MarioV

MarioV

Lives in Australia Perth, Australia
Joined on May 5, 2002

Comments

Total: 43, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On Canon India teases 'something big' coming soon article (146 comments in total)

Maybe Canon is announcing a medium-format camera.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 1, 2014 at 13:45 UTC as 11th comment
On Travel tripods: Comparing 5 aluminum kits article (106 comments in total)
In reply to:

MarioV: Nice selection of tripods. If you dont need as much capacity, then also look at the MeFOTO BackPacker.

The MeFOTO RoadTrip is certainly a competitor here. I'm trying to decide whether I really need the CF version......

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 16:06 UTC
On Travel tripods: Comparing 5 aluminum kits article (106 comments in total)

Nice selection of tripods. If you dont need as much capacity, then also look at the MeFOTO BackPacker.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2014 at 15:18 UTC as 37th comment | 7 replies
On Fallen Leaves Back On Tree in the somethings missing - mirror challenge (6 comments in total)

Very clever. Well done.

Direct link | Posted on May 18, 2014 at 05:05 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

mosc: I'd so much rather have 16-150 than 16-300 if the image quality were even slightly improved. Where is all this demand for the long end coming from? APS-C DSLR's can't focus at f6 in anything but direct sunlight and anything you have to be that far away from is most likely moving. I never understood the market for slow tele.

It's APS-C, it should be cheaper than FF to get some decent aperture telephoto lenses. Why are all real telephoto lenses FF? Show me something past 150 that's faster than f5.6 for APS-C and not FF? Pentax, champion of APS-C makes 60-250 f4 which is incredibly expensive ($1400) and 250 f4 isn't that impressive. Minolta had a FF 210 f4 more than 20 years ago and it never cost that much nor does it weigh 2.2 lbs!

Funny. I've seen some beginners with modest equipment take better photos than some "seasoned" photographers with allegedly superior equipment. Rather than judge a person or equipment, lets judge the photo instead.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2014 at 07:37 UTC

Very reasonably priced. If this has optics as good as my Sigma 18-250 macro, then it will become my new travel lens.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2014 at 05:27 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Retzius: For those who are confused as to why this lens is relevant, compared to the Nikon equivalent it is smaller, lighter, and much cheaper, with equal to better optical performance.

It is not targeted at your average Dpreview brick wall shooter who examines his sensor for dust particles. It is targeted at a first time Dslr shooter with an intro level body who doesn't want to change lenses that often.

And they sell alot of these

Stylus 1 doesn't have the sharpest lens either and its 2 stop advantage isn't enough. RX100 is nice but small reach. The V1 comes close, but still falls short and that lens is not manual.
There are better options but cost and size come into play.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2014 at 17:27 UTC

Not bad, but I recommend the Sigma 18-250 macro.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53077688 see samples.
Also waiting for the Tamron 16-300.. and perhaps a Sigma version.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2014 at 10:37 UTC as 14th comment
On Canon unleashes PowerShot SX700 HS travel zoom article (22 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: F3.2-6.9 lens is all I needed to see. NEXT!

People, please stop being misleading.
Just because f/6.9 may be the equivalent exposure to f/41 on a full frame sensor doesnt mean that its a flawed system in the compact.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2014 at 12:45 UTC
On CP+ 2014: Hands-on with Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II article (200 comments in total)

Looks like a great camera.
But why no 1080p60 video? Is canon still having issues with Digic 6 and 1080p60 video battery life?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2014 at 12:27 UTC as 32nd comment | 1 reply
On Canon unleashes PowerShot SX700 HS travel zoom article (22 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: F3.2-6.9 lens is all I needed to see. NEXT!

@jpg
there's no evidence that you would even know what to do with f/whatever lol.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2014 at 14:12 UTC
On Canon unleashes PowerShot SX700 HS travel zoom article (22 comments in total)

Specs:
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/digital_cameras/powershot_sx700_hs#Specifications

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2014 at 14:05 UTC as 5th comment
In reply to:

antares103: It's not 2.8 throughout? Failboat.

It's not 1.8 throughout? Failevenlargervessel.
duh
I hope you were joking.. but going by a lot of the negative comments, I somehow dont think you were.
A 300mm 2.8 prime alone is almost a foot long and over 2kg and costs thousands.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2014 at 00:04 UTC
In reply to:

Yoggie: "Shut up and take my money!" This will be great for flexibility when walking around or traveling to take acceptable pictures. I will switch to quality primes when I want to take great shots.

Totally agree. There's nothing more to be said.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2014 at 13:24 UTC
On Nikon Coolpix P600, P530, S9700 go big on zoom range article (45 comments in total)
In reply to:

eddie_cam: You can see a few P600 samples here:
http://www.nikon-image.com/products/camera/compact/coolpix/performance/p600/sample.htm

Thanks Eddie.
Good to see the lens is still nice and sharp. Sensor seems slightly improved over P510..marginally. If you want a basic long-zoom camera with good image quality, this will serve you well.

Just annoying that Nikon couldnt be bothered including RAW, hot/cold shoe for flash/mic, Expeed 4 for 1080p60 video, which are all considered minimum these days.

Just an incremental improvement.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2014 at 13:12 UTC
On Nikon Coolpix P600, P530, S9700 go big on zoom range article (45 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: They could take a dump in a box and write 20+ megapixels and 60x zoom on it and some people would buy it.

Some people just were not meant to be photographers.

And still produce better photos with it than some..

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2014 at 06:09 UTC
On Nikon Coolpix P600, P530, S9700 go big on zoom range article (45 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: 1440mm is not useful within our atmosphere. My telescope is only 800mm.

Nonsense.
A good quality acromat is capable of at least 30x magnification per inch of aperture. Apochromats even more so. So a telescope with 2inch objective can easily perform at 60x.

60x zoom is not the same as magnification. Its less magnification.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2014 at 06:04 UTC
On Sony DSC-RX10 preview (725 comments in total)
In reply to:

JJLMD: There's NOTHING on the market that is comparable because this camera offers 2 attributes that don't travel together in ANY competing product:

1. The constant f2.8 zoom allows me to snap quality pics of my kid's indoor performances (ie, ballet recitals). Previously bought the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 for my wife's Nikon D3200 and she made me return it- too big, too heavy, and she doesn't like changing lenses. I've considered a Sony 70-200 f2.8 for my SLT-a99 but also find it too big, too heavy...and it's $2k!

2. DSLR IQ from sensor + processor. I recently bought the Sony RX100m2 and its IQ surpasses that of my wife's Nikon D3200 + 18-200 f3.5-5.6 (!), especially in low light. The BSI architecture allows 40% more light gathering ability than the sensor size would predict meaning it'll perform on a par with the best MFT sensors.

This UNPRECEDENTED combo makes it the perfect camera for the enthusiast soccer mom (and dad). I ordered mine.

I do agree with the conclusion, however - its a great combo. I'm looking forward to seeing low light samples and some video before I consider buying it.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2013 at 16:55 UTC
On Sony DSC-RX10 preview (725 comments in total)
In reply to:

JJLMD: There's NOTHING on the market that is comparable because this camera offers 2 attributes that don't travel together in ANY competing product:

1. The constant f2.8 zoom allows me to snap quality pics of my kid's indoor performances (ie, ballet recitals). Previously bought the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 for my wife's Nikon D3200 and she made me return it- too big, too heavy, and she doesn't like changing lenses. I've considered a Sony 70-200 f2.8 for my SLT-a99 but also find it too big, too heavy...and it's $2k!

2. DSLR IQ from sensor + processor. I recently bought the Sony RX100m2 and its IQ surpasses that of my wife's Nikon D3200 + 18-200 f3.5-5.6 (!), especially in low light. The BSI architecture allows 40% more light gathering ability than the sensor size would predict meaning it'll perform on a par with the best MFT sensors.

This UNPRECEDENTED combo makes it the perfect camera for the enthusiast soccer mom (and dad). I ordered mine.

Wait a sec, he said the RX100m2 and its IQ surpasses the 3200 + 18-200. The RX100* doesnt have the reach for what you point out either.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2013 at 16:33 UTC
On Sony DSC-RX10 preview (725 comments in total)
In reply to:

JJLMD: There's NOTHING on the market that is comparable because this camera offers 2 attributes that don't travel together in ANY competing product:

1. The constant f2.8 zoom allows me to snap quality pics of my kid's indoor performances (ie, ballet recitals). Previously bought the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 for my wife's Nikon D3200 and she made me return it- too big, too heavy, and she doesn't like changing lenses. I've considered a Sony 70-200 f2.8 for my SLT-a99 but also find it too big, too heavy...and it's $2k!

2. DSLR IQ from sensor + processor. I recently bought the Sony RX100m2 and its IQ surpasses that of my wife's Nikon D3200 + 18-200 f3.5-5.6 (!), especially in low light. The BSI architecture allows 40% more light gathering ability than the sensor size would predict meaning it'll perform on a par with the best MFT sensors.

This UNPRECEDENTED combo makes it the perfect camera for the enthusiast soccer mom (and dad). I ordered mine.

You've given your wife the wrong lens for low light. Put a proper lens on the D3200 such as a 17-50 2.8.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2013 at 16:23 UTC
Total: 43, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »