Leandros S

Joined on Jan 22, 2013

Comments

Total: 1624, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon EOS R5 vs. R6: What's the difference? (253 comments in total)
In reply to:

I have a dream: "Canon's EOS R5 and R6 are designed to act as mirrorless versions of the hugely popular EOS 5D and EOS 6D"
I cannot agree with that. R6 sounds 100x more promising than 6D.
Except for the pixel count and the digit '6', these 2 cameras have nothing in common.

You may also want to keep in mind that the original 6D was released in 2012, and the Mark II was little more than a slight spec bump - updated to newer image processor, a few more megapixels, a few more focus points, slightly higher continuous drive and frame rate in video and a stereo microphone instead of mono. That was it, as far as I can recall.

I don't think they could have very easily made that same camera as a mirrorless and released it successfully in 2020.

The point I'm personally pondering is whether I can see the same audience buying this camera that might have bought the 6D. I think there is a slight shift there, mostly in terms of being more video-centric. That may simply reflect shifts in the market generally, though, and therefore the audience. Fewer people shooting stills, more people shooting video? Just a guess. But more video would help with differentiating cameras from smartphones.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2020 at 16:26 UTC
On article Canon EOS R5 vs. R6: What's the difference? (253 comments in total)
In reply to:

Helen: Regarding the construction of the two cameras, the Canon UK's full specifications for each on their website are interesting and detailed, and suggest that they are not as similar as this article suggests (unless they have it wrong of course, in which case, apologies!).

For the R6 it says:
"Magnesium Alloy chassis, outer panels are polycarbonate resin with glass fiber"

Whilst for the R5 it says:
"Magnesium Alloy body and Chassis with some components consisting of polycarbonate with glass fibre"

No idea why one entry is in American spelling and the other in UK spelling though...!

The R6 wording is NOT a copy and paste from the RP. The R5 description would be appropriate for the original EOS R too.

Hard to tell if it's just different versions of the same original text, they revised one copy and forgot to revise the other, or if there is an actual difference in materials.

Sure would be good to have that clarified.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2020 at 16:15 UTC
On article Canon EOS R5 vs. R6: What's the difference? (253 comments in total)

"The R6's AF is rated as working in light as low a -6.5EV when used with an F1.2 lens, or -5EV in video mode. The R5 is rated down to -6EV in stills and -4EV in video, again with an F1.2 lens attached."

It seems curious that the lower-priced camera would focus better in low light. Is there any technical reason given for this - pixel pitch, perhaps?

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2020 at 14:14 UTC as 59th comment | 2 replies
On article Canon EOS R5 vs. R6: What's the difference? (253 comments in total)

"or experience with providing tools to wedding photographers who can't risk moiré creeping into critical images,"

You need to finish that sentence on page 2.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2020 at 14:00 UTC as 61st comment | 1 reply
On article Hands-on with Canon's new RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

DuxX: Nice Canon, really nice. After body crippling era is over now it is time for a new one.... Lens crippling era. Bravo!

Why this lens is f2.0? Why not f1.8? Yes, I know... because you must to cripple aperture to give us crippled macro. Okay!

Now we need to choose between sledge hammer lens at f1.2 and crippled partially useful 85mm f2.0. Or maybe.... a completely new system. I think that this last is best choice.

Do you realise that Zeiss Macro Planar is corporate branding? There is nothing academic about it just because it's Zeiss.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2020 at 13:31 UTC
On article Hands-on with Canon's new RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

DuxX: Nice Canon, really nice. After body crippling era is over now it is time for a new one.... Lens crippling era. Bravo!

Why this lens is f2.0? Why not f1.8? Yes, I know... because you must to cripple aperture to give us crippled macro. Okay!

Now we need to choose between sledge hammer lens at f1.2 and crippled partially useful 85mm f2.0. Or maybe.... a completely new system. I think that this last is best choice.

blackcoffee17: Yes, there is such a thing as 1:1 being true macro, but there are also people who have been so taken in by decades of marketing that they will never admit this point. I seem to recall that this exercise had come up before, and if I'm not mistaken, there were quotes posted from various reputable books on macro.

The bottom line is, it does matter when you need a repro lens. Only 1:1 is repro, anything else leaves you unable to reproduce the same framing on the same sheet size.

If you choose not to care, that's fine, but please call it a close-up lens. Thank you.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2020 at 12:54 UTC
On article Hands-on with Canon's new RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

DuxX: Nice Canon, really nice. After body crippling era is over now it is time for a new one.... Lens crippling era. Bravo!

Why this lens is f2.0? Why not f1.8? Yes, I know... because you must to cripple aperture to give us crippled macro. Okay!

Now we need to choose between sledge hammer lens at f1.2 and crippled partially useful 85mm f2.0. Or maybe.... a completely new system. I think that this last is best choice.

@Alam12: Getting closer to subject would work a whole lot better if this were a true macro.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2020 at 15:39 UTC
On article Hands-on with Canon's new RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

DuxX: Nice Canon, really nice. After body crippling era is over now it is time for a new one.... Lens crippling era. Bravo!

Why this lens is f2.0? Why not f1.8? Yes, I know... because you must to cripple aperture to give us crippled macro. Okay!

Now we need to choose between sledge hammer lens at f1.2 and crippled partially useful 85mm f2.0. Or maybe.... a completely new system. I think that this last is best choice.

@Maxxum Fan: The 100-500 is also an f7.1.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2020 at 15:37 UTC
In reply to:

PLShutterbug: $3,300.
No monitor
No hot shoe
12MP
Global e-shutter only
No removable storage
$3,300. No sale.

Calphate: how did you come up with that notion? Global shutter means no movement distortion, unlimited X-sync speed, etc. E-shutter is a different matter - there will no doubt be further tests of whether this one also affects bokeh in the same way e-shutters on some other cameras do.

But global shutters are the holy grail. Nobody wants "jello" rolling shutters.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 09:34 UTC
In reply to:

JasonTheBirder: The problem with a camera that needs an app for certain features (even though it can be used without the app) is that four years down the line when mobile OSes are updated, the app might not even work any more if the startup ceases to exist and doesn't update it.

Doesn't need the mobile app, works with desktop operating systems as well. Camera is entirely operable on its own, read the review.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 09:09 UTC
In reply to:

bskbo: I really don’t understand all the negativity here. This is a new company that has done something amazing. They build a new digital rangefinder camera in a time that traditional camera brands are going down because off the ever declining market for digital camera’s. They try to merge the smartphone that’s killing off the traditional camera with a camera that offers the traditional experience, combined with the modern need to instantly share.
What they’ve done is amazing.
Is it expensive? Yes. As I’ve stated elsewhere in my country I can buy a new Leica M-E typ 240 for the same price. But I can also understand that people with an interest in photography that are looking for this combination of camera and smartphone will be more interested in this than a Leica.
Let’s be more positive and supportive of this amazing archievement.

As of the last revision of their website in February, prior to them rehauling it for the launch, it stated that the BATTERY *IS* INTERCHANGEABLE. With the reviewer making a comment to similar effect, I'm going to assume the battery is still swappable as major hardware design changes since February, just before launch, would be highly unusual.

The specs now state that it is an NP-FW50 battery, fairly generic now, but originally a Sony design.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 09:06 UTC
In reply to:

PaloAltoMark: I'm not a fan of any device that relies on a connection to a smart phone to work. The operating systems for phones change all the time. If Pixii goes out of business, who is going to update the Pixii app to pull photos from the camera to the phone? Nobody. And from what I can tell, there is no other way to get photos out of the camera. Then you've got a $3K paper weight.

Why "seriously"? Isn't that exactly what you asked for:

"off the shelf non oem lith-ion batteries"

It seems to me that that's what the NP-FW50 is or has become, for all intents and purposes.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 09:01 UTC
In reply to:

Johannes Zander: Looks nice. But APS-c for that price , no exchangeable memory card or battery, not for me. A used Leica would be my choice if I want a rangefinder.

As of February, the Pixii website was still stating that the battery would be swappable, and the reviewer made a comment that suggests that was still the case on the review unit as well. Unlikely that they completely rehauled the hardware design when they were probably struggling to get things going at all, due to COVID.

So until I hear directly from Pixii or an actual hands-on reviewer that the battery is not swappable (why would that be the case when they had a working, swappable design?) I'm going to assume it can be swapped.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 08:59 UTC
In reply to:

Tibor1: Leica, beware!!!

Leica has the pocket change to buy this company if they see fit. If money is the object, that is...

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 07:41 UTC
In reply to:

Ingo70: Had a good laugh when reading the specs.
Why don't you write more about the Viewfinder, the most important part of such a camera?

Framelines are listed in this early coverage:
https://breakfastographer.wordpress.com/2018/10/23/rangefinder-pixii-to-cost-half-of-a-leica-pair-with-smartphone/

Just checked the spec sheet, info hasn't changed.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 07:39 UTC
In reply to:

il_alexk: Built-in battery in $3000 camera? No worries, just buy a new camera when the battery dies. Simples!

The battery is a *removable* NP-FW50, easy to obtain and used in many peripherals (lighting units, external displays, etc.)

DPReview should have really consulted the spec sheet first rather than relying on earlier coverage of a prototype.

The spec sheet is easy to find, not long or difficult to read imo:
https://pixii.fr/specifications

A little fact checking in today's general "climate"? Can I get an Amen on that?

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 07:35 UTC
In reply to:

Mindprison88: Strange to see that all the included samples were shot an ISO of 320, even those in broad daylight. I've never seen that before.

My guess is the electronic shutter is fast enough that no lower sensitivity is needed. At 16k to 32k, most commonly used (fastest) electronic shutter speeds can compensate for bright daylight even with fast lenses.

So this camera shifts the onus of correct exposure a little away from the sensitivity setting and towards shutter speed (in spirit like Av with fixed ISO). The only settings I have seen on photos of the camera are M and A.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 07:26 UTC
In reply to:

PaloAltoMark: I'm not a fan of any device that relies on a connection to a smart phone to work. The operating systems for phones change all the time. If Pixii goes out of business, who is going to update the Pixii app to pull photos from the camera to the phone? Nobody. And from what I can tell, there is no other way to get photos out of the camera. Then you've got a $3K paper weight.

Some corrections:
- From what I've read, connecting to a computer works as Matt describes
- Battery is removable; in fact, it's a relatively standard NP-FW50, originally designed by Sony but now also used in lots of third-party peripherals

Source:
https://pixii.fr/specifications

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 07:12 UTC
In reply to:

GlobalGuyUSA: Is this the Avocado Toast of Hipster cameras?

Chimping with your phone while holding a camera...? Great. Not! I feel like they lost a HUGE OPPORTUNITY by leaving out a screen -- or a screen module that you can plug in, optionally. Why wouldn't you spend $2 to put a USB-3 port and contact points for an optional screen to plug-in?

Hell you don't even have to make the screen -- just advertise it as a 2nd project & have a kickstarter for that too. Or release the specs & let a 3rd party sell a screen or touch screen.

I think the whole intention of cameras like this and the Leica M10-D is to not have you chimping at all. Like we didn't used to when all things were film. Chimping only happens because highlights are so fragile on digital.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 06:46 UTC
In reply to:

Ranger 9: "The frame size is too small. The image quality is too low. The shutter speed range is too limited. It's ridiculously expensive - just a toy for rich people. The manufacturer has no camera experience. And who's going to fix it when it breaks?" I feel like it's 1924 and I'm reading sneers directed at a silly little camera just introduced by an obscure German microscope maker called E. Leitz...

Is that really so, Mr Bolton? I'm thinking film, processing chemicals, darkroom hardware... all of these would be required.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 06:27 UTC
Total: 1624, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »