Mark Tuccillo

Mark Tuccillo

Lives in United States Southington, CT, United States
Works as a Electrical Engineer
Joined on Sep 14, 2002
About me:

F/FTn, FE2, F100, D100, SB-28
AI-S 20mm/2.8; AI-S 24mm/2.8; AI-S 50mm/1.4; AI 135mm/2.8; AI-S 300mm/2.8; 500mm/8 mirror
AFS VR 24-120; AF 50mm/1.8; AF-D 105mm micro/2.8; Tokina ATX-Pro 28-80/2.8; AF-D 80-200mm/2.8; 1.4X

Comments

Total: 3, showing: 1 – 3
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1410 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark Tuccillo: IMHO, Richard Butler is coming from the wrong prospective. Going to cropped sensors was a serious downgrade coming from FF film. The transition from my F100 and the many manual focus and auto focus lenses I have to the D100 was just plain ugly. There were very few DX lenses and although I picked up reach I lost the wide end, not to mention the great handling of the F100. MY AI-S 20mm f2.8 was no longer useful, and the 24-120mm was no longer the great travel lens it had always been. With the D200 the handling issues were addressed, but I needed to buy the 16-85mm to get a decent travel setup.

For me, going to the D600 was not an upgrade, just a return to the way it was. And make no mistake, FF will always have better image quality.

I cannot argue with your logic about people who have entered the market with cropped sensors. However, I'm not sure there is even a need for cropped sensor bodies anymore, with the possible exception for light long reach. Most people with low end bodies and kit lenses would be far better served with something like the Sony DSC-RX100 III or even the Panasonic DMC-LF1. For most of them a high end pocket able is the upgrade path. Meanwhile the FF sensors will get better and cheaper faster then cropped sensors, it's hard to beat physics.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2015 at 19:45 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1410 comments in total)

IMHO, Richard Butler is coming from the wrong prospective. Going to cropped sensors was a serious downgrade coming from FF film. The transition from my F100 and the many manual focus and auto focus lenses I have to the D100 was just plain ugly. There were very few DX lenses and although I picked up reach I lost the wide end, not to mention the great handling of the F100. MY AI-S 20mm f2.8 was no longer useful, and the 24-120mm was no longer the great travel lens it had always been. With the D200 the handling issues were addressed, but I needed to buy the 16-85mm to get a decent travel setup.

For me, going to the D600 was not an upgrade, just a return to the way it was. And make no mistake, FF will always have better image quality.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2015 at 17:38 UTC as 105th comment | 3 replies
On Nikon D600 Hands-on Preview preview (712 comments in total)
In reply to:

roustabout66: In comparing different places on the scene with the D600, D800, 5DM3, and Nex7 at ISO 100 RAW the Sony and Canon seem to consistently be the sharper images to me. The D800 is obviously larger but not as crisp. The D600 seems to be the least sharp in all the spots I checked. I am really shocked at how well the NEX 7 does at low ISO.

Try this. Download the JPEGs and load into PS, down size the D600 to match the 5D3 (5760X3840), increase the contrast of the D600 by +50. Then try to tell the D600 from the 5D3. Check out the red print near the middle of the scene, and notice the obvious sharping artifacts with the 5D3.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2012 at 18:41 UTC
Total: 3, showing: 1 – 3