bcalkins

bcalkins

Lives in Canada Canada
Joined on Jun 4, 2007

Comments

Total: 180, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »

"will comfortably house a mirrorless camera or compact DSLR with a couple of lenses"

I have a Crumpler 4 Million Dollar Home that is 8x8x5 versus 11x8x13 and I carry an OM-D with grip, and 3 or 4 lenses, spare batteries and memory cards plus a polarizer and 10mm extension tube (not all that all the time, but that is what fits comfortably). The sling 250 should definitely hold a mirrorless camera and two lenses!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2013 at 00:09 UTC as 10th comment
On Best Digital Cameras for Kids article (141 comments in total)

I've got kids that are 2, 4, 6, and 7 and the older two can handle a dSLR when supervised, but really they have a lot more fun doing videos. I suspect it will be a few years before they are interested in any kind of manual control. I'd just get them a Go-Pro and let them shoot video for a few years until they express an interest, and then go for a year or two year old model like an e-pm1, nikon v1, e-pl1, Panny G3 or something like that. The MILCs are just so much more responsive than entry level P&S cameras, and the older ones aren't far off in price. Getting into manual control with a camera that has a tiny sensor make it hard to see the effects of aperture...

Just make sure they turn off the go-pro when they head into the changeroom after the waterslides :)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 22, 2013 at 04:09 UTC as 70th comment
In reply to:

tko: $1265, all manual, 760g.

Canon 85MM F/1.8 = $365, all auto, 425 G

Less performance, more expensive, and heavier. A whopping 0.3" smaller in one dimension, 0.1 in the others.

A perfect example of how M34rds rips of the unsuspecting buyers who think that a F0.95 lens is amazing, and close their eyes to the real specs.

No wonder M43rds doesn't want equivalence spec published - they reveal the sham.

Spot on, BJL. Adding a Nikon 85mm 1.8 lens and a full frame body to my OM-D kit is a lot more expensive than adding this one lens... Which isn't to say that I see the value in this lens for my uses, but it is an option in the same way that people buy into Canon and Nikon knowing there is a tilt/shift or long and fast telephotos if they ever need it. The reality is that most of us can get creative with our images without needing an f/ 0.95 lens.

I'm excited to see this lens, but the price is high, and I'm unlikely to buy it. But I never purchased an f/1.2 lens when I shot APS-C dSLRs, either. People buy Zeiss MF lenses for their dSLRs for similar money. Nothing wrong with having options.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2013 at 20:39 UTC

Wow - that is a lot less than I expected. Nice job Sigma!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2013 at 15:41 UTC as 59th comment

Nice to see more options for the mirrorless and APS-C crowd. I'm not sure I see the appeal of the 16mm for micro four thirds specifically, since we already have the 17mm f/1.8, 20mm f/1.7 and 14mm f/2.5, which are all pancakes compared to the 16mm... But for APS-C dSLRs there are few dedicated fast wide angle primes.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 13, 2013 at 16:27 UTC as 45th comment | 5 replies

Sounds promising!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2013 at 00:03 UTC as 69th comment | 12 replies
On Leica announces X Vario zoom compact with APS-C sensor article (757 comments in total)
In reply to:

anthony mazzeri: "The Leica X Vario is the world’s first compact camera to combine a large, APS-C format, CMOS image sensor with a zoom lens."

So what about the Ricoh GXR A16 24-85mm released a year and a half ago?

It's actually even smaller in every dimension when it comes to being a compact. And it's also wider at 24mm and faster F5.5 and longer at 85mm.

Ricoh needs to get better PR/marketing people.

Technicalities aside, I think you have to give the nod to the Canon as the first large sensor with zoom, or Ricoh/Sony/Fuji if you count MILCs. Restricting the claim to 'compacts' isn't exactly defining the category by a useful feature...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2013 at 16:19 UTC

To me it has to be cheaper than the 24-70mm f2.8 full frame zooms to be successful. But looking at smaller format fast zooms, you have the Panasonic MFT f/2.8 zoom and Olympus's 14-35mm 4/3 f/2 zoom - which still sells for $2,300. I'd say $1800 sounds about right for this lens... Not that I'll buy one!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2013 at 14:13 UTC as 23rd comment
On Studio comparison widget article (13 comments in total)
In reply to:

TheDigitalCruiser: In the case of interchangeable lens cameras, where does it explicitly say what lens was used to shoot the studio image shot? For instances, we the Olympus OM-D shot with the 12-50mm zoom, the older 14-42mm zoom, or some other legacy lens that few people use anymore. If you're not doing it already, I'd suggest shooting with the most popular package lens and then listing the identity of that lens prominently on the same page as the comparison engine.

You can hover over the gear in the lower right of each image, and see the lens details, including aperture. The OM-D shots are all with the 4/3 50mm f/2 Macro lens, which surely helps the OM-D a little compared to some of the other brands :)

Direct link | Posted on May 23, 2013 at 04:32 UTC

Hang on, did they double the price of a 'Pro' (= ad free) account? Yahoo may have just talked me out of spending any money with them next year...

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2013 at 16:01 UTC as 61st comment | 3 replies

It is good to see Canon bringing out more options that will work with the EOS-M ;)

Direct link | Posted on May 15, 2013 at 15:15 UTC as 26th comment

Do people really have model releases for all of those entries? I find it hard to believe that people could provide "a signed release from all persons who appear in the photograph submitted" on 7 days notice for some of these images...

You can see why they run these contests - last year had 12,000 entries at $15 a pop. I find it amazing that so many people are willing to PAY NG to give THEM the right to publish, use, etc. their images with no additional compensation. I don't mind paying for a contest entry, but they shouldn't get to use non-winners...

Direct link | Posted on May 13, 2013 at 15:58 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
On Just Posted: Detailed hands-on Olympus PEN E-P5 preview article (315 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: With the EVF it's not compact. With a metal body, it's not light. Why not just buy a DSLR, which has a larger sensor? You can get a really nice DSLR for (less than) $1,500.

@Marike6 There are different definitions of 'pockets'. I take my E-M5 with a pancake lens in my jacket pocket when I ski or am out with the kids. I did a run with the kids last week where I brought the E-M5 with me. No question this camera doesn't have the pocketability of a S90 or something like that - but it IS more portable than a dSLR. I never would have grabbed my 7D, gone for a run and got this shot: https://www.flickr.com/photos/47706598@N08/8716678984/in/photostream.

To me the benefit of this kind of camera is if you make it the ONLY camera you own. Then the slight premium in price pays off as you don't have to own a P&S or run two systems.

Your point about the 7100 are exactly opposite why I like the OM-D as my only camera. It is precisely because I do some video with it that the EVF and IBIS come into their own. For stills, agreed that IBIS is only so valuable.

Direct link | Posted on May 10, 2013 at 17:57 UTC
On More pictures leak of purported Olympus PEN 'E-P5' article (237 comments in total)

Isn't this kind of pointless? I can wait for the real news release...

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2013 at 19:20 UTC as 35th comment | 1 reply

Nice! Didn't think anyone would be saying 'I shot my zoom lens STOPPED DOWN at f/2' any time soon :) Sigma is bringing out some interesting stuff these days...

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2013 at 10:54 UTC as 124th comment
In reply to:

michi098: Would love the 30mm 1.4 but I have mostly moved to Canon full format sensors. (Still have a 7D but not buying any more APS-C lenses). I think that quite a few people are doing the same. Kind of a shame Sigma is ignoring a growing market with their new lenses.

I was thinking the exact opposite - at least someone is paying attention to APS-C and smaller formats and making dedicated primes :) I'm impressed with the direction Sigma is heading in lately!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 8, 2013 at 16:54 UTC
On Nikon D5200 added to our studio comparison database article (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

bobbarber: marike6

Just curious. You've stated several times that "jpegs don't matter" or something along those lines. It is obvious to me that the jpegs from the E-M5 are much better than the jpegs from this camera. I encourage anybody to compare the jpegs from the D5200 to the E-M5, starting at base ISO.

There have been several threads in the past here where some pro shooters have weighed in and expressed their preference for jpegs. Not the kind of shooters who spend all day taking 3 landscape shots, but wedding shooters, for example, or sports shooters, or other types of documentary shooters, who take a lot of shots and don't have time to process raw.

I have no doubt that some wedding shooters, etc. prefer raw, but is it accurate for you to say that raw is all that matters, jpegs don't matter, etc.? That isn't my belief, and it isn't the belief of many professional shooters.

While I prefer to shoot RAW, jpg performance is as useful as anything to compare. I make use of JPGs at family events or other occasions where I might take a lot of shots at once, and be unlikely to want to print them large. JPGs have a lot of detail if you are only going to be using them for web use or small prints.

I agree with BobBarber - I see little advantage to the D5200 over a MFT camera for what I use it for. Even if it is better at an absolute level - the real question is if that translates into any difference in my photography. The ability to carry a small, lightweight kit with me trumps absolute image quality - but we all have to evaluate and weigh the trade-offs and make our own decisions...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2013 at 17:41 UTC
In reply to:

howielenny: Good to see Tamron investing into M43. Having used Tamron lenses with my D7000 along with Sigma and Nikon, this will be a nice addition to m43. I'm more of a prime man myself so will eagerly await to see what primes they come out with :)

Agreed - while this lens doesn't appeal much to me, both Tamron and Sigma make lenses that do. Any signs that 3rd parties are producing lenses for MFT are welcome...

Direct link | Posted on Jan 30, 2013 at 20:13 UTC
On Capture One Fujifilm X-Trans Raw support tested article (211 comments in total)
In reply to:

bcalkins: Well, I'm glad I downloaded the RAW and took a look. I can't see any problems with the LR 4.2 processing of the Fuji file - compared to the MFT camera I'm familiar with I'd say the files out of the Fuji look great, though the difference is not huge. The samples above really don't do the Fuji or ACR justice... Posting default ACR is an OK starting point for a comparison, but it certainly doesn't come close to showing the capabilities of that combination. I'd get the impression you are better off with jpgs and should avoid ACR from these samples above, which is not close to the reality. Not impressed with this article - using defaults gives you some ground to claim you don't have a bias, but misses the whole point of what cameras can do photographically. Is C1 better just because the defaults suit this camera better than ACR? Hardly...

Good points - I guess I see value in both, a comparison of the defaults, and then some results after tweaking with a display of those results and settings. I personally use Lightroom and spend some time tweaking and then make that a preset for importing, so I'm not going to live with the defaults for long - but it does make it hard to evaluate the software's capabilities given that you need some time invested to really understand the differences. But that goes for just about everything you would ever buy!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2013 at 23:06 UTC
On Capture One Fujifilm X-Trans Raw support tested article (211 comments in total)

Well, I'm glad I downloaded the RAW and took a look. I can't see any problems with the LR 4.2 processing of the Fuji file - compared to the MFT camera I'm familiar with I'd say the files out of the Fuji look great, though the difference is not huge. The samples above really don't do the Fuji or ACR justice... Posting default ACR is an OK starting point for a comparison, but it certainly doesn't come close to showing the capabilities of that combination. I'd get the impression you are better off with jpgs and should avoid ACR from these samples above, which is not close to the reality. Not impressed with this article - using defaults gives you some ground to claim you don't have a bias, but misses the whole point of what cameras can do photographically. Is C1 better just because the defaults suit this camera better than ACR? Hardly...

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2013 at 17:32 UTC as 24th comment | 6 replies
Total: 180, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »