a history of screwing up their cameras lineups pretty badly, though, stripping features, burying things in menus, rolling out bizarre lens lineups with odd priorities. The A6000 was starting to look like the ultimate "NEX", fixing all the complaints about prior models and then I noticed that they removed the viewfinder level gauge feature. I'm much happier buying a Sony compact than buying into a Sony system (I've owned two). Not that this is about systems, but Sony still needs work on the "understand what customers want" part. (Maybe their Cybershot group knows, but the Alpha group doesn't ?)

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 13:43 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2962 comments in total)
In reply to:

kona_moon: f/1.8-2.8 sounds impressive, but when you look at the plot of equivalent f-stop for the entire zoom range, it is almost a constant f/2.8 from 30mm up. Still, tempting.

Yes, and the RX100 goes from 1.8-2.8 over the 28-35mm range, and after that, climbs steadily to f/4 at 70mm equivalent. So it's really not all that much better. Sure, I'd take 1-stop at 70mm ... and I'd take 24mm. But I also like the tele end (even if it is f/4.9 on the RX100) so it's not a slam dunk. (The EVF and - assuming it has it - Auto ISO in M are the more compelling features to me).

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 13:32 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2962 comments in total)
In reply to:

M H S: Oh no! Not this again.

The excessive focus on the alleged unsatisfying "shooting experience" is just ridiculous.

First and foremost, the point of the camera is to take good pictures (and videos). Furthermore, one person's "inert" experience is another person's "smooth" experience. Give it a rest DPR.

Shooting experience is very important ... it's also very personal. I find the RX100 to be a remarkably easy/intuitive camera to use after a few customizations. But it doesn't matter; people will buy the camera based on specs and reputation and realize the same thing.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 13:30 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2962 comments in total)

Re: lens speed ... the RX100-3 beats the earlier models by having 24-28mm. From 28-35, the older models are a match. From 35-70, the older models creep up to about 1 stop slower, according to the equivalence chart from the 2012 roundup here:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2367736880/roundup-enthusiast-zoom-compact-cameras/2
And then the older win at the tele end, regardless of speed.

So the new camera has WA and is up to 1-stop faster from 35-70. Nice, but to me, the bigger deal is the EVF.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 04:56 UTC as 750th comment | 1 reply
Total: 168, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »