deep7

deep7

Lives in New Zealand (Aotearoa) New Zealand (Aotearoa)
Works as a writer/photographer/ecologist
Has a website at deeppics.com
Joined on May 10, 2008
About me:

God makes it, I see it and photograph it. Sometimes that works well!

Comments

Total: 255, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

drh681: Finally.
this is where they should have started.
does anybody like the fact that it will run full up photoshop?
or that it comes with a pen(stylus)?

I prefer the small screen - more portable for field work, then plug into a big screen back home when you need more space.

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2014 at 22:26 UTC
In reply to:

TwoMetreBill: 8GB of RAM for serious image editing, NOT!

..but, with the docking station, it COULD be a desktop replacement for a lot of people!

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2014 at 22:24 UTC
In reply to:

deep7: This is almost enough to make me move over from Apple. Such a great concept.

Shame the mini display port isn't Thunderbolt so you could run various adaptors, other than just a screen.

"abortabort": the iPad is not the same concept. In any case, the Surface Pro was the first time I came across a full computer in tablet form which allowed full touch screen and conventional user control.

"Menneisyys": The screen isn't the problem. Firewire and Ethernet are. I use both a lot.

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2014 at 22:22 UTC

This is almost enough to make me move over from Apple. Such a great concept.

Shame the mini display port isn't Thunderbolt so you could run various adaptors, other than just a screen.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 23:05 UTC as 53rd comment | 4 replies
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

JeffreyJC: $800.00 is almost twice as much as this camera should be. You can buy for example a Oly PM2 with 2 lens kit for $370. Sure this is a great camera but a $800 dollar great camera ? NOT EVEN CLOSE!

I have the original G1X (similar sensor to G1XII) and an EM1. There is no way I would say the EM1 had a better sensor. All this talk of extra dynamic range doesn't really work out in practice. Both have good highlight headroom but the Canon recovers blue out of blown skies better and the Olympus recovers reds and yellows better.

Both can recover extra shadow detail. The Canon gets some colour noise if you push it but the Olympus has little tonal separation around the black point and you get a posterisation effect if you push it, which is hard to deal with. Differences on test charts don't translate to the real world unless you are a jpeg shooter and don't drive the camera yourself.

It's easier to balance detail and noise on the Canon at 1600 "ISO" but there's not much in it.

The most obvious difference is that, shooting RAW, default colours on the Olympus are more pleasing, if not more accurate, on default Lightroom settings.

GaryJP is bang on. Experience counts a lot.

Direct link | Posted on May 10, 2014 at 01:19 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: This extreme shadow noise test, especially compared to the Sony RX100, seems bizarre. If you have to pull your shadows by four stops, you've basically stuffed up your exposure! The bridge example, in particular, is totally unrealistic. I have the original G1X and have never, ever seen this sort of noisy shadow effect, even though the exposure compensation dial lives in the negative region (Canon really want you to overexpose every photo, for some reason).

Highlight recovery with the original G1X is pretty useful too, as it works very well on blues, bringing skies back to life which you were sure were just going to be white or grey. If the two G1X models have the same sensor, dynamic range is not a problem at all.

So the only advantage of the RX100 is in deep shadows. This can be helpful in very high dynamic range images but, invariably, gives very flat and unnatural photographs in most cases. While it may rescue bad exposure, it doesn't compensate enough for that bad exposure. It's one advantage but not as stated in the review, which implies it's a much better sensor, even though it actually is only better in one way and worse in others.

I have no axe to grind. I like many Sony, Leica, Olympus and Leica cameras, amongst others. I'm just annoyed by this weird obsession with rescuing deep shadows that is prevalent in some places, even though it may be at the expense of a balanced image.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 06:08 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: This extreme shadow noise test, especially compared to the Sony RX100, seems bizarre. If you have to pull your shadows by four stops, you've basically stuffed up your exposure! The bridge example, in particular, is totally unrealistic. I have the original G1X and have never, ever seen this sort of noisy shadow effect, even though the exposure compensation dial lives in the negative region (Canon really want you to overexpose every photo, for some reason).

Highlight recovery with the original G1X is pretty useful too, as it works very well on blues, bringing skies back to life which you were sure were just going to be white or grey. If the two G1X models have the same sensor, dynamic range is not a problem at all.

Richard/Rishi, thanks for your comments but I think you missed my point, not surprising because I never make things clear when I am in a hurry! I'll try again.

I have had a G1X for the last two years and have had an EM1 (a camera which does very well in dynamic range comparisons). I have also looked at a lot of R100 images taken in a range of light conditions.

Ok, the G1X, when using jpegs and left on default settings, tends to overexpose badly and blow highlights like a point and shoot. However, control your exposure (like any photographer who understands the basics will do) and shoot raw and you find the highlights aren't too bad at all. Better for blues than my EM1 but not for every colour.

What I have seen of the RX100 is that it lags behind in highlights, quite badly in many samples (but I haven't used one). Beyond that, the midtones get very noisy very quickly, worse than the G1X or even the EM1, which is quite noisy too.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 06:08 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: This extreme shadow noise test, especially compared to the Sony RX100, seems bizarre. If you have to pull your shadows by four stops, you've basically stuffed up your exposure! The bridge example, in particular, is totally unrealistic. I have the original G1X and have never, ever seen this sort of noisy shadow effect, even though the exposure compensation dial lives in the negative region (Canon really want you to overexpose every photo, for some reason).

Highlight recovery with the original G1X is pretty useful too, as it works very well on blues, bringing skies back to life which you were sure were just going to be white or grey. If the two G1X models have the same sensor, dynamic range is not a problem at all.

The RX100 is way behind on mid-tone noise (going by charts in this review, which show most of the detail lost to noise reduction by 1600 "ISO"). This is far more important than deep shadow noise, so why say the two sensors are close when they are not? This is, unusually for dpreview, not balanced. Not that I want to defend the G1XII as I have no interest in a camera with no viewfinder...

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2014 at 19:53 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (637 comments in total)

This extreme shadow noise test, especially compared to the Sony RX100, seems bizarre. If you have to pull your shadows by four stops, you've basically stuffed up your exposure! The bridge example, in particular, is totally unrealistic. I have the original G1X and have never, ever seen this sort of noisy shadow effect, even though the exposure compensation dial lives in the negative region (Canon really want you to overexpose every photo, for some reason).

Highlight recovery with the original G1X is pretty useful too, as it works very well on blues, bringing skies back to life which you were sure were just going to be white or grey. If the two G1X models have the same sensor, dynamic range is not a problem at all.

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2014 at 19:53 UTC as 172nd comment | 6 replies
On 1939: England in Color (part 2) article (170 comments in total)

Magic!

Direct link | Posted on May 5, 2014 at 05:53 UTC as 61st comment
On Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review preview (2295 comments in total)
In reply to:

davidonformosa: I'm sure it's a great camera, but is the price premium over the Fuji XE2 or Olympus E-M1 worth it? I'd say no, but I'm sure Leica will still have plenty of orders for this camera.

The EM1 is quite pricey but you get what you pay for. I'm far from rich and do not buy what's trendy at all but bought an EM1 anyway, as part of the system which suits me best out of what's available today.

I'd be amazed if the Leica's sensor wasn't significantly cleaner than the one in the EM1 but I'd be equally amazed if the Leica lenses were better than the best available for the EM1 (which are also very expensive!

In fact, in the market segment where people want small/light gear but very good image quality, the Leica doesn't represent a massive price premium at all. Nor will it give a "better" image. It's just another choice, and quite a different one too, if you consider the interface/philosophy.

Direct link | Posted on May 2, 2014 at 21:48 UTC
On Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review preview (2295 comments in total)
In reply to:

topstuff: Got to love the hypocrite haters on DPR.

If the people knocking Leica all wear Lorus or Casio copy watches, drive Hyundai's, only wear Walmart clothes, only eat non-branded food and genuinely have no desire for "aspirational brands" then they would have a point.

But I bet the average, 50 plus, white north American male on DPR is not like that. I bet the average guy here likes a premium brand car, likes a well cut suit, and well made clothes, enjoys a branded TV and home appliances. If these same people do not apply the same code to photo gear, that is their prerogative. But to knock Leica and the people who do value Leica gear, is hypocritical IMO.

While I am over 50, "white" and male, I am glad I am not one of the average dpreview readers described here! Flip, there's still a real world out there waiting to be photographed. You can't do that if you're trapped into obsessing about image and possessions! What a waste of a life.

The Leica T will be a great tool for some people. For others it will be purchased as some sort of pathetic image bolsterer. For me, no built-in viewfinder = no sale but I appreciate the minimalistic approach Leica have taken and hope they do well with it.

Direct link | Posted on May 2, 2014 at 21:37 UTC
On MIT algorithm predicts photo popularity article (97 comments in total)
In reply to:

carlos roncatti: And popularity has nothing to do with quality

The study was about one, not the other! Popularity is measurable, quality seems to be highly subjective, though that wasn't always the case.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 29, 2014 at 19:21 UTC
On MIT algorithm predicts photo popularity article (97 comments in total)
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: It was very generous of her to compensate all the photographers whose photos were used in this study. Some people think that images online are just there for the taking.

I have posted photos to Flickr specifically so people can download them.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 29, 2014 at 19:19 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (451 comments in total)
In reply to:

FartIng: Having bought G1X - and realised the only advantage was the articulating screen - I sold it within 2 months.

The Macro was awful and there was a HUGE time lag from taking a photo to seeing it on screen.

The G16 is a DREAM to use on the other hand! - and the full HD 1080/60 is sweet.

Weird, I find the articulating screen on my G1X really annoying, much preferring the setup on my EM1. The real advantage of the original G1X was/is all about stellar image quality (lens + sensor) in a small package without having to give up having a zoom lens. On paper, the G1XII continues this theme, though I am yet to be convinced the image quality hasn't suffered from the ambitious lens.

I don't know why people say the G1X is slow. I never have to wait for it, it just works. You can work around the "joke" macro easily enough but, yup, that was something that needed sorting - and seems to have been.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2014 at 22:03 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (451 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zoron: Incredibly poor photo quality.....even at low iso.....it seems the big 1.5"sensor and noise reduction software are designed to produce compromise quality.......amazing how the sensor is almost APSC size but clearly a sub-par sensor and very soft un-sharp center-to-corner lens combination....

You make an inaccurate statement on a public forum. Expect some correction. Who paid you to write that anyway?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 20, 2014 at 20:16 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (451 comments in total)
In reply to:

camerosity: Hey dpreview! How about a Nikon V3 first impressions review? It's a system camera, not a fixed lens point and shoot like the Canon G1X Mark II. I don't know anyone who liked the G1X, it was a dud at introduction. The Nikon 1 series is much more popular. So...prove to me you don't have a massive Canon bias and review the V3!

"I don't know anyone who liked the G1X". Therefore the camera is a dud! Total lack of logic. I don't know anyone who likes the Nikon D800. The same logic says that camera must be a dud too...

When I sold most of my Canon gear and moved back to Olympus, the one thing I kept was my G1X. It's a fabulous little camera.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 20, 2014 at 20:12 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (451 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zoron: Incredibly poor photo quality.....even at low iso.....it seems the big 1.5"sensor and noise reduction software are designed to produce compromise quality.......amazing how the sensor is almost APSC size but clearly a sub-par sensor and very soft un-sharp center-to-corner lens combination....

Soft lens on a G1X??? Are you kidding? I'll agree the jpeg processing wasn't great but it was pretty much the same as my 60D was... Shoot RAW and love it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2014 at 22:30 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (451 comments in total)
In reply to:

jira: So these days cameras have WiFi and what not but not viewfinders. And lenses don't have filter threads.

I'd have never imagined that getting a compact with a filter thread would be hard

For the original G1X, you can get an adaptor with a 58mm thread, which clips onto the lens. It works well but, weight for weight, is the single most expensive piece of plastic I ever bought!

I'd be surprised if you couldn't get something like this for the G1X II.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2014 at 21:51 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (451 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vitruvius: Looks and appears to be just like the Olympus E-P5 but no interchangalbe lens and much worse specs.

There's some poor observations here. That Canon lens is pretty much as fast as it gets for a lens with that focal length range used on a sensor that size. It's an amazing engineering accomplishment. The apertures are more useful in low light than any camera of its size, except for a very few specific body/lens combinations which do not zoom. On paper, this is possibly the most usable compact camera available for people who shoot with a range of common focal lengths, don't care about a viewfinder and do care about sensor quality. Better quality only comes from a bigger setup, if you want to cover a decent focal length range.

It's smaller than an EP5 with anything like the lens range and better in low light than anything that size, ESPECIALLY at longer focal lengths. The whole point of the clever graph above is to show that!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2014 at 00:50 UTC
Total: 255, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »