SkySpades

Lives in Wisconsin
Joined on Feb 13, 2015

Comments

Total: 98, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Hazel123: Boo hoo. First Contax went bust on me and now Olympus! Just when I'd found a satisfactory replacement for a Contax G1 with small sharp lenses! I can't see there'll be ongoing investment in new products. Some of these big organisations just buy a failing company as a tax loss. Vaio isn't heard of any more.

It certainly may be the case, but why pay to license the Olympus name at this point then?

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2022 at 14:25 UTC
In reply to:

dc8b707: The R6's 20MP sensor rules out this camera for me, which is too bad since it otherwise seems pretty darn good for stills. I routinely crop most of my photos and reducing overall pixels (vs my Canon 5DM3) is not the direction I want to go.

That's why they make the R5.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2020 at 12:37 UTC
In reply to:

Parshua: Very good camera for photography, but it still puzzles me why Nikon, using the same processor, decided to gimp the video. It's just waste of material. If it sells more than the Z6, let it.
They just made sure whoever was in the market for a cheaper FF camera with video to not buy this one, and a LOT of newer generation camera buyers need them for video. Just how out of touch can a company be?
Another surprise is the weight. Anyone here knows why a plastic body would weight the same as a metal one? Thicker body to compensate the weakness?

@Parshua - same processor doesn't equal same readout speed. The Z6 sensor is BSI which gives a faster readout allowing for full-frame 4k.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2020 at 20:21 UTC
In reply to:

Parshua: Very good camera for photography, but it still puzzles me why Nikon, using the same processor, decided to gimp the video. It's just waste of material. If it sells more than the Z6, let it.
They just made sure whoever was in the market for a cheaper FF camera with video to not buy this one, and a LOT of newer generation camera buyers need them for video. Just how out of touch can a company be?
Another surprise is the weight. Anyone here knows why a plastic body would weight the same as a metal one? Thicker body to compensate the weakness?

And there are just as many (and likely more) who want a full-frame body without having to pay for extra processing power or a better sensor in order to include better video specs.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2020 at 12:21 UTC
On article Nikon Z50 review (1979 comments in total)
In reply to:

dexsax: Why did z50 with the same score (85%) as the Canon M6 II receive the Silver Award whereas the Canon received the Gold Award? Both cameras are in the same class and nearly the same price.

Read the conclusion, it explains exactly why the Z 50 received the silver rather than gold award.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2020 at 17:09 UTC
On article Nikon Z50 review (1979 comments in total)

I just bought the Z50 with the two kit lenses and FTZ adapter. My main uses will be a lightweight travel body and using the 300 PF and 500 PF lenses with the 1.4x TC which sometimes needs major AFMA on DSLR's, mirrorless eliminates the AFMA problem.

My secondary use (and why I bought the kit lenses) is for my 6 year old to have a body and lenses he can handle when he wants to go out and shoot with me. In my brief testing of the 16-50 and 50-250, they both punch a little above their weight and size (and price) when it comes to image quality - if you can handle the slow apertures at maximum focal length.

While nothing about the Z50 absolutely blows me away, I'm extremely pleased with the form factor and the fact that the menu system is very similar to my D500. Kit lenses that actually have really good image quality is also a plus, but not necessarily for my needs.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2019 at 20:22 UTC as 167th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

RvEL: Great camera with some solid specs.
However, NO 24p is a NO GO....

Why does Canon always seems to feel the need to cripple their cameras, when it comes to video?

24p is being added via a firmware update.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2019 at 14:29 UTC
In reply to:

steelhead3: Since when is a lens a marvel when it uses a consumer build of external zooming? I am sure it will be a good lens though weather sealing may be a problem.

You mean like the Canon 100-400 II, considered a pro lens and is fully weather sealed when a filter is used. I see the 100-400 II used all the time in all weather conditions. Is a 24-70 f/2.8 a consumer lens? I don't know of a single one that doesn't have an extending zoom.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2019 at 20:10 UTC
In reply to:

SkySpades: While the Ra doesn't take away from Canon's other priorities, the price point seem a bit high. One can purchase an EOS R for $1799 right now and have the stock IR cut filter removed professionally for about $300.

Let me rephrase...a professional third party modification.

Better?

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2019 at 00:00 UTC
In reply to:

SkySpades: While the Ra doesn't take away from Canon's other priorities, the price point seem a bit high. One can purchase an EOS R for $1799 right now and have the stock IR cut filter removed professionally for about $300.

Right. They removed the stock filter and replaced it with a modified filter. A filter that doesn't have nearly the Ha sensitivity that you would get from having a professional modification - at least that was the case with the 60Da.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2019 at 22:47 UTC

While the Ra doesn't take away from Canon's other priorities, the price point seem a bit high. One can purchase an EOS R for $1799 right now and have the stock IR cut filter removed professionally for about $300.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2019 at 21:25 UTC as 50th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Gesture: Excellent idea and value.
Also, in five years, the virtue of Nikon Z and Canon R will be moot points-they will be the standard advanced amateur/pro go-to cameras. Folks will wonder what all the fuss was about.

Idea, yes. Value, no

You can buy an EOS R for $1799 right now and pay $300 to have the stock IR cut filter removed.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2019 at 21:20 UTC
In reply to:

worldaccordingtojim: So the EOS R is 1,799, and this is $2500? So Canon is charging $700 to remove the IR filter. Anyone that would buy this, is more clueless than Canon at this point. This Camera will be $1799 in the matter of months. So anyone that buys this will immediately lose $700 in resale value.

A number of businesses will remove an IR filter for $250-$300 that will give better Ha sensitivity than the Ra.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2019 at 21:18 UTC
In reply to:

LMOE: Thanks, Canon!

Glad you have your priorities straight. The faithful have been absolutely screaming for this.

Throwing in a different filter and updating the software to allow for 30x live view doesn't exactly take away from other priorities. The camera body and all internals were released in the past. It essentially costs Canon nothing in R&D (time or yen) and they make a little extra money from it.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2019 at 21:15 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: The Canon 70-200mm 2.8 L RF looks way better than the Tamron with plasticky build and no lens stabilization.

Why a study? Look at what the manufacturers do...every Sony E-mount lens over 150mm has OSS whereas below that only about 1/2 of the lens lineup has OSS. Care to take a guess as to why that is?

Physics the reason. When using IBIS with a 200mm lens it needs to move four times as far and as fast to compensate for shake than it would with a 50mm lens because of the much smaller field of view.

Even if Canon had IBIS in their bodies, they would likely still use lens-based image stabilization at longer focal lengths.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2019 at 14:49 UTC
In reply to:

Daft Punk: Camera and lens sales must be dying really fast.

Look at those prices !

The biggest competitor to these lenses are Canon EF lenses on eBay and a R mount native adaptor.

Considering the new technology Canon put in the 70-200 - dual AF motors, floating focus control, etc., it seems the slight price increase over previous 70-200's is warranted.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2019 at 14:17 UTC
In reply to:

Chaitanya S: From the leaked specifications that 70-200mm is really light compared to current lenses of this class. If its true then thats 70-200mm is a game changer.

@QuarryCat - Wait..."Canon can't even play a game" without a great camera, but yet you bring Tamron and Sigma into the conversation?

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2019 at 14:14 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: The Canon 70-200mm 2.8 L RF looks way better than the Tamron with plasticky build and no lens stabilization.

I would still want lens-based IS with a 200mm lens as IBIS isn't very effective at longer focal lengths.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2019 at 14:11 UTC
In reply to:

gameshoes3003: I'm sure this lens will please a lot of Sony users! Too bad they didn't reveal pricing yet.

Seeing the "lock" switch makes me believe that this will be a telescoping design.

Yes, the specs above mention it's an "extending" zoom.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2019 at 04:37 UTC
On article Canon's 32MP chip marks the end of the 24MP APS-C era (492 comments in total)
In reply to:

Brian P Smith: Waiting to see the Scale up to FF for this sensor, as it seems most all sensors are the same "base" wafer scaled up/down (GFX100/A7rIV/X-T3) etc. Should be a ~75mp sensor, no?

Likely closer to 83 MP - 32.5*1.6*1.6.

Canon has patented an 83 MP sensor: https://www.canonrumors.com/patent-83mp-full-frame-image-sensor-from-canon/

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2019 at 13:11 UTC
Total: 98, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »