Bexter

Bexter

Lives in United Kingdom London, United Kingdom
Joined on Apr 18, 2005

Comments

Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

I don't think is is very hard to change some metadata to state that an image is an out of camera jpeg vs an edited raw converted to a jpeg.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 19, 2015 at 00:36 UTC as 53rd comment
On article 2015 Holiday Gift Guide: $25-100 (10 comments in total)

The triggertrap link has a space at the end which causes a %20 and the link not to work.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2015 at 06:20 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

showmeyourpics: As usual, lots of bitching and moaning in these posts. In his presentation, Brian Smith is very clear about what he is talking about. Mirrorless is here to stay and, in addition to a number of features that makes it particularly attractive to many photographers, there is the extraordinary ability to mount a number of larger formats lenses through inexpensive adapters. These can be either modern or legacy lenses, probably models that are exceptional in their quality and performance. With a positive attitude, Brian takes advantage of the opportunity and, for example, has no problem using manual focusing with an otherwise excellent lens. BTW, there is plenty of pros who are already using mirror-less equipment and EVF's and make no mystery about it. This is another feature that makes the format even more attractive.

It was a great presentation and for hit type of photography this is great. If you are into wildlife or sports then it would be better at the moment at least to stick with a single system. If you can get away with manual focus then the Sony A7 series are amazing.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2015 at 21:11 UTC
In reply to:

Eric Glam: I'd like to express my thoughts on this new camera, based on specs alone:
1. Shutter limited to 1/4000 sec. They could easily offer 1/8000 sec.
2. Still no optical zoom. Not even x1.5. And no, cropping won't get you the same quality you'd achieve with optical zoom.
3. No touch-screen, so no touch-focus and no touch-shutter and no quick menu adjustments.
4. $3300 USD!! insane.
5. Battery life is pathetic.
6. Video limited to 1080p60. Bitrate limited to 50Mbps. In this day & age? really??
7. No weather sealing. Why not?
8. EVF with XGA resolution. Nice to have the EVF, but why limited to XGA (1024 x 768)? That's less than 1MP. I would have liked to see an EVF with 1.92MP (1600x1200) which can refresh at 120Hz.
9. Only 25 Contrast-detect AF points. They should at least double that.
10. 42MP is way too much. 33MP would have been more welcome. larger pixels, smaller files, faster writes to card, better low-light high ISO shots.

I think I said enough.

What do you need 1/8000 shutter for on a 35mm lens? Its more useful for long lenses but since this is fixed at 35mm it doesn't really matter.

I disagree, a prime lens is the correct choice for this, a zoom will not give you the same image quality and bokeh.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 19:43 UTC
In reply to:

nboyer: I wonder if Sony addressed the slow motorized zoom on the RX10? I like this camera, but zooming with it is painful to me.

It is too slow but there was a post on here recently showing that by twisting the zoom ring at the right speed it actually zooms a lot faster.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 01:37 UTC
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: Hmmmm, so this is supposed to compete with the Panasonic FZ1000? And at $4-500 higher price?

I hope at least the build quality is better than the FZ1000, as it seems the FZ1000 beats it in most other areas.

The lens on the RX10 is very good, the constant aperture is great, I'd take that over the longer reach with lower quality.

Either camera is good though.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 01:34 UTC

I only have two complaints about my RX10 and sadly they don't seem to be resolved:

The screen articulation is too limited (though obviously better than fixed).
The Exposure dial is too easy to move accidentally.

It is still a great camera, especially if you can find one on sale. I don't see anything in this new version to make me want to upgrade.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 01:33 UTC as 69th comment | 4 replies
On article Show us your best shot of 2014 (101 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dmitry Novak: Not indicated - only one shot or multiple are possible?

BTW the 'no money again' complaint doesn't look reasonable because the main content that gains most visitors and ads income are the reviews and news. Plus, you dont have to complain any internet photo gallery showing some favourites on its main page. It's normal. And 'Best shot of 2014' isn't a contest, it's just an initiative and motivation to choose and post here another good photo.

It says best "shot", upload your "photo" and my-best-shot-2014 so I think it is safe to assume only one picture.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 3, 2015 at 06:58 UTC
On article Show us your best shot of 2014 (101 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stollen1234: Hey Dpreview..no thanx..try harder next time

You are the one visiting the site...

Direct link | Posted on Jan 3, 2015 at 04:51 UTC
On article Ricoh surfs into action camera market with WG-M1 (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: There are digital watches, with three or even four control buttons on them, which are waterproof to 100 meters. Why can't SOMEONE make a digital action camera that has the same sort of toughness as a $100 watch? It's pretty damn pathetic, if you ask me.

A watch is sealed with screws and you don't have to take the battery out every few times you use it. It is also recommended to replace the seals when you replace the battery. Also a watch is tiny with very little space for air in it so physics help it along as well.

Making a camera with 100 meter water proofing that is also easy to get the card and battery in and out of, and keep it tiny would be very difficult and expensive. Also this camera would be next to useless at 100m as it is so dark down there and this is a small sensor. If you are diving to 100m then you can probably afford a proper dive camera.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 11, 2014 at 14:47 UTC
On article Sony a5100 First Impressions Review (588 comments in total)

The a5000 does have a built in flash, the chart above says that it doesn't.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 18, 2014 at 18:36 UTC as 110th comment
In reply to:

Bexter: This site is going downhill with these silly articles and multiple previews.

Simon, I appreciate your response and realize this one is a bit tongue in cheek. What I mean about multiple previews is that it just seems like there should just be a single preview and a single review rather than them coming out piecemeal.

I see why you do it this way and it probably gets more clicks. My honest feedback is that it is a bit frustrating on the front page as there is enough good topics you cover that we don't need to see links to the same camera on 3 or 4 consecutive days.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 15, 2014 at 03:40 UTC

This site is going downhill with these silly articles and multiple previews.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2014 at 17:15 UTC as 46th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

robbertleopold: According to the announcement in DP Review the Panasonic DMC-FZ1000 will become available for USD 897,99 and Pound 749,99. At the moment the equivalent of USD 897,99 is Pound 523,63. Does this mean that the FZ1000 will be 43 % more expensive in the UK than in the USA ? That can't be true. There must be a mistake in the announcement.

UK price includes 20% VAT but NA price doesn't include taxes. Still expect to pay 15-20% more in UK.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 13, 2014 at 16:40 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Review (499 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: I think the RX10 is overpriced. The lens is great but in a few years it can't be used with a newer 1" sony sensor that offers new things like 4k video or real action tracking on-chip PDAF. If they make an RX20 one day, you'll have to re-buy the lens. Maybe it'll be a little longer at tele or a little lighter but your old glass is throw away. Usually, fixed glass comes at a discount. No mount to deal with, the lens can have fewer compromises, saves money. That makes up for it. This one doesn't seem to have that.

You can't find 1" lenses that compete with this but there are plenty of APS-C sized lenses that do. The article lists a couple, the EF-S 18-135 and the very impressive sony E 18-105. There's also the 18-200 sigma that just came out which is under a pound and has 11x instead of 8x range and usable macro. The dimensions of the RX10 isn't revolutionary either compared to one of those lenses attached to a small camera. Several combos come out LIGHTER than the RX10, all are CHEAPER.

It is very expensive but this is a constant aperture f2.8 lens covering that huge range. That is what you are paying for.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2014 at 16:11 UTC
In reply to:

The Davinator: No OVF. Pay extra for an EVF. Hello Canon.....anyone home?

Helps keep it small, I don't think I have ever used the viewfinder on my G11 in 3 or so years of having it.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2014 at 04:32 UTC

Glad they now let me disable that Movie record button on my A77. I never use it and often hit it by mistake.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 18, 2012 at 15:32 UTC as 24th comment
On article Sony announces Alpha SLT-A99 24MP full-frame camera (92 comments in total)

Another half assed Macro ring light, we need a ring flash as my at least 15 year old Minolta one won't last forever...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2012 at 15:06 UTC as 12th comment
On article Sony announces Alpha SLT-A99 24MP full-frame camera (92 comments in total)
In reply to:

nicolaiecostel: Why did they make it SLT ? How do sony people clean that mirror ? I can't imagine working with a camera like this at slow apertures. Is the dust a problem for those switching lenses frequently ?

Same problem as without a mirror, instead of the dust getting on the sensor, it gets on the mirror. What difference do "slow" apertures make?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2012 at 14:59 UTC

Do we really need to cut down the rainforest for this?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 12, 2011 at 18:39 UTC as 237th comment | 3 replies
Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »