rich889

rich889

Joined on Jun 12, 2012

Comments

Total: 22, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-CM1 camera review post (236 comments in total)

Is anyone using the Samsung Galaxy S4 Zoom w 20MP BSI sensor? It seems to only be selling in the UK http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/mobile-devices/smartphones/android/SM-C1150ZKABTU#

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2015 at 15:14 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply
On P1010111 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Surprisingly sharp for 1/13th sec exposure!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 17:16 UTC as 1st comment
On P1010088 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

The lovely detail in the eyelashes shows the sharpness this lens is capable of, as well as the sensor, which seems to be superior to any of the samples shown on the Panasonic G7. Notice that this is shot at f/4 and is still plenty sharp. In the other samples here at f/10 there is noticeable softness.

Diffraction is a major issue for Micro-Four-Thirds, especially for photographers coming from full-frame where f/8 through f/16 are acceptable apertures. Here is a great discussion by Gordon Laing of cameralabs.com on diffraction specifically on m4/3 and the E-M5II. (at the 47min mark)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ojq29oY0o34

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 17:14 UTC as 1st comment
On P1010051 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

This image is a classic case of diffraction, details are there but not crisp, just beginning to soften. F/11 is WAY too small an aperture for Micro-Four-Thirds and I'm surprised that the photographers for DPreview are not aware of this. Here is a great discussion by Gordon Laing of cameralabs.com on diffraction specifically on m4/3 and the E-M5II. (at the 47min mark) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ojq29oY0o34

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 17:04 UTC as 1st comment
On P1010046 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (2 comments in total)

This image is a classic case of diffraction, details are there but not crisp and beginning to soften. F/11 is WAY too small an aperture for Micro-Four-Thirds and I'm surprised that the photographers for DPreview are not aware of this. Here is a great discussion by Gordon Laing of cameralabs.com on diffraction specifically on m4/3 and the E-M5II. (at the 47min mark) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ojq29oY0o34

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 17:03 UTC as 1st comment
On P1010002 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (2 comments in total)

A bit soft overall. Is it diffraction at f/7.1? Sure looks like it. That means that in going from f/3.5 to f/7.1 is not ideal for this lens.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 16:44 UTC as 1st comment
On ISO-400-P1010200 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Nice shot. Shows off the potential of the 12-40mm by avoiding diffraction issues and exhibiting sharpness to the edges and excellent depth-of-field.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 16:42 UTC as 1st comment

Lightroom's way of forcing you to IMPORT photos before being able to work with them is often time consuming and unnecessary. Adobe Bridge on the other hand is much easier to work with, and much faster. It not only that it allows you to open images seamlessly into Photoshop, do PhotoMerge or HDR. You can even do Searches and assign keywords (meta tags) for your searches. Creating masks on-the-fly in Bridge for contrast, or color control, or color balance is easy. And all it can be saved into a DNG file. I came across this link which I found really useful:
http://design.tutsplus.com/tutorials/top-10-reasons-you-should-be-using-adobe-bridge--psd-17633

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2015 at 18:45 UTC as 155th comment
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (432 comments in total)

Nikon did take huge step back by increasing the pixel count from 14MP (of v2) to 18MP. There is noticeably greater noise in the daylight shots of the v3 as compared to the v1 or v2. When they fix one thing in the series 1 they ruin another. Perhaps they just had a mental block of creating a decent mirrorless right from the start?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 18:33 UTC as 43rd comment
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 Review preview (342 comments in total)
In reply to:

Theelderkeynes: Olympus have now posted the much awaited anti-shock firmware 1.1 upgrade for the OM-D E-M10 here:

http://www.olympus.co.uk/site/en/c/cameras_support/downloads/e_m10_downloads.html

This implements electronic first curtain below 1/320 sec shutter speed, thus reducing vibration, in theory, from the shutter.

Perhaps comnsumer pressure does work!

Thanks for the update link. I do see a clear but subtle difference in the E-M10 output with anti-shock enabled.

Direct link | Posted on May 27, 2014 at 21:49 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 Review preview (342 comments in total)

After using the E-M1 with it's fabulous grip and button layout, I found the E-M10's lack of a proper grip and the close layout of the top deck's F2, Movie Record button (which I reassigned to ISO), and the F1, to be too awkward to use. I don't have large hands but found that I had to twist fingers and shift my hand position in to order to activate those controls, especially in using the camera with manual focus lenses, which meant using Magnify. All in all, very disappointing handling. I found that Allison Johnson also complained about “grip” issue in the Handling section, so I see that I am not alone. I did find the image-stabilization to be very effective though. And image quality was excellent.

Direct link | Posted on May 14, 2014 at 14:48 UTC as 27th comment | 2 replies
On Olympus PEN E-P5 Review preview (499 comments in total)

Has anyone with an E-P5 had a positive experience with this “Anti-shock” delay in actual practical use? Or is it too intrusive?

Direct link | Posted on May 11, 2014 at 19:26 UTC as 39th comment | 1 reply
On Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review preview (2081 comments in total)
In reply to:

Frank C.: Great camera but sensor is too small to control dof or generate bokeh properly, I'll stick to my iPhone for everyday shooting and my D610 for the serious stuff

Panasonic's 35-100mm f2.8 is sharp wide open and will give you great bokeh on the E-M1 as will the Olympus 75mm f 1.8.

Direct link | Posted on May 11, 2014 at 18:36 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review preview (2081 comments in total)
In reply to:

Augustus Urbex: Are there any updates on the hot pixel/extreme noise issue in long exposures on the E-M1 yet? I havent heard anything new in a long time. Has Olympus fixed the issue? Were only early EM-1s affected? I want to buy one, but with this issue, that is unlikely.

For those of you who don't know what I am talking about, it is well known that the E-M1 produces an ocean of hot pixels on long exposures of 30 seconds or more at base ISO, and the exposure time needed to make them visible drops by one stop for every stop you bump the ISO. Turning on dark frame subtraction almost eliminates the issue, but this makes star trails, fireworks, bracketed long exposures impossible. Examples can be seen here : http://www.seldomscenephotography.com/2013/11/14/the-olympus-e-m1-and-long-exposures/

DPReview : PLEASE update your review to include information on this issue with sample images. This is a HUGE problem that big review sites need to address and let be known, or Olympus may never fix the issue.

Excellent link, thanks for posting. I too have been on the fence regarding the E-M1. I have rented it and loved it, loved the image quality, EVF, and handling, but this hot pixels issue affects more than just stargazers.

Direct link | Posted on May 11, 2014 at 18:33 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (626 comments in total)

While I really like the idea of the mirror less Nikon v1 I found the sensor to be a bit too small, and with v2 noise definitely increased in the shadows. Now they have boosted the number of pixels again from 14.2 to 18.4 without increasing sensor size. That is just foolish. The excellent features they had in v1 (i.e., silent shutter, intervalometer, etc.) they eliminated from v2. Did they restore them in v3? Nikon is beyond conservative, they ARE afraid to challenge their own line of DLRS with a premium quality mirrorless while at the same time misjudging who this camera is for. Overpricing it does not help.

I should also say that I've used the v1 and v2 to photograph wildlife with the Nikon DX 55-300mm. And while they look ridiculous with normal size lenses the results can be impressive at 16 x 20 inches. Nikon really does not have a clue who their potential market is.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 20:52 UTC as 38th comment | 1 reply
On Nikon 1 V3: a quick summary article (596 comments in total)

While I really like the idea of the mirrorless Nikon I found the sensor to be a bit too small, and with v2 noise definitely increased in the shadows. Now they have boosted the number of pixels again from 14.2 to 18.4 without increasing sensor size. That is just foolish. The excellent features they had in v1 (i.e., silent shutter, intervalometer, etc.) they eliminated from v2. Did they restore it in v3? Afraid to challenge their own line of DLRS with a premium quality mirrorless? Nikon's motto: running scared.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 20:42 UTC as 23rd comment

The sense that I came away with in this interview that Nikon is extremely complacent. For instance, Nikon does NOT want to create a high quality mirror-less camera because it might detract from their DSLR revenue so instead they blame the American public. Denial to cover mediocrity. They ignore the fact that the move towards mirror-less is a growing market, and that the picture quality of Nikon 1 v1 and v2 is indeed INFERIOR to APS-C and even Micro Four Thirds. Nikon has not been an pioneer in the digital age for over 15 years, but the recent falling-off of quality (as shown by problems with the D600) is troubling, and is a shame for those of us who have used Nikon equipment for decades.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 21, 2014 at 16:08 UTC as 22nd comment | 8 replies

Nikon has been reactive rather than pro-active for decades. Regrettably, they are NOT an innovative company, (look at sensor backside-illumination, or sensor-shift technologies, or fast response 2.3 mil dot EVF's) and their poor effort shows in the Nikon 1 v1. I purchased both, the v1 and v2 hoping for something better. Both models have great detail for their sensor size and have some excellent features, but are generally bested by Micro Four Thirds in a shot-by-shot comparison, especially now with the Olympus OM-D E-M1.

Nikon is so afraid to compete against themselves (DSLR's) that it stifles anyone who wants to cheer them on. In the mirror-less market as well as lens construction (in many lenses) they settle for mediocrity.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 18, 2014 at 15:05 UTC as 59th comment | 1 reply
On A sneak peek at our forthcoming camera test scene article (323 comments in total)

the point of the comparison scene is to COMPARE between cameras across the board, OLD AND NEW. The most logical way to do that is to expand the current scene rather than delete it and start with a clean slate.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 11, 2012 at 16:17 UTC as 33rd comment | 7 replies
On A sneak peek at our forthcoming camera test scene article (323 comments in total)

the old scene is preferable because it gave a better mix of detailed actual objects (like the bottle label and Mickey) and printed objects (like the engraving lines of the Apollo). The vast majority of the new seems to be printed objects. Why not just expand the existing scene to give you more distance? That would make it a lot easier for us to compare older cameras (5 years ago) and the newest because it would retain some of the older objects.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 11, 2012 at 15:46 UTC as 35th comment
Total: 22, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »