Dave Oddie

Dave Oddie

Lives in United Kingdom Chester, United Kingdom
Works as a IT
Joined on Jan 23, 2002

Comments

Total: 202, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R real-world samples gallery article (273 comments in total)
In reply to:

kecajkerugo: If it only had OIS or if Fuji had internal stabilization….
Fast lens does work well if the subject is moving and therefore cannot be frozen by any stabilization system (even by the OMD- EM-1). It does not work for any steady subject where a stabilized glass, even much darker, easily outperforms a bright prime lens.

Since when does OIS not work for a moving subject?

That would mean I could not use an OIS lens with anything other than static subjects and that clearly isn't the case as OIS is used by sports photography all the time.

I have one OIS lens (Sigma 105 macro) and it has mode of OIS for panning. IBIS also works on non-static subjects.

OIS and IBIS stabilize camera shake. They have got nothing to do with the subject moving or not.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2014 at 10:55 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Review preview (492 comments in total)
In reply to:

pedroboe100: I don't get it. It's bulky and expensive. Why would someone choose this over a Pentax K5, Olympus EM1, Pana GH3, with a Tamron superzoom lens?

"The fact you don't get it shows your lack of understand in photography, even more so the models you suggest as alternatives. Please tell me how much a GH3 with a 200mm f2.8 zoom lens would cost?????"

The point is you don't need an F2.8 lens on an aps-c camera to match the RX10 shooting wide open due to the lower noise of the sensor.

I think it is you who doesn't get it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 29, 2014 at 15:24 UTC
On Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review preview (2302 comments in total)
In reply to:

GCHYBA: Uhhh, will 99.9% of people really be able to tell the diff between the images this one makes and a much cheaper, similar model?
In my opinion, there are two types of camera: One you carry in your pocket and a DSLR.
This is neither.

"Show me 20 B&W pictures and I will tell you which one they were took with Leica (in the M3-4 period).
The quality was huge in difference"

Years ago in the UK there used to a Leica club that circulated members photos for comment. One member received plenty of praise in particular comments about the technical quality delivered by the Leica lenses they had used.

The trouble was he took them with a Nikon and had duped the other members. I don't believe it was out of spite but more out of interest to see if people could spot the difference. They couldn't and waxed lyrical about the quality delivered by what were in fact Nikon lenses.

Emperors new cloths!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2014 at 23:36 UTC
On Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review preview (2302 comments in total)
In reply to:

Diopter: The Sony NEX 5 line has been discontinued and it is selling below $400 here and there.
Why I should buy a Leica's poor copycat without a flip-flop screen?!
(-)

For some reason when I read the above rather condescending reply by RMillward the old saying "A fool and his money are easily parted" came to mind.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2014 at 23:22 UTC
On Sony a6000 First Impressions Review preview (899 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dave Oddie: "I found myself wondering whether the truism about 'the best camera is the one you have with you' shouldn't really be something like: 'the best camera is the one you enjoy shooting with enough to have with you.' "

The above from the article is very true in my experience. Get the ergonomics right and a camera will get used. Get them wrong and it can actually stop you taking photos as the urge to pick the camera up is somehow muted subconsciously in my experience.

Years ago in the days of film I bought one SLR which was supposed to be the "best" when in the shop another felt better in the hand. Always regretted it.

These days I shoot with a Sony A77 and ergonomically it's the best camera I have ever had. I enjoy taking photos with it so I can see absolutely where the reviewer is coming from here.

It may be his personal view regarding the a6000 but having read it I doubt many would find themselves in disagreement over most points if they actually used the camera.

I am not sure you make a valid point here.

I could say my old film SLR has better ergonomics than your 5N but you would never consider using one.

Back in the days of film when I made my mistake of picking the wrong camera ergonomically the "sensors" were always identical because the film was the same for either camera. So the issue you highlight wasn't one back then.

I don't think it is now either in that once you decide on your modern "film" i.e. what size of sensor you want then if that was aps-c given most 16-24mp aps-c cameras deliver the goods image quality-wise ergonomics can be a deciding factor when a few years ago that was not true.

Most would never consider going for a small sensor camera if aps-c was the quality level you were after so the fact an ergonomically better camera of lower quality existed is rather a moot point.

What you need is a better aps-c camera from an ergonomic point of view. Then I guarantee you will stop using the 5N.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2014 at 14:42 UTC
On Sony a6000 First Impressions Review preview (899 comments in total)

"I found myself wondering whether the truism about 'the best camera is the one you have with you' shouldn't really be something like: 'the best camera is the one you enjoy shooting with enough to have with you.' "

The above from the article is very true in my experience. Get the ergonomics right and a camera will get used. Get them wrong and it can actually stop you taking photos as the urge to pick the camera up is somehow muted subconsciously in my experience.

Years ago in the days of film I bought one SLR which was supposed to be the "best" when in the shop another felt better in the hand. Always regretted it.

These days I shoot with a Sony A77 and ergonomically it's the best camera I have ever had. I enjoy taking photos with it so I can see absolutely where the reviewer is coming from here.

It may be his personal view regarding the a6000 but having read it I doubt many would find themselves in disagreement over most points if they actually used the camera.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2014 at 08:49 UTC as 84th comment | 4 replies
On Pentax K-3 Review preview (493 comments in total)
In reply to:

suntek101: This seems to be a wonderful camera but I like to do low and high angle shooting and I have been waiting for Pentax to incorporate an articulated LCD screen into their next camera since the K10. Hopefully the "K1" will be released in a year or two and my wish will come true. Are you listening Ricoh/Pentax? Until then, I'll just dream of the K3 while making the most of my old K10!

The objections to a tilting LCD are bonkers in my opinion.

I own a Sony A77. It's weather sealed, the tilting LCD doesn't affect this nor does it add bulk. Just how thick do you think these things are?

The fact it can be turned round so the LCD screen faces the body protects it from damage when not in use. You can't do that with fixed LCD screen so it is actually better from a durability point of view than camera with fixed LCD's.

Why any digital camera doesn't have a tilting LCD I really do not understand. It is an option this modern technology brings to the table.

And as to the comment about Capa, do you not use things like auto focus or in-body stabilization? Please turn them off so you can enjoy the full photographic experience!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 11, 2014 at 09:23 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: I'm not really sure this product is very relevant to the dpreview site or its users. I get including the Canon Cinema 1D cameras and NEX camcorder because they use camera lenses, but this has zero to do with photography.

No need to apologise as you were right the first time. They are not relevant to the majority of the sites users. Specialist video related sites would serve the minority who are interested better and leave this place uncluttered. Same goes for Smart Phone stuff.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 2, 2014 at 21:06 UTC
In reply to:

dbateman: I find it interesting that the EM1 with a Panasonic sensor gets this feature.

Whereas the older models using a Sony sensor (know to have this feature) haven't got the update yet.

Either the update is coming or the Sony sensors sold to Olympus don't support this feature. Maybe somethings are better with Panasonic sensors, thus the shift in the high end pro model.

If the Sony sensors Olympus use don't support this feature I think you mean the ones Olympus chose to buy don't have it.

Sony won't sell sensors with deliberately reduced features. They would not have a market if they did.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 1, 2014 at 09:44 UTC

Unimpressive. Lots of shots of the drone. Few if any of going where humans can't.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 29, 2014 at 01:51 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

Zoron: no built-in stabilization....so no for me.

Arguments against stabilisation on short lenses are just silly.

I learned this years ago when I found how useful it was on my Minolta A1 which had an F2.8 lens at 28mm equivalent.

Shooting that in a museum at ridiculously low shutter speeds was all the convincing I needed.

A fast lens with stabilisation simply extends the usability envelope .
Furthermore and a point everyone misses, with stabilisation you aren't forced to go wide open in dim light all the time. You can still exercise a degree of control over the aperture, stop it down a bit for d.o.f control or to sharpen things up as most lenses are at least a bit soft wide open.

Without stabilisation you have to use F1.7 like it or not.

It was the best thing Panasonic did adding in body IS to the GX7 for this reason.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 25, 2014 at 09:26 UTC
On Hungarian law bans photos taken without consent article (321 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pantyhose Bandit: Oh... The Guardina - the company that can't even spell its own name right. What a bastion of journalistic integrity. I wouldn't trust anything the guardian scrawled on its pages.

The Guardian is a left of centre paper generally but supported the Liberal Democrats at the last election in the UK. Who now prop up a right wing government. At times it struggles to reconcile its support for the Lib Dems with what actually happened. So its credentials as a leftist paper are a bit tarnished.

More is the pity as "anything that even smells conservative" deserves all the trashing anyone can heap upon it. In my humble opinion of course.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 00:27 UTC
In reply to:

alexisgreat: Once again Olympus shows how much brainier they are than other camera manufacturers- especially the "big name" conventional ones. Direct Live Histogram, Pixel Mapping, Supersonic Wave Filter, Live View, and now this!

"I guess that is a matter of opinion."

Olympus has always been innovative. I bought an OM4 film camera which had "multi-spot" metering where you could take several spot readings from different parts of the scene.

This is sort of doing the same except instead of averaging out the readings as the OM4 did this adjusts the exposure for each "spot" independently. An old idea taken to its logical conclusion given the capabilities digital allows.

Canon copied the "multi-spot" metering on the T90 (I think). Someone will copy this feature just the same.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 18, 2014 at 14:58 UTC
In reply to:

Andrew Booth: Sigma's turnover last year was 33 billion yen - $320 million

This shouldn't concern them too much.

It is 15% of the profit on the sales of the six specific lenses.

From the article:

15% of the 10.1 billion JPY profit Sigma made on the lenses in question will go to Nikon.

So that is 1.5 billion JPY which is not a lot.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 12, 2014 at 01:41 UTC
On Giotto's launches 'Air' range of lightweight tripods article (30 comments in total)
In reply to:

jackspra: Sales in the states keep these companies rolling so give the price etc. in American language.

The new 'Air' tripods will retail from £180-£334 ($301-$559)

3rd line down!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 9, 2014 at 21:16 UTC
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)
In reply to:

gskolenda: I don't get it! $6,500 bucks for a 16mp FF camera body, they don't need to sell very many of these to make a huge profit, regardless of the market conditions!

This is a big time Rip in my mine, I would take the D800-D800e any day over this camera.

"You are not the market for this camera GSK, but I am guessing you do not make $40k+ a year as a professional portrait/wedding/newswire photographer......"

I thought they all used iPhone's for that these days ;)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2014 at 19:11 UTC
In reply to:

Daniel from Bavaria: Maybe its a bit slow for the one other thing, but therefore it is quite small and lightweight and it seems that optically it is very, very good.
Therefore I do not really understand all the bashing here.

I am a Canon and Fuji X user and think that Sony is doing great for the whole camera industry - they are playing the pioneer in many areas. Only Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji are also in that ballpark, but FF only comes from Sony.
Canon and Nikon are still waiting with their thumbs up in their - you know what - .
If you like the handling of the Sony cameras or not is just a matter of preference, but technically they are doing really well.
Very interesting times for all of us!

Daniel

"Some people need to learn that not only fast lenses are "good" lenses. And so not only the fast lenses are expensive lenses."

What has that got to do with anything posted above?
I certainly don't need to "learn" that this Sony is optically good. I used to use an Olympus Zuiko F2.8 35mm in my film days as my standard lens.

It was optically superb. It was also a lot cheaper than its faster F2 counterpart, which is the point.

I see no reason for this Sony lens to be priced as it is.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 20, 2014 at 10:14 UTC
In reply to:

Daniel from Bavaria: Maybe its a bit slow for the one other thing, but therefore it is quite small and lightweight and it seems that optically it is very, very good.
Therefore I do not really understand all the bashing here.

I am a Canon and Fuji X user and think that Sony is doing great for the whole camera industry - they are playing the pioneer in many areas. Only Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji are also in that ballpark, but FF only comes from Sony.
Canon and Nikon are still waiting with their thumbs up in their - you know what - .
If you like the handling of the Sony cameras or not is just a matter of preference, but technically they are doing really well.
Very interesting times for all of us!

Daniel

If it was F2 even at this price I think you would see far less complaints.

Sony seems to be shying away from fast lenses for this series of camera. The new 70-200 zoom is F4 but priced as an F2.8 ought to be (The A series F2.8 is also overpriced).

If they want to keep things compact by selling slower lenses fair enough but don't charge the same price as faster glass.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 19, 2014 at 12:22 UTC

Lenses like the 8.5mm are what all the smaller formats lack. You have to go with a zoom in most cases as far as I am aware on m43 and aps-c with most primes being no wider than 14mm. (Unless you want a fisheye)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 18, 2014 at 12:43 UTC as 16th comment | 2 replies

At F2.8 the lenses are not fast for the focal lengths they have so why not just stick a 19mm->50mm F2.8 zoom on and save the trouble if having three different cameras?

I am sure with zoom lens optical design being so good these days such a lens would offer excellent quality and they would sell a lot more cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2014 at 10:35 UTC as 223rd comment | 3 replies
Total: 202, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »