JhvaElohimMeth

JhvaElohimMeth

Lives in Italy Capri, Italy
Works as a Professional photographer
Has a website at www.sposarsiacapri.it
Joined on Dec 5, 2012
About me:

www.davide-esposito.squarespace.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davideespositocapri/

Comments

Total: 170, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (415 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alphaville: I’d buy m43 because less separation at high apertures can be good.

In fact, I'm so comfortable shooting with my panny 20mm at 1.7...
So light, so good!

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2017 at 16:33 UTC
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (415 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZeBebito: Even though the lens can isolate subjects, the images still look flat. Like 17mm flat. Sorry m43 boys.

The only REAL premium rendering lenses for micro 4/3, for my taste, are the voigtlander 0.95 lenses.

However in a more general way, I like the compactness of the system, not those giant and pricey beasts.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2017 at 15:58 UTC

improvement in raw files too?

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2017 at 16:31 UTC as 14th comment
On article Canon EOS M100 review (791 comments in total)
In reply to:

brownie314: I already have a 22/2 and a seldom used EOS M original (doesn't get much use because I also have a Nikon Coolpix A). I wonder if this now M100 body will make the EOS M experience worth carrying it? I do love the 22/2.

@Martin JC: thanks, I tried GR once but it seemed to not lock even on easy subjects where my old GX1 does istantly.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2017 at 11:30 UTC
On article Canon EOS M100 review (791 comments in total)
In reply to:

brownie314: I already have a 22/2 and a seldom used EOS M original (doesn't get much use because I also have a Nikon Coolpix A). I wonder if this now M100 body will make the EOS M experience worth carrying it? I do love the 22/2.

@Carey do you advice Coolpix A over the Ricoh GR in terms of autofocus?

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 14:27 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix G9 sample gallery (147 comments in total)
In reply to:

JhvaElohimMeth: Is there something to do for the sad adobe standard color profile (the only one avaiable)? It makes me mad.

With Panasonic I can't. With Oly, Canon and Nikon yes

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 19:23 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix G9 sample gallery (147 comments in total)
In reply to:

JhvaElohimMeth: Is there something to do for the sad adobe standard color profile (the only one avaiable)? It makes me mad.

I know, mine is a general question :)

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 17:35 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix G9 sample gallery (147 comments in total)

Is there something to do for the sad adobe standard color profile (the only one avaiable)? It makes me mad.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 17:24 UTC as 34th comment | 6 replies
On article Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM sample gallery (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

JhvaElohimMeth: @dpreview team: stop using adobe standard color profile, it's terrible on Canon.

@Carey Rose: Camera standard is better on the 5D mk IV?

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 18:55 UTC
On article Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM sample gallery (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

D135ima: Looks good. With IS and weather sealing its true "strong lens". Dear Canon, please make "strong" 50 , 135 and ultra wide angle prime.

sure, but in a general way I like more the rendering of the 1.4

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 16:55 UTC
On article Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM sample gallery (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

D135ima: Looks good. With IS and weather sealing its true "strong lens". Dear Canon, please make "strong" 50 , 135 and ultra wide angle prime.

I've never liked the colors and the microcontrast of the Canon 50mm 1.8, and the STM has the same drawbacks. On the sheet the 50mm 1.4 is weaker, but in the field it clearly shows why it costs more than the nifty fifties.

In the right light condition is beautiful even at 1.4

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 16:44 UTC
On article Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM sample gallery (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

JhvaElohimMeth: @dpreview team: stop using adobe standard color profile, it's terrible on Canon.

Mhm, yes. It's terrible on all the cameras. On Nikon it's more tolerable according to my taste. However it's a shame Panasonic doesn't communicate color profile to adobe... Olympus does, Nikon does, Canon does... I love my GX1 but managing its adobe standard raws is a bit frustrating in some light condition.

My next micro 4/3 body will be an Olympus one for this reason.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 14:26 UTC
In reply to:

JhvaElohimMeth: I tried it. Ok quality for the price (nothing astonishing), but the software is so lacking and I noticed severe banding...

I don't know, it seemed to lack that magical leica look

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 14:23 UTC
On article Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM sample gallery (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

D135ima: Looks good. With IS and weather sealing its true "strong lens". Dear Canon, please make "strong" 50 , 135 and ultra wide angle prime.

@ozturert: you're goddamn right.
I would like a new 50mm 1.4
the old one is weak between 1.4 and 1.8 and focusing is a real pain

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 14:21 UTC
On article Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM sample gallery (323 comments in total)

@dpreview team: stop using adobe standard color profile, it's terrible on Canon.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 13:20 UTC as 103rd comment | 9 replies
On article Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM sample gallery (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

Greg VdB: Before people start commenting on poor colors: using the Adobe Standard profile with Canon cameras is a great recipe for dull, flat images.

(Depending on the scene, I will start processing from Camera Standard/Landscape/Neutral/Portrait, but *never* Adobe Standard...)

Well said sir. When using Adobe Standard the image looks so flat, lacking contrast and always got a magentish dominance. I usually start processing with camera standard, sometimes camera portrait.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 13:14 UTC
In reply to:

JhvaElohimMeth: I tried it. Ok quality for the price (nothing astonishing), but the software is so lacking and I noticed severe banding...

However, if I have to be completely honest, this camera isn't worth over 4k bucks, at least for me. The lens is very nice, but not at the level of their M mount lenses. In a parallel universe I would buy it for 3K to shoot weddings, handling is nice, and the finder too.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 12:23 UTC
In reply to:

JhvaElohimMeth: I tried it. Ok quality for the price (nothing astonishing), but the software is so lacking and I noticed severe banding...

@shigzeo: Fuji and Sony are bad too for me.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 12:16 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: JhvaElohimMeth:

What firmware were you using?

I've never noted banding except over ISO 12,800.

"software"? You mean you didn't like the UI? Many do.

answered you in the other post

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 01:53 UTC
In reply to:

JhvaElohimMeth: I tried it. Ok quality for the price (nothing astonishing), but the software is so lacking and I noticed severe banding...

Software is just poor, the interface. I don't know the firmware since I brought some raw(s) home from a leica shop stand in Turin.
The best things in this camera are of course the lens and the handling.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 00:51 UTC
Total: 170, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »