Dericali

Joined on May 12, 2017

Comments

Total: 281, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

filmluvr: Too bad this can't prevent the Chinese from cataloging tens of thousands of Uyghers using their Cisco surveillance cameras.

hmm, would that be data that you voluntarily uploaded to a US company like Facebook or Google?

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2020 at 09:25 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sigma 85mm F1.4 DG DN Art (319 comments in total)
In reply to:

NexUser: I read somewhere that this lens has better sharpness and bokeh than Sony's GM lens. If the AF motor is also better, than it is a winner already.

"I read somewhere that is has better bokeh"

Not sure I'm going to believe it until I see it.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2020 at 14:23 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sigma 85mm F1.4 DG DN Art (319 comments in total)
In reply to:

panther fan: 85mm might be the most competitive focal length in E-mount. Not only are there many options, none of the options have some sloppy mistake like a slow AF drive, etc…
-The cheapest option is the Viltrox 85mm F1.8 II which is a truly great lens in every regard
-The Sony 85mm F1.8 joins at a competitive price and is all the things you want, sharp, fast, silent, weathersealed etc..
-Samyang tries to compete with their 85mm F1.4 at the same price point and it’s probably their best AF lens today
-Zeiss offers a high priced version with IS
-Sigma offers their old 85mm design
-Sony rounds the top of with their 85mm F1.4 GM
The Sigma really sounds like an amazing lens, but going up against all the competition will be extremely tough. Samyang will be a viscous competitor at its low price, with a fast linear AF drive, great optics and full sealing. I just hope Sigma sells enough of this lens, so that they don’t think their “reasonable size” experiment was a fail, because I truly want more of these

Sony 85 f1.4 autofocus is not that good, really. One of the first GM lenses they produced. It's noisy and a bit slow.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2020 at 13:13 UTC
In reply to:

Dericali: Prior to the R5 launch, the biggest criticism of Canon that you would always hear (and one reason many people would cite when they left the brand) is that Canon would always deliver a 75% amazing product, but then cripple it in some way to avoid cannibalising another product segment.

It's pretty hard to avoid the impression that this has also happened here. They were so concerned that an 8K mirrorless could impact their Cine sales that they made it basically unusable for pros. The only other explanation is extreme incompetence. But deliberate crippling is what people have observed in the past.

Pretty much Canon will have to fix this - drop the R5 price, and launch a R5-II with in-built fan, or they are going to have a limited impact in this segment, which is a shame because they already have the best lenses. The winners will be Nikon and Sony and Panasonic.

Canon should listen to Jeff Bezos:

"It is better to cannibalize yourself; than let others cannibalize you"

The issue is not what it can do, the issue is what it can't do, which is be used reliably for a long day of shooting, changing between video and photos. Imagine using a camera where if you spend longer fiddling around with the White Balance settings etc then your shooting time is limited. According to some of the reviews, it takes 12 hours for the camera to fully cool down.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 19:44 UTC
In reply to:

Dericali: Prior to the R5 launch, the biggest criticism of Canon that you would always hear (and one reason many people would cite when they left the brand) is that Canon would always deliver a 75% amazing product, but then cripple it in some way to avoid cannibalising another product segment.

It's pretty hard to avoid the impression that this has also happened here. They were so concerned that an 8K mirrorless could impact their Cine sales that they made it basically unusable for pros. The only other explanation is extreme incompetence. But deliberate crippling is what people have observed in the past.

Pretty much Canon will have to fix this - drop the R5 price, and launch a R5-II with in-built fan, or they are going to have a limited impact in this segment, which is a shame because they already have the best lenses. The winners will be Nikon and Sony and Panasonic.

Canon should listen to Jeff Bezos:

"It is better to cannibalize yourself; than let others cannibalize you"

The main complaints about the SH1 were its autofocus, not its weight or its weather sealing.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 13:04 UTC
In reply to:

Dericali: Prior to the R5 launch, the biggest criticism of Canon that you would always hear (and one reason many people would cite when they left the brand) is that Canon would always deliver a 75% amazing product, but then cripple it in some way to avoid cannibalising another product segment.

It's pretty hard to avoid the impression that this has also happened here. They were so concerned that an 8K mirrorless could impact their Cine sales that they made it basically unusable for pros. The only other explanation is extreme incompetence. But deliberate crippling is what people have observed in the past.

Pretty much Canon will have to fix this - drop the R5 price, and launch a R5-II with in-built fan, or they are going to have a limited impact in this segment, which is a shame because they already have the best lenses. The winners will be Nikon and Sony and Panasonic.

Canon should listen to Jeff Bezos:

"It is better to cannibalize yourself; than let others cannibalize you"

@Mark3794 they could put in a fan as in the Panasonic SH1

@Feralfoto - you're right. I did read it in an article about Bezos but looks like it's a SJ original

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 12:52 UTC

Prior to the R5 launch, the biggest criticism of Canon that you would always hear (and one reason many people would cite when they left the brand) is that Canon would always deliver a 75% amazing product, but then cripple it in some way to avoid cannibalising another product segment.

It's pretty hard to avoid the impression that this has also happened here. They were so concerned that an 8K mirrorless could impact their Cine sales that they made it basically unusable for pros. The only other explanation is extreme incompetence. But deliberate crippling is what people have observed in the past.

Pretty much Canon will have to fix this - drop the R5 price, and launch a R5-II with in-built fan, or they are going to have a limited impact in this segment, which is a shame because they already have the best lenses. The winners will be Nikon and Sony and Panasonic.

Canon should listen to Jeff Bezos:

"It is better to cannibalize yourself; than let others cannibalize you"

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 09:12 UTC as 287th comment | 11 replies
In reply to:

nabpaw: As a professional I carry 2 cameras anyway.

If you ordinarily carry 2 cameras - one to use, and one in case of a problem, then by that logic you should carry four R5s

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 09:05 UTC
On article Sony a7S III initial review (1774 comments in total)
In reply to:

biggercountry: I think this may be the most relevant camera for the way visual media is consumed today.

Phones are much more competent at photography than video, so the case for owning a dedicated stills camera is getting weaker every year. But ILCs really come into their own compared to phones when it comes to video. Sensor noise is much more noticeable in video than a still image, and phone sensors out themselves with their terrible noise performance in video in any lighting besides daylight. And I’m aware of no phone that can convincingly simulate shallow depth of field in video, if at all.

The a7S III has enough resolution to make it a perfectly competent stills camera for social media, and is (arguably) the most competent and self-contained video-centric ILC currently available. Yes, it’s spendy for the amateur vlogger, but not totally out of reach for prosumers, and is very attractively priced for professionals. I see Sony selling a lot of these.

It's the kind of language that you see coming out of a propaganda unit in a country like Russia or China. I can't see what value it creates for Canon to pay someone to comment continually on their products and on their competitors when most people just ignore their posts because of the obvious bias.

If it was one or two posts, sure that would be fine, but Thoughts R Us must be about 10% of all the posts in the comment. Has definitely ramped up due to the overheating debacle.

Interesting that they can't comment on financial results. Probably that is a compliance issue for Canon, they can pay someone to spam a forum with comments about tech and gear, but not about the financials.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2020 at 11:39 UTC
On article Sony a7S III initial review (1774 comments in total)
In reply to:

biggercountry: I think this may be the most relevant camera for the way visual media is consumed today.

Phones are much more competent at photography than video, so the case for owning a dedicated stills camera is getting weaker every year. But ILCs really come into their own compared to phones when it comes to video. Sensor noise is much more noticeable in video than a still image, and phone sensors out themselves with their terrible noise performance in video in any lighting besides daylight. And I’m aware of no phone that can convincingly simulate shallow depth of field in video, if at all.

The a7S III has enough resolution to make it a perfectly competent stills camera for social media, and is (arguably) the most competent and self-contained video-centric ILC currently available. Yes, it’s spendy for the amateur vlogger, but not totally out of reach for prosumers, and is very attractively priced for professionals. I see Sony selling a lot of these.

What's the deal, Thoughts R Us.

Are you a paid shill for Canon?

Because the way you go on about things, your bias and propaganda, it's pretty clear that no-one can take a word that you write seriously.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2020 at 07:25 UTC
In reply to:

vFunct: I don't know why people care about dual card slots when you can just send backup images through WiFi to your phone as you shoot, effectively making your phone the 2nd card slot...

Yes, I definitely want to fill my phone up with 32 gigs of photos in Raw and jPG format. While draining my camera and phone batteries at the same time.
Yes, I definitely want to rely on my smart phone being with me and powered on at all times so I can take photographs.
SMH

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2020 at 16:28 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony 12-24mm F2.8 review (111 comments in total)
In reply to:

pentaust: Happy with Tamron 15-30 f2.8 (on DSLR): pretty good, and costs 3 times less.

The issue with 15mm for architecture and real-estate is that often you need to shoot with a wider focal length to be able to shoot horizontal. You may be fine with 15-30 (which I have), but for some people (e.g. professionals in certain areas) it's not wide enough.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2020 at 08:30 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony 12-24mm F2.8 review (111 comments in total)
In reply to:

Indohydra: Chris,
You blew it. The whole point of this review should have been : How does it compare to the Sony 12-24 F4. Not a peep.

Of course it is a good lens, maybe even a great one. What would you expect? But going to F2.8 from an F4 is really not that big a deal under most conditions if you already have or can only afford the F4. With your eyes and experience you should have noticed a difference...unless there isn't one. Which would be news in itself. Not a peeper. What gives?

They don't do comparisons, they do reviews. They compare lens to baseline performance factors which are the same for any lens - e.g sharpness, distortion, aberrations. Anyway, most people looking at this lens would probably compare it with the Sigma 14-24.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2020 at 07:01 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony 12-24mm F2.8 review (111 comments in total)
In reply to:

Autoxave: Very nice review and it seems to be a very good lens indeed. However, a 12-24 with a f/2.8, is a niche lens to capture some very special action images using f/2.8. I am not sure if it is advisable for landscape photography other than the fact that you get very good image quality (which can also be achived by other Sony lenses when stopped down). But does that potential gain in image quality justify the price tag?

You don't need wide open for real estate or architecture typically, normally you'd be shooting f8-f11 on a tripod, but this lens has some very nice features, like the sunstars.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2020 at 20:35 UTC
On article Canon EOS R5 initial review (1768 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sarman 2525: The 8 stop IBIS is really cool.
Its a big advantage for Canon.
This is something Sony will never come close too because their mount is too small.
If you look at the Sony mount, it already covers the far corners of the sensor.
https://static.bhphoto.com/images/images500x500/sony_alpha_a7r_iv_mirrorless_1591795350_1526353.jpg
This is a real problem. It means the camera cannot shift the sensor without the corners getting blocked even more.
If you've ever seen a video of good 5 axis IBIS in action it really has to move the sensor around.
So Sony is stuck with very ineffective IBIS that doesn't work well at all during video.
Watch any comparison video and you'll see how bad Sony IBIS is, and sadly it can't get any better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvytGuUEQeU

Just get two then. Problem solved

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2020 at 14:49 UTC
On article Sony 12-24mm F2.8 GM sample gallery (84 comments in total)

Pretty average set of photos, to be honest. A lens like this has some pretty obvious uses where it could shine - architecture, interiors, landscape, cityscapes....

But there's none of that here. Many of these shots could have been taken with a 28mm lens... Also tip for the photographer - keep verticals straight unless there is a particular reason not to.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2020 at 19:31 UTC as 19th comment
In reply to:

io_bg: Real estate shooters will now have a new favorite lens.

Sure, maybe in 5% of your real estate shots you may want to use a very wide angle lens where the distortive effective can be used creatively.
But the simple truth is that you can shoot an entire house using a 15 or 17mm lens, but you can't shoot an entire house using a 9mm lens uncropped without it misleading people that view the listing. As is evident in the interior sample photo.

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2020 at 06:20 UTC
In reply to:

io_bg: Real estate shooters will now have a new favorite lens.

The temptation to shoot wider in real estate is always there (and strong), but ultimately I believe it back-fires on agents because it creates false expectations in potential buyers, who may view the images and then travel to view the property, only to be quite disappointed. That then harms their trust in that particular agent.

Once you've done enough of it you can pick what angle of view a real estate photographer has used, and so estimate the actual size of a room, but unfortunately many people still get fooled by wide angle.

Normally around 16-17mm is considered fair representation from a professional standpoint, but the Laowa 15mm would squeeze in because lack of distortion, i.e. keeping the verticals straight.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2020 at 10:08 UTC
In reply to:

io_bg: Real estate shooters will now have a new favorite lens.

A bit wide really, unless you're shooting cropped. Their 15mm Zero D lens would be a better option. 'Honest' real estate photography is normally no wider than 16-17mm because of the false sense of space it creates (which ultimately disappoints potential buyers).
Good for architecture though where you want to produce a creative wide angle.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2020 at 16:07 UTC
In reply to:

zsedcft: I must be missing something about this. The Mashable article was a piece praising female photojournalists and bringing attention to the issues that they care about and she wouldn't let them use a picture she has already used on Instagram? They gave full attribution so it's not like they used the image without credit.

I understand the legal arguments but why would she have a problem with it in the first place? It's basically free advertising with no downside.

If I was the editor of Mashable I would have just found someone else. I can't imagine they would have to contact many people before someone agreed to be featured.

To be clear, they shouldn't have used an image after being told not to use it. It just sounds like a strange situation to begin with.

@Stevo23 - no, $50 is the kind of low-ball offer that a media organisation might offer to a photographer to use a photograph say in an article (it would make sense for the media company if it's a gallery type article with 10 photos- $500 in total). Some photographers might say yes, for example if it's an image they've already sold multiple times, then it's just passive income.

But if photographer is planning to sell that image or use it in a competition, then they may want to sell it or offer it exclusively. (Publishing a photo on instagram or their own website often wouldn't count for these purposes.) Hence why they might turn down an offer to pay for rights to use a photo. And that's why a media organisation should respect the photographer's wishes, as it may harm future earnings.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2020 at 14:37 UTC
Total: 281, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »