MSullivan

Joined on Nov 5, 2014

Comments

Total: 149, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article What you need to know about the new Nikon Z5 (304 comments in total)
In reply to:

Flow Friday: "Also good news is that the Z5 shares the same electronic viewfinder as the Z6/7."

Really?
Or is it the same in the way you say the display to be the "same" (which it isn't)?
Resolution-wise the evf is, but what about the optics?

The display and optics are the same.

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2020 at 17:35 UTC

@DPReview, please fix the EVF resolution in the spec list. It's 3.69 million dots not 2.36.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2020 at 23:50 UTC as 40th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

fPrime: The Z 20mm looks like the Z 24mm which looks like the Z 35mm which looks like the Z 50mm which looks like the Z 85mm. What lovely black beer-cans they all look like.

Nikon is now only one prime lens short of letting you carry them around as a six pack! 🤣

I guess Nikon users just like beer.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2020 at 23:01 UTC
In reply to:

Caleido: Am I missing something? This is hailed like a major update that improves autofocus on the Z6/Z7. The only real news is you can start/end AF-tracking with one "OK" button press less. And you can face detect animals, but you need to dive into the menu to toggle between human & animal.

Nothing on the Nikon website says anything about performance or reliability AF improvements.

Nikon tends to not list performance improvements in the release notes. Goodness knows why.

The functionality changes make the tracking mode actually useable now, so that's a big improvement.

There are ways around the menu diving for Animal AF, like My Menu and U1/2/3. It would have been nice if they made it an i menu option though.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2020 at 14:22 UTC
In reply to:

George Zip: With this release and what Sony has achieved so quickly , you fear for the future of Nikon. Especially in the wake of the D6 announcement.

Except this hasn't been released yet. It's all just marketing at this point, and it seems to be working well from the looks of it.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2020 at 03:21 UTC
On article Canon unveils $400 RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM (509 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: slower, slower and slower....I think we will see 24-70/6.3-8 soon for 300 USD...

@unhappymeal What's wrong with that is f/8 is in cell phone territory. Cell phone cameras are almost at f/1.4 now, and the sensors are about 5 stops off FF, which puts them around f/8 equivalent. Plus, with the various computational tricks available to them they're probably even a bit better than that. If you're going to get a similar image from your phone why bother getting a camera, even if the lens was only $300?

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2020 at 15:36 UTC
In reply to:

Discombobulate: Currently I shoot 4K 10bit 4:2:2 use up 10G space every 3.5 minutes video. So can I expect 8K is 20G every 3.5 minutes? What is 8K video use for?

Wouldn't it be 4x for 8K , so 40G every 3.5 minutes?

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2020 at 15:22 UTC
In reply to:

AdventCal: I bet beta testers have this in their hand very quickly. This will be the hot camera to have all all the major upcoming sporting events.
My guess is video will be excellent too. Canon wants people to buy this more expensive camera over the less expensive models.
Also, this may kill off the A9. Its sales have been very low. And remember, due to its stacked sensor, it has always had low DR, several EV below other FF cameras, so Canon sensors have always been competitive. Between Sony's poor colors, poor ergonomics, poor pro support system, and now poor specs, no serious photographer would switch.

The A9's stacked sensor with its fast readout is also what allows it to have a smooth viewfinder experience with no blackout when shooting action though.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2020 at 15:21 UTC
In reply to:

Nicolas Alexander Otto: Damn, these Z lenses are expensive. I payed not even 600€ for my 20mm 1.8 back in the day. Guess I will stay with FX a bit longer until there is a used market.

You could also buy a new Ford Mustang for around $3,000 back in the day.

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2020 at 16:48 UTC
In reply to:

Boissez: The 24-200 is the exact same size as the Olympus 12-100 f/4 - I wonder if it is as sharp. If it is it might be the most useful superzoom of any system.

The MTF charts (which DPR failed to include) indicate that the 24-200 is quite a bit sharper than similar Nikon super zooms in the past, like the 28-300 G.

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2020 at 14:30 UTC

@DPReview the 24-200 is rated at 5 stops VR not 4.5 like in your chart.

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2020 at 14:25 UTC as 29th comment
In reply to:

SHood: Hopefully this won't be another DL debacle.

@sirhawkeye64 You can update lens firmware through the Z bodies. They released an update for the 50/1.8 a while back.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2020 at 00:38 UTC

Hope it also comes with a massive cooling fan.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2020 at 02:14 UTC as 170th comment
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: Agreed that nobody should spend a lot on a 50mm-equivalent lens (unless it's super fast) but other than the digression into Canandian exchange rates, why is a video needed for a simple list of pros and cons?

Exactly. Why do we need to spend 6 minutes watching a video when we could skim a pro/con list in less than 1 minute. They should at least include a written summary after the video.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2020 at 03:52 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 S (631 comments in total)
In reply to:

luka3rd: Disappointed...
Waiting for the next version, it WILL be smaller or faster.
Did you see the recessed rear element? That's the proof that they didn't harness the given advantages of the new mount.

Unless you're an optical engineer I'm not sure how you can conclude that.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2020 at 16:29 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 S (631 comments in total)
In reply to:

Youn Chin: The size is ridiculously big for a mirrorless! Missing the point for going mirrorless with this size and weight, IMO.

This sort of lens is built for ultimate image quality and performance, not size and weight savings.

Imagine if they had released a smaller and lighter lens with worse image quality than the F version. The internet would have eaten them alive.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2020 at 18:50 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 S (631 comments in total)
In reply to:

artnaz: I'm curious whether Nikon was "lazy" with the heavily recessed rear element (meaning that they kept the lens element in a similar construction as for the F-mount and just artificially increase the flange focal distance) or that it is physically impossible/difficult to decrease the flange focal distance. If the latter is the case, then we have no benefit for tele-lenses with the Z-mount, in terms of shorter lenses?

I didn't check how Sony does it.

Lens construction is totally different than the F mount versions.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2020 at 18:47 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm F2.8 S (631 comments in total)
In reply to:

ElDiablo73: There's one thing everyone is missing...

S lenses stand for SUPERIOR image quality. If we want professional fast glass physics are physics. We all have the option of carrying non S zooms that perform extremely well and are collapsible and relatively small (or S smaller f/1.8 primes).
Nikon created the f/4s for all the folks wanting a compact system. Now it is time for the big toys, thank you for your understanding.

In addition, the majority of Nikon users (98%) are DSLR owners and they tend to defend them to death against ILS. Now suddenly, everyone has something negative to say regarding the S lenses...

ps. When Nikon presented the f/4: "it doesn't feel solid enough due to the external zoom..." When they presented the 24-70mm S: "We would have preferred an internal zoom..." Now we have a new 70-200 and folks go: "Why don't they make this lens collapsible like Canon..." The human soul is never satisfied...

@wasTF There's nothing similar between the Z and F versions other than a similar size and weight and the fact that it's a 70-200/2.8.

If you want to see a lazy upgrade look at the latest Canon EF 70-200/2.8 III.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2020 at 15:53 UTC
On article Nikon's 70-200 F2.8 for Z-mount to ship in February (226 comments in total)
In reply to:

Discombobulate: The rear element is far away from the sensor, almost like a af-s lens + FTZ setup. The size saving is not optimal.

But you get (seemingly) much improved image quality, at the same price as the previous lens in exchange. Seems like a fair trade.

Also, there may be good reasons why the rear element is where it is in the diagram. Perhaps the rear group moves when focusing/zooming, or maybe it helps correct some kind of aberration. Unless we're optical engineers it's hard to know.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2020 at 15:40 UTC
On article Nikon's 70-200 F2.8 for Z-mount to ship in February (226 comments in total)
In reply to:

muxch: A naive question: how come this lense is basically the same size and weight of the old one with FTZ, whereas with the 24-70 2.8 Nikon was able to shrink it in both terms? Going smaller with the Z7, I would have loved to have something that is also going that direction. To me this lens looks like a gradual improvement over the F lens but not a ground-up recreation.

There's less need to retro focus with wide angle lenses due to the short flange distance in mirrorless, so wide angle designs can theoretically be made simpler/smaller.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2020 at 15:34 UTC
Total: 149, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »