ThomasH_always

ThomasH_always

Lives in United States Santa Clara, United States
Joined on Jul 16, 2005
About me:

Sailing-Flying-Photography

Comments

Total: 31, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

This is a very positive tendency to test a wider range of equipment, not merely the cameras. I am however somewhat stunned that the testers have not recognized just how... unique the UniqBall is. It is a ball head and a leveling plate in one, quite extraordinary in practice for panning and tilting. Ingenious like the legendary Rubic Cube. In my opinion, a special mention would be in place.

Correction: I just spotted a special mention for most innovative design in the summary, my fault that I have not spotted it prior to writing this comment.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2015 at 14:39 UTC as 3rd comment
On Nikon 1 J5: What you need to know article (493 comments in total)

I said it before and I say it again: No Viewfinder, no buy. Its that darn simple.
Another one: No raw format, no buy. Its the "Simple Checklist if Thomas will buy the new camera."

Ever since I dumped the V1+2 zooms for 40% of purchasing price I monitor the Nikon-1 development with some astonishment: What are they thinking? The dynamic range in the V1 was nice, the fast AF was indeed prime class, but the shot-to-shot time was abysmal, so was the up to 8sec waking time of the V1. That was the deal killer in the V1 for me. And than came the Mr.Robato and Homer Simpson designed V2, arguably the "most ugly shape ever devised by any camera maker". I just dumped the V1, be gone, good riddance.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2015 at 14:04 UTC as 23rd comment | 3 replies
On Photokina 2014 Video: The Canon G7 X article (143 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThomasH_always: For me its simple really: No viewfinder, no buy. Not ever.

I do not understand that people are here excited about a step backward, and a remake of a RX100 Mk II, whereas Sony showed with Mk III how it is done.

Canon: too late, too little.

yes, I understand, but... for all who wear glasses and cannot read on closest distance, a viewfinder is not an option, its a must. It is a physical reality. Add to it the outdoor sun light, making any screen barely visible, add to it stability issue when camera is kept at arms length, and the viewfinder is even more the "proper way" of looking at your subject.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2014 at 20:50 UTC
On Photokina 2014 Video: The Canon G7 X article (143 comments in total)

For me its simple really: No viewfinder, no buy. Not ever.

I do not understand that people are here excited about a step backward, and a remake of a RX100 Mk II, whereas Sony showed with Mk III how it is done.

Canon: too late, too little.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 14:05 UTC as 4th comment | 2 replies
On Fast and full-frame: Nikon announces 24MP Nikon D750 article (406 comments in total)

yikes is right! What I want from Nikon is the freaking D400 (DX) at last, I do not want the full frame, except for some low light work, it does not serve any purpose for me.

Your mileage may vary, of course. Of course there is merit to FX for many.

I like the greater depth of field for my action shots. Once someone started this entire claim about the "super goodly shallow depth of field" in FX, everybody repeats it like a parrot, without asking himself/herself: Do I need or prefer indeed a shallow depth of field? Example, two kids in the frame, meter apart. I like the DX for such purpose, and the m4/3 even more.

I think its time that this person, after 40 years Nikon (!! since the silver Nikkormat!) says good buy to the Arrogant Yellow Logo camera company, I am dumping my 12 lenses and walking to Canon for good. They pull out the 7D MkII and I have the impression, its the right tool for me.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2014 at 05:42 UTC as 65th comment

I will be glad to send you in one of my red apples and a reddish orange for an equally meaningful compare. Both are a fruit, with some amount of sugar, and both have some shades of red/orange on the outside skin. Both can be eaten. But: which is better? Which is superior? Which handles better in a hand, which can be used as a ball to play, not merely as a food or desert?

Nun serious: the size of the sensor alone puts these both cameras in fully different types of application, and the infrastructure is dramatically different. Sony has barely E-mount lenses, whereas m4/3 has meanwhile a battery of some 50-60 lenses, thus a different scope of application. In same term, the low light ability is diametrically different as well. Is the choice of these two about the 4K video, is that it? If dpreview is a site devoted to photography, the entire video stuff is rather alien to most photographers. Maybe we need a Vpreview.com or cinepreview.com, for folks making videos and movies?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 8, 2014 at 22:13 UTC as 90th comment | 1 reply

What puzzles me here, is why to compare the Sony models to EOS-5DMkIII, whereas we know that the EOS-6D and Nikon Df have both superior low light properties. Of course aside of the "pixel peeking" we also need to be able to focus in low light. As a EOS-6D user, I can only attest the amazing ability of this camera to focus, officially even in -3EV, albeit I have no scientific way to check if that value is really true. In a practical shootout in an Aquarium the EOS-5D was "hopelessly helpless", and that is that. So why to compare low light properties to an ultra expensive camera, aimed at a different application? In this context: note that the new Lumix GH4 focuses even in -4EV, a record nowadays, and a fact often overseen, because most people think of GH4 as a video tool.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 22, 2014 at 14:19 UTC as 132nd comment
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (251 comments in total)

I have a problem with the presentation in this group test: If you write something positive about a camera A using large font, as if a quintessence, ("Best feature such-and-such in the Group") you cannot write for the Ricoh in large font the negative "Has the worse battery life in the group", and than in the text you write, I quote directly: "WG-4 has the best image quality of the bunch". Wouldn't you say, THIS IS THE PRIMARY MESSAGE, to be printed in large font??? I would say, the image quality tops everything else, the maximum depth inclusive, and surely the "battery performance."

I would also wish that you would clearly state with EVERY single camera, on a VERY PROMINENT PLACE if the camera supports raw. Having 12 or 14 bit per pixel, instead of 8 with a lossy compression appears to me as truly essential. I only take a no-raw camera if there is no alternative. For example, if there is no waterproof camera with raw.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 19:35 UTC as 51st comment
On 2013 Waterproof Camera Roundup preview (123 comments in total)

Among the many comparative attributes, wouldn't you please like to mention is any of these support RAW format?? For me, its an essential feature, surely of higher interest than e.g. how many megapixels the sensor has. I even wish I could per cookie preference suppress news and display of any camera without RAW support.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 20:00 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

carlos roncatti: same old sluggish raw timings?

They are stubborn, they waste money on maintaining 2 raw formats, instead of using DNG.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2014 at 15:50 UTC

Well, yea, "shame about the price." I offer $1400. Want more? Nope, not from me, you keep the lens. I am endlessly patient. I will rather take my old 80-200 F/2.8 with extender.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2013 at 05:23 UTC as 35th comment | 3 replies

A "mini update" for the Least Important Customers of Nikon: The passionate photographers with skills. Or so it looks. We waited for years and years to get the same sensor, which the beginner models had for a long time. Canon is more clever about that: they simply placed the same sensor in all DX cameras, and so the speed of operation, functionality versus size are the differentiators.

But, lets nonetheless see here the Silver Lining: We have a new mid-range DX model at last, our existence has been noticed by Nikon's product planers.

However, the D7000/D600 controls in terms of their ergonomics are not my favorites, and the D7100 does not correct the mess in any significant manner. I really hate this left side mode selector, and the bizarre under wheel even more. Its op in the dark or with gloves is not possible.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 21, 2013 at 15:29 UTC as 32nd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Liu_BR: The Simpsons would say: "like you've never seen them before", so weird...

I said already in the forum: Homer Simpson designs a Camera Body. I really have to wonder about Nikon... And the new battery! Even the D800/D600 use the EL15, and that is a good thing. Here the Battery-o-Mania resumes into next act and scene. I Think I will grab than the Olympus and move from CX to m43. They have lenses I would like to have...

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 14:53 UTC

This interview is very disappointing. Reviewer did not asked any "difficult" questions. The celebratory claim of Nr 1 in Europe (without numbers!!) contrasts the massive list of user wishes, dramatic downfall in value, questionable J2 release, year waiting for any wide lens, year waiting for firmware upgrade, which is a minimalist change rather.

I understand that Mr. Jasper is a PR-man, he has to smile and sell roses and lilies, but Dpreview should know better what happens with the Nikon 1 system, and how desperate users are for improvements. Foremost Jaspers claim of "see, press, done" speed of operation angers me in context of the camera deep-sleep mode, 4-6 sec to wait time to boot, which I regularly clock, and the dreaded forced preview in viewfinder. Luminous Landscapes put it well in their terse writeup about the camera, and even put the name Pronea in context of Nikon 1.

One star for the interview, job not well done, Dpreview.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 26, 2012 at 14:48 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
On Just Posted: Canon PowerShot G15 preview article (81 comments in total)

Pity that the optical viewfinder has not been improved. For me its an invaluable tool in my G12, but I wish I would have rudimentary focus information in it. And it could be a bit bigger as well. Brighter lens in the G15 is an advantage, of course, however I became quite attached to the flippable LCD screen, and I will have to do some thinking if I really want to replace G12 by a G15.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2012 at 14:27 UTC as 22nd comment | 2 replies
On Nikon D600 Hands-on Preview preview (712 comments in total)

Once upon a time the Sony A850 was released at this price range, and the element of novelty and introductory FX sensor costs should be considered over now, several years later. Even a D3200 for our kids has a 24Mpix sensor. Here we get a body with childish controls (boy, I dislike this left side mode selector... To Hogan wrote on his page, it is a component from defective parts department, lets take another), shutter speed down to 1/4000, and quite a steep price. I do not care how unsubstantiated the rumors were. PR department must know that this will wake public's expectations, and must react in timely fashion by spreading their own "rumor."

Meanwhile we all are getting way older while waiting for the D300 replacement. I do not count the D300s, its samo, samo to me. I even used to have, and sold already the EOS-7D to bridge the wait time. Now I know there is null number from Nikon, back to Canon for me!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 13, 2012 at 14:35 UTC as 185th comment | 2 replies
On Nikon D600 Hands-on Preview preview (712 comments in total)

How can someone (dpreview reviewer) call D600 fairly low costs, whereas we are confronted with a "price surprise" on a large scale? Rumor was, and expectation was around $1500, and I would say: That would be enough for a body like that, with D7000/D5000 like controls.

For me its a clear and decisive "no buy".

Direct link | Posted on Sep 13, 2012 at 05:03 UTC as 253rd comment | 9 replies

My take is very, very simple, and consistent:

No RAW, no interest, no buy.
No viewfinder, no interest, no buy.

Got that in Japan at last? You delivered a half of "must have" features,
its a no buy.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 23, 2012 at 21:03 UTC as 23rd comment | 9 replies

I never found Flikr attractive, period. I do not care about it. The looks of our photography are ugly with it, lacks camera/lens database. In other words, it lacks a photographers orientation. Yahoo photos were also bad, and as they deleted these, I never looked back and for the most part I am happy with pBase. That is though a complicated issue, and I looked several times for alternatives. Flickr was always on the very bottom of the list.

Others have mentioned Lightroom/Aperture support, etc. Personally I say no, no interest at all. I want the operating system support to be the intermediary. No senseless bloat with more and more "intelligent" features, which offer no additional function but more learning, dependency and more maintenance.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2012 at 14:42 UTC as 14th comment

Now Nikonian the mystery here is, why we, the users of D300 (top DX model) wait the longest time for a contemporary upgrade? I feel like having to wither and die before getting the new model. Meanwhile I even bought Canon 7D, and sold it year later, now using the D7000 and waiting, waiting, waiting for something more customary.

In short: where the heck is the D400 ?

Nothing against the D3200, seem that Nikon has resolved the pixel deficit, which surely bring them advantage with some buyers, who measure pixels first. The positive is though that these new Nikon cameras have also a great high-iso capabilities. I dropped the Canon 7D instantly once I got the D7000. Previously I always carried a Canon for the evening shots. For example the D200 was with ISO 400 already visibly in disadvantage.

The generic question here is though: With 24-36 Mpix, is the pixel race finally over? Can we focus on other novelties, like HDR, floating point raw format?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 20, 2012 at 14:58 UTC as 41st comment | 3 replies
Total: 31, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »