RPJG

RPJG

Joined on Nov 4, 2011

Comments

Total: 410, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (594 comments in total)
In reply to:

RPJG: "However, the +/- exposure compensation button on the top plate doesn't work in M mode"

How does something like that get past the QA and "common sense check" processes? Seems ludicrous.

Mind-boggling. I'd love to hear Chuck (or someone) explain how they arrive at these (seemingly?) idiotic decisions.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2016 at 09:54 UTC
In reply to:

Potemkin_Photo: they need 50 1.2 FF lenses.

mosc, I'd never thought about that. Do you know of anywhere I can view video with narrow DOF, to understand what it's like?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2016 at 03:57 UTC
In reply to:

Yoggie: Smart move. They cannot compete with the cheap knockoffs on the low end so they are better off sticking with the high end. The difference between a knockoff and the Hero+ LCD is inconsequential for the casual user butt the difference between the Hero4 and even the best knockoff is huge for a pro user.

Mister Roboto: Huh?

You say "I would bet my Panny GF7 with WA lens will produce clearer video even if it has only 1080p capability."

Well... of course. But can you strap a GF7 to your surfboard or bike or helmet?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2016 at 03:13 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (594 comments in total)
In reply to:

matthew saville: I dunno, I always HATED how my Nikons would allow the metering bias to be altered in M mode, it was freaking annoying to shoot in A (Av) for a certain scene, then switch to M and have the same +1.3 still dialed in. In fact isn't the whole point of using "M" mode to be able to ALWAYS visualize your choice to be at +1.3 or whatever? IMO it's one of the most bone-headed ideas of modern photography to think that folks would want to let such compensations out of their sight for even five minutes.

I don't understand - it seems you're a professional photographer, but you can't see use cases for this method?

There's *so many* instances where you want control over aperture and shutter speed (for the obvious reasons), but you want auto-exposure (for speed of shooting), but also want EC (for obvious reasons).

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2016 at 03:07 UTC
In reply to:

The Silver Nemesis: New (Sony) vision: "Beat Leica!"

Thematic: you mean, they could *not* care less.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 08:57 UTC
In reply to:

Androole: It's fantastic technology, but I think that anyone hoping it will debut before 2020 in a Micro Four Thirds camera are going to be disappointed.

I am one of those people who will disappointed, because it's a lovely system and it could really use another 1-2 EV of dynamic range, which is really the only thing holding it back for me.

Hopefully the system is still alive and kicking in 4 years and we don't only see such a sensor in $50,000 Varicams...

Androole, why not use some subtle HDR for those cases?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 05:22 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (594 comments in total)
In reply to:

RPJG: "However, the +/- exposure compensation button on the top plate doesn't work in M mode"

How does something like that get past the QA and "common sense check" processes? Seems ludicrous.

plevyadophy, did they really remove that function? I'll never understand why functions like that (which cost nothing to implement, especially if they're accessed via menus instead of physical buttons) are removed.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 05:09 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (594 comments in total)
In reply to:

RPJG: "However, the +/- exposure compensation button on the top plate doesn't work in M mode"

How does something like that get past the QA and "common sense check" processes? Seems ludicrous.

Ken, get over it, it's just terminology.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 05:08 UTC
In reply to:

thx1138: So finally Sony announces fast lens for it's E mount FF cameras and the fantasy that this is a lightweight system is now dispelled. Sony deliberately only released slow lenses when the A7 twins first launched to con people into how small and light this system is compared to DSLR. The A7R II comes along almost 50% heavier than A7R and now we finally see their fast lenses as heavy or heavier than DSLR FF equivalents. So A7R II + 70-200 only weighs a few hundred grams less than a D810/5DsR + 70-200, but will handle worse.

wombat661: that's because they obviously *are* smaller and lighter, *and* have all the other advantages people mention (facts, not opinions), as well as disadvantages like battery life.

Just because a MILC can be nearly as large as a DSLR when you attach a large professional wide-aperture lens to it, doesn't negate any of that. Surely that's not hard to grasp. The rest of the time, and especially with walk-around lenses, the package is massively smaller.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 07:13 UTC
In reply to:

adengappasami: common. Car that big, even original A7 will focus them in track. Just saying.

Why do people write "Common" when they mean "Come on"?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 01:59 UTC
In reply to:

focuspulling: I'm surprised by how insistent folks are here about the size issue. Yes, Micro Four Thirds is a smaller sensor, but Panasonic deserves lots of credit for being first-to-market with mirrorless, portable, CONTINUOUS f/2.8 aperture zoom lenses that are not priced into the stratosphere. Their G lenses, especially 12-35mm and 35-100mm, are a dream team.

Someone in one of my camera user groups said it best: evidenced by the launch of the a6300 simultaneously today, which is a jaw-dropping bargain, it's clear that Sony is in a panic to keep its coffers full from high-tier revenue, while its margins on electronic bodies is slipping away (just like HDTVs and smartphones where they can't make their big wealthy margins anymore). All the marketing jargon about these lenses is motivated by profit, to justify dramatically inflated pricing on these "G-Masters," but actual tests will mean everything.

Abortabort, for many use cases, the RX10 II can't compare to a system with much-better autofocus capabilities and lenses you can zoom quickly. Still a nice camera though!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 01:39 UTC
In reply to:

thx1138: So finally Sony announces fast lens for it's E mount FF cameras and the fantasy that this is a lightweight system is now dispelled. Sony deliberately only released slow lenses when the A7 twins first launched to con people into how small and light this system is compared to DSLR. The A7R II comes along almost 50% heavier than A7R and now we finally see their fast lenses as heavy or heavier than DSLR FF equivalents. So A7R II + 70-200 only weighs a few hundred grams less than a D810/5DsR + 70-200, but will handle worse.

If you're not conned, then why are you complaining about it?

Obviously a mirrorless system is larger when you choose to use large-aperture lenses. But f you only have one system, like most people do, then with a mirrorless system you have the best of both worlds; a much-smaller system with one set of lenses, and a slightly- smaller system when using large-aperture "professional" lenses.

To complain about that win-win situation is to entirely miss the point of mirrorless (including the fact that you're overlooking the other advantages of mirrorless systems). Incredible.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 01:31 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (594 comments in total)
In reply to:

thx1138: So why am I reading on other sites that dpreview aren't impressed with the 1D II AF and think the Nikon D5 is much better.

Rishi that would be awesome. Any such setup, if designed and implemented well and/or updated over time, would last you many a year - maybe making the initial investment justifiable?

Of course, designing such a beast to cater for the inevitable critics would be an interesting task!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 11:20 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (594 comments in total)
In reply to:

RPJG: "However, the +/- exposure compensation button on the top plate doesn't work in M mode"

How does something like that get past the QA and "common sense check" processes? Seems ludicrous.

Why do so many people not understand the use-case for exposure compensation in M + Auto ISO mode? And seriously Ken, who cares whether the combination of M and Auto ISO is "really" Manual?

Anyway, even if you don't understand it or use it, the point remains - it's ludicrous that the feature is there, but doesn't use the +/- exposure button!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 14:16 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (594 comments in total)
In reply to:

RPJG: "However, along with 4K capture, the 1D X II includes tools to grab 8.8MP frames from its 4K files: at which point the decision to save every frame as an individual JPEG makes slightly more sense."

Does this mean it makes it *easier* to grab a frame from a video?

Surely you can grab a frame from *any* video, using the right program - or are there limitations with that process?

Thanks gents.

I understand a little about shutter angles, but as Dr_Jon says, if you're taking video for the purpose of extracting stills, presumably you can set the shutter speed to your liking (within limits set by the frame rate) - at least on some cameras?

Re extracting stills from non-MJPEG videos, can't that be done using programs such a Premiere Pro etc, even with less-amenable codecs?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 14:03 UTC
On article Key features explained: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

RPJG: Does anyone know why the AF module only covers "only" a relatively small part of the frame? Would it be prohibitively expensive to implement a larger module? Presumably bird/sports/etc photographers would appreciate the ability to track objects outside that central part of the frame.

On a related note, if every pixel is split into two separate photodiodes, does anyone know why "only" 80% of the frame is available for focus using DP AF?

Thanks!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 13:58 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (594 comments in total)

"However, along with 4K capture, the 1D X II includes tools to grab 8.8MP frames from its 4K files: at which point the decision to save every frame as an individual JPEG makes slightly more sense."

Does this mean it makes it *easier* to grab a frame from a video?

Surely you can grab a frame from *any* video, using the right program - or are there limitations with that process?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 08:18 UTC as 93rd comment | 6 replies
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (594 comments in total)
In reply to:

matthew saville: Lastly, holy crap, in-viewfinder face detection AF! Finally! I hope they hit the nail on the head first try, though, it took Nikon a while to perfect it. Sounds from initial tests that this may not yet be the case for Canon. (And if it was Rishi doing the testing, I trust it! ;-)

BTW, did any of the testers notice whether or not Canon has added face detection to image review as well? I gotta say, I'm absolutely and utterly spoiled by Nikon's face-detection during 100% zoom, AFTER taking a picture. It has vastly improved my focus / keeper rate, and my wedding clients' experience, when shooting general candids from the waist-up even of 5-7+ people...

How does face detection in image review help your keeper rate? Serious question, trying to understand how you use it. E.g. do you see when there have been focussing errors, and adjust the focus mode thereafter, or some such?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 08:00 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (594 comments in total)
In reply to:

matthew saville: I dunno, I always HATED how my Nikons would allow the metering bias to be altered in M mode, it was freaking annoying to shoot in A (Av) for a certain scene, then switch to M and have the same +1.3 still dialed in. In fact isn't the whole point of using "M" mode to be able to ALWAYS visualize your choice to be at +1.3 or whatever? IMO it's one of the most bone-headed ideas of modern photography to think that folks would want to let such compensations out of their sight for even five minutes.

Are you saying you don't understand why anyone would want exposure compensation in M/AutoISO mode?

Or do you mean that you'd prefer that any such adjustments should be reset to 0 when changing back to non-M modes?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 07:57 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (594 comments in total)

"However, the +/- exposure compensation button on the top plate doesn't work in M mode"

How does something like that get past the QA and "common sense check" processes? Seems ludicrous.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 07:47 UTC as 96th comment | 13 replies
Total: 410, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »