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

Comments

Total: 241, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: I have a new idea for a test to replicate the harsh climatic conditions that many of your readers will subject the lenses to. Store them in a freezer for a couple of days (preferably a walk-in) and then test them for autofocus performance and accuracy while they're still cold. Then repeat the test by storing them in an oven heated to 110°F for a couple of days (most modern ovens will hold that temp easily). I know my Nikon gear has survived worse out in the world but I wonder how these third-party lenses would do under tougher circumstances.

Robin Ducker; Near field photography isn't what this type of lens is usually used for.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 14, 2015 at 17:14 UTC
On Enthusiast DSLR camera roundup (2014) article (27 comments in total)

Comment from a cheapskate here. Since all these are great cameras I rate the A77ii the best for being the most camera for the least cost and the 7Dii being the worst for it's high price.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2015 at 13:48 UTC as 2nd comment
On Alien embryo! in the Alien challenge (4 comments in total)

It would have been nice if you could explain what we are really seeing here. Looks like some kind of kelp attached to a rock.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 10, 2015 at 13:01 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

ProfHankD: I'll repeat my standard plea: wider, smaller, slower, cheaper, ultrawide zooms. I don't care if wide open is f/5.6 (or any number on the good side of the diffraction limit)... but I'd like it to start at 12mm (for FF) and be smaller and much cheaper without having poorer IQ. I have faith that somebody should be able to make a nice 12-24mm f/8 to sell for $300... it can even be manual focus... anybody?

vscd; You say mirrorless aren't "real cameras"? You are an absolute dick head and a condescending ass. Then you say the following;

"Every Screen on the Back is a EVF if you like to. Just look on it if you prefer it. You never see the real picture on an EVF... it's like a sex doll, it's just a copy of the real one. But there may be people who enjoy it... why not. I prefer the real one."

If that's true why do you bother taking photos because they are just copies of the real thing. If you stop and think about it what you said is just plain stupid.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 20:08 UTC
In reply to:

art99: Why are you still designing lenses for the mirror box cameras ?
They will soon be obsolete pretty soon.
Haw about offering us some compact wide zooms for the FF mirrorless instead.
Like a 12-36 F4 so I can use it on my Sony A7r.

Saying that DSLRs will be obsolete "pretty soon" is a bit premature. It will be at least 5 years before DSLRs become a niche product available only for the expensive high end market and even then they won't be obsolete.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 20:06 UTC
On Canon EOS 5DS / SR First Impressions Review preview (2342 comments in total)

In reference to the paragraph below from the article. Sony's SLTs and Mirrorless cameras don't need to delay because there is no moving mirror, and they use electronic first curtain shutter so the shutter doesn't move until it closes. All you have to do is use 2 sec delay or a remote release and any potential movement is eliminated.

"The option for shorter delays means you can choose the shortest delay required to mitigate the effects of mirror vibration, but that is no longer than is necessary. Sadly, a mechanical shutter is still used to initiate the exposure, and can potentially remain a source of shake. An electronic first curtain could've complemented Canon's new pre-selected delays perfectly, with the shutter press lifting up the mirror and shutter simultaneously, and the exposure initiated electronically after a short delay. We've been asking Nikon and Sony to introduce this feature for some time to reduce the impact of mirror / shutter shock on sharpness."

Direct link | Posted on Feb 15, 2015 at 13:35 UTC as 74th comment
On Canon announces long-awaited EOS 7D Mark II article (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

peevee1: It's bigger and 160g heavier than D750. It is twice the weight of Sony A7r and almost twice the weight of NX1. All are sealed metal cameras (although Sony's sealing is so-so). What are they putting in there, bricks?

Carbon fiber is lighter, stronger and more expensive than metal. To prefer a metal chassis on a camera makes no sense at all.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2015 at 12:35 UTC
On Real-world test: Nikon D750 at the Museum of Flight article (281 comments in total)

If you can't get to Seattle the Air and Space Museum at Dulles International Airport is well worth the trip.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 14:22 UTC as 3rd comment
On 2014 DPReview Readers' Best Shots: Things article (25 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lee Jay: I like number 2 since I like airplanes. Number 10 is just disgusting.

I agree

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 01:12 UTC
On 2014 DPReview Readers' Best Shots: Things article (25 comments in total)
In reply to:

VincentKV: Number 10 should not have been included as it will make some viewers desire to have such anti-nature objects in their homes.

I have to agree that keeping a skin of an endangered species is in poor taste.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 01:12 UTC
On Hands-on with Canon's 'not-coming-to-USA' EOS M3 article (532 comments in total)
In reply to:

dwill23: I LOVED the EOS M. The size, weight, and image quality were truly awesome. People put too much emphasis on the AF, sadly because review sites like this had a pre-hung-jury before it could get into consumer's hands.

It was a great camera. Period. It took excellent photos. Period.

But, AF and Video performance on other cameras eclipsed the EOS M.

I can only assume the EOS M did so poorly in the US, that's why Canon didn't bring the EOS M2 or M3 to the US.

Well Canon, you fixed the video and the focus, so I'll take one!

This hurts Canon so much in the mirrosless segment that there must be another reason. Maybe they know people in the US can shell out the money for a small compact and an SLR and don't want one that comes close to doing both.

This slew of cameras is not enough to save troubled Canon. This is good news; they'll have to do better soon.

I'm hanging on to a few lenses and a 70D... but maybe not for long. (I used to have EOS 1s and all L's).

Time will tell.

Abu Mahendra; You don't shoot action do you?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2015 at 01:58 UTC
On Hands-on with Canon's 'not-coming-to-USA' EOS M3 article (532 comments in total)
In reply to:

dwill23: I LOVED the EOS M. The size, weight, and image quality were truly awesome. People put too much emphasis on the AF, sadly because review sites like this had a pre-hung-jury before it could get into consumer's hands.

It was a great camera. Period. It took excellent photos. Period.

But, AF and Video performance on other cameras eclipsed the EOS M.

I can only assume the EOS M did so poorly in the US, that's why Canon didn't bring the EOS M2 or M3 to the US.

Well Canon, you fixed the video and the focus, so I'll take one!

This hurts Canon so much in the mirrosless segment that there must be another reason. Maybe they know people in the US can shell out the money for a small compact and an SLR and don't want one that comes close to doing both.

This slew of cameras is not enough to save troubled Canon. This is good news; they'll have to do better soon.

I'm hanging on to a few lenses and a 70D... but maybe not for long. (I used to have EOS 1s and all L's).

Time will tell.

I consider focus speed and accuracy every bit as important as IQ, especially since all larger sensor cameras have good IQ.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2015 at 19:45 UTC
In reply to:

tbcass: While I own a Sigma 17-70 for my A mount Sony's and it works great there have been issues with some other Sony cameras and their lenses requiring firmware upgrades. Personally I'll stick with Tamron as a 3rd party vendor from now on because they actually pay licensing fees to the manufacturers rather than trying to reverse engineer.

KentG; Isn't allowed? Do you have proof of that because I seriously doubt that is true. When it comes to money if Sigma was willing to pay it would be forgive and forget. Unless you come up with solid proof I will chalk that up to being a false rumor.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 27, 2015 at 13:39 UTC

While I own a Sigma 17-70 for my A mount Sony's and it works great there have been issues with some other Sony cameras and their lenses requiring firmware upgrades. Personally I'll stick with Tamron as a 3rd party vendor from now on because they actually pay licensing fees to the manufacturers rather than trying to reverse engineer.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 26, 2015 at 16:13 UTC as 5th comment | 2 replies
On 2014 Readers' Polls: The results are in! article (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

tbcass: Didn't include the Sony A77ii so I didn't vote.

I guess I was too late to see that. Personally I think that dollar for dollar it's the best camera made. Nothing in it's price range is as good overall. I see that it was put up against cameras that cost a lot more money with the A77ii being by far the cheapest.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 25, 2015 at 02:17 UTC
On 2014 Readers' Polls: The results are in! article (378 comments in total)

Didn't include the Sony A77ii so I didn't vote.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2015 at 16:33 UTC as 40th comment | 4 replies
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1446 comments in total)
In reply to:

goblover: Richard, I think you should add more information about lens compatibility. Some people(cough, Tony Northrup, cough) said that, after looking at DXO Mark comparison, FF lenses are actually not that compatible with APS-C bodies, and we are talking lenses and bodies in the same brand. The FF lenses are not as sharp if used on an APS-C body.

Another topic and a question now. I myself am thinking of never go full frame. Even then,if you want to have several good lenses for your system, it will be quite costly. I am thinking of having two bodies in a system, a compact pocketable one and a more serious one. Right now I'm looking to the Panasonic system with GF6 and maybe GH4 bodies, with 20mm 1.7, 12-35 and 35-100 2.8. What do you think, is that setup better, or just go with a full frame camera and lenses and one premium compact?

What makes people think that Tony Northrup is any kind of authority?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2015 at 15:01 UTC
In reply to:

vscd: Why don't you add the Sigma SD1 or the Merrill cams? In the review of the SD1 itself, the camera is inside the test, blowing every other cam away, but not in the Studio update.

Is there a reason for not including it? I think it would be fair to present the advantage of the foveon. Of course it's also fair to see the drawback from ISO800 and upwards. But simply not to show any sign of it is quite surprising.

True and that is what should be done. Unfortunately most people don't bother with that but prefer to make judgments the easy way. Also if the camera is new they may not have the latest software necessary to develop the RAWs.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2015 at 23:19 UTC
In reply to:

vscd: Why don't you add the Sigma SD1 or the Merrill cams? In the review of the SD1 itself, the camera is inside the test, blowing every other cam away, but not in the Studio update.

Is there a reason for not including it? I think it would be fair to present the advantage of the foveon. Of course it's also fair to see the drawback from ISO800 and upwards. But simply not to show any sign of it is quite surprising.

Samuel Spencer;

I realize you don't have the time to fine tune every RAW file but using the defaults on every camera in many ways makes the comparisons invalid because the defaults may work better in some than the others. It's a big reason I don't take these studio comparisons seriously.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2015 at 14:32 UTC
In reply to:

Plastek: NX1 is seriously underwhelming considering all the hype around this camera.
Lens is clearly crippling it, in terms of far corner sharpness even RX 100 mk III got higher resolution and less CA in RAWs, but even if you disregard this problem - it seems to produce some weird artefacts in blue and red colors.

Take a look here - all cameras got blue rings centered to the middle and NX1 got some weird ghosts centered to the top and left edge. Smells like Samsung is heavily cooking their RAWs.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=samsung_nx1&attr13_1=pentax_k3&attr13_2=nikon_d7100&attr13_3=canon_eos7dii&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=100&attr16_3=100&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.2994289983456964&y=-0.6154152083996184

I'd easily pick both: Pentax and Nikon over NX1. Both seem to retain more details in base and higher ISOs. Even with Pentax mushy reds in higher ISOs.

If you look hard enough at these studio shots anybody can find something to support their opinion as to which camera is "better". Such pixel peeping nonsense is a waste of time, IMO.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2015 at 14:28 UTC
Total: 241, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »