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: 640, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

biza43: It sure looks to be built like a tank. But it does not help in understanding why the lens is so big:)

Lots of elements, many quite big, a complex focus track, at least two motors, big image circle, telecentric design. It's not so big for what it is. It's not like it's full of hollow space!

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 23:48 UTC
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1093 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vlad S: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-pen-f/11

So, what IS the RAW dynamic range? There used to be simple graphs that showed how many stops of dynamic range the files could record, in RAW format and in JPEG in different settings. They were easy to compare between different cameras.

How many EVs is this camera's dynamic range? How do the tonal curves compare? What is the highlight roll off like? How much DR do we sacrifice at higher ISO to the lower noise?

Which is fine, because a lot of people use those algorithms!

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 23:17 UTC
In reply to:

art99: Does the world need another aps size sensor ?
Cannot Foveon make a real FF sensor with exceptional low light performance ? Like a sd quattro FF.

To those who say that a bigger sensor has advantages, of course I agree - but why stop at the arbitrary 35mm size? Go even bigger, get a Leica S or larger format Pentax.

Personally, I like a smaller sensor for the advantages it gives to the system overall. If I had a larger system I would rarely have it with me. Each to his or her own.

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 20:50 UTC
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1093 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vlad S: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-pen-f/11

So, what IS the RAW dynamic range? There used to be simple graphs that showed how many stops of dynamic range the files could record, in RAW format and in JPEG in different settings. They were easy to compare between different cameras.

How many EVs is this camera's dynamic range? How do the tonal curves compare? What is the highlight roll off like? How much DR do we sacrifice at higher ISO to the lower noise?

Richard: I must be going senile, because I remember you had a bit where you looked at how much highlight recovery was possible from RAW and, in some cases, which colour channels clipped first. I'll send a message as you suggest.

badi: The DXO numbers bear so little resemblance to real world experience that I never even look at them.

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 20:26 UTC
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1093 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: Thanks for the review. However, I am stumped as to why you'd consider this a prime-lens-only camera? Personally, I find this style better with a long lens than the faux SLR style of my EM1 as it's easier to balance with the viewfinder in the corner. Even when I used my EP1 (no usable viewfinder) with 4/3 lenses, such as the 50-200 zoom, I found the shape very easy to manage.

The whole issue of balance is just that, balance. Hold the camera in a balanced way, left hand taking the weight and right hand driving the main controls. If I don't have to hold the body away from my big hooter, it's just going to be easier!

I guess it's a subjective thing but saying "prime only" is a bit extreme!

By the way, I love the innovative images that go along with the commentary. Great!

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 04:27 UTC
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1093 comments in total)

Thanks for the review. However, I am stumped as to why you'd consider this a prime-lens-only camera? Personally, I find this style better with a long lens than the faux SLR style of my EM1 as it's easier to balance with the viewfinder in the corner. Even when I used my EP1 (no usable viewfinder) with 4/3 lenses, such as the 50-200 zoom, I found the shape very easy to manage.

The whole issue of balance is just that, balance. Hold the camera in a balanced way, left hand taking the weight and right hand driving the main controls. If I don't have to hold the body away from my big hooter, it's just going to be easier!

I guess it's a subjective thing but saying "prime only" is a bit extreme!

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 04:27 UTC as 73rd comment | 3 replies
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1093 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vlad S: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-pen-f/11

So, what IS the RAW dynamic range? There used to be simple graphs that showed how many stops of dynamic range the files could record, in RAW format and in JPEG in different settings. They were easy to compare between different cameras.

How many EVs is this camera's dynamic range? How do the tonal curves compare? What is the highlight roll off like? How much DR do we sacrifice at higher ISO to the lower noise?

Great point! I actually boycotted this website for two months, because of their obsession with this poor method of assessing dynamic range and their petty defensiveness about it.

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 03:43 UTC
In reply to:

KameraFever: It remains to be seen what the image quality will be like, but if it's good, this would be a great hikers lens when wanting to keep the kit as small as possible. Just my two cents.

Absolutely!

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 18:28 UTC
In reply to:

art99: Does the world need another aps size sensor ?
Cannot Foveon make a real FF sensor with exceptional low light performance ? Like a sd quattro FF.

What's the obsession with an arbitrary, film-based sensor size? These two sizes are perfectly adequate and bring advantages over larger formats.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 18:27 UTC
In reply to:

deep7: As alluded to below, there is not one native plant in the winning photo - it is a totally altered environment and the feature plants are aggressive weeds! Even that stream is highly modified. There has been a bit of grumbling in New Zealand about this photograph, as you can imagine.

Not that it is a bad image, just that it represents some sort of unreal fantasy which has come at a high price. Thank goodness New Zealand is no longer pushing the totally inaccurate "clean, green" image these days.

"Infared", your comment was strange and incorrect.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2016 at 01:53 UTC
In reply to:

deep7: As alluded to below, there is not one native plant in the winning photo - it is a totally altered environment and the feature plants are aggressive weeds! Even that stream is highly modified. There has been a bit of grumbling in New Zealand about this photograph, as you can imagine.

Not that it is a bad image, just that it represents some sort of unreal fantasy which has come at a high price. Thank goodness New Zealand is no longer pushing the totally inaccurate "clean, green" image these days.

I see some comments below about the winning image being over-saturated. Not on my calibrated screen! They look reasonably accurate to me. The HDR treatment is maybe a bit less natural but that's been the trend for a while and judges don't mind, it seems.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2016 at 20:40 UTC

As alluded to below, there is not one native plant in the winning photo - it is a totally altered environment and the feature plants are aggressive weeds! Even that stream is highly modified. There has been a bit of grumbling in New Zealand about this photograph, as you can imagine.

Not that it is a bad image, just that it represents some sort of unreal fantasy which has come at a high price. Thank goodness New Zealand is no longer pushing the totally inaccurate "clean, green" image these days.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2016 at 20:37 UTC as 14th comment | 6 replies
On article Heavy hitter: Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM first shots (350 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Silver Nemesis: In order to be a "heavy hitter" it must be better than the Canon(24-70 wise). Is it?

Otherwise, maybe it is a bit early to shout "victory" right now.🍾

"Better"? Or just comparable?

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2016 at 18:48 UTC
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1093 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: It's almost like Olympus had knocked on my door and asked me exactly what I wanted in a camera. This is what I have been waiting for for the last decade.

Well done, Olympus.

That's correct. Sony, Fuji and Panasonic have all put out "box with viewfinder in the corner" type bodies but none of the interchangeable lens options have been implemented this nicely. If you factor lens choice into it, that only leaves some Panasonic bodies, the designs of which appeal far less to me.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2016 at 19:16 UTC
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1093 comments in total)

It's almost like Olympus had knocked on my door and asked me exactly what I wanted in a camera. This is what I have been waiting for for the last decade.

Well done, Olympus.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2016 at 09:29 UTC as 292nd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Calvin Chann: I'd be interested to see how many of these they sell. It's not the typical Fuji users lens.

" My experience with most mirrorless cameras is that the screen blackout between shots makes them very difficult to use for this end use. (I'm talking shooting on continuous). My current selection of bodies is X-T1, A7R2, OMD-EM1, A6000."

I use an EM1 and have never noticed this blackout you talk about. I do a lot of bird photography too.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2016 at 20:11 UTC

We use solar charging at work for various installations. Initially, I thought that either this camera is extremely efficient, that charger is amazing or they tested the thing at midday at the equator! Then I actually looked at the website and noticed the fast charge rate is via cable. That makes more sense.

Still, a nice concept if your "action" comes in bursts rather than being an all-day thing.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2016 at 02:54 UTC as 11th comment
In reply to:

deep7: "..with an equivalent maximum aperture of F8 and F12.6 on the 200mm and 800mm equivalent ends". One of the true advantages of m4/3 over larger formats - particularly at very long focal lengths, the extra depth of field is very welcome!

The second you crop, you are effectively shooting a smaller format. That's why the point is irrelevant to this discussion, even if there is some truth to it, in theory.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 02:10 UTC
In reply to:

deep7: "..with an equivalent maximum aperture of F8 and F12.6 on the 200mm and 800mm equivalent ends". One of the true advantages of m4/3 over larger formats - particularly at very long focal lengths, the extra depth of field is very welcome!

What are you smoking? I was quoting the author here. The statement is based on the relationship between focal length, aperture and the size of that part of the image circle used for capture. Pixel number/size is irrelevant. Yes, at any actual focal length, a smaller sensor gives a smaller apparent depth of field, simply because you enlarge imperfections more. However, that effect doesn't compensate for the difference between focal lengths needed to give the same angle of view, hence the statement holds.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 19:10 UTC

Amazing. Plus, it's actually realistically worth saving up for! Good on ya, Olympus.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 07:38 UTC as 30th comment
Total: 640, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »