BarnET

BarnET

Joined on Aug 14, 2012

Comments

Total: 2172, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Nikon D7200 First Impressions Review preview (1054 comments in total)
In reply to:

eddychan008: Never able to understand, still NO touchscreen on top of the line camera ???

enenzo

Nikon implemented the touchscreen very well with the d5500.
Changing the AF point while swiping the left part of the screen is rather clever.

Then a touchscreen is just great for reviewing images. Pinch in to zoom and swipe arround to check focus is great for all users.

And if you don't like it you can always turn it off.

Direct link | Posted on May 5, 2015 at 09:37 UTC
On Nikon D7200 First Impressions Review preview (1054 comments in total)
In reply to:

cinemascope: Regarding the lack of a D400...
I think Canon and Nikon are trying very hard to keep the 3K pricing bracket alive for as long as they can... Canon just got those 50MP out mainly so they can sustain their pricing... And for Nikon, that means keeping D800-style controls exclusive of that price bracket, otherwise they will soon not be able to justify their pricing... Hence why the D750 also doesn't have those, why they cannot release a D400 anymore... They would be shooting themselves in the foot... They need to maintain the status quo somehow and I think they are very scared of loosing that 3K price bracket... Specialist cameras like the D810A also help in that regard, and I think that should be trend going forward...
The laptop market saw a huge drop in prices a few years back, and I think the same needs to happen to the camera market, but the two dinosaurs are in denial...

The 7d mk2 tracks moving subjects better has a great buffer and 10 fps. It's by no means a good allrounder but it is good in it's niche.

The D610 is bargain. It has decent AF(unlike the competing 6d) And a great sensor.

The D750 has the same 3d tracking system of the D4 with a more sensitive in low light AF system. The downside is a bit tighter spread.

So the D750 is pretty much capable for anything you throw at it. And it has some great video features too!

Direct link | Posted on May 5, 2015 at 09:21 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

stevo23: Olympus implementation of pixel shifting didn't impress. But this one makes a lot of sense. It has the potential for being a very nice image maker.

It will probably lead to similar issues regarding any movement in the scene.

Nice that it has this feature with a fresh approach. But like the AA blur feature i don't think it will see much use in the field.

It does ofcourse impress from a technical standpoint

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 15:57 UTC
On Readers' Showcase: Janne Voutilainen article (35 comments in total)

these..........are........frickin............awesome

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 15:16 UTC as 4th comment
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2123 comments in total)
In reply to:

Elaka Farmor: Some people here seem to think that they can produce the same level of clean image (low noise) with a GH4 as with an A7R when shooting at iso100 with the FF camera. Not possible.

Attomole.

There is still a way to make multiple shots of the same scene at the lowest ISO's.

Then combine all these images and let software normalize the noise. The same low noise can be achieved albeit at a much longer time. And ofcourse any movement will cause complications.

Stitching images when zoomed in further is a way to get higher resolution images. I've personaly used these techniques for a Accountant bureau wall print of 2.5m by 1.5m.

Had a 60mp tiff-file of 2 gb while editing. That was pretty much more detailed then a D800 shot. It was done with a GX7 on a tripod.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 15:01 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alex Permit: A souped up FZ1000 for the price of a gh4. For $2500 I'll take a gh4, thank you.

With a shogun the Gh4 does 4:2:2 10-bit.
This doesn't have 10-bit out of the hdmi.

Then the 4:2:0 is there for a reason on the panasonic.
SD cards are cheap and can be purchased in great sizes. But they don't have the 300mbps needed for 4:2:2.

It'a made for easy 4k and the codec was the best option available for a small camera.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2015 at 23:41 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alex Permit: A souped up FZ1000 for the price of a gh4. For $2500 I'll take a gh4, thank you.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00LEEF6XC/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?qid=1430033941&sr=8-2&keywords=gh4+14-140&pi=AC_SX200_QL40&dpPl=1&dpID=41WmjEppSHL&ref=plSrch

2000 with a similar lens included. Not gonna pay 2.5k if i don't have to

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2015 at 07:39 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: finally! Canon is listening!
XC10 is like a prosumer Powershot G, albeit with:
1) 4k (built-in cooling for normal everyday 4k length recordings)
2) Tilt/Flip Screen; can operate as a Tilt-Angle EVF (Eye-Loupe included) like pro cine/video cams
3) 1" 12mp sensor pixels sized for low-light rather than higher-res best only in better light
4) Tilt-Grip; like prosumer compact video cams
5) Canon ES-LV (Powershot Exposure Simulation Live View)
6) Built-In sealed integrated compact wide-long zoom lens with ff.fov.eq 24-240mm (eliminates changing lenses for different focal lengths)

Misc: IBIS ... has been around in Powershots since Pro90IS

Missing:
Modular VASS (Vari-Angle Swivel Screen)*
Modular VA-EVF (Vari-Angle EVF)*

*no ... smartphones make for poor ergonomics if serving remote vari-angle swivel viewers (they all lack proper built-in hand controls)

No XLR input = paperweight for ENG shooter
No interchangeable lenses= paperweight for creative indy filmmakers.

This camera is a paperweight for every video/stills shooter on the face of this earth.

Nonetheless i agree it's "a big deal"

After this giant has fallen this will be the product shown. This was their answer to the changing market. This was where they hit the iceberg.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 23:32 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

RRJackson: Lousy 8-bit codec. Might as well buy a 4K cell phone.

The original M was 799 dollars at launch.
Canon never intended it to be sold at a third of that within a year.

They just couldn't move the dead stock. So firesales came and Canon USA never tried again after that debacle.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 23:25 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Elaka Farmor: With a $2500 price tag it should outclass GH4 and NX1. Good luck with that…..

Sdaniella?!
What the hell have you been smoking again
There is no 12-60mm lens in m43.

The 12-35mm is 900 dollars but it's a f2.8 constant on a sensor twice the size.

Panasonic does make a equiv. Lens. It's the 14-140mm f3.5-5.6

And it's 549 at bh

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 23:20 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

EduPortas: I undestand most readers of this site find this camera unappealing. I would too if I were a landscape or portrait photographer, where every pixel counts.

However, I see the XC10 as a strong bet by Canon to try to get a hold of the nascent ENG industry bursting practically everywhere. Yes, there are cheaper cameras by Panasonic that do practically the same thing, but the allure of the Canon brand is very strong amongst big media organizations. If you're a small media outfit you buy what big boys buy so you can compete with them, at least with logo on your gear.

Also, ergonomics seem very nice on this new camera. That goes a long way for photogs and videographers that use their gear huge amounts of time every day.

William

The eng market likes XLR inputs!
Which this camera lacks.......

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 17:41 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: Great job by Chuck. DPR readers need more education like this from the editors on the difference between the requirements of video shooters versus still shooters. Like life, camera design is a series of compromises and it looks like the Canon engineers did a great job of balancing the features vs. cost vs. complexity vs. weight.

Features
Why is it missing raw images then?
Cost
It's bloody expensive for the features. A slow lens and a 1" type lens costs a lot less from the competition.

Unless it has advanced features like XLR inputs and dedicated mulitchannel audio controls. Then it just costs a bit less

Complexity
Well the stupid loupe sure is a downer. Once on you can't just edit your setting while holding the camera pointibg down. I can live with this on a Dslr. There is a reason why that has no EVF. Here it's just stupid and outrageous.

Weight
It's heavy!
The fz1000 for instance is lighter with a faster lens covering the same sized sensor with a longer focal length to boot.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 17:34 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

BaumBoyPhoto: This camera may be useful, and the ergonomics are intriguing to say the least. I will probably end up renting it as a B-Cam for one of my run of the mill video gigs just to see how it handles. I don't plan on buying it, though. Definitely not at this pricepoint.

I mean, Chuck repeats often that some limiting design decisions were made to reduce cost, but I fail to see him convince us that the $2,500 is worth what is offered. I just don't see it. It definitely feels like paying a premium for slightly better ergonomics, bit rate, and the Canon name tag, while sacrificing the flexibility of Interchangeable lenses.

$2,500 can get you solid photo performance.
$2500 can get you decent video performance.

If you are heart set on a 4K hybrid, just about everyone in this thread has pointed out how much $2,500 can get you in that market.

It's just not a great pricepoint for Canon.

The x70 has the same sensor as the ax100
So i guess the jello will be a problem.

But then it's a problem on many great camera's including the a7s and gh4

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 17:03 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mohamed Rizwan: $2500 for this camera where as Gh4, FZ1000, LX100 are available for less price. Canon made this camera for foolish peoples who thinks canon is god. SONY coming with rx10 mark2 and rx100 m4 with 4k. Come on canon stop preparing useless cameras. Learn from panasonic and sony.

Try finding a used news acquisition tool without a XLR input

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 15:00 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

RStyga: Pentax has mastered the APS-C DSLR concept overall, from features down to the retail price, well done! I believe this is the best Pentax camera ever made.

Yup,

Then the statement makes a lot of sense.
It might actually be the best all-round Apsc Dslr.
Not as a system(pentax is limited in 1st party and 3rd party support.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 07:53 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

BaumBoyPhoto: This camera may be useful, and the ergonomics are intriguing to say the least. I will probably end up renting it as a B-Cam for one of my run of the mill video gigs just to see how it handles. I don't plan on buying it, though. Definitely not at this pricepoint.

I mean, Chuck repeats often that some limiting design decisions were made to reduce cost, but I fail to see him convince us that the $2,500 is worth what is offered. I just don't see it. It definitely feels like paying a premium for slightly better ergonomics, bit rate, and the Canon name tag, while sacrificing the flexibility of Interchangeable lenses.

$2,500 can get you solid photo performance.
$2500 can get you decent video performance.

If you are heart set on a 4K hybrid, just about everyone in this thread has pointed out how much $2,500 can get you in that market.

It's just not a great pricepoint for Canon.

http://www.sony.co.uk/pro/product/broadcast-products-camcorders-xdcam/pxw-x70/specifications/#specifications

Take a look at this it will have 4k in june 2015.
It has XLR inputs. it has good audio control
It has a sensor the same size
And it has good ergnomics.

This is a camera that actually make sense and it probably never had a article written here. not to mention 4 in a month

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 07:49 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)

http://www.eoshd.com/2015/04/canon-struck-raw-evf-and-brighter-zoom-from-xc10-for-cost-reasons/

OUCH!!!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 07:35 UTC as 70th comment | 9 replies
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I think the biggest problem I have is that Dpreview doesn’t understand its own audience. We simply don’t want to hear about this camera. It isn’t something that we would ever consider buying. We accept that you don’t EVER talk about products from RED or the high end Panasonic video cameras because we know that not many people here would ever buy those.

So why is this camera so special? What makes Dpreview think that their readers want to have this camera shoved in our face every couple of days. For once and for all. Stop pimping this camera to us. We get it that you think it is revolutionary. However, we simply don’t see it that way.

Rishi

Look arround at NAB. What are these people using.
Yes gh4's and a7s's instead of 5dmk2's/5dmk3's

Considering this site is not aimed at professional grade cinema camera's. Focus on the developments at those products.

Like the anomorphic mode and upcoming Vlog in the GH4
Anomorphic lenses coming to the GH4.

There are a lot of developments going on with these 2 camera's and to lesser extent the NX1. And these camera's actually take decent RAW images with interchangeable lenses. Putting them in a while different ball game stills wise.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 07:12 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bernard Carns: God bless Chuck.

He's better at putting lipstick on a pig than I am.

Thank God DPReview is on the internet.

If this were a live press conference some of us would be reaching for our basket of rotten tomatoes and eggs.

Which seems to be required at Canon press conferences these days.

BC

That's probably why they hired jackie chan for the reveal in china.

No one wants to get on his bad side.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 06:50 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

BaumBoyPhoto: This camera may be useful, and the ergonomics are intriguing to say the least. I will probably end up renting it as a B-Cam for one of my run of the mill video gigs just to see how it handles. I don't plan on buying it, though. Definitely not at this pricepoint.

I mean, Chuck repeats often that some limiting design decisions were made to reduce cost, but I fail to see him convince us that the $2,500 is worth what is offered. I just don't see it. It definitely feels like paying a premium for slightly better ergonomics, bit rate, and the Canon name tag, while sacrificing the flexibility of Interchangeable lenses.

$2,500 can get you solid photo performance.
$2500 can get you decent video performance.

If you are heart set on a 4K hybrid, just about everyone in this thread has pointed out how much $2,500 can get you in that market.

It's just not a great pricepoint for Canon.

From a hybrud standpoint

The gh4 is cheaper creates MUCH better stills
Offers more creativity in video while also offering 4k
Ow and these days it can shoot anomorphic too.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 06:43 UTC
Total: 2172, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »