PIX 2015
AshMills

AshMills

Lives in United Kingdom Sixpenny Handley, Dorset, United Kingdom
Works as a Photographer
Has a website at www.AshMills.com
Joined on Aug 19, 2002

Comments

Total: 445, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Sports Shooter: all sounds great but why 72mm filter thread? why not standardize with 77mm ( 16-35, 24-105, 70-200)?

Yeah might as well have it as big as possible.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2015 at 11:08 UTC
In reply to:

SidePod: don't organic materials age fast? OLED displays and organic color filters in homecinema projectors are said to suffer from this ....

This lens only needs to last till the IS version comes out.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2015 at 10:25 UTC
In reply to:

jm5: $1799? I will go with sigma. Once that breaks I will buy a second sigma.
Will the canon be sharper? Probably but who can really tell.

https://www.topazlabs.com/stareffects

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2015 at 10:23 UTC
In reply to:

slippedcurve623: Wow just saw the mtf chart for this lens, and it looks like this new Canon 35mm ii might even bests an zeiss 55mm otus wide open, though ill need to wait for the canon to arrive so i could compare them side by side myself :-)

Yeah the Canon is not so great at 55mm.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2015 at 10:22 UTC
On Bang for the Buck: Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Review article (523 comments in total)
In reply to:

Andrei Todea: Thank you for publishing the review so fast!

The Studio scene says the images are "slightly less detailed" in Jpeg.
Looking at the RAW images, they still look quite softer compared to the older E-M5, E-M10.
Could this be due to an error during testing or does the camera produce softer images than its predecessors (or do I need new glasses)?
Thanks!

Thanks, ok less than interesting. :-)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 23:35 UTC
On Bang for the Buck: Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Review article (523 comments in total)
In reply to:

Andrei Todea: Thank you for publishing the review so fast!

The Studio scene says the images are "slightly less detailed" in Jpeg.
Looking at the RAW images, they still look quite softer compared to the older E-M5, E-M10.
Could this be due to an error during testing or does the camera produce softer images than its predecessors (or do I need new glasses)?
Thanks!

Interesting surely that this needs a new version of ACR, if the chip and processing has in theory not changed?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 16:32 UTC
On Bang for the Buck: Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Review article (523 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: this got to be the quickest review on DPR.

They needed to hurry, as they have more A7RII articles to write. ;-) (ps Yes I agree that camera is more interesting)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 11:28 UTC
In reply to:

Poweruser: And the rf ist still perfectly aligned? I have my doubts...

Drop it from a balcony?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 19, 2015 at 22:34 UTC
On Under the hood: A closer look at the Sony a7R II article (586 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vanitas Photo: Funny thing is a Sony full frame camera will drive AF faster in Live View Canon and Nikon lenses than Canon and Nikon cameras...

I think its unlikely for exposure since the nikkors use a mechanical link for exposure. AF should be possible though?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 18, 2015 at 09:42 UTC
On Under the hood: A closer look at the Sony a7R II article (586 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vanitas Photo: Funny thing is a Sony full frame camera will drive AF faster in Live View Canon and Nikon lenses than Canon and Nikon cameras...

Does it do Nikon lenses too? Cool.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 17, 2015 at 17:01 UTC
On Corel releases ParticleShop brush plugin for Photoshop article (73 comments in total)

"Lighting" or "Lightning" ?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 12, 2015 at 22:04 UTC as 25th comment
In reply to:

tcab: Hope the new 24-70 VR fixes the problems with the current model re lack of sharpness and distortion in the corners at 24 all the way to about 35. This is not a perfect lens.

It's more than the corners, too, the un-sharpness and distortion is a thick doughnut around a sharp centre. Maybe people taking portraits with this lens don't notice or care. I then compared extensively against the highly regarded m43 Olympus 12-40 2.8 (equivalent to 24-80) and that lens suffered no such flaws. It was an eye opener for me.

Careful, people get rabid pretty fast here if you start comparing things to m43 lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2015 at 01:02 UTC
In reply to:

Horshack: Quick Weight comparison of available 24-70 f/2.8 lenses:

Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 VR: 1070g [2.35 lbs]
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8: 900g [1.98 lbs]
Tamron 24-70VC F-Mount: 825g [1.81 lbs]
Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II: 805g [1.77 lbs]

Oops, just bought one.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 23:31 UTC
In reply to:

AshMills: Ok I know equivalence meh meh, but the Olympus 12-40 2.8 (24-80 5.6) AND the 40-150 2.8 (80-300 5.6) TOGETHER weigh about the same as the 24-70 2.8VR.

Some very beautiful photos in your gallery, that D7000 serves you well. Thanks for the chat, lets get back to taking photos.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 23:13 UTC
In reply to:

AshMills: Ok I know equivalence meh meh, but the Olympus 12-40 2.8 (24-80 5.6) AND the 40-150 2.8 (80-300 5.6) TOGETHER weigh about the same as the 24-70 2.8VR.

Those lenses may be light but they are not as sharp wide open. They are not 2.8 so I need to bump up my ISO to freeze the action, the VR is not as good as the IBIS I have on m43, the FF camera body still weighs nearly twice as much, and thats without a portrait grip. You say I ignore equivalence when the first post I made said it clearly, I'm not arguing with you to try and make you or anyone change to m43 or DX, but to make it clear to Canikon etc if they are listening that a proper mirrorless solution with lighter kit is a sensible aspiration. My pictures will not look the same with any gear, undoubtably they are less noisy and more out of focus (sorry, selectively focussed) than they are with m43, but with m43 Im more likely to be carrying a cheeky fisheye, a macro lens, perhaps some retro glass with a speedbooster because Im not so overloaded.

As I said I have the 24-85 and 70-300 but in my view they are cheap toys compared to the sharpness of my alternatives on m43.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 22:48 UTC
In reply to:

brownie314: Is Nikon not aware of the current situation in the camera market? Why throw more uber high priced lenses at a market where people are willing to spend less money?

Brownie- I can confirm I have almost paid for my house on my income as a photographer. I don't do sports. None of the photojournalists I come across use little cameras as their main camera. There are plenty of photographers out there still. And thousands of "Pros" who arent of course.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 16:57 UTC
In reply to:

brownie314: Is Nikon not aware of the current situation in the camera market? Why throw more uber high priced lenses at a market where people are willing to spend less money?

No, frankly this is aimed at two types of photographer, those that need it, and those that think they need it.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 16:45 UTC
In reply to:

AshMills: Ok I know equivalence meh meh, but the Olympus 12-40 2.8 (24-80 5.6) AND the 40-150 2.8 (80-300 5.6) TOGETHER weigh about the same as the 24-70 2.8VR.

Rajeshb "these small sensor users" - this isn't some kind of war, I'm not bragging or anything. In the context of the ever-increasing size and weight of top notch FF gear (which I agree produces the very best results in the right conditions) mine was simply that for times when conditions are less than ideal (and you dont want to have a workout) other options are out there. There is no panacea, there is no Best, it's all a balance.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 16:01 UTC
In reply to:

AshMills: Ok I know equivalence meh meh, but the Olympus 12-40 2.8 (24-80 5.6) AND the 40-150 2.8 (80-300 5.6) TOGETHER weigh about the same as the 24-70 2.8VR.

Noirdesir, which body is that combo with, I may pick one up. ( I have those lenses already)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 15:56 UTC

Tumbleweed.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 01:12 UTC as 15th comment
Total: 445, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »