zakk9

Lives in Thailand Samut Prakan, Thailand
Works as a Graphic designer
Has a website at http://epixx.wordpress.com/
Joined on Sep 18, 2004
About me:

Some Fujis, Nikons and a Panasonic,
and a few Nikkor, Zuiko, Tamron, Panasonic and Zeiss lenses

Comments

Total: 170, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Just what I've always needed, a limited edition tripod. I wonder how I've managed so far without one...

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 00:33 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (691 comments in total)
In reply to:

Osa25: The article maybe focuses a bit too much on the choice of mount and its implications for size.

But this is misplaced given that Sigma also sells the DPQ series of fixed lens cameras which are targeted at high image quality/portability ratio.

So they do have that end of things covered - and are correct to focus elsewhere with this particular product.

If your purpose of buying a camera is to experiment with non-native lenses, this is not the camera for you. If optimum image quality is your target, there's little wrong with Sigma's Art lenses.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2017 at 06:47 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2664 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shiranai: When your brandnew Sony a9 is hardly better than a 4 year old Canon 6D and just looses hands down against Nikon 750D in DR. And those are fullframe entry models.

I've been shooting sports, mainly motor sports, with assorted Nikon bodies for years. Focus on moving subjects was rarely a problem with any of those cameras, dating all the way back to the D2Xs. I've even used the D810 for this purpose, at full resolution and with great results. I struggle to see how the A9 would mean enough improvement over a camera like the D750 to defend the extra $2,500 price per body. Since two bodies would be needed, the savings would be $5,000, which would be enough for a 200mm f/2 which is a stop faster than any Sony lens at that focal length. Add to that the better high ISO quality of the Nikon, and this translates into higher quality images.

With Nikon, I would obviously not buy two D750 bodies, but a D750 and a D500 for faster paced work and extra reach. When using the 200mm, I would be able to reduce ISO number by one stop, giving the D500 the same image quality as the A9.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 05:15 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2664 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shiranai: When your brandnew Sony a9 is hardly better than a 4 year old Canon 6D and just looses hands down against Nikon 750D in DR. And those are fullframe entry models.

The comparison with the D750 made me laugh. The three year old Nikon is in no way a sports photographer's dream of course, but great high ISO has kind of been the sports cameras' tour de force, and it cleans the floor with the more than twice as expensive Sony.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 15:04 UTC
In reply to:

GEONYC: Dear sweet Teila... If you would stop talking about yourself and where you are going and what you are doing and write about the camera and not about what would be "leery"and what you are "not sure of"....
1. the price of the body is said to be, $5,950 add another $3,000-$4,000 for a lens, it would be cheaper than the H'blad X150 and about the same as the FIJI GFX. Don't you think (I am not sure you can think.) they would update it and probably use a Sony sensor and thanks for the good luck wishes from such a LEERY and UNSURE person.. Maybe it's the spike heels. I think you don't know what you are talking about and flip flop all over the place, I am also very LEERY about your future success and you are probably a, "Money Pit"... But I wish you great success in the future with your glitchy brain and your can of worms.

The Leaf backs (60 and 80) are apparently still available for this camera.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 14:04 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (805 comments in total)

To those who would like to have the OM-1 included:
Not a good idea. I loved mine and used it for 30 years, but batteries can't be found anymore, so an adapter is needed.

One camera that should absolutely have been there though is the Nikon F3. It's a legendary camera with professional build quality, manufactured for 21 years, surviving the F4 and mostly the F5 too. Besides the Leica M3, it's the 35mm classic to have, but as opposed to he Leica, the Nikon is a bargain and can easily be found for $2-300,

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 13:52 UTC as 343rd comment | 2 replies
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (805 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: The Olympus XA is a rangefinder?

Yes

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 13:44 UTC
In reply to:

zakk9: I don't mind that dpr writes about the A9, but conveying as "news" the fact that Sony has finally implemented functionality that has existed on pro level cameras for a decade or more strikes me as odd. Even my $900 G85 and slightly more expensive GX8 offer most of these options by pushing a button, flipping a switch or turning a wheel. Most Panasonic and most Nikon cameras that I own or have owned do this. The fact that Sony has relied on deep diving into menus to change primary settings doesn't make the improvement a revolution.

While this article is informative and show some improvements with the A9 compared to previous Sony cameras, the constant flow of articles gives the impression of something revolutionary and new, which it clearly isn't. However, if the Marketing and PR departments at Sony continue their great work, Sony will most certainly gain more market shares.

Example: The silent shutter of the A9 has been described as something revolutionary new. But it isn't. I've used silent shutter with my Panasonic cameras for years. Ok then, I suppose the A9 features less rolling shutter when shooting silent compared to my Panasonics, but I would like to see a direct comparison first. And every time I ask when that particular combination of features is useful, I get the "golf" answer. Fine, so it's a revolution for those who shoot golf tournaments. Most people don't though.

The A9's silent shutter is a revolution only because some A7 models have shutters that are so noisy that it's a bloody nuisance.

Link | Posted on May 3, 2017 at 03:20 UTC
In reply to:

zakk9: I don't mind that dpr writes about the A9, but conveying as "news" the fact that Sony has finally implemented functionality that has existed on pro level cameras for a decade or more strikes me as odd. Even my $900 G85 and slightly more expensive GX8 offer most of these options by pushing a button, flipping a switch or turning a wheel. Most Panasonic and most Nikon cameras that I own or have owned do this. The fact that Sony has relied on deep diving into menus to change primary settings doesn't make the improvement a revolution.

Change between S and C mode on the G85 is by flipping a switch that is under my right thumb. Changing drive mode is by turning a wheel on the top left of the camera. While this operation might take four instead of two tenth of a second, it's they way I've worked shooting sports with Nikon bodies for years. My D2Xs from 2006 works the same way, and the D300, and it's second nature to many if not most sports shooters. The G85 is an amateur body that costs 20% of an A9. The GH3, 4 and 5 have the same layout of course, making it easy to switch between different bodies.

Link | Posted on May 2, 2017 at 12:57 UTC

I don't mind that dpr writes about the A9, but conveying as "news" the fact that Sony has finally implemented functionality that has existed on pro level cameras for a decade or more strikes me as odd. Even my $900 G85 and slightly more expensive GX8 offer most of these options by pushing a button, flipping a switch or turning a wheel. Most Panasonic and most Nikon cameras that I own or have owned do this. The fact that Sony has relied on deep diving into menus to change primary settings doesn't make the improvement a revolution.

Link | Posted on May 2, 2017 at 11:29 UTC as 110th comment | 12 replies

Has dpreview become Sony's new marketing department? 2 A9 batteries to replace 2 Canon LP-E4N? One would easily need 3-5 A9 batteries for each of the Canon ones. And what happened to the 300mm f/2.8 listed under Canon? Sony has one, and it costs $7,500 plus adapter. If it's not on the Sony list, it shouldn't be on the Canon list.

Are you playing games with us, dpreview?

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 12:16 UTC as 215th comment | 3 replies
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1905 comments in total)

Please explain this to:
Olympus E-M1, which at $2,000 has been critisised for being expensive, has similar specs, apparently better weather sealing, fully articulated LCD, dual IS and uses USB-3 vs. the USB-2 on the Sony. How is the larger sensor and lower specs of the A9 worth $2,500 extra for a camera that doesn't even offer the long lenses I would need shooting sports?

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 22:56 UTC as 44th comment | 46 replies
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1905 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cheng Bao: Now I want baby a9. 8fps+, 50buffer or so.
Same battery, 1/3 of price tag.
a7 iii?

Not the battery. That's a major improvement.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 15:35 UTC
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1905 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aitoritu: The price is tagged in pounds, is it an error?

Probably not. It's just an indication that the British will also be allowed to buy it ;)

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 15:34 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Panasonic Leica 8-18mm F2.8-4 (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

Internet Enzyme: Seems slow. F/2.8 to F/4 is a F/5.6 to F/8 full frame equivalent. I do understand that that probably doesnt matter much since this is meant as a wide landscape lens, where long exposures negate the issue and slow apertures are necessary to get everything in focus. But if you plan on using this lens in any other capacity, you will be very disappointed in just how much noise that the lens will produce.

It would be nice if all those who aren't interested in using m4/3 could stop posting their equivalence whining. We've all heard it before. I went from full frame Nikon D810) to m4/3 a year ago, and my photos mostly look the same, but then I don't do much of the artsy shallow DOF junk at f/1.2 and a zillion ISO.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 07:05 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 Review (1189 comments in total)
In reply to:

snapa: It still amazes me how a 'm4/3' camera can cost $2,000 (without any lens), and be considered such a great camera. Once you start adding Pro lenses, then think about how well the IQ is at higher ISO levels with still pictures, it does not make any sense to me.

Maybe if you are looking for a very good 'video camera', it would be a good solution to your problem if you are looking to get very good videos. Still, to me, a m4/3 sensor camera for $4-5,000 (with lenses) that take just OK still pictures seems like quite a bit of money to me IMO, considering its competition with larger senor cameras.

BTW, how may professional videographers seriously look to buy a m4/3 cameras for taking serious video?

The cheaper, smaller GH5 is called G85. I had a GH3 too but have "downsized" to GX8 (primarily stills) and G85 (primarily video).

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2017 at 03:30 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 Review (1189 comments in total)
In reply to:

Narek Avetisyan: Why do they put that side-opening display instead of much more convenient tilting one??? Just look at the 2-axis tilting displays of Fuji X-T2 or Fuji GFX 50s. There is no problem with opening the display when something is connected in to the left side.

Who said that the fully articulated display is the best for video shooting? It's the worst choice possible!!!

"Who said that the fully articulated display is the best for video shooting? "

I say, after using the GH1/2/3 and GX8. I had the E-M1 and hated the tilting display.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 08:49 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 Review (1189 comments in total)
In reply to:

snapa: It still amazes me how a 'm4/3' camera can cost $2,000 (without any lens), and be considered such a great camera. Once you start adding Pro lenses, then think about how well the IQ is at higher ISO levels with still pictures, it does not make any sense to me.

Maybe if you are looking for a very good 'video camera', it would be a good solution to your problem if you are looking to get very good videos. Still, to me, a m4/3 sensor camera for $4-5,000 (with lenses) that take just OK still pictures seems like quite a bit of money to me IMO, considering its competition with larger senor cameras.

BTW, how may professional videographers seriously look to buy a m4/3 cameras for taking serious video?

My current m4/3 camera, the GX8, with 12-35mm and 35-100mm f/2.8 weigh about the same as the D810 that I sold, body only. Add the 24-70mm and 70-200mm f/2.8 and the Nikon is more than three times the weight (Yeah, yeah DOF, equivalence, light gathering... I know all the arguments. I sell images, not arguments.). I've been using m4/3 professionally since the GH1 in 2009, and my m4/3 photos sell just as well as those taken with other brands. Easy choice.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 02:00 UTC
On article At the market: Panasonic GH5 sample video (79 comments in total)

Looks very good to me, tempting.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2017 at 12:10 UTC as 25th comment

And remember: There's a camera in your microwave!

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 16:02 UTC as 7th comment
Total: 170, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »