Kim Letkeman

Kim Letkeman

Lives in Canada Canada
Joined on Nov 27, 2005


Total: 251, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD Lab Test Review preview (189 comments in total)
In reply to:

photogirl7: Here's an interesting thread about the tamron being used for aviation.

Sadly, those samples are at the short end, where all zooms are competitive ...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2014 at 18:38 UTC

One question: Does LR CC change the database in any way to make it incompatible with LR 5? Because that would completely blow their concession out of the water ...

Edit: It seems like there will be a perpetual license upgrade to LR 6 at some point. One supposes that it would be acceptable to try LR CC for a year or two and then drop back to perpetual license version, even if forced to upgrade to maintain compatibility. But since Adobe have a poor backward compatibility record, this remains a point of concern.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 11, 2014 at 17:21 UTC as 44th comment | 2 replies

About as useful sounding as the ridiculous commercials that try to convince us that curved TVs "surround" the viewer ...

You'd have to be sitting about 6" from the set to feel surrounded.

Just examples of solutions looking for problems ...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 19:54 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Stephen McDonald: What's next is sensors that flex with the changing focal-length of the lens. Perhaps the sensors will be built right into the structure and mechanism of the lens, for maximum compatibility at all focal-lengths. This could lead to the capability for a photographer to change sensors in a camera, along with the lenses.

How about dual sensors ... one stacked in front of the other. As the focal length cross thresholds, the sensors swap positions by shuffling ... marketing could make real hay with something that inherently ridiculous :-)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 19:52 UTC
In reply to:

grasscatcher: I see people making reference to the sensor mimicking the human eyeball. However, the sensor, as shown, is concave. Wouldn't it have to be convex to mimic an eyeball? Maybe we need a convex sensor and a fresnel lens? But then there'd likely be a decrease in image quality...

On another tangent, why would the lens need to be round? Can you make, say, a 3x2 rectangular flat lens to convey maximum light to a 3:2 sensor? Seems you could significantly reduce overall camera (lens) size by doing so...

Um ... the sensor would be mimicking the retina, not the lens :-) Thus, concave is correct ...

As for making lenses round versus rectangular ... it seems to me that the interaction of the curves at corners would create spectacular opportunities for weird distortions ...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 19:50 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

orion1983: In the wide angle space needle scenery, the trees in the mid-left are way too muddy with the RX10. And in the night scene on the mid-right (horizon, before the trees appear), the building is also sooo much blurred with the RX10 compared to the FZ1000. However, seems like the RX10 specimen is also one with a de-centered lens (I altogether owned FOUR of them....and finally sent all back because of this issue....that much to "mighty Zeiss".....).

Up to now....the RX10 images look a bit cleaner with jpegs (i.e., lines are more straight, less graining)...but maybe thats a jpeg issue only!

Look around the frame ... all the foliage is smeared, no doubt by mediocre noise reduction algorithms. The Panasonic does nothing like that at all. And the Panasonic foliage has a warmer cast to it, which I really like. Reminds me of Nikon colors, which is a good thing ...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 15:05 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

jackf00: So no 4k video sample to show ?
Strange they didn't do any, as it's the key feature of the FZ1000.

It is an obvious advantage only for some few people today. But it does future proof an already excellent body.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 15:04 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

Akpinxit: FZ1000 looks like highly capable second body for high-end DSLR or even equal switch for mid-end . I'm surprised to how good IQ and lens are (through whole zoom range) . RAW+high speed , up to 3200 ISO IQ is good enough , grip - it has it all .

@Black Box -- "OKAY! I can't take this anymore. WHY do you need a SECOND body if you already have a high-end DSLR?!"

Seriously? I carry one body a lot of the time -- G6 and 14-140. But when I want some flexibility or am heading into low light, I carry multiple bodies with primes. I hate swapping lenses in real time, but grabbing a different body from a shoulder bag is trivial. And the total weight of the bag is the same as the D7000 and a few lenses, so there is no penalty there either. This has nothing to do with "professional" photography and everything to do with "personal" taste on how to manage lens choice etc ...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 15:03 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

Greynerd: It seems to me that the RX10 sits in a sort of no man's land between the Canon G1X MkII which has 80mm less reach but a large rather than mid size sensor yet is substantially smaller and the FZ1000 which has the reach to justify its size.

Very personal choice in the end. For me, FZ1000 is a no brainer because 200mm at the long end is far too short ... but for others it is an irrelevant metric.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 15:00 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wye Photography: To me the Sony is a better performer but not by much and in the UK is £100 more expensive. Both cameras look remarkably similar.

Is the Sony worth £100 more? Considering the Panasonic has a longer reach!

Better performer ... that's not what the review suggests. And if you examine very closely the day time comparison scene you will find that the foliage clumps on the Sony image and not on the Panasonic image. That's a huge difference for any JPEG shooter in my book, and no doubt why the reviewer mentions that their JPEGs are "off-putting" .... I have always felt the same way.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 14:58 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

abortabort: Typical DPR 'we hate sony because they aren't fun', but this time with no actual explanation... Because there just really isn't one. So you praise Fuji for more direct controls, like aperture rings around the lens, exp comp dials and e-dials... But when Sony do it it's 'less fun' than a Panasonic with one miserable dial... Righto! Maybe it's the selfie screen that makes it more 'funerer'?

Fanboi tone aside, he explained it quite clearly. More zoom and better ergonomics, which translates to being more fun to shoot. Not much rocket science in there ...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 14:56 UTC
In reply to:

agentul: well, finally! however, for that price, it has to compete with the Panasonic 14-140, which does have OIS. so Tamron better offer some really good IQ and build quality.

"... which does not have OIS. so Tamron better offer some really good IQ and build quality."

And this would entice Panasonic and older Oly body users how? It's an EPIC FAIL ... leave it at that.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2014 at 13:47 UTC
In reply to:

abrsp: Perfect for GX7!!

People have been skeptical of the efficacy of GX7 IBIS for a long time, and now you are saying that it will handle 300mm EFL. Really?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 19:11 UTC
In reply to:

chris_j_l: Not understanding the commercial rationale behind this. Olympus has 1 that covers this range, Panasonic has 2 that cover this range. Now we have Tamron wanting to cover this range.
I'm all for choice and that, but there is a phenomenal amount of me-too bunching of glass focal length in u4/3 with little or no differentiation between them bar the manufacturer name.
Tamron does have 1 jump on Oly and Pana in this - the announcement of the lens appears to be followed by sales 1-2 months later. Pana/Oly seem to be in the "announce this year, available 2 years later" which may as well be "available for sale on the 16th of Neveruary"

Not all that relevant to ship fast when you ignore most of the existing bodies by skipping stabilization. Tamron's EPIC FAIL is what this was ...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 19:10 UTC
In reply to:

Jogger: The problem for third-party m43 lens makers is the huge incompatibility issues.

e.g. IBIS on some bodies, but, not others... so do you put in OIS or not?

e.g. DFD on new Panasonic bodies.. BUT, the profile needs to be created and Pana isnt sharing that proprietary tech anytime soon. So, for Tammy there's no point in creating anything beyond consumer lenses, where AF speed isnt that big an issue.

e.g. automatic software correction. Pana corrects somethings that Oly doesnt.

The "huge" incompatibility issues are not issues at all. You put in OIS, period. More than half the existing Oly bodies have insufficient IBIS to handle 300mm EFL. OIS is a no brainer, unless one is missing a brain entirely.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 19:07 UTC
In reply to:

wootpile: Nice to see Tammy moving in. Now please make us a small 14 - 50 and a fast but cheap 15

Nice to see them care enough to bother, but not so nice to see them blow it so badly. 300mm EFL without stabilization. Addresses three or four bodies with sufficient IBIS to be reliable ... everyone else need not apply.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 19:05 UTC
In reply to:

Daniel Lauring: I have a feeling this is just another low IQ superzoom that duplicates existing lenses. Tamron and Sigma should concentrate on some high quality fast zooms to support m43. How about a 12-60 F2.8 or F4? That would make a dynamite semi-pro walkaround lens.

On fast zooms, I agree. They need to replicate their success with a 12-35 2.8 or even faster. But on IQ of the kit zoom, I disagree. My guess is that optics will be quite good, but without stabilization half the market will ignore it ... total waste of effort.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 19:03 UTC

Tamron makes some of the best optics in the business and their zooms rarely disappoint. But 300mm EFL and no stabilization? That's about the most short-sighted decision I've ever seen and they automatically cut their target market in half. For me, this zoom hit the "never in a million years" category instantly.

So when people inevitably say that m4/3 is not big enough to attract the 3rd party manufacturers, we need to point out that Tamron at least have been idiots about it. Sigma's primes are brilliant, but Tamron has done the exact opposite in making their design choices.

I held out great hope for Tamron in the fast zoom category ... I always loved their 17-50 and 28-75 lenses and shot both regularly on my Nikons. So I consider this a tragic loss for m4/3 as Tamron's weak sales will not justify any more zooms at all.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 15:06 UTC as 29th comment | 3 replies

:-) ... I've been railing against the "special offer" for only Photoshop since the day it was originally announced as they reserved the right to raise the price at any time. That kept me from even considering this option.

Now they've bundled it with Lightroom and formally announced that 10 bucks is the price and this makes it the same price as all of Office. That's a decent deal, finally.

Adobe should not have waited so long to become really competitive in the rental market, but now that they have I believe that I may just pull the trigger when the next upgrade cycle hits.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 16:42 UTC as 75th comment
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 real-world samples gallery article (59 comments in total)
In reply to:

G1Houston: No one should expect this to be a quantum leap the way EM5 was in terms of IQ. However, it is my impression that the DR and high ISo in the GH4 are just so slightly improved over the previous gen of m4/3 cameras. The ISO 3200 images are very clean and detail so I can imagine ISO 6400 images will still be quite acceptable. There is no harsh highlight blown out in these images although the shadow is still a bit too dark, still not bad for m4/3.

"DR and high ISo in the GH4 are just so slightly improved over the previous gen of m4/3 cameras"

You do realize that it is absolutely impossible to divine any difference, never mind a "just so slight" improvement from a random set of images in unknown lighting of one camera. Seriously ... :-)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 19:13 UTC
Total: 251, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »