tbcass

tbcass

Lives in United States Central, NY, United States
Works as a Master of the Universe
Joined on Nov 21, 2005
About me:

Sony RX100
Sony A65
Sony A77
Sony A77ii
Minolta Maxxum 50mm f1.7
Sony 35mm f1.8
Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 "C" lens
Tamron 70-300 USD
Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro
Tamron 70-200 f2.8 USD
Also play Bass Guitar and Keyboards
Fender Squire Fretless 4 String
Fender Precision Lyte fretted 4 string
Yamaha TPG635 electronic Piano/Keyboard

Comments

Total: 147, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD Lab Test Review preview (189 comments in total)
In reply to:

BonnieSueM: "Canon's EF 100-400...simply not as sharp when compared like-for-like?"

Buy L glass they said, you'll never regret it they said. Sigh.

What are you smokin' brother?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 20:13 UTC
On Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD Lab Test Review preview (189 comments in total)

Lassoni, after looking at your posts you obviously don't know what you are talking about. Apparently this lens is better than what you have but believe me, all your negative posts won't change that.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 20:11 UTC as 20th comment | 4 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

MAStai: The Fujifilm X-S1 is overlooked--with identical concept. Its been around since 2011 and has lower res and smaller sensor but 24 – 624 mm range.

Still a lot smaller than 1".

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2014 at 22:34 UTC
In reply to:

Maklike Tier: The Elephant in the room for me, is that the A7 is a $1449 body.....and the 5D MkIII is a $3399 body. Yeah sure the 7S can resolve ridiculously high ISO shots, but in 'normal use' it's no advantage really from where I'm sitting...and it's a $2495 body.

For this shootut, the impressive camera to my eyes is the plain ol' boring ol' A7, punching well above it's weight.

Want.

*edit* Actually I just noticed that the comparo was for the A7R ($2298) DPR, can you add the A7 to this shootout? The 7S is worth the money if you're shooting regularly above ISO51200, but if not, then I'm not sure what the point is. A very specific tool for a very specific job? I'd be less inclined to say that if it could shoot at high ISO with more than a paltry 5fps.

In "normal use" ridiculously high iso's aren't needed either.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2014 at 17:19 UTC
In reply to:

Leandros S: That's nice and all, but where is the A7? And why isn't there a Nikon in the race?

This wasn't meant to be a best high ISO article but was meant to see if reducing pixels in a specialized high ISO camera produces better results.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2014 at 17:17 UTC
In reply to:

vadims: I think it's about time for ISO to introduce another, logarithmic scale for measuring sensor sensitivity. The fact that the numbers look crazy does not mean that the sensitivity per se is "crazy" -- it's still far cry from the capabilities of the human eye.

BTW, "who needs more than ISO 6,400" sounds to me suspiciously similar to "640 kilobytes should be enough for everyone".

Your ISO/640kilobyte analogy is irrelevant. A relevant one is pixel resolution and in both cases the higher number becomes less and less useful for more and more people. ISO 3200 and below works for me 99% of the time. ISO 6400 and below 100%.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2014 at 17:11 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: Additionally, and like the Sony RX10, although you can use the ring around the lens to zoom, it zooms AT ITS OWN SPEED, it is motorized. It does not zoom as and when you want it to like any ordinarily available zoom lens does, so the entire concept is dead in the water-like the RX10.

I ordered and paid for an RX10, like a fool, as it seemed the ideal gizmo for an ageing population, and for their grandchildren, light, enough resolution and fast enough prefocussed to outgun a Leica, with a Leica lens, but elsewhere I discovered the thing could not be zoomed manually, so I cancelled. And both using a teeny sensor give great graphic quality- the Sony especially, yet fail to reproduce reality, which is what I have always naively thought a camera is for.

An old film camera will always give better results than this can, so what's the point, eh?

No camera can give you "reality" but digital certainly comes closer to it than film ever can. FYI I shot film for 40 years.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 14:49 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

derekmjenkins: I was starting to compare this camera to my GH1 with the 14-140 OIS 4.0-4.8 lens, and it is looking like this bridge camera beats it in every way:

Equivalent focal length: 25-400 vs. 28-200
Max aperature: 2.8-4.0 vs. 4.0-5.8
Max aperature equivalent: 7.6-10.8 vs. 8.0-11.6
ISO range: 125-12800 vs. 100-3200
EVF (dots): 2,359,000 vs. 1,440,000
LCD (dots): 921,000 vs. 460,000
Shutter speeds: 1/16000-60 vs. 1/4000-60
Flash GN (m): 13.5 vs. 10.5
Drive Speed (fps): 12 vs. 3
Focus points: 49 vs. 23
Exposure Compensation -5 to +5 (1/3 steps) vs. -3 to +3 (1/3 steps)

Oh and with the FZ1000 you also get:
- Panorama mode
- HDR mode
- Orientation sensor (try using a 20mm 1.7 on a GH1 vertically!)
- 4k video up to 30 fps!
- Timelaps video
- 5-axis in body IS
- SDXC support

The only things you do not get in the FZ1000 are dof preview and white-balance bracketing. I would miss the ability to use some higher quality primes and to get down to use my 9-18mm lens.

It's a good camera.

The GH1 beats it by having better IQ.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 14:40 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fabini: When available, I will buy a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000.
I own a DMC-FZ50. It has been a great travel companion for the past eight years. Suddenly, I wish to go bigger in all ways (except for the top end zoom.) I look forward to a decade of new photos.

When did 400mm become a "super" zoom?

About 8 years ago. ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 14:39 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: This must be a great camera. Ok, the RX10 has a faster lens but the Lumix has a greater zoom range and the price difference is big. On paper at least it's a better choice than the Sony.

They are different enough to appeal for different uses but the price difference makes the Pany a much better deal. Sony is going to have to drop the price of the RX10 big time.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 14:37 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

MAStai: The Fujifilm X-S1 is overlooked--with identical concept. Its been around since 2011 and has lower res and smaller sensor but 24 – 624 mm range.

The small sensor puts it in a different category IMO.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 14:29 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)

Unless the constant F2.8 lens is important (and it can be for some uses) this, for the price, seems like a much better deal than the RX10.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 17:16 UTC as 201st comment
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZAnton: A version III hassignificantly more noise than v.II (at ISO 3200), and also more than Canon GX1 mk2

It could be a difference in exposure. DPR is notorious in it's inability to maintain consistent exposure between cameras in it's studio comparisons. DXO is the only reliable source for such comparisons because it's objective and well controled.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 2, 2014 at 10:40 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)
In reply to:

cashewNut: The Samsung NX2000 and the Fuji X-A1 leave the Sony RX100-lll in the mud.
At iso 6400, the images on these two cameras are still very clean and well-defined. Wow! This is a major disappointment for me.

By cashewNut (1 day ago)
"But the Pentax K50 and the Nikon D-3200 which are both APS-C sensors are identical to the Sony RX100-lll @ 6400. What is stupid about that?"

Technology moves on. It certainly isn't disappointing if the 1" sensor of the RX100 series competes favorably with older APS-C cameras. What I found stupid was comparing it to a camera with the latest APS-C tech.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 2, 2014 at 10:36 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)
In reply to:

SergeyMS: Fantastic resolution! Comparing with some more bulky and expensive cameras, it is great result!

It's all about being ultra compact. With an equivalent lens attached the GM1 is simply more bulky. Size/quality is the only reason I bought an RX100. Are you a GM1 fanboy?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 2, 2014 at 10:29 UTC
On Light Field Cameras - Focusing on the Future article (133 comments in total)

It seems to me the camera would be awkward to handle with the way the body angles down. It would be tough on your wrist.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 2, 2014 at 10:24 UTC as 9th comment | 6 replies
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)
In reply to:

SergeyMS: Fantastic resolution! Comparing with some more bulky and expensive cameras, it is great result!

Can you put a GM1 with an equivalent lens in your pocket? No, and at the same time it can't compete with cameras with larger sensors either. It appears the brand fanboys (on both sides) are coming out of the woodwork.

Direct link | Posted on May 31, 2014 at 13:49 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)
In reply to:

cashewNut: The Samsung NX2000 and the Fuji X-A1 leave the Sony RX100-lll in the mud.
At iso 6400, the images on these two cameras are still very clean and well-defined. Wow! This is a major disappointment for me.

Rather stupid statement as it would be true for any APS-C camera in comparison. The (put any APS-C camera here) leave the Sony RX100III in the mud. I know my Sony A77 and 65 easily outperform my RX100 above iso800.

Direct link | Posted on May 31, 2014 at 13:45 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)
In reply to:

xenofotofun: The RX100 series….: the digi throw away cam of the new millennium; a clever $$$ fleecing plan for the P.S. fan sheep from your Sony photo-God! Third evolution and still no wether-dust sealing; once the dust gets in its time for the garbage. At this price range it should have been included from the start….
waiting for more useful improvements until I buy or perhaps Pana or Fuji will deliver the right P.S. "common sense" is over taken by greed…..

xenofotofun, You are an idiot troll. I guess this camera crushes your favorite brand leaving you with nothing to do but bad mouth it.

Direct link | Posted on May 17, 2014 at 00:19 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)
In reply to:

obayedh: "we're a little worried that it might be another great camera that we just can't love"

We all know dp can't love Sony cameras! It's an open secret, isn't it!!?

Yes, they just can't get past the ergonomics of the camera even though there are countless users of the RX100 cameras, me included, that think the ergonomics are just fine for a compact. Ergonomic design is a very personal thing and it is a huge mistake for DPR's reviewers to assume that what they dislike translates to everybody else.

Direct link | Posted on May 17, 2014 at 00:15 UTC
Total: 147, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »