camcom12

camcom12

Joined on Feb 21, 2012

Comments

Total: 68, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On Cactus flower challenge (4 comments in total)

Many gorgeous images here. "Night Bloom" is impressive !

Direct link | Posted on Feb 1, 2015 at 00:14 UTC as 3rd comment
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF7 flips for selfies article (385 comments in total)
In reply to:

straylightrun: "oh boo hoo I hate selfies, people shouldn't be having fun taking photos and sharing it with their friends online"

You guys sound old, lonely and bitter... someone call the retirement village, the grandpas have escaped again!

Lol !

Direct link | Posted on Jan 20, 2015 at 22:09 UTC
On Real-world samples: Sony Alpha 7 II in Kauai article (227 comments in total)
In reply to:

camcom12: Shadows appear a bit mottled, void of detail, at least on my monitor. Are these images "right out of the box" jpeg defaults, or were parameters tweaked a bit, or raw then post processed? Most Sony cams can be set to produce very substantial shadow recovery if jpegs are the desired output.

Thanks Scott !

Direct link | Posted on Jan 20, 2015 at 21:21 UTC
On DSC01127 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (4 comments in total)

Very deep shadows are distracting. Needs some shadow recovery work. This would show a truer test of the sensor's noise & dynamic range limits, I think.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2015 at 21:13 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On DSC01462 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (14 comments in total)

Shadows appear nearly black (00,00,00). Needs at least some shadow recovery.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2015 at 21:09 UTC as 1st comment | 3 replies
On Real-world samples: Sony Alpha 7 II in Kauai article (227 comments in total)

Shadows appear a bit mottled, void of detail, at least on my monitor. Are these images "right out of the box" jpeg defaults, or were parameters tweaked a bit, or raw then post processed? Most Sony cams can be set to produce very substantial shadow recovery if jpegs are the desired output.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 18, 2015 at 19:33 UTC as 47th comment | 3 replies

Might have purchased the Stylus 1 if it was originally offered with the wide-adapter and/or 24~25mm wide lens. But for the money the FZ200 has nearly as good IQ, based on the reviews I've seen. Then there's the FZ1000, which is very competitive, unless you really need 22mm-eq or smaller size. The Stylus 1 is a nice, small camera, but the adapter seems like a punt at this point.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 16, 2015 at 23:17 UTC as 3rd comment
On My Best Photo of the Week challenge (2 comments in total)

Best photo of the week? Wow, I might challenge that. Most of the images are gorgeous, 'best shot of the month' or even 'of the year' quality. So full congrats on that. If any photographer can pull off one of these beautiful images a week, more power to them, as these could be sold for real $, and I imagine some are.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2014 at 20:04 UTC as 1st comment
On Tamron 16-300mm Di II VC PZD real-world samples article (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

tsk1979: The zoom range is impressive. I guess only a full test with MTF graphs will reveal how good or bad it is.
But this lens has one thing going 24mm equivalent at the wide end. For landscapes, and basic architecture, that is the bare minimum must have.

At the tele end even 200mm is fine for a walkabout, but most 18-2xx lenses are limiting at the wide end.

The day someone makes a 14-140 kind of lens for APS-C or a 20-200 10X lens for full frame, it will be the ideal walkabout!

Or a slightly brighter 16-160mm would be nice. Too many 18 to XXXmm out there.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2014 at 21:39 UTC
On Post-Photokina polls - Tell us what you think article (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Greynerd: I would like a sensor half way between 1/1.7" and 1". This would create a pretty high performance zoom compact without creating the gigantic beasts that have appeared with equivalent focal length 200mm+. They have tripled the area of the sensor when doubling it would probably suffice for compact purposes.

2/3" might meet your requirements. Examples: Fujifilm
X-10/20/30/F1/Q1/S1.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format

Direct link | Posted on Oct 5, 2014 at 00:44 UTC
In reply to:

dynaxx: The Lumix LX100 is a very interesting design for serious photographers looking for a more portable camera ; people that care about IQ and don't give a fig for touchscreens. Best to compare it downwards ( to DSLR's ) rather than upwards ( to P&S's ) and the focal length range becomes its achilles heel. Not using the full sensor area matters not a jot. I think the Leica equivalent model ( D-Lux type 109 ) deserves a mention as the price differential, for once, is not absurd.

Sony deserve some credit here too ; without their pioneering camera designs Pansonic/Leica would not have pushed to create such a good camera.

I must agree with the post below that criticised the writing style. I am sure I have seen Damien's work before ; the graffiti on the walls outside Victoria station, possibly ?

Well stated...fully agree. A very captivating article for its topic & content, but I kept tripping over the prose.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2014 at 03:25 UTC
In reply to:

cjep1: Fuji should be afraid as well.

It's really a bummer that LX100 hasn't touch'n'tilt LCD screen. That would make it a no brainer to me.

@Doug...well stated. I could never understand the point of having a high-end compact w/o a built-in flash.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2014 at 02:23 UTC
In reply to:

misha marinsky4: I see we have many visits from Debbie Downer and her family.

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/debbie-downer/n11825

Indeed ! funny link too.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 30, 2014 at 23:23 UTC

This release makes me believe Tamron might have been the contract developer for the original Oly 14-150mm u4/3 lens, and the exclusivity clause expired, or the market for u4/3 10X zooms is on fire, so Tamron is simply capitalizing on it. Methinks the former is more plausible. Unless this iteration has amazing IQ somehow, what's the attraction here?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2014 at 04:13 UTC as 15th comment | 2 replies

Beautiful, clever images, even though a few seem a bit over-saturated. #3 & #7 definitely trick the eye at first glance. That said, it makes #8 one of my favorites of this group. Congrats to the winners.

Direct link | Posted on May 26, 2014 at 01:13 UTC as 8th comment
On Sony SLT-A77 II First Impressions Review preview (680 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: They took away the GPS?!? WTF?!?

Though I am glad they have made a new, updated version of the A77, I can't understand Sony. I won't buy it without GPS. I will get the old one instead . . . or I'll get a Nikon D5300. I don't really need the speed shooting capability, and until I see that Sony is committed to this line of cameras by making three or four new, kick-ass lenses for them, I will stay away from their newest cameras. The mirrorless cameras don't have two of the features I have come to expect from Sony - in-camera image stabilization and GPS, and now Sony drops GPS from their newest A77! I think they dropped the ball too.

I was thinking Sony should make one of these without an anti-aliasing filter. Hopefully they will make an A79 with that and GPS . . . and a bigger buffer . . . and two memory card slots (fast ones - maybe UHS2).

I wonder how fast the memory card slot in this camera is.

Totally agree...no GPS, no sale. GPS 'was' one of the defining features of this line of cameras.

Direct link | Posted on May 2, 2014 at 00:54 UTC

I might jump for 16-160mm for the same price, but with slightly better IQ, but this lens portends to be quite the compromise. Who knows, maybe it will surprise us.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 11, 2014 at 19:34 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply
On Fujfilm interview: 'The only way is to keep innovating' article (228 comments in total)
In reply to:

J Parker: This might be the best interview of this type I've ever read. The fact that Fujifilm draws on the expertise of an engineer who helped develop its Provia and Velvia films is an advantage that very few camera companies can claim (thank you Barnaby for asking that question!).

I use primarily Sony Nex and Panasonic mirrorless cameras -- but for my most important portrait work, the Fujifilms still have no peer. The Fujifilm portraits are the only ones where my clients continuously ask what camera was used to take them. They're the only cameras I have where I've never needed to shoot RAW (or post process at all) to get outstanding images, saving me tons of time to shoot more pictures instead of sitting behind a computer. I ended up giving away two Nikon DSLRs -- the Fujifilm's color rendition is just that good.

Thanks DPReview for the insightful interview.

Agree. Remarkably candid compared to many other manufacturer interviews, which come-off as overly cautious and defensive.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 16, 2014 at 02:12 UTC
In reply to:

samfan: Well if they can pull off a 16mm , why wouldn't they rather make a decent 16-100 or something?

All these superzooms are rather tiring. 'Either get a crappy megazoom or deal with prime lenses' seems to be a message of the day. What happened to good zooms with moderate range and moderate speed? Not pushing the envelope much lately.

Agree. While we have 16-80, 16-85, 16-105, and 15-85(?) already, they are not 'super' zooms. Superzooms are 10X and up. So 16-160mm, would make a better compromise s-zoom than 16-300mm!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2014 at 19:57 UTC
In reply to:

Franz Weber: I wish they would also develop such a lens equivalent for micro four thirds: 12-225mm would be nice

Or even 12-120mm would be fantastic. There enough 14- XXmm zooms in the Micro 4/3 space now. Fortunately, some 12-XXmm have started to come on the market recently.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2014 at 19:46 UTC
Total: 68, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »