keeponkeepingon

keeponkeepingon

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

Comments

Total: 265, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
On Just posted: Canon EOS 100D / Rebel SL1 Review article (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I really wish Canon could shrink their lenses instead of shrinking their cameras.

Yet somehow pentax manages to churn out small lenses with great IQ.

Even canons attempt at a pancake lens is a monster compared to pentaxes.

And then there is the Panasonic "power zoom". Or just make more EF-S lenses; for most of the lineup you are paying for glass you don't use when you use a crop sensor....

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2013 at 17:22 UTC
On Just posted: Canon EOS 100D / Rebel SL1 Review article (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

cmvsm: How does the Canon score a Gold Award at 78%, yet the Nikon D5200 scored 79%, but received a Silver Award? Furthermore, all other cameras reviewed within the last year, that scored a 79 or above, all received Gold Awards, except for the Nikon D5200.

I really could care less either way, just trying to understand DVR's scoring/rating system, as its a bit inconsistent.

"is deserves a gold because," but for you to get the gist of the message, which repeatedly mentions its LV AF abilities "

But the LV AF abilities are only realized when we buy all new STM lenses? And that selection is limited to 3 lenses at this point?

And even though the AF is improved, and may be useable, according to most reviewers it lags way behind the competition.

So we have a slightly smaller T5i with a slightly less horrible LV AF (if we buy all new lenses) = gold? Still don't get it Shawn and reading these comments, I'm not the only one.

I don't believe the payola stuff, but I've handled the Sl1 (it's not that much smaller than my 350d) so we are all fairly confused as to how such minor improvements (with severe STM restrictions) and practically no IQ improvement and a 5 year old sensor that is way behind the competition ranked a Gold.

The "it's a gold because I liked it" really sort of degrades the whole rating scheme.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 28, 2013 at 18:46 UTC
On Just posted: Canon EOS 100D / Rebel SL1 Review article (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

miketala: I wonder how this compares with a Panasonic G6. G6 i understand would have better video, but similar body styles. the m43 lenses would be smaller. THough the G6 sensor is a bit old it's fairly similar to the Canon with its older sensor.

"By Plastek (7 hours ago)
100d on the other hand got one enormous advantage over G6: HUGE choice of lenses."

Exactly how many STM lenses are there? Without the STM AF in video or live view is total garbage putting it again way behind the G6.

"Oh, wait, there's another one: Larger sensor, meaning more options to control depth of field (especially when matched with trio of f/1.4 primes)."

Small DOF is not necessailly a good thing. For example taking picture of my kids running around in the evening I want something fast with a huge DOF. Using a F1.4 lens (I have both the 50 and 30) is frustrating because if you actually use the F1.4 aperature your DOF is about as thick as a piece of paper. Having a fast lens and a bigger DOF would let me have my cake and eat it too. G6 wins again.

So canon is great if you are taking artsy pictures of flowers and want to swim in a dreamy bokeh. For real life the G6 wins...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 28, 2013 at 16:29 UTC
On Just posted: Canon EOS 100D / Rebel SL1 Review article (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

cmvsm: How does the Canon score a Gold Award at 78%, yet the Nikon D5200 scored 79%, but received a Silver Award? Furthermore, all other cameras reviewed within the last year, that scored a 79 or above, all received Gold Awards, except for the Nikon D5200.

I really could care less either way, just trying to understand DVR's scoring/rating system, as its a bit inconsistent.

Shawn Barnet regarding

"If you read the review, I explain repeatedly why it deserves a gold."

I went through the entire review page by page and the word gold does not appear once.

Perhaps you use a graphic for gold that my search tool is not finding?

I'm also confused as to why this got the gold. It's simply a T2i,T3i,T4i,T5i in a smaller package. More of the same old stuff, no IQ improvements just smaller. The RAW scores reflect this and you are nodding as you read the review, then see the gold and have a "say what?" moment....

Direct link | Posted on Jul 27, 2013 at 19:31 UTC
On Just posted: Canon EOS 100D / Rebel SL1 Review article (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: You really have to wonder.... if mini DSLRs like the SL1 existed five years ago, would there be so much interest in high end MILC cameras today?

It is indeed smaller and more portable, but may be still to large (especially in thickness) for people who want really small cameras.

I think Canon has a good product here, but it arrived too late to the party.

Still... it makes a very nice second camera for people who own a 70D or 7D and have plenty of EOS lenses...

But they did have SLRs like this 5 years ago. The Canon Rebel 350D and 400D are basically the same size.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2013 at 15:00 UTC
On Just posted: Canon EOS 100D / Rebel SL1 Review article (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

Matt1645f4: @ Shawn Barnett "added to the Rebel's well-established quality it's a clear gold award." How??? DXO scoring system which DPR seems happy to mention frequently rates the 100D's sensor at 63!! a full 16 points lower than the Pentax K50 (which is weather sealed) and its Big Brothers the K5/5II/5IIs which is scored 82. The only APS-C cameras with a higher score are the Nikon D5200 & 7100. So please tell me how its image Quality is Well established? i've tried a Canon 700D and was far from impressed with its quality over my Pentax K5's.

"but there's a huge difference in sensor quality between this and Similar budget cameras according to DXO."

Yes the K-50 at $775 is $25 more than the Sl1 at $750. Way more expensive, no way should they be comparing them Apples with Apples.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2013 at 14:57 UTC
On Nokia's 41MP Lumia 1020 looks impressive post (227 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: A slew of these pre-views hit the web today but no site is comparing against the 808.

Question: Was that a condition on getting an early 1020? Not even nokia is offering comparisons.

Thanks!

Erin Lodi

Thanks for the reply! I should have been more explicit, no site is comparing images to the 808.

Can't wait for the studi comparisons, but will these be "normalized" to 8mp, or was that just the DXO mark comparisons?

Thanks again!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 24, 2013 at 14:56 UTC
On Nokia's 41MP Lumia 1020 looks impressive post (227 comments in total)

A slew of these pre-views hit the web today but no site is comparing against the 808.

Question: Was that a condition on getting an early 1020? Not even nokia is offering comparisons.

Thanks!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 24, 2013 at 13:10 UTC as 49th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: "Although the 1020's sensor is around 30% smaller than the one found in the 808, it's still larger than the 1/1.7" type found in most high-end enthusiast compact cameras. The Lumia 1020's aperture is also 1/3EV faster (F2.2 vs F2.4), which makes up for much of the difference in sensor size."

1/3EV makes up for a 30% reduction in sensor size? I'd love to see the math behind that one.....

I was very excited about this camera but then disappointed in the smaller sensor. I'll believe they compensated for the 30% reduction in size when I can compare some samples side by side, until then my guess is it's slightly worse and no better than the 808.

This also gave me a chuckle:
"the 808 performed only slightly better than a 5-year-old-camera"

Let me rewrite that for you:

"The 808, amazingly, performed better than 2007's Canon G9, a camera that dpreview claimed was "as it gets in a compact camera".

ref: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/20

The "revolution" is that they are cramming a sensor physically larger than that used in the G15/X10 into a cell phone. "that was 2007?" I will gladly take the IQ of a G9 in my go anywhere fits in my pocket and makes phone calls/gets email device.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 14, 2013 at 21:15 UTC
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: "Although the 1020's sensor is around 30% smaller than the one found in the 808, it's still larger than the 1/1.7" type found in most high-end enthusiast compact cameras. The Lumia 1020's aperture is also 1/3EV faster (F2.2 vs F2.4), which makes up for much of the difference in sensor size."

1/3EV makes up for a 30% reduction in sensor size? I'd love to see the math behind that one.....

I was very excited about this camera but then disappointed in the smaller sensor. I'll believe they compensated for the 30% reduction in size when I can compare some samples side by side, until then my guess is it's slightly worse and no better than the 808.

This also gave me a chuckle:
"the 808 performed only slightly better than a 5-year-old-camera"

Let me rewrite that for you:

"The 808, amazingly, performed better than 2007's Canon G9, a camera that dpreview claimed was "as it gets in a compact camera".

ref: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/20

Sorry about the typo above. "as it gets"?

Here's the actual dpreview quote:
"IQ-wise the G9 is about as good as it gets in a compact camera"

Direct link | Posted on Jul 14, 2013 at 16:23 UTC

"Although the 1020's sensor is around 30% smaller than the one found in the 808, it's still larger than the 1/1.7" type found in most high-end enthusiast compact cameras. The Lumia 1020's aperture is also 1/3EV faster (F2.2 vs F2.4), which makes up for much of the difference in sensor size."

1/3EV makes up for a 30% reduction in sensor size? I'd love to see the math behind that one.....

I was very excited about this camera but then disappointed in the smaller sensor. I'll believe they compensated for the 30% reduction in size when I can compare some samples side by side, until then my guess is it's slightly worse and no better than the 808.

This also gave me a chuckle:
"the 808 performed only slightly better than a 5-year-old-camera"

Let me rewrite that for you:

"The 808, amazingly, performed better than 2007's Canon G9, a camera that dpreview claimed was "as it gets in a compact camera".

ref: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/20

Direct link | Posted on Jul 14, 2013 at 14:34 UTC as 26th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

natna: 5mp pureview is SMALLLL!

Nokias 85% jpeg "super fine" quality is a joke.
I have both N8 and 808 and in good lighting conditions untill sunset, I use 100% jpeg quality from third party camera apps. And iso 100.
12mp ---> 10mb super quality files! What a great start for post processing in my PC!
Twice the pixel peeping image quality.

Not impressed from the new sensor so far.
OIS is surely great.

The nokia camera app is great ui. Fast and very promising. Shutter control and 4secs is epic!

The lens on my 808 is almost flawless for a wide angle lens. There is a wide variation in lens quality in 808 devices.
Let's hope the 1020 will have better quality control.

The accessory grip is a great idea!
And the true innovation, in wp platform, is the stereo rich recording!

natna

Which camera app do you recommend for the 808?

Also, how did you test your lens as "flawless?". I have a few more days on my 808 return window, I'm pretty happy with the IQ to my untrained eye, but it would be nice to know if it could be better.

Thanks!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 14, 2013 at 14:17 UTC
On Pentax unveils blue and white K-01 in Japan article (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gully Foyle: I don't get it. People feedback was that they wanted a blue-white camera or just the K-01 back? Or did Pentax, failing to see why the product failed (pun), asked 'what if it was blue-white? would you buy one then?" and the Japanese responded emphatically "YES!" ???

While this is funny, exactly why do you think the K-01 is a failed product?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 5, 2013 at 05:44 UTC
On Just posted: Olympus Tough TG-2 iHS Review preview (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Can we burry this phrase. It's overused, apologetic, meaningless and a bit silly:

"Photo quality isn't fantastic on the TG-2, but it's more than good enough for purpose and target audience. "

Olympus claims that "the Olympus TG-2 iHS was designed with the serious photographer in mind. ". If the target audience is the serious photographer, I would think IQ would be a concern.

So why have an extending lens at all? How useful is telephoto under water, especially as the lenses get gosh awful slow when extended.

I've had tons of fun with a simple disposable fixed focal length waterproof film camera. Why not a decent fixed focal length UW camera? I'd think such a camera would be popular with the camera crowd. Put a M43 sensor with a fixed 35mm equivalent lens in reasonably sized body and you'd have a nice little snorkeling gem.

Or you could put a telephoto lens in a fixed body. Casio did it with the 5X EX-P505 and I loved that little camera. Enclosing the telphoto lens makes it a favorite to hand over to the kids.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2005/01/31/casioexp505

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2013 at 15:54 UTC
On Just posted: Olympus Tough TG-2 iHS Review preview (105 comments in total)

Can we burry this phrase. It's overused, apologetic, meaningless and a bit silly:

"Photo quality isn't fantastic on the TG-2, but it's more than good enough for purpose and target audience. "

Olympus claims that "the Olympus TG-2 iHS was designed with the serious photographer in mind. ". If the target audience is the serious photographer, I would think IQ would be a concern.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2013 at 07:33 UTC as 40th comment | 4 replies

You have got to be kidding. This camera came out well over a year ago, which is 4evah in P&S years:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02/07/Canon_D20

There are way more interesting and recent UW cameras to review.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2013 at 19:12 UTC as 16th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

3dreal: New Zeiss HQ/Highend FF Distagon 55/1.4 will kill this zoom and any lens ever in terms of quality by multiple lenghts. at 3 -3.5x the price. As already mentioned. In an interview Zeiss managers(amount the two was dr. nasse) confessed that until recently they were not allowed to offer highest topquality for the publice. This lens is the first of a series which will show the real optical possibilities. Maybe i will sell a lot of my stuff, forgetting 6x6/6x7. Zeiss said the new series will have MF-quality.

Fixed manual focus boutique prime versus a consumer zoom. What a non sequitur. It's like telling us that a 747 will fly faster than the sigma lens. Our reply would be "of course" followed by "so what"?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 15, 2013 at 22:12 UTC
On Adobe releases Photoshop Lightroom 5 article (281 comments in total)

Aftershot Pro (corel's LR clone) just dropped to $25 at amazon (digital download)

I'm not sure if they are scared of LR5 or ASP 2.0 is on the way....

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2013 at 15:45 UTC as 42nd comment
On 10 Photo Editing Programs (that aren't Photoshop) article (451 comments in total)
In reply to:

40daystogo: It was silly of DPR to limit the list to 10. It should have given at least 20.

e.g. Corel's AfterShot Pro (equivalent to LightRoom).

Yet they list lightroom as a photoshop alternative.

If LR fits the list so does Aftershot Pro.

Direct link | Posted on May 18, 2013 at 22:47 UTC
On First Impressions: Metabones Speed Booster article (357 comments in total)

MSRP is $599

http://www.metabones.com/sony/ef-e-speed-booster

Here's a chronological list of lenses released by canon. The pickings are pretty slim if you are looking for a fast FF prime:

http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/lenses?sort=chronological&view=list

Direct link | Posted on May 17, 2013 at 06:12 UTC as 11th comment
Total: 265, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »