keeponkeepingon

keeponkeepingon

Lives in United States United States
Joined on May 28, 2005

Comments

Total: 299, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Wow.

THis would be the perfect lens for my K01.

The 40mm kit is great but wow would be more flexible while still not being huge like the kit *ist DL lens I've been using when the 40mm won't cut the mustard.

Thanks Pentax!

(Now get working on that K-02 upgrade!)

I assume the K-02 will fix that? Sony fits and EVF into a smaller bodies so it's not impossible....

Direct link | Posted on Feb 17, 2015 at 10:16 UTC
In reply to:

nikonson: Rich man's lens: FE 90mm/F2.8 = $1,500
Poor man's lens 1: 85mm/F2.? = Maxxum 50mm/F1.7 + 1.7X converter + LAEA4
Poor man's lens 2: 85mm/F2.? = Maxxum 50mm/F1.4 + 1.7X converter + LAEA4

"much better than clunky 50mm plus adapter". but but the alpha lens needs an adapter too?

But I guess I see the point. Instead of paying top $$ for these huge lens just get the adapter and an alpha lens for similar IQ?

It would be nice to see some comparisons

Does the alpha adapter affect focus speed? I'm pretty sure it does on my A6000 (no PDAF?).

Direct link | Posted on Feb 14, 2015 at 06:40 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: If it's going to be the size of a D750 with the lenses included, then just get the D750!

But with the sony you can do make a nice compact full frame "walk around":
http://camerasize.com/compact/#579.394,567.333,ha,t

Can't really do that with the D750.

Plus the view from above is a bit misleading (or was that the intent?)

http://camerasize.com/compact/#579.394,567.333,ha,b

Now if Nikon would get off their buts and make a decent pancake like canon's 40mm you might have a point.....

Direct link | Posted on Feb 14, 2015 at 06:35 UTC
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Wow.

THis would be the perfect lens for my K01.

The 40mm kit is great but wow would be more flexible while still not being huge like the kit *ist DL lens I've been using when the 40mm won't cut the mustard.

Thanks Pentax!

(Now get working on that K-02 upgrade!)

K-01 is not just shorter, it's also thinner. The smaller size makes it much more (jacket) pocketable than any DSLR, espeically with the "kit" 40mm pancake. It's bit more than "a few grams" lighter than the K-S2 (113g lighter). I'd assume a mythical K-02 would improve on all that.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#610,285

Also dropping the mirror should make it cheaper to manufacture but really it comes down to personal preference and choices. Pentax chose to drop mirrorless so I chose to move over to sony (A6000).

From camerasize:
Pentax K-S2 is 1% (1.5 mm) wider and 15% (12 mm) taller than Pentax K-01.
Pentax K-S2 is 23% (13.5 mm) thicker than Pentax K-01.
Pentax K-S2 [678 g] weights 21% (118 grams) more than Pentax K-01 [560 g] (*inc. batteries and memory card).

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2015 at 13:09 UTC

Dang I had hoped pricing/availability would be announced at CP+ instead of just another "teaser".

(I'm considering the 28mm for my A6000 as an alternative to the SEL35F18)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2015 at 12:25 UTC as 82nd comment | 1 reply

Wow.

THis would be the perfect lens for my K01.

The 40mm kit is great but wow would be more flexible while still not being huge like the kit *ist DL lens I've been using when the 40mm won't cut the mustard.

Thanks Pentax!

(Now get working on that K-02 upgrade!)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 12:11 UTC as 9th comment | 4 replies
On Hands-on with Canon's 'not-coming-to-USA' EOS M3 article (517 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thorgrem: Any sign for new EOS M lenses?
No? Move on people, nothing to see here.

I think he meant that you can cover 11-200mm with canon EOS-M lenses.

But for the US market it's more like 18-55 unless you go 3rd party? Or did I miss a US lens release?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2015 at 11:41 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Review preview (436 comments in total)
In reply to:

NAwlins Contrarian: The table on the first page comparing the GM1, GM5, and RX100 Mk. III is misleading in an important respect. For some purposes (weight, zoom range) the Panasonic M4/3s are listed with their kit lens, but for other purposes (depth), they're listed without it. As your pictures on page 2 show, put on the kit lens and the package becomes more like 3 inches (75mm) deep. An RX100 Mk. III is pocketable in most reasonable pants pockets; with the Panasonics and their kit lens, forget it unless you have cargo pockets.

Also, since we routinely list lenses with focal lengths as "35mm equivalent", can we please routinely do the same thing with apertures? For some purposes it's convenient to see that the 12-32mm kit lens is an f/7-11 equivalent and the RX100 Mk. III's lens is an f/4.9-7.6 equivalent. IOW, (1) the Sony can achieve shallower depth of field, and (2) in low light, its much brighter lens will tend to more than compensate for its somewhat smaller sensor.

Brainstorm: Someone should make photographer pants/jackets with a lint free camera pocket.....

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2015 at 08:38 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Review preview (436 comments in total)
In reply to:

Glen K Wells: Jusy my two pennyworth but i think it is a mistake by Panasonic to not provide a built in flash.
Ok add-ons are more powerful etc but who are these cameras aimed at?

The LX100 - no flash and now the GM5?
Basic photo punters do not want to carry a separate flash around with them to a friends house or out in their other pocket. Just want to take a quick snap oh hang on everyone I need to find and then attach the flash - hey where did everyone go?
A built in flash is one of the functions that make cameras like the E-M10 and the NEX I mean A6000 lines popular.
A built in flash is dam useful. If there is no room on top anymore why not squeeze one on the front like the days of old - software or the camera can remove red-eye.

Personally I would not choose a camera without one, I know that counts for zip but it is a feature that I look for. Currently have D610, X-E2, NEX-6 and E-M10.

Gonna start a bring back the built in flash campaign haha.

If you use aperture versus flash as your lowlight crutch you reduce DOF which may be unacceptable in many non-portrait artsy situations.

And no matter what your aperture there are some situations where flash is the only answer and your $1000 P&S won't get the shot while a cr@ppy iphone camera with it's horendous flash will give you something worth taking home.

Cameras such as the A6000 let you tilt and bounce the flash for results that occasionally can be quite nice.

A flash is nice to have around as a fill light to soften harsh shadows on sunny days.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2015 at 08:36 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Review preview (436 comments in total)
In reply to:

morepix: I don't know if it's just a testing fluke or a real camera difference, but the studio comparisons at high ISO (1600, 3200) look a good deal better for the GM5 than for my LX100. I'm seeing my $900 going down the drain. :-(

Doesn't the LX100 only use a portion of the sensor? I thought that was one of the compromises to get the zoom range?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2015 at 08:31 UTC
On Fujifilm releases XQ2 premium compact article (60 comments in total)

Amazon is currently asking $499 for the XQ2

Gosh it's hard to pay list price for any fuji point and shoot (well mabe the X100 series). The $500 XF1 was just selling for $125 and I can't believe this things takes $375 better pictures:

http://cameradeals.1001noisycameras.com/fuji-xf1-red-drops-to-131-limit-2/

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2015 at 11:38 UTC as 28th comment | 1 reply
On Quick Look: The art of the unforeground article (85 comments in total)

I probably should read the article before commenting but I find it odd that the pictures all have beautiful foregrounds.

Especially the first, given the relative distance of the milkyway versus the mountain the mountain is like in your face foreground.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2015 at 19:21 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

Mike FL: As a matter of fact, the "FUJI XF 10-24mm F4 OIS" is not normal b/c no other OIS UW zoom goes beyond 2X for mirror-less sub-frame body:

> Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS

>Nikon 1 Nikkor VR 6.7-13mm f/3.5-5.6

>MFT no need for OIS b/c IBIS:
- Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6
- Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH

Fuji did good job for UW OIS Zoom, and it is WR too.

You conveniently forgot the EF-M 11-22

But then that's pretty easy given the "love" canon gives to the EOS-M.....

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2015 at 08:43 UTC
On Canon announces five PowerShot compacts article (150 comments in total)
In reply to:

LionelA: I am interested in buying the sx710 because its a compact camera with a good IQ for the sensor size and great 30x zoom....for those who are posting saying why they wont buy any of these cameras I dont care, if you are waiting for a compact superzoom with a 1/1.7 sensor keep waiting.....then when it is finally released bash that sensor size and keep waiting for the 1" and it goes on and on

How do you know that it has "a good IQ" and that the 30x Zoom is great? What is great about F6.9? Thank you very much!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 00:54 UTC
In reply to:

Maxmolly7: Where is the EOS M listed?

You still sell those.

Sold and shipped by amazon, number one camera in compact system cameras:
http://www.amazon.de/dp/B00LUQ6188/

Direct link | Posted on Dec 27, 2014 at 17:11 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1261 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thunder123: I like how DPReview after removing the A77ii jpgs due to an error in noise reduction still hasn't replaced them

But looking at the Raw files clearly the A77ii is better in most areas.

Using a D7000 to compare the DR, really? DPR cooked the books on this review

Not according to dxo mark:
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D7100-versus-Nikon-D7000___865_680

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 17:05 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1261 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thunder123: I like how DPReview after removing the A77ii jpgs due to an error in noise reduction still hasn't replaced them

But looking at the Raw files clearly the A77ii is better in most areas.

Using a D7000 to compare the DR, really? DPR cooked the books on this review

I was wondering what you meant then I looked it up:

Wow, pitting the "latest and greatest" canon against a 4 year old Nikon?

"The Nikon D7000[2] is a 16.2 megapixel digital single-lens reflex camera (DSLR) model announced by Nikon on September 15, 2010"

Double wow, I just looked them up on amazon. D7000 is $484 versus the 7D MK II at $1799 talk about an apples and aligators comparison.....

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 15:28 UTC
On Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) article (310 comments in total)
In reply to:

Philip Corlis: No Sony cameras in the mix - hardly a credible review.

I just don't understand why a camera can't be in two roundups if it qualifies. The A7 should be in the Full frame roundup and the mirrorless roundup and the Ricoh GR should be in both pocketable roundup and whatever roundup they eventually plan on putting it in.

And I agree the A6000 should be here. It is as good or better than the cameras in this list and is certainly just as compact.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2014 at 18:50 UTC
On High-end pocketable compacts 2013 roundup article (264 comments in total)

Why isn't the ricoh GR in this roundup?

It seems like a really poor choice to leave a dpreview GOLD award winning high end pocket camera out of the "High End Pocketable" roundup.

Even if you plan on putting it in a "Big sensor Roundup" (or whatever) it still belongs here also as folks looking for a pocketable camera won't necessarily go looking for it among huge clunkers such as the LX100 in your big sensor roundup.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 2, 2014 at 08:03 UTC as 16th comment | 5 replies
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (2702 comments in total)
In reply to:

ozturert: Summary of some comments:

1) I think this is a horrible camera because I don't need it.
2) This is perfect because it's Canon.
3) This is terrible because it's Canon.
4) X camera is much better because...
5) I cannot afford it, so it's bad.
6) It must be bad because I've just bought another camera, so mine should of course be better. See xxx forum if you don't believe me!
7) It's ISO25600 is worse than A7, so why should waste my money?
8) It's bad because DxO says so.
9) 7DMarkII is way behind its competitors like A7s.
10) This is old technology compared to xxx.
11) There is no WiFi so it's bad.
12) Fixed LCD? Come ooooon!
13) No touch LCD is a deal breaker for me, I'll continue using my IPhone.
14) Only 20MP? This is 2014!
15) The old 70D sensor!
16) The best camera ever! Does it have Instagram-like effects?
17) My camera has more effects!
18) Sony is kicking aeass, Canikon is waaay behind!

Thank you so so much for the TLDR.

Now I can go take some pictures and play with my kids instead of reading the 2400+ comments.

You also for got 19) something something something DxO sucks.

You can fill in the something something something, from the few comments I did read there seems to be an anti DxO sentiment from some of the commenters.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2014 at 15:20 UTC
Total: 299, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »