Joined on Dec 13, 2012


Total: 134, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Studio tests and samples: Leica SL (beta) (727 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: DPR, can you answer the speculation about this lens mount being big enough to cover a Leica S sized MF sensor? Kind of goes with it that the lens they released also covers Leica S sized dimensions. I think nobody's doubting the sensor in the SL is FF, just that some future Leica body might feature a larger sensor for this mount...

The Leica S sensor isn't that big. 45*30 is a smaller step up from 36*24 than FF is to APS-C.

I can understand the logic, but at that point there's no reason to not directly go for an S body or, at 1/3rd the price, a Pentax 645Z

Direct link | Posted on Oct 28, 2015 at 19:31 UTC
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1406 comments in total)
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: Well I see the trolls are out in force today. I am also willing to bet that 99+% of the naysayers couldn't afford this camera anyway.

Not to worry folks, it's a Leica, aimed at and for those that can appreciate Leica, and like the opening blurb says, have high credit limits.

Okay. I have 6 M lenses, including the 21mm Summilux and Noctilux ASPH. The Noctilux alone is close to the price of the SL kit. I don't have a digital M but I do own a Bessa R3M.

This camera is hideous and huge. I don't want to be caught dead on the street with this thing in my hand. The SL is as "Leica" as a Dodge charger is of European lineage. Aside from the fps and high-res EVF I don't see a single reason that this camera is better than an A7rII. You can get the A7rII with 4 Zeiss primes for how much this thing is.

The whole kit is not much lighter or cheaper than the 645Z with the 45-85. And if the SL uses the Q sensor, the 645Z's image quality is nowhere close to it. I rest my case.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 05:45 UTC
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1406 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rooru S: Good size. One of my main issues with a7 series is that the only way to handhold it confortably is by buying the vertical grip. Sony must stop their obsession with small bodies and start taking into consideration offering larger bodies (specially since their latest lenses, with the exception of the SEL28F20, are bigger than SLR counterparts.)

If the camera is big by design, there's no way of making it small. The small camera's handling can however be much improved by adding a vertical grip, as you said.

Some of us don't have big hands, and would prefer they keep the cameras small and light. And FE lenses are not generally bigger than SLR lenses. Almost none of the Sony-Zeiss primes are bigger than the SLR equivalents (Yes, Canon has a 40mm F2.8, but it doesn't perform as well as the 35mm FE). The only zoom that's bigger than the Canikon counterpart is the 70-200.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 20, 2015 at 19:37 UTC
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1406 comments in total)

Has anyone handled a 2nd gen Sony body with the 16-35 or 24-70 FE? The combination actually balances pretty well. The 55mm FE balances *amazingly* on the A7rII. The package feels great, almost as if designed specifically for each other.

This is basically magnifying everything by 1.5x. The 24-90 is faster but much, much heavier than the 24-70 FE. The 50mm F1.4 is absolutely massive and I doubt how much better it can be compared to the FE 55. At this size and cost, the SL compares unfavorably to the 645Z on image quality...why would anyone buy it? Leica glass?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 20, 2015 at 18:44 UTC as 468th comment | 2 replies

I honestly don't get the "too expensive" comments in this post. The A7rII alone is $3,200. The Sony 35mm F2.8 is another $600-800, which brings the total price to close to $4,000. For the price of the A7rII body you get effectively the same sensor, with amazing sync speeds, minus IBIS and 4k, and a great F2 Zeiss lens. Sure, it's not for everybody, but neither is any other FF camera.

I've handled the Leica Q and found a lot to be desired. The sensor is okay but not brilliant, dynamic range at low ISO cannot compete with the A7rII and the files are distinctly more noisy than the A7rII files downsized to 24MP. The body is almost as heavy as an M, and operations are just a tiny bit slower at each turn than the new E-mount bodies. Leica's flash system is also pretty miserable compared to Sony. So there are trade-offs...Not to mention the fact that you can't seem to buy a Leica Q anywhere right now. At least you can know for sure that you'll have an RX1II by November if you pre-order now.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 19:13 UTC as 114th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

CaPi: - 3299$ + tax
- viewfinder like that?

What will Europe be paying 4000+€ ?

First time I am actually angry.

Is this a supposed to be funny, Sony?
First The A7x II updates pushing into the super luxury segment - now this?

Who is supposed to pay for that? Is there a market you kept hidden? Will this compensate for all the low and mid-end market lost to smartphones?

This is continuosly moving in the wrong direction. Leica to my mind isnt thriving or leaving a huge market unserved.
This is developed for a chosen few who barely kept this segment alive.

I seriously fear Sony is driving this branch of their corporation into the same mess they did with televisions and smarthphones.
Dont die on us.

How is $3,200 "super-luxury"? A decent super-tele is almost certainly twice as expensive, and the Leica 35mm F2 alone is upwards of $3,000. Photography is an expensive hobby, and much more so for full frame systems.

This is catering to the market who cares about compact, high-performance digital. The low-end is being cannibalized by phones, so this is most likely a pretty smart strategy.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 18:17 UTC
In reply to:

ColdViking: Betteridge's law of headlines: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."

So, no.

There are a few reasons, and a far, far, far better alternative. Reasons:

1/ It runs a mobile chip, the chip will never be able to do what a laptop or desktop chip can do. Want to do RAW? Forget about it. Never going to happen. There is no way the ARM chips are going to be able to power through that.

2/ It runs an operating system designed for a phone. It shows. It doesn't work.

3/ The apps are not there, and due to (mostly) hardware and software limitations of the device, they're never going to be there either.

The alternative, if you want to use a tablet, is a Microsoft Surface Pro. It's a real PC. It blows anything ever created by Apple out of the water for real work. It also isn't all that much more expensive than the iPad pro.

The iPad "Pro" is for those easily separated from their money.

@rkumar These are short tests (and mostly browser-based). The peak processing output of the 6S might be 50% of the SP3, but the SP3 will be able to sustain that level over a much longer session.

The reviewer also didn't specify which model of the SP3 was used. I suspect the figures are from the 2g/i3 or 4g/i3 versions, which would largely explain the lower browser-test scores.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2015 at 23:24 UTC
In reply to:

Mister Roboto: Not sure if this is a joke review or not. iPad for serious imaging pro? Even Surface Pro 3 and then 4 are much better yet I wouldn't use them for editing purposes.

This is just an oversized crippled Candy crush playing device nothing more, nothing less. Oh wait, there is more.. some use this for taking photos and selfie too. =D

I actually use my SP3 regularly for processing on-the-go. It's perfect for working on a plane or train, and the screen is good enough for editing for displaying online...Post calibration mine reports ~99% sRGB, and the i7 version is powerful enough to push most raw files.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2015 at 23:18 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7R II Review (2077 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: While you wait for DPR's final review check out TheCameraStoreTv's review. It is very long and comes in two parts
"Blows the Canon 5DRS out of the water" they also do a short head to head shoot out with the Canon. A lot of people are genuinely excited about this camera.

@marshwader I've taken the A7 and A7s out in mild rain multiple times with FE and adapted lenses. No issues to date.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2015 at 20:27 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7R II Review (2077 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boxbrownie: It is a shame it has all the controls of a point and shoot........

Which P&S has five customizable buttons and three customizable dials? I'd love to buy one.

The mode dial lock is a huge pain and IMO on a camera of this level there is no need for mode dials at all, but that's one issue on a camera with professional, robust controls.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2015 at 20:23 UTC
In reply to:

Retzius: So now the purchase price is called a "pledge"?

Instead of a customer you are a "backer"?

Now THATS good marketing.

PD regularly uses Kickstarter as a funding source. You get a 6-month delay in delivery in exchange for 25% off retail price.

As far as I'm concerned I am a customer when I'm dealing with established brands on Kickstarter. The process is not different from a regular pre-order, but easier because you go through only one website.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 24, 2015 at 20:18 UTC
On article Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II (1119 comments in total)
In reply to:

artnaz: Can someone tell me how is life for Sony FE users regarding remote flashes? I have been using Nikon's CLS, Phottix Odin, Pixel King Pro (and a bit Canon RT), but I have no idea how it is for Sony...

I am seriously considering selling my beautiful Nikon gear and buying this Sony, but the flashes are very important for my portrait photography!

My flash system is full Sony, and I use an on camera flash for an optical trigger. As of now I think that is the only option for remote triggering. I've found the F20m to be quite reliable under almost all circumstances, but I have a cable for single off-camera flash work in daylight.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 01:48 UTC
In reply to:

Thoughts R Us: Ask any photographer for advice on which camera to buy and they will usually tell you to consider not just a spec sheet on a camera body, but the lens ecosystem, ergonomics, handling, ease of use, support, etc. In all of these areas Canon excels and beats the competition.

In one area of sensor measurement, DR at low ISO, Canon falls short of Sony Exmor sensors. That's something, but not everything. Most pro's still go with Canon.

But yet there's this two pronged attack on Canon: one, on sensor DR. Two, regarding this fetish over mirrorless (note that most mirrorless cameras don't have better DR than Canon.) Yet even with that, Canon still maintains market share.

Actually, most do. Virtually all APS-C and FF mirrorless bodies have better DR than the best Canon body at low ISO.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 07:03 UTC
In reply to:

exapixel: Sony's FF strategy means I can either put a big heavy lens on a somewhat smaller camera, or become a combination of scavenger and Paralympian as I find old film glass to mount on third party adapters. What a mess.

Old glass? Voigtlander has an entire library of current production M mount optics from 12mm to 90mm. Zeiss M lenses from 35mm and upwards also play nice with the A7 sensor. The native 35mm F2.8 is a tiny, sharp lens perfectly good for street photography.

So yes, you could put one of these on a camera half as heavy as a 5dmk3, still saving quite a bit of weight, or put the 35mm F2.8/28mm f2 on and have a light, small full frame kit, or buy an adapter and use virtually any lens ever made.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2015 at 19:30 UTC
In reply to:

matthew saville: Wow, I bet that 28mm + 21mm adapter is heavier, more expensive, and WAY less sharp than the Nikon 20mm f/1.8 G. Further proof that Sony's business tactic is STILL to just throw BS at the wall and see what sticks...

It is a stopgap measure. What do you expect? And the 28mm is a budget offering which should not be compared to a Nikon flagship lens. Adding the adapter might be more expensive, ut that gives you the versatility of two lenses.

The 20mm F1.8G is a slow, soft lens with ugly bokeh compared to the Leica 21mm F1.4 Summilux. And it's heavier. Does this mean Nikon is throwing BS at the wall?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2015 at 19:25 UTC
In reply to:

ZhanMInG12: Nice, but too expensive. I can get a secondhand D800 and do a filter conversion for ~25% cheaper, the AA filter would be taken out during the conversion and I can specify the IR filtration strength of the filter stack.

Perhaps worthwhile for professional astrophotographers, though...

@dad_of_four No, but the results are similar. You could of course go and get a new D800 and do the conversion ($300-400) and still save when compared with this model. It won't make much sense, since when you do the conversion you also lose the warranty.

But the ability to select your own IR filter strength cannot be understated. I'm sure what the D810a uses is good for most astro people, but when you get into these circles there are many specific needs involved...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 05:20 UTC

Nice, but too expensive. I can get a secondhand D800 and do a filter conversion for ~25% cheaper, the AA filter would be taken out during the conversion and I can specify the IR filtration strength of the filter stack.

Perhaps worthwhile for professional astrophotographers, though...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 04:28 UTC as 90th comment | 6 replies
On article A second glance: two takes on the Leica X (400 comments in total)
In reply to:

pdelux: Pretty average images. I dont mean to be disrespectful, but those images could've come from any camera released in the last 5 years. Where is this "leica" look Leicaphiles are always raving about?

So have you seen a picture made by, say, the 21mm Summilux or the Noctilux ASPH? Or from the S system?

If you want to criticize Leica, at least make sure you know what Leica can offer.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2014 at 02:59 UTC
On article A second glance: two takes on the Leica X (400 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: "But it also made the camera seem a little delicate, and fragile."

Seemed plenty solid when I handled it.

NB: Magnesium can feel a lot like plastic.

"However, it does seem a bit blasphemous to put the revered 'Summilux' name on a lens that isn't an f/1.4, and sometimes is closer to the brightness of an Elmarit than anything else."

The above quotation is preposterous. I suggest that the author use the newish 50mm M f/2.0 APO Summilux (8,000usd) and not get lost in the names, but concentrate on results.

Ummm...the F2.0 is a summicron, not a summilux.

Leica has never used the summilux designation on its own cameras for any lens other than F1.4. So yes, it is a bit blasphemous.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2014 at 02:57 UTC
On article Canon announces EOS C100 Mark II (279 comments in total)

Is the EVF really only 1.23 MP? This is a 5 grand camera...the least Canon can do is get a decent 2MP EVF.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2014 at 07:16 UTC as 58th comment | 1 reply
Total: 134, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »