audiobomber

audiobomber

Lives in Canada Sudbury, ON, Canada
Joined on Jan 27, 2008

Comments

Total: 111, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1173 comments in total)
In reply to:

audiobomber: What is the basis for saying the 7D II outperforms the a6000 and K-3 for noise? DXOMark shows the 7D II with the lowest score of the three for SNR.
a6000: ISO 1347
K-3: ISO 1216
7D II: ISO 1082

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-7D-Mark-II-versus-Sony-A6000-versus-Pentax-K-3___977_942_914

Here's why DXOMark's raw measurements are the only credible source on the net:
"Pre-cooked" RAW?
"Certain manufacturers embed a small part of the processing directly in the sensor, which means that some degree of processing occurs before the RAW image is sent to the RAW converter. In this case, measurements for these "pre-cooked" RAW images can be biased by this processing.

To avoid any potential impact on our measurements, DxOMark always tests all cameras to detect any pre-processing of RAW images. A processed or pre-cooked RAW image has different characteristics from a genuinely unprocessed image. To some extent, these characteristics enable us to walk back the processing and reconstruct the original image to perform unbiased measurements, and we always inform the user about models with embedded pre-processing."
http://www.dxomark.com/About/In-depth-measurements/Measuring-sensors-using-RAW-and-testing-lenses-on-cameras

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2014 at 15:55 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1173 comments in total)
In reply to:

audiobomber: What is the basis for saying the 7D II outperforms the a6000 and K-3 for noise? DXOMark shows the 7D II with the lowest score of the three for SNR.
a6000: ISO 1347
K-3: ISO 1216
7D II: ISO 1082

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-7D-Mark-II-versus-Sony-A6000-versus-Pentax-K-3___977_942_914

There is a great deal of info posted about DXOMark's testing methods. On the main page, look in the ABOUT tab.

DPR uses ACR, which applies different raw processing, depending on manufacturer. Then of course there are manufacturers who manipulate ISO numbers to make them look better when compared by ISO, like DPR does in its Image Comparator.

DXOMark is the only source for true raw sensor measurements.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2014 at 15:54 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1173 comments in total)

What is the basis for saying the 7D II outperforms the a6000 and K-3 for noise? DXOMark shows the 7D II with the lowest score of the three for SNR.
a6000: ISO 1347
K-3: ISO 1216
7D II: ISO 1082

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-7D-Mark-II-versus-Sony-A6000-versus-Pentax-K-3___977_942_914

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2014 at 05:01 UTC as 29th comment | 9 replies
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1173 comments in total)
In reply to:

walgarch: This review is blowing my mind!

Canon 7d MkII:
84% Silver award

Pentax K3:
83% Gold award

I don't even...

The Pentax K-3 equals the 7D II in most ways; weather sealed, 200,000 actuation shutter, magnesium exterior, large buffer, dual card slots, 100% coverage VF, USB 3.0, etc.

The Mk II is superior in some ways; better focus tracking, 65 vs. 25 cross points, faster live view AF, 10 fps vs 8.3, tilt LCD, built in GPS vs. optional.

The K-3 is superior in other ways; better dynamic range and SNR, higher resolution, selectable blur filter, -3EV metering & AF, -10 to 40C temperature range, three f2.8-sensitive AF points, IBIS, optional Wi-Fi.

Either is a valid choice, depending on your needs. The reason the 7D II achieved Silver, IMO, is the high price.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2014 at 04:56 UTC
On Enthusiast DSLR camera roundup (2014) article (13 comments in total)

K-3 high ISO performance is identical to the D7100's according to DXOMark. DPR, please correct your review.

Note too that the K-3 sensor doesn't suffer banding like the D7100's.

I don't understand why you couldn't find some highlights for the K-3 instead of the cheap shot D7100 comparison. How about one of these, which the D7100 can't match?
200,000 actuation shutter
full magnesium case with stainless frame
large raw buffer
-3EV metering & AF
-10 to 40C temperature range
three f2.8-sensitive AF points
IBIS

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2014 at 21:09 UTC as 2nd comment

Fashion photography seems a pretty easy gig for any half decent camera system. Lots of light and small apertures is a forgiving combination for focussing, lens sharpness and aberrations. Timing is rather leisurely, so you can fiddle with features and setup. Most any m4/3 or APS-C body with premium lenses could have handled this assignment.

I think fashion photography is mostly about creativity and post-processing.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2014 at 21:51 UTC as 84th comment | 1 reply
On Sony Alpha 77 II firmware update improves AF speed article (153 comments in total)
In reply to:

tecnoworld: I hope they'll test the new improved AF against the samsung nx1 and the top performer Nikon D750.

Familiarity with the camera is also important. The Pentax K-3 AF tests were botched due to incorrect settings.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2014 at 15:57 UTC
On Mid-range Mirrorless camera roundup 2013 article (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

audiobomber: There's an error in the a6000 page. It says:
◾24MP APS-C sensor is one of the best in this class

It should say:
◾24MP APS-C sensor is the best in this class

The a6000 and a5100 use the same sensor.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 18:40 UTC
On Mid-range Mirrorless camera roundup 2013 article (295 comments in total)

There's an error in the a6000 page. It says:
◾24MP APS-C sensor is one of the best in this class

It should say:
◾24MP APS-C sensor is the best in this class

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 14:37 UTC as 27th comment | 3 replies
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (2702 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vignes: DXO detail analysis chart which shows the performance from low ISO to high ISO are helpful. it gives you a first hand pass of the sensor capability. from there you can narrow down your camera selection for your needs. They should leave the user to decide based on their study on the analysis chart rather than providing scores.. This will look unbiassed and professional. Users should spend time learning how to read the charts rather than just taking the scores and recommendation.

DXOMark sensor scores are the only credible source for noise performance on the net, because they ignore manufacturers' ISO numbers.

Pentax is penalized on DPR for being honest. Canon and Sony exaggerate sensitivity by 1/3 stop, Fuji and Olympus by a whole stop, yet DPR and everyone else continues to compare based on manufacturer's stated ISO.

DXO is the only place you will see the truth. Check the ISO Sensitivity graphs:
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-7D-Mark-II-versus-Pentax-K-3-versus-Olympus-OM-D-E-M5___977_914_793

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2014 at 15:50 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review preview (827 comments in total)
In reply to:

spontaneousservices: I lusted for a Fuji, but the LX100 was one of the contenders. Alas, the fiddly manual AF-point selection was a deal-breaker for me. Also, when the lens is extended to 'operational' position it feels quite fragile.

Came home instead with a Sony a6000, in many respects a great little camera. The shutter lag bothers me though, not yet sure whether I'll be able to live with it.

There's new firmware available to speed up the a6000 start times.
http://esupport.sony.com/US/p/swu-download.pl?mdl=ILCE6000&upd_id=10073&os_group_id=5

Re Nikonguy's rant, some people love overly punch jpegs. I quite like the a6000 jpegs but I shoot raw because I can always do better. Of course anyone who's not a total newbie would know to adjust jpeg output in the menu.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 20:18 UTC
In reply to:

audiobomber: You can't tell IQ or build quality from a photo. Ricoh says this lens is intended for people who want higher IQ than a kit lens. It's safe to say it will outperform the 18-55, 18-135 and the various superzooms.

The DA 18-135mm feels like a pro lens; it is tight, no creep, no rattles or looseness anywhere. It makes a Tamron superzoom feel like junk. I expect the 16-85mm will be the same build, and hopefully IQ will match my 16-45mm. If so, I'll sell the others and get this.

Most of us who actually own the lens think the Photozone review is a hatchet job. There are plenty of more balanced reviews.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52109191
http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2011/06/lens-test-pentax-da-18-135mm-f35-56-dc-wr
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/smc-pentax-da-18-135mm-f-3-5-5-6-ed-al--if--dc-wr-lens-review-16544
http://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/da-18-135mm-f35-56-ed-al-if-dc-wr/introduction.html
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-DA-18-135mm-F3.5-5.6-ED-AL-IF-DC-WR.html

Direct link | Posted on Nov 2, 2014 at 01:28 UTC
In reply to:

abortabort: Genuine question, but why are Sony the only brand to offer constant aperture or near constant in these kinds of crop lenses? They have the 16-80mm f3.5-4.5, 16-70mm f4 and 18-105mm f4... yet everyone else seems to be f3.5-5.6 (or not offer one at all)?

No, it is a Pentax lens, not available from Tokina.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 1, 2014 at 14:36 UTC

You can't tell IQ or build quality from a photo. Ricoh says this lens is intended for people who want higher IQ than a kit lens. It's safe to say it will outperform the 18-55, 18-135 and the various superzooms.

The DA 18-135mm feels like a pro lens; it is tight, no creep, no rattles or looseness anywhere. It makes a Tamron superzoom feel like junk. I expect the 16-85mm will be the same build, and hopefully IQ will match my 16-45mm. If so, I'll sell the others and get this.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2014 at 13:20 UTC as 5th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

abortabort: Genuine question, but why are Sony the only brand to offer constant aperture or near constant in these kinds of crop lenses? They have the 16-80mm f3.5-4.5, 16-70mm f4 and 18-105mm f4... yet everyone else seems to be f3.5-5.6 (or not offer one at all)?

Pentax has a DA 17-70mm f/4.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 30, 2014 at 22:21 UTC
In reply to:

Joe Mayer: I guess it makes a great headline and it's clever referring to the mk2 as twice as good? But sadly, no, it's not. I doubt it could ever have been and really, at the price point, does anyone realistically expect it to be so? If you'd like it to be better, it existed before it's announcement. It's called the 1DX. Oh, but no one wants to pay for it. They want a 7D that does what the 1DX does for the price of an SL1. Never gonna happen (though it does a lot of what the 1DX does). So, it's a little better in some ways (iso over 800 wasn't very good at all), a lot better in others (the 7D AF could be flaky) so the mk2 is what it is. Twice as good it isn't but better it is. Another thing's for sure is that the price isn't twice of the 7D. In fact, it's debuting for less than the mk1. Not a bad deal at all.

You're looking at the manufacturer's default jpeg settings at IR. It's a useful comparison only for noobs who never shoot raw, and don't know enough to adjust jpeg settings in camera. Plus manufacturers diddle with ISO settings. The only realistic ISO comparisons are done by DXOMark.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 19:08 UTC
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (328 comments in total)
In reply to:

quezra: "But any cost benefit of buying a 70-200mm F4 rather than an equivalent zoom is lost if you have to buy a full frame camera to gain access to that capability."

... unless there's an A7 in that mix, which you completely forgot about. The 70-200/4 is $100 less than the Fuji and Samsungs, both the A7 body and the FE70-200/4 weighs less than the APS-C versions, so the total system cost is very close against their flagships (X-T1 and NX1), and overall weight is less. And is FF, so for other things is much better. But that would spoil your prose wouldn't it...

I believe the point of the article quezra, is that Sony, Canon and Nikon should offer a 50-135mm or 50-150mm f2.8, as Pentax, Fuji and Samsung have done for their APS--C bodies.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 12:19 UTC
In reply to:

Rooru S: Excellent range. Hopefully it will perform great. Now I'm questioning myself why buy again E-mount APS-C cameras...

ISO doesn't matter, DOF, shutter speed and noise matter. Just bump up the ISO with a larger sensor, noise will balance out.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 04:05 UTC
In reply to:

Rooru S: Excellent range. Hopefully it will perform great. Now I'm questioning myself why buy again E-mount APS-C cameras...

> But it's F4

Yes, f/4 on FF, f/6 equivalent on APS-C. The Oly is f/5.6 equivalent. No significant difference.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 16:46 UTC
In reply to:

qwertyasdf: This might be the first and last time that I say this to a M43 lens:

It's priced reasonably.
Given it's longer range than 70-200 FF lens, it is way way more versatile, and I have confidence in the IQ of a Oly HG lens. Oh....also, the 0.21x magnification, taking into account of the crop factor of M43 sensor, is class-leading.

@bobjob

Pentax Q lenses are significantly smaller and more pixel dense than m4/3 if that's your criteria.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 16:42 UTC
Total: 111, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »