peevee1

peevee1

Joined on Mar 28, 2012

Comments

Total: 2838, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Sony drops list price of Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 article (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lab D: Pretty obvious why they dropped the price.
I am sure all the owners planning on ebaying these to get the wider range lens and 4K on the FZ1000 are really upset now knowing their camera just lost $300 in value.
Since it can't compete for video nor for sports and wildlife due to the short lens and slower focusing, I am guessing used prices will drop even more.

"No for sports"? How all these sports are shot with 70-200/2.8 on FF cameras? ;) Not every sport requires you to be million miles away, but faster lens is always welcome.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2014 at 12:00 UTC
On Sony drops list price of Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 article (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aroart: Awesome, Now make the olympus omd $300 less please..Its funny, B&H still has the used rx100 at $1099..

OM-D E-M5 is $300 less. :0) Even $340 less or so. :)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2014 at 11:58 UTC
On Sony drops list price of Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 article (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Now do RX100 III.

Wait for the next Pana LX... ;)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2014 at 02:09 UTC
On Sony drops list price of Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 article (201 comments in total)

Thank you, Panasonic!

Panasonic had to do the same ($1300 -> $999) with their 12-35/2.8 after Olympus released their 12-40/2.8. :)

Competition is great! Even between different departments of the same company - Sony microelectronics got more sales, while Sony cameras lost some money. :)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 18:12 UTC as 62nd comment | 1 reply
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

peevee1: DPR wrote: "The first thing you'll notice here is that a) the Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 is noticeably sharper"

Huh? Check out the brick building near the bottom right corner, and a yellow structure near it. There is no question about which one is sharper - of course it is Panasonic. There is not difference in the center, but FZ1000 clearly wins in the corners, at least at wide end.

"he Sony is sharper, including the center."

I think in the center they both are very sharp, no issues.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 03:34 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

peevee1: DPR wrote: "The first thing you'll notice here is that a) the Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 is noticeably sharper"

Huh? Check out the brick building near the bottom right corner, and a yellow structure near it. There is no question about which one is sharper - of course it is Panasonic. There is not difference in the center, but FZ1000 clearly wins in the corners, at least at wide end.

jaykumarr: "peevee1, please look at the metal fence in left bottom corner. There is no doubt that Sony is sharper."

Are you talking about "architectural" sample, at 70mm? Because I was talking about the wide end.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 03:33 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

peevee1: DPR wrote: "The first thing you'll notice here is that a) the Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 is noticeably sharper"

Huh? Check out the brick building near the bottom right corner, and a yellow structure near it. There is no question about which one is sharper - of course it is Panasonic. There is not difference in the center, but FZ1000 clearly wins in the corners, at least at wide end.

Agree, although it might be a result of different JPEG processing.
I personally like RX10 much more, but fair is fair, and FZ1000 lens is sharper in the corners at wide end. I don't know how the DPR reviewer can think differently when it is SO obvious from the comparison samples. Maybe the reviewer just mixed them? ;)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2014 at 21:32 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)

DPR wrote: "The first thing you'll notice here is that a) the Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 is noticeably sharper"

Huh? Check out the brick building near the bottom right corner, and a yellow structure near it. There is no question about which one is sharper - of course it is Panasonic. There is not difference in the center, but FZ1000 clearly wins in the corners, at least at wide end.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2014 at 20:32 UTC as 153rd comment | 11 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)

DPR wrote: "The situation in which the fully articulating (rotating) display wins out is when recording video."

Uhh... no. In video it is the same, which is determined by the 16:9 output format (only complete dolts shoot video vertically). When there is a difference is for still in portrait orientation, and for selfies, and for preservation of the screen in closed position.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2014 at 20:23 UTC as 157th comment | 3 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)

Great, more direct comparisons, please! Much more interesting to read this way!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2014 at 19:56 UTC as 161st comment
In reply to:

forpetessake: Many people complain this zoom is too dim, and traditionally Tamron superzooms have poor image quality, etc. You are forgetting that Tamron is a business, and as such is measured by profits, they must make the decisions based on those considerations. The stuff that sells and brings profits usually not the best quality. Never confuse saleability with quality.

110/4 does not have to be big.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2014 at 01:35 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (432 comments in total)

DPR wrote: "The Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 (and Samsung NX Mini) are the only other interchangeable lens cameras that are physically smaller than the V3"

Huh? Olympus E-PM2, Panasonic GF5, Sony a5000 are all smaller and lighter than V3, with much bigger sensors, and in case of m43 system, lenses of about the same size. I am sure if you look, you can find other ILCs smaller than V3 - how about Pentax Q and older NEX and m43 cameras?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 30, 2014 at 17:16 UTC as 134th comment | 1 reply
On Surf's Up: Clark Little's incredible wave photography article (54 comments in total)

Excellent!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2014 at 19:21 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

peevee1: How come they need a firmware update for every camera to support a new lens? And what other lens makers are supposed to do, who cannot upgrade a firmware in every Fujifilm camera as soon as they release a new lens? And what will happen to old bodies when they go out of support eventually - no compatibility with new lenses for them?
Seems like a bad standard.

"Reason for the firmware updates with each release of a new lens has nothing to do with camera flaws, but is because Fuji does in camera barrel distortion, chroma removal and other kind of 'repairs' to lens flaws."

Everybody does that, but competent standards store the profiles needed in the lenses themselves and communicate everything to the camera when the lens is mounted and camera is turned on.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2014 at 13:08 UTC
In reply to:

peevee1: How come they need a firmware update for every camera to support a new lens? And what other lens makers are supposed to do, who cannot upgrade a firmware in every Fujifilm camera as soon as they release a new lens? And what will happen to old bodies when they go out of support eventually - no compatibility with new lenses for them?
Seems like a bad standard.

"The lenses work anyway, just not as well as if the firmwares are updated."

Why? How bad is it? You are buying a shiny new expensive lens, and it does not work as it should without a firmware for all your cameras? Why the data for the lens (making it work optimally) is not stored in the lens itself, as it is done in m43 for example?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2014 at 13:06 UTC

How come they need a firmware update for every camera to support a new lens? And what other lens makers are supposed to do, who cannot upgrade a firmware in every Fujifilm camera as soon as they release a new lens? And what will happen to old bodies when they go out of support eventually - no compatibility with new lenses for them?
Seems like a bad standard.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2014 at 11:52 UTC as 4th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

Sdaniella: Kodachrome 25 ... ISO 25
I've been asking for 25/12/6 since Canon offered ISO 50
never mind 64/32!

"What are you talking about @peevee1 ?"

I can explain how using global electronic shutter you can achieve the effect of low ISO (NOT just high shutter speed - long exposures etc) but the explanation is too large to fit in the margin. :-)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2014 at 11:37 UTC
In reply to:

Sdaniella: Kodachrome 25 ... ISO 25
I've been asking for 25/12/6 since Canon offered ISO 50
never mind 64/32!

Properly implemented global shutter can provide any ISO you want. Even 0.5. :) That is what current cameras are missing most of all, for that and many other reasons.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 27, 2014 at 21:17 UTC
In reply to:

Just another Canon shooter: It is amazing that the author thinks of the removal of the AA filter as a plus. By this site's own admission, there is little gain in resolution but visible "gain" in aliasing, like here:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=nikon_d800e&attr13_1=nikon_d800&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr16_0=50&attr16_1=50&normalization=full&widget=13&x=-0.6062281934907472&y=0.3464424680377989

The most significant thing, if true, would be the ability of the sensor to register more photons, and the better tonality associated with that.

It is a natural landscape camera, do not shoot brick buildings and people with it (at least clothed people). :-)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 27, 2014 at 21:15 UTC

"Sometimes we need a gentle polish, a tidy-up and a fix for the things that didn’t work so well the first time. And in the D810, that is exactly what we are getting"

How do you know that? Being an untested Nikon camera, it might have problem with focusing, or with oil, or they managed to invent some new problem. :-)

Besides, being intermediate "almost-non-upgrade" means than the next upgrade will be as big as D700 to D800E. You simply get more value being an early adopter after a significant change than early adopter of basically the same old thing - much more life left in your purchase.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 27, 2014 at 21:12 UTC as 85th comment | 2 replies
Total: 2838, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »