mikegt

Lives in United States Thousand Oaks USA, CA, United States
Joined on Aug 29, 2003

Comments

Total: 291, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

mkowalski: In Poland, the price difference between new Z5 and new Z6 is ... 80USD. From customer standpoint Z5 makes no sense. Its impossible to recommend this camera to anyone just because Z6 is still available and superior and price difference is negligible.

> with the Z6 you'd have to spend a lot extra on an XQD memory card

Interestingly Nikon added an SD slot to the Z6 II.

I agree with mkowalski. The Z6 is much better than the Z5, IMHO the Z5 does not deserve the DPR Gold award.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2020 at 19:12 UTC
On article Canon EOS R5 review (2499 comments in total)
In reply to:

mikegt: I am not going to let Canon make me into a chump by giving them $4,000 for a poorly made unreliable camera. Look at the tear-down photos, they are pretty shocking - Canon made no engineering effort to control heat in the camera. Even worse, it appears to be a deliberate choice on their part to protect the upcoming $20,000 Cinema Series 8K camera that has already been shown in prototype form. Why else would they stick a cheap fragile micro HDMI connector on a $4,000 camera ? Even the $1,000 Panasonic G9 comes with a full-size HDMI port.

Here is something pretty mind-blowing about Canon sticking a cheap fragile micro HDMI port on the $4,000 R5. Canon makes a line of very inexpensive (cheap) camcorders called "Vixia" starting at $249. Every Vixia, including the $249 model, comes equipped with the much larger "mini" HDMI port, which is far more robust than the micro version. Also many of the cheap Canon "pocket super zoom" cameras from years ago came with the larger better mini HDMI version ports. But for some reason they couldn't do it on the R5. This is a textbook case of artificially crippling something for absolutely no reason other than greed and disrespect for the customer.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2020 at 00:25 UTC
On article Canon EOS R5 review (2499 comments in total)
In reply to:

mikegt: I am not going to let Canon make me into a chump by giving them $4,000 for a poorly made unreliable camera. Look at the tear-down photos, they are pretty shocking - Canon made no engineering effort to control heat in the camera. Even worse, it appears to be a deliberate choice on their part to protect the upcoming $20,000 Cinema Series 8K camera that has already been shown in prototype form. Why else would they stick a cheap fragile micro HDMI connector on a $4,000 camera ? Even the $1,000 Panasonic G9 comes with a full-size HDMI port.

> But, again, what do you know.

Bud! Apparently I know at least more than you. I know enough to avoid rewarding Canon for their bad behavior. Enough to know that Canon has no respect for their customers - they wield the cripple hammer more often and more harshly than any of the other major camera makers.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2020 at 00:08 UTC
On article Canon EOS R5 review (2499 comments in total)
In reply to:

mikegt: I am not going to let Canon make me into a chump by giving them $4,000 for a poorly made unreliable camera. Look at the tear-down photos, they are pretty shocking - Canon made no engineering effort to control heat in the camera. Even worse, it appears to be a deliberate choice on their part to protect the upcoming $20,000 Cinema Series 8K camera that has already been shown in prototype form. Why else would they stick a cheap fragile micro HDMI connector on a $4,000 camera ? Even the $1,000 Panasonic G9 comes with a full-size HDMI port.

> do not realize how wrong they are.

Really ? Was I wrong about what the the tear-down revealed, even though the tear-down and analysis was done by a trained electrical engineer? Am I wrong about the HDMI port not being full-sized, even though the specs and pictures of the body clearly show that it is the fragile "micro" version? You know that thing is directly attached to the camera's main board, right? When you break it, the repair cost will literally be half the price of your camera.

Perhaps what is happening here is that you blew $4,000 on this camera by buying it before the reviews and overheating reports started coming in. Now you're stuck with it, and feel the need to defend it no matter what. Whatever you say bud!

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2020 at 19:48 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: For those who like to say that since this doesn't have a BSI sensor it's a no go for them, and they are entitled to their opinions. But just consider the D750, which also didn't have a BSI sensor, had an AA-filter, but is among one of the NIkon's top pro-sumer enthusiast cameras for the past 5-6 years with IQ that rivals even an A7 II or III. I think the real telling will be in the comparisons between the Sony's, Z6 and D750/D780 among others, of which I'm sure will be coming along shortly....

Here's another way to think about it... you can buy a 5-6 year old D750 (new) for $100 more than you can buy this camera, which seems to inherit a lot of the characteristics, and adds things like IBIS, faster max shutter speed, EFCS, etc, at the cost of no top deck plate, and cropped 4k among other "minor" details.... (of course, the D750 didn't even shoot 4k though so cropped 4k IMO is better than no 4k).

wjan: Every camera reviewer on the planet has stated that the newer Sony BSI sensors are superior in low light to the six year old sensor in the D750, which is based on an older non-BSI Sony sensor - the sensors Nikon uses are all made by Sony. If you don't believe all these reviews then it is just a waste of time sending you the comparisons, since you won't believe them either.

It must drive Nikon fanpersons nuts to know that Nikon has to rely on Sony to make their sensors. This also means that no Nikon camera can ever have a better sensor than what Sony puts into their own cameras.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2020 at 10:04 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: For those who like to say that since this doesn't have a BSI sensor it's a no go for them, and they are entitled to their opinions. But just consider the D750, which also didn't have a BSI sensor, had an AA-filter, but is among one of the NIkon's top pro-sumer enthusiast cameras for the past 5-6 years with IQ that rivals even an A7 II or III. I think the real telling will be in the comparisons between the Sony's, Z6 and D750/D780 among others, of which I'm sure will be coming along shortly....

Here's another way to think about it... you can buy a 5-6 year old D750 (new) for $100 more than you can buy this camera, which seems to inherit a lot of the characteristics, and adds things like IBIS, faster max shutter speed, EFCS, etc, at the cost of no top deck plate, and cropped 4k among other "minor" details.... (of course, the D750 didn't even shoot 4k though so cropped 4k IMO is better than no 4k).

Alex tK: Since you are just another stupid nasty troll, do the world a favor and firmly shove your comments back up where they came from. Don't bother to reply, as I will not read it.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2020 at 09:54 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: For those who like to say that since this doesn't have a BSI sensor it's a no go for them, and they are entitled to their opinions. But just consider the D750, which also didn't have a BSI sensor, had an AA-filter, but is among one of the NIkon's top pro-sumer enthusiast cameras for the past 5-6 years with IQ that rivals even an A7 II or III. I think the real telling will be in the comparisons between the Sony's, Z6 and D750/D780 among others, of which I'm sure will be coming along shortly....

Here's another way to think about it... you can buy a 5-6 year old D750 (new) for $100 more than you can buy this camera, which seems to inherit a lot of the characteristics, and adds things like IBIS, faster max shutter speed, EFCS, etc, at the cost of no top deck plate, and cropped 4k among other "minor" details.... (of course, the D750 didn't even shoot 4k though so cropped 4k IMO is better than no 4k).

> Still no photos, ey?

Use the Studio scene tool you idiot.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2020 at 23:54 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: For those who like to say that since this doesn't have a BSI sensor it's a no go for them, and they are entitled to their opinions. But just consider the D750, which also didn't have a BSI sensor, had an AA-filter, but is among one of the NIkon's top pro-sumer enthusiast cameras for the past 5-6 years with IQ that rivals even an A7 II or III. I think the real telling will be in the comparisons between the Sony's, Z6 and D750/D780 among others, of which I'm sure will be coming along shortly....

Here's another way to think about it... you can buy a 5-6 year old D750 (new) for $100 more than you can buy this camera, which seems to inherit a lot of the characteristics, and adds things like IBIS, faster max shutter speed, EFCS, etc, at the cost of no top deck plate, and cropped 4k among other "minor" details.... (of course, the D750 didn't even shoot 4k though so cropped 4k IMO is better than no 4k).

> can't see any meaningful difference between D750 and Sony a7 III at any ISO

I think you are seeing only what you want to see. While you are correct that the D750 does better in raw mode, the Studio Scene reveals that even in raw the Nikon starts to look noisier at ISO 12800 compared to the Sony A7 III. Also remember that the D750 tops out at 51200 ISO, while newer cameras from both Canon and Sony are able to go much higher.

The D750 high ISO JPEGS look just dreadful. I think Nikon made a mistake here by not putting more effort into making good looking JPEGS; Sony really excels at this. After all, most amateurs don't want to spend a lot of time making JPEGS from raws for every picture they take. Sony cameras are not perfect, but they do a great job making JPEGS. They are very usable "as is" which is a big benefit for folks who just want good looking pictures without having to spend a lot of time post-processing them.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2020 at 23:51 UTC
In reply to:

blink667: Question: is the an IQ difference between the Z6 vs Z5 considering the different sensors?

> So rude

Fully justified. Thoughts R Us is a Canon fanperson who is a serial liar and total nut case. He constantly spams comment threads to bury any negative comments about Canon; lookup his profile and you can see that he has posted over 6,000 comments; most of them in just the last few months.

He routinely attacks me because I have the nerve to stand-up to this cyber bully and expose what he is about.

In conclusion, my reply to him was in fact the most polite one I could think of for someone like him.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2020 at 01:42 UTC
In reply to:

blink667: Question: is the an IQ difference between the Z6 vs Z5 considering the different sensors?

> ISOs of over, say 6400

You didn't go over ISO 6400 because D750 images really start to deteriorate above that ISO.

And by the way, I used to own a D750, and I used to work as a professional photographer; so I know what I'm talking about here.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2020 at 01:40 UTC
In reply to:

flip 21: no 6K, no 4K 60, no 1080p 240fps, low soft quality 1080p, the same crappy stabilization, no HFR like the Sony Zv1... Crap!! An expensive camera with a fully articulated LCD. The A7 III with a selfie LCD LOL

"Tru" employer Canon is the worst crippler of cameras ever. Let's review just some of Canon's greatest crippling jobs:

All Canon 5D, 6D and Rebel models: Fuzzy pixel-binned video, heavy rolling shutter.
Canon M models - video cropped, heavy rolling shutter.
Canon R - giant 1.8x video crop, rolling shutter.
Canon R5 & R6: Massive over-heating, fragile HDMI mini-ports, no high-rez pixel shift stills mode.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2020 at 05:39 UTC
In reply to:

flip 21: no 6K, no 4K 60, no 1080p 240fps, low soft quality 1080p, the same crappy stabilization, no HFR like the Sony Zv1... Crap!! An expensive camera with a fully articulated LCD. The A7 III with a selfie LCD LOL

There must be a patent out there for controlling menus via a touch screen on a camera, and Sony does not want to pay whoever has the patent.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2020 at 22:45 UTC
In reply to:

blink667: Question: is the an IQ difference between the Z6 vs Z5 considering the different sensors?

> Put the D750 images up against any modern camera and
> the vast majority cannot tell the difference.

No, not true. It's just you, you can't see anything at all due to your head being perpetually stuck up in a very dark place...

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2020 at 21:20 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: For those who like to say that since this doesn't have a BSI sensor it's a no go for them, and they are entitled to their opinions. But just consider the D750, which also didn't have a BSI sensor, had an AA-filter, but is among one of the NIkon's top pro-sumer enthusiast cameras for the past 5-6 years with IQ that rivals even an A7 II or III. I think the real telling will be in the comparisons between the Sony's, Z6 and D750/D780 among others, of which I'm sure will be coming along shortly....

Here's another way to think about it... you can buy a 5-6 year old D750 (new) for $100 more than you can buy this camera, which seems to inherit a lot of the characteristics, and adds things like IBIS, faster max shutter speed, EFCS, etc, at the cost of no top deck plate, and cropped 4k among other "minor" details.... (of course, the D750 didn't even shoot 4k though so cropped 4k IMO is better than no 4k).

Alex tK = Sore Loser

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2020 at 22:09 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: For those who like to say that since this doesn't have a BSI sensor it's a no go for them, and they are entitled to their opinions. But just consider the D750, which also didn't have a BSI sensor, had an AA-filter, but is among one of the NIkon's top pro-sumer enthusiast cameras for the past 5-6 years with IQ that rivals even an A7 II or III. I think the real telling will be in the comparisons between the Sony's, Z6 and D750/D780 among others, of which I'm sure will be coming along shortly....

Here's another way to think about it... you can buy a 5-6 year old D750 (new) for $100 more than you can buy this camera, which seems to inherit a lot of the characteristics, and adds things like IBIS, faster max shutter speed, EFCS, etc, at the cost of no top deck plate, and cropped 4k among other "minor" details.... (of course, the D750 didn't even shoot 4k though so cropped 4k IMO is better than no 4k).

Alex tK: You have already lost this argument by a mile. Go find somewhere else to be a troll.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2020 at 06:22 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: For those who like to say that since this doesn't have a BSI sensor it's a no go for them, and they are entitled to their opinions. But just consider the D750, which also didn't have a BSI sensor, had an AA-filter, but is among one of the NIkon's top pro-sumer enthusiast cameras for the past 5-6 years with IQ that rivals even an A7 II or III. I think the real telling will be in the comparisons between the Sony's, Z6 and D750/D780 among others, of which I'm sure will be coming along shortly....

Here's another way to think about it... you can buy a 5-6 year old D750 (new) for $100 more than you can buy this camera, which seems to inherit a lot of the characteristics, and adds things like IBIS, faster max shutter speed, EFCS, etc, at the cost of no top deck plate, and cropped 4k among other "minor" details.... (of course, the D750 didn't even shoot 4k though so cropped 4k IMO is better than no 4k).

> Urbex Mark & Alex tK: ISO 51000; come on. Who actually uses that?

How sad. Evidently you two have never owned cameras that perform well in low light at high ISOs. Just because you have gear that can't do the job doesn't mean the rest of us are stuck at your level. For those of us who own modern gear, like one of recent A7 cameras, ISO 25600 and even 51200 are very usable. After all the A7III goes up to 204800 ISO, so 51200 is only 1/4 of it's maximum!

Time for you guys to get modern cameras...

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2020 at 21:22 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: For those who like to say that since this doesn't have a BSI sensor it's a no go for them, and they are entitled to their opinions. But just consider the D750, which also didn't have a BSI sensor, had an AA-filter, but is among one of the NIkon's top pro-sumer enthusiast cameras for the past 5-6 years with IQ that rivals even an A7 II or III. I think the real telling will be in the comparisons between the Sony's, Z6 and D750/D780 among others, of which I'm sure will be coming along shortly....

Here's another way to think about it... you can buy a 5-6 year old D750 (new) for $100 more than you can buy this camera, which seems to inherit a lot of the characteristics, and adds things like IBIS, faster max shutter speed, EFCS, etc, at the cost of no top deck plate, and cropped 4k among other "minor" details.... (of course, the D750 didn't even shoot 4k though so cropped 4k IMO is better than no 4k).

You skewed the comparison by picking an ISO of only 6400 !

Try the comparison at 51000 ISO (see link below). The A7III utterly destroys the D750 at ISO 51000 - also does the same even at ISO 25000 !

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=nikon_d750&attr13_1=sony_a7iii&attr13_2=apple_iphonex&attr13_3=apple_iphonex&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=51200&attr16_1=51200&attr16_2=32&attr16_3=32&normalization=full&widget=1&x=-0.5387100886963534&y=0.2961927065054472

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2020 at 03:50 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: For those who like to say that since this doesn't have a BSI sensor it's a no go for them, and they are entitled to their opinions. But just consider the D750, which also didn't have a BSI sensor, had an AA-filter, but is among one of the NIkon's top pro-sumer enthusiast cameras for the past 5-6 years with IQ that rivals even an A7 II or III. I think the real telling will be in the comparisons between the Sony's, Z6 and D750/D780 among others, of which I'm sure will be coming along shortly....

Here's another way to think about it... you can buy a 5-6 year old D750 (new) for $100 more than you can buy this camera, which seems to inherit a lot of the characteristics, and adds things like IBIS, faster max shutter speed, EFCS, etc, at the cost of no top deck plate, and cropped 4k among other "minor" details.... (of course, the D750 didn't even shoot 4k though so cropped 4k IMO is better than no 4k).

> I call BS on that.

And we call BS expressing an opinion with no facts or actual knowledge to back it up. I used to own a D750, and I currently have several Sony A7 models. The D750 does not do any where near as well as the A7 models in low light.

The D750's video capabilities also do not compare, it does fuzzy pixel-binned 1080p only.

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

sirhawkeye64: For those who like to say that since this doesn't have a BSI sensor it's a no go for them, and they are entitled to their opinions. But just consider the D750, which also didn't have a BSI sensor, had an AA-filter, but is among one of the NIkon's top pro-sumer enthusiast cameras for the past 5-6 years with IQ that rivals even an A7 II or III. I think the real telling will be in the comparisons between the Sony's, Z6 and D750/D780 among others, of which I'm sure will be coming along shortly....

Here's another way to think about it... you can buy a 5-6 year old D750 (new) for $100 more than you can buy this camera, which seems to inherit a lot of the characteristics, and adds things like IBIS, faster max shutter speed, EFCS, etc, at the cost of no top deck plate, and cropped 4k among other "minor" details.... (of course, the D750 didn't even shoot 4k though so cropped 4k IMO is better than no 4k).

> Most couldn't tell the difference between a photo taken with a D750
> and an A7III

Dead wrong as usual. Your constant lying and personal jihad against Sony makes you a very ugly personality indeed. As many many others on this site have already pointed out to you.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2020 at 20:35 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: For those who like to say that since this doesn't have a BSI sensor it's a no go for them, and they are entitled to their opinions. But just consider the D750, which also didn't have a BSI sensor, had an AA-filter, but is among one of the NIkon's top pro-sumer enthusiast cameras for the past 5-6 years with IQ that rivals even an A7 II or III. I think the real telling will be in the comparisons between the Sony's, Z6 and D750/D780 among others, of which I'm sure will be coming along shortly....

Here's another way to think about it... you can buy a 5-6 year old D750 (new) for $100 more than you can buy this camera, which seems to inherit a lot of the characteristics, and adds things like IBIS, faster max shutter speed, EFCS, etc, at the cost of no top deck plate, and cropped 4k among other "minor" details.... (of course, the D750 didn't even shoot 4k though so cropped 4k IMO is better than no 4k).

> was at least close

When it comes to low light performance, it is not close. The Sony A7 III has the clear advantage. Don't forget I used to own a Nikon D750, I know exactly how it performs based upon direct experience.

> Sony sort of is.

That is a trollish statement at best. Sony has been a leader in the video production business for at least half a century.

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2020 at 13:47 UTC
Total: 291, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »