Thematic

Thematic

Joined on Dec 11, 2013

Comments

Total: 134, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

UCSB: Without AF micro adjustment, this is just a frustrating waste of money. Anyone that owns any lenses or hopes to buy additional lenses in the future should not consider this camera. The front focusing example in the review is a perfect example of how every single one of your quality lenses will perform on this camera. The only question is just what will be the extent of the front/back focus errors ... one thing is clear at 24 MP, the focusing errors will be plainly visible.

Very good point.

Direct link | Posted on May 22, 2015 at 21:37 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T10 First Impressions Review preview (357 comments in total)
In reply to:

tedolf: Well, I will say it since no one else will. While I like retro styled cameras as much as anyone, it must be admitted that Fuji's film SLRs were never good looking cameras, unlike the Olympus OM models. So aping an ugly SLR does not make for an attractive MILC. Next, the very small Fuji bodies, e.g. XA-1, and this one make the lenses look huge.

The analog control system is nice though. This is Fuji's strong point.

Tedolph

So?

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2015 at 19:29 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T10 First Impressions Review preview (357 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thematic: Can any current fujifilm users confirm that picture quality will improve by using capture one pro to develop the raw files?

I currently own a Sony rx1 and my sister wants something similar but cheaper. I was thinking about this or the x100t for her... But these sample pictures are very poor. Skin for example.

Thanks for the help.

Thank you both for the reply - I was able to google a few Fuji raw xt1 and x100t files and I am now downloading Capture One Pro to try it out.

Many thanks.

Direct link | Posted on May 18, 2015 at 21:12 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T10 First Impressions Review preview (357 comments in total)

Can any current fujifilm users confirm that picture quality will improve by using capture one pro to develop the raw files?

I currently own a Sony rx1 and my sister wants something similar but cheaper. I was thinking about this or the x100t for her... But these sample pictures are very poor. Skin for example.

Thanks for the help.

Direct link | Posted on May 18, 2015 at 19:10 UTC as 38th comment | 4 replies
On Canon EOS 5DS / SR First Impressions Review preview (2960 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThrillaMozilla: So the Canon image is blown up about 60" wide, while the Nikon image is displayed 11" wide, thereby inviting derision on Canon. That's not a nice thing to do. The Web site should be fixed.

what the?

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 18:42 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Is it REAL titanium or just titanium-coloured paint? The OM cameras had real titanium panels, but they suffered later from a deterioration of the finish put over the titanium. I'd be happy with natural finish titanium, personally, and would LOVE to get rid of paint finish.

Its real.

You better hurry and buy them all.

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 05:56 UTC
In reply to:

Earth Art: I saw this article and thought the light was much smaller than it actually is after doing a look on their website. This would be cool for light painting objects in landscapes for a much softer lighting compared to a small headlamp.

It might help to mention these produce over 1100 lumens which is really damn bright! My biking headlamp is 800 lumens and is capable of burning retinas. :)

A really neat product for sure.

Edit: I think the lumen output I mentioned was for the old model. If the new one is 50% brighter, then wow. Very impressive. Portable tanning salon.

Edit now I understand what you ment by painting objects in landscapes.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2015 at 04:39 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Review preview (656 comments in total)
In reply to:

jvt: It's simply the perfect street camera if you can't afford a Leica...some examples here:

https://jimtardio.exposure.co/istanbul

Your images?

Either way - those are fantastic. Lots of talent. Thanks for sharing.

Direct link | Posted on May 2, 2015 at 17:31 UTC
In reply to:

cpt kent: Seems to be a lot of folks exclaiming brilliance without questioning. Sources? References? Research? Further reading?

http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/pdfs/linear_gamma.pdf

dpreview is correct - this is exactly how digital sensors behave. Sony and Canon have documents proving their claims. Ill try to find some and repost but they go back a few years.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 04:51 UTC
In reply to:

GuitarCamera Man: Mt sentiments exactly! Why not buy a roll of Tri-X and get the real effect?

so?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 02:47 UTC
In reply to:

zsedcft: I was under the impression that ETTR is often not a good idea. If the subject is the brightest thing in the scene (a wedding dress or clouds for example) exposing to have the wedding dress almost clipping is a bad idea. The closer you get to clipping the less tones you have available for highlights. I use ETTR on my eos-m for timelapses, but I avoid the very top of the histogram when I am actually holding the camera. It may not happen as much with 14/16bit RAW files, but I believe it is still an issue.

(if you can afford it) Just get a D800/D800E/D810/A7R and you will have a camera that you can shoot at ISO 100 and recover everything in post processing. I have found that ISO 100 with the exposure pushed in lightroom looks the same as ISO 1600 from the camera. Shadow noise is always better than blown highlights IMO so I usually pretty conservative with exposure. If you want the best of both worlds in landscape, just shoot a exposure bracket and pick the best or blend them.

bracketing is different - you are right about that

Direct link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 18:43 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (513 comments in total)
In reply to:

robbo d: I think full reviews are becoming things of the past people ..... these hands on previews are more and more as much as we will most likely see.
DP News is the new title ... its more snap shots of info rather than in depth stuff nowadays.
Nevertheless this gives us enough insight from existing experience with K5 series and K3 to know they've probably turned what was a fast, twitchy handling little sports car .... into a better handling beast by way of tech.
The 24 mp sensor is a handful in low light and low shutter speeds, so the increased SR and sensor shift resolution is a good way of steadying up the camera and squeezing the best out of the sensor, which is typical Pentax style.
The K5IIs is currently my go to for low light, low shutter speeds hand held, but when I can keep it under 800-1600 ISO and keep the shutter up, the 24mp res is pretty amazing.

Dpreview is at an all time high with quality content right now. The video reviews and posted reader highlights are exceptional.

This hands on has pictures of the camera taken in their labs - these are not just stock shots ripped from the Pentax website.

I have a feeling they did a job so professional that people are thinking they didn't take the pictures.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 17:30 UTC
In reply to:

GuitarCamera Man: Mt sentiments exactly! Why not buy a roll of Tri-X and get the real effect?

cost

Direct link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 17:28 UTC
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: The problem with pouring on exposure without clipping the highlights is just that. It's great when you have your D800 on a tripod, mirror locked up, and are meticulously focusing your Zeiss lens. You are crafting the perfect image.

In practice, when doing anything where time is not unlimited, setting the camera to just touch the right without going over will result in the exposure going over, and clipping. At least that's been my experience. Better to expose less and if unavoidable, pull up noisy shadows than try to recover highlights that don't exist.

Of course, I grew up with film, where 400 ASA was fast so I don't use incredibly high ISOs since they're too noisy.

Not a good way to shoot if quality images are your end goal.

Please read this:

http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/pdfs/linear_gamma.pdf

Direct link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 17:16 UTC
In reply to:

zsedcft: I was under the impression that ETTR is often not a good idea. If the subject is the brightest thing in the scene (a wedding dress or clouds for example) exposing to have the wedding dress almost clipping is a bad idea. The closer you get to clipping the less tones you have available for highlights. I use ETTR on my eos-m for timelapses, but I avoid the very top of the histogram when I am actually holding the camera. It may not happen as much with 14/16bit RAW files, but I believe it is still an issue.

(if you can afford it) Just get a D800/D800E/D810/A7R and you will have a camera that you can shoot at ISO 100 and recover everything in post processing. I have found that ISO 100 with the exposure pushed in lightroom looks the same as ISO 1600 from the camera. Shadow noise is always better than blown highlights IMO so I usually pretty conservative with exposure. If you want the best of both worlds in landscape, just shoot a exposure bracket and pick the best or blend them.

you are indeed wrong and dpreview is right

what you are doing is introducing posterization into your images and reducing image quality.

ETTR is a "shift" in exposure, not clipping highlights. Underexposure is the enemy of a digital sensor.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 17:13 UTC
On Readers' Showcase: Janne Voutilainen article (36 comments in total)

Does he sell images? Wouldn't mind purchasing #8.

Beautiful.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2015 at 06:04 UTC as 12th comment
In reply to:

Tecumseh: OMG!!!!!!! What if I don't have any hands.

a food or head or big belly works also

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2015 at 05:57 UTC
In reply to:

Fogsprig: It looks unpredictable, but kind of useful, so kudos to Sony.
P.S. I dream of making a photo with an eye's blink to make myself a shutterlord! :D

Unpredictable?

What situations are you photographing where you cant predict what is 12 inches from your camera?

You are grasping at straws.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2015 at 18:53 UTC
In reply to:

ARSPR: I've just upgraded and I've got two complaints:

1. GPU acceleration doesn't work in my system, although my Radeon HD6870 fulfils all the specified minimum requirements (1 GB of VRAM and OpenGL 3.3 or greater - https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/lightroom-gpu-faq.html ). The trouble seems to be in GL_MAX_COMBINED_TEXTURE_IMAGE_UNITS (whatever it is). LR system info shows I have 32 and 48 is the minimum.

So be careful about what you expect.

(Nevertheless I'm "guessing". Help is welcomed: https://forums.adobe.com/message/7460364#7460364 ).

2. Samsung new "professional" lenses are still un-profiled: 16-50S and 50-150S. What the hell are you waiting for, Adobe? This is not serious...

Agree with Pengtunck - your graphics card is worth $75 and will need an upgrade. Amazon and Newegg have lots that will help you out for a few hundred dollars.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 03:11 UTC
In reply to:

En Trance: Finally, a manufacturer correcting shortcomings for free. Wish there were more out there.
Too bad, I do not like Nikon. Don't know why?

Flag her post. So lame.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 03:05 UTC
Total: 134, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »