Lab D

Lab D

Lives in USA
Joined on Sep 10, 2013

Comments

Total: 218, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Supply and demand. Plain and simple. There is a demand for this. A company is going to profit from providing a solution.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 20, 2014 at 15:19 UTC as 14th comment
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (401 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Really a very impressive camera, especially for video -- which seems to be where u4/3 shines. However, the JPEGs don't seem to be as good as the raw would allow them to be, and even raw resolution per pixel isn't awesome... perhaps this is using a heavier anti-alias filter than most cameras? The still image IQ is definitely down a couple of notches from a much cheaper Sony A6000 (which DPReview rated 5% lower), especially for JPEGs, and the price-competitive A7 blows it away.

The A7 grip gave my hand a cramp. Too small for the big lenses. My D600 is even better.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 23:38 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (401 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Really a very impressive camera, especially for video -- which seems to be where u4/3 shines. However, the JPEGs don't seem to be as good as the raw would allow them to be, and even raw resolution per pixel isn't awesome... perhaps this is using a heavier anti-alias filter than most cameras? The still image IQ is definitely down a couple of notches from a much cheaper Sony A6000 (which DPReview rated 5% lower), especially for JPEGs, and the price-competitive A7 blows it away.

The gh4 is not for everyone and the a7 is a good camera, but the gh4 focuses faster, has faster fps, has a nicer grip, more custom settings, better video, imho better weather sealing, silent shutter (like a7s) and on and on. It is the more capable camera for most, but as you point out, not all.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 23:18 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (401 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Really a very impressive camera, especially for video -- which seems to be where u4/3 shines. However, the JPEGs don't seem to be as good as the raw would allow them to be, and even raw resolution per pixel isn't awesome... perhaps this is using a heavier anti-alias filter than most cameras? The still image IQ is definitely down a couple of notches from a much cheaper Sony A6000 (which DPReview rated 5% lower), especially for JPEGs, and the price-competitive A7 blows it away.

You found why the GH4 scored so much higher. The OOC jpeg and RAW output are not as good as the A7, but since there is so much more in to getting the best images and content the GH4 scores higher. It simply is a more capable camera.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 19:28 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (401 comments in total)
In reply to:

sneakyracer: From all the samples posted I see that M43 still has a long way to go in terms of still image resolution and noise performance. Even at low iso the images posted from the Gh4 are still quite noisy in the shadows.

Not true.
Shadow noise is mostly determined by DR, and the GH4 has more DR at low ISOs than Canon APS-C cameras. Most likely you are looking at bad examples because all these cameras (m43 and APS) are very, very good at lower ISOs.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 19:23 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (401 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joe Ogiba: The stills I get from my GH4 4K videos are great looking and if I need images for 36x48" prints I use my A7r .
https://vimeo.com/96644118

http://mirrorlessphototips.com/making-a-60-inch-print-from-a-lumix-gh4/
GH4 4k is good enough for 60 inch prints :)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2014 at 23:30 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (401 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lab D: A great review and great camera. I may have missed it, but I found the GH4 still focuses very fast in very dark situations. The -4EV claim appears to be true.

JunzInc, do you have any experience with the GH4???
I started a thread a while back on this. I was shooting in near darkness and getting focus lock in less than 1/2 second. I was shooting with ISO6400 and a 1/6th second shutter speed! Still, even when switching near to far focus and back, focus lock was very quick.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53563402

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2014 at 20:26 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (401 comments in total)

If the GH4 had the Olympus 5 axis stabilization it would be the dream camera for many, many people. As Jorginho points out it is a fantastic stills camera already, and at the moment the best ILC for video in its price range.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2014 at 19:52 UTC as 62nd comment | 3 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (401 comments in total)

A great review and great camera. I may have missed it, but I found the GH4 still focuses very fast in very dark situations. The -4EV claim appears to be true.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2014 at 18:26 UTC as 66th comment | 3 replies
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (328 comments in total)
In reply to:

sans culotte: "Equivalence theory" pushed by some guys is absurd cause it's never used to really compare systems. Why Richard Butler uses his "equivalence" only when talking about m43? Why he doesn't use it when talking about APS-C? Why he doesn't compare FF to medium format? If you wish you could call it DOF equivalence, but not equivalent aperture. Just cause aperture is focal length divided by diameter of entrance pupil. There's much easier to understand camera+lens capabilities dealing with some real physical numbers like Aperture, Focal length, ISO, not their pseudo-"equivalent" distorted versions.
Why is Pana 35-100 f/2.8 comparable to FF 70-200 f/5.6? To match the exposure I would need to push ISO 2 stops higher on FF which would result in higher noise despite all "light capture", is it somehow equivalent?

Richard, the problem I often see with people using "Equivalence" is they try to convert to FF terms when comparing APS and M43 and it can be misleading.
For example, the Panasonic lens is really an F/3.5 zoom in APS-C terms when using Equivalence.
The difference between M43 and APS is close to 2/3rds of a stop and the difference between APS and FF is close to 1 and 1/3rd stops.
Too often I see people say things like the M43 lens is really F/5.6 which is why the F/4 APS is better...Except that APS lens is really F/6.3, but everyone misses that.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2014 at 19:50 UTC
On Photokina 2014 Video: The Samsung NX1 article (98 comments in total)

Look what Samsung did to Sony and others in the smartphone and TV sectors.
Now they have their eye on APS-C ILCs.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 19, 2014 at 14:46 UTC as 16th comment | 4 replies
On Panasonic unveils Lumix DMC-GM5 with EVF article (42 comments in total)

The GM5 with that tiny 35-100mm lens (200mm in FF terms) is what makes this guy different than the LX100. Panasonic need to see the 2 in a discounted kit.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 12:38 UTC as 3rd comment
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 First Impressions Review preview (1425 comments in total)

4/3rds sensor, built-in EVF, lens starting at F/1.7. I can see why this will be very popular.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 12:36 UTC as 180th comment | 1 reply
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1872 comments in total)
In reply to:

maljo@inreach.com: Great AF and 10 fps - what more could a birder/sports photographer want?
Nikon has nothing like this.
Distinguishes the DSLRs from the mirrorless.

"Nikon has nothing like this"
"Distinguishes the DSLRs from the mirrorless."
Right, Nikon only offers 20 fps with continuous AF and subject tracking.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 13:13 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1872 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lab D: First I read this and then I saw the new Samsung. I don't know anyone who buys Samsung, but it seems to beat the 7D in every spec.
For example 10 FPS is not exciting when others are offering 11,12 and 15 FPS. "Full HD" video is boring when other shoot 4K.
I just hope the 7D does use the same technology in this new sensor as found in the Rebel T2i.

Can you provide a link to back up your claim of 13 oof images out of 15?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 12:57 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1872 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lab D: First I read this and then I saw the new Samsung. I don't know anyone who buys Samsung, but it seems to beat the 7D in every spec.
For example 10 FPS is not exciting when others are offering 11,12 and 15 FPS. "Full HD" video is boring when other shoot 4K.
I just hope the 7D does use the same technology in this new sensor as found in the Rebel T2i.

I agree about the Samsung. I don't know anyone who buys one, but it goes to show just how far behind Canon is still using sensors similar to the Canon t2i.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 12:56 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1872 comments in total)

First I read this and then I saw the new Samsung. I don't know anyone who buys Samsung, but it seems to beat the 7D in every spec.
For example 10 FPS is not exciting when others are offering 11,12 and 15 FPS. "Full HD" video is boring when other shoot 4K.
I just hope the 7D does use the same technology in this new sensor as found in the Rebel T2i.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 12:47 UTC as 420th comment | 21 replies
On Fujifilm announces weather-resistant XF 50-140mm F2.8 article (221 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Forget about "dueling formats" for a moment... this looks like a great lens for Fuji X users who need a high quality telephoto zoom lens.

This solves a problem for them, and does it much more economically then selling all their gear and buying a FF DSLR plus brand new lenses. The decision to buy a MILC camera was already made, for lots of other reasons the buyer had.

When people select a system, they already know the pros and cons of each one. Especially when they are spending several thousand dollars. The option to "switch to something else" is a joke, because it assumes the buyer didn't consider it before they committed to Fuji X.

"A7 has about at least 1.5 stops (not 1 stop) advantage over mFT "
It is easy to see from DxO that DR is about 1/2 stop better while noise is about 1.5. Overall saying 1 stop is pretty fair. Obviously, your "light gathering" argument has little to do with reality since we looking at actual results from DxO. The 35-100 is clearly much smaller and lighter which goes against your FF is about the same is size and weight.
btw, I have the D600 (same as D610), so I am glad you mentioned it. It is heavier/larger/more expensive than my other cameras so I rarely use it. As you say it is better than the A7 in every way though.
The Fuji looks like a great option instead. I can see why people are excited about it. It is great to see so many FF users switching to these smaller, lighter systems.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2014 at 14:28 UTC
On Fujifilm announces weather-resistant XF 50-140mm F2.8 article (221 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Forget about "dueling formats" for a moment... this looks like a great lens for Fuji X users who need a high quality telephoto zoom lens.

This solves a problem for them, and does it much more economically then selling all their gear and buying a FF DSLR plus brand new lenses. The decision to buy a MILC camera was already made, for lots of other reasons the buyer had.

When people select a system, they already know the pros and cons of each one. Especially when they are spending several thousand dollars. The option to "switch to something else" is a joke, because it assumes the buyer didn't consider it before they committed to Fuji X.

Oh geeze. Another person who doesn't realize DxO tests Lens/Cameras combinations and not the lens by itself. To be fair compare the Nikon 70-200F4 lens on the D800 vs. the A7R. Sony still has an advantage because the D800 has an AA filter, but the smaller Nikon scores higher.
Now check the E-M1 sensor vs, that A7 and notice that for DR the difference is less that 1 stop for most ISOs and for noise it is a little more than 1 stop. Now check the size of the 35-100mm lens, which is 1 stop faster, to your ginormous 70-200mm lens.
See how easy it is to kill your arguments?
Anyway, I agree with all the OTHER posters here.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2014 at 13:34 UTC
On Fujifilm announces weather-resistant XF 50-140mm F2.8 article (221 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Forget about "dueling formats" for a moment... this looks like a great lens for Fuji X users who need a high quality telephoto zoom lens.

This solves a problem for them, and does it much more economically then selling all their gear and buying a FF DSLR plus brand new lenses. The decision to buy a MILC camera was already made, for lots of other reasons the buyer had.

When people select a system, they already know the pros and cons of each one. Especially when they are spending several thousand dollars. The option to "switch to something else" is a joke, because it assumes the buyer didn't consider it before they committed to Fuji X.

qianp2k lost all creditably after repeating, FF is "not necessarily heavier/bigger or even more expensive" than the A5000 which sells for $450. All he came up with was a old used 5D with a worse performing sensor that is 3x as large. What happened to the "not heavier/bigger" part? :)
Anyway it is safe to ignore him.
Absolutic, it looks like you made the best choice for what you want, and good luck!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2014 at 12:52 UTC
Total: 218, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »