treepop

treepop

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Mar 8, 2010

Comments

Total: 64, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On article Canon RF 35mm F1.8 Macro IS STM sample gallery (285 comments in total)

Hey Sony! Look! This is what you need!!! How Sony doesn't have an inexpensive 35 1.8 is baffling. Every company should have a well priced 50 1.8, 35 1.8 and 85 1.8, that's optically amazing, but lacks build quality.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2019 at 11:54 UTC as 4th comment

That was great. Loved it.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2019 at 18:21 UTC as 38th comment

Man. Wish this was for the E mount.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2018 at 17:10 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

meanwhile: Bought one. Going to take some photos with it. I know that's passé and off-topic for a photography site in 2018, but hey, I'm a dinosaur.

Madness

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2018 at 15:19 UTC

I own both systems. Come on Canon. I'm a huge Canon fanboy, but have been forced to switch because you wont pull your head out. So disappointing. The good thing is my 70-200 IS II (my most favorite lens of all time) wont be losing its value any time soon.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2018 at 13:10 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
On article Sony 24-105mm F4 G OSS sample gallery (160 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rob40: i notice that the sony marketing machine is doing overtime. im about to buy the a7-3 and im looking into a lens. im not using it for photography. i notice the horrible lens lineup. extreme prices or they just dont have it. thank god i dont have that problem with my D850. guess im buying a 16-35 F sony lens.

Yeah. Sony needs to chill out on their lens prices. Performance/price needs to be greater than 1. Right now. They have great high quality lenses, but their prices are nutso. $900-$1000 for the 55 1.8!? $750 for a 35 f2.8 is just ludacris! And on and on...the larger options are a little high price wise, but their light weight options (that make the mirrorless system a no brainer) are priced sky high.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 03:17 UTC
On article Sony 24-105mm F4 G OSS sample gallery (160 comments in total)

Would rather it be smaller, lighter and cost less then have oss. I’m getting the Tamron fo sho. Size and f/2.8. I couldn’t imagine having to shoot at f/4 all the time.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 03:11 UTC as 7th comment | 2 replies
On article Sigma announces nine full-frame E-mount Art primes (361 comments in total)

Will these be smaller than, for instance, a Canon mount sigma art lens with an mc-11 adapter. What I’m wonder is. They aren’t just building in the mc-11 adapter are they? The lenses are already rather large and using the mc-11 made them even larger. So I’m hoping the native lenses will be shorter than a Nikon/Canon mounted art lens with an mc-11 adapter.

Sorry if I rambled. Little sleep. Just curious.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2018 at 16:27 UTC as 5th comment
On article Sigma announces nine full-frame E-mount Art primes (361 comments in total)
In reply to:

wildbild: … what a terrible idea to bridge the shorter flange distance with a piece of black tube. These lense are stupendously long and will be terrible to handle attached to those flimsy Sony bodies. Doesn’t look like a great product strategy to me.

I’m confused. Are you saying you don’t like his because they are not custom lenses made for the fe mounts ( basically the lenses made for other brands with an mc-11 built in) or are you just not a fan of sigma lenses?

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2018 at 16:19 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony a7 III (569 comments in total)
In reply to:

Great Bustard: Who would buy this when you could get a 6D2 for $100 less? : )

@kreislauf
All true. I just wouldn't say it's as good to use Canon glass on a Sony as it is natively. I know it's obvious to some of us, I just worry about people new to the market thinking they can just switch, buy an adapter and it be perfect. It's cool that it's possible to use them, and even get autofocus, it's just not reliable enough to be used professionally or even for recreation on critical moments.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2018 at 22:23 UTC
On article Canon EOS M100 review (786 comments in total)

No 4k. No Optical sensor stabilization. Very few STM lenses. No thanks. I'm a huge Canon fan boy, but haven't seen anything special out of Canon since the 5D Mark 2.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 06:19 UTC as 37th comment | 4 replies
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2155 comments in total)
In reply to:

jjstier: I have the 5D II and I"m seriously considering the IV. But I'm confused by the raw and jpg quality in the comparison to the II and III. Isn't the purpose of a camera, esp a very expensive camera, to produce excellent images? Am I missing something? Better dynamic range, etc. yet it's saying the image quality is less than my Mark II, I don't understand. Appreciate any explanation.

Oh. I see. You're looking at the comparison tool on the conclusion page. To that, I have to imagine it is incorrect, or only applies to the camera in its own time. So in comparison, the 5D Mark 2, during it's time, was more superior to its peers than the 5D Mark 4 is to its peers.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV-versus-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II___1106_483

This may help.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 22:23 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2155 comments in total)
In reply to:

jjstier: I have the 5D II and I"m seriously considering the IV. But I'm confused by the raw and jpg quality in the comparison to the II and III. Isn't the purpose of a camera, esp a very expensive camera, to produce excellent images? Am I missing something? Better dynamic range, etc. yet it's saying the image quality is less than my Mark II, I don't understand. Appreciate any explanation.

While the 5D Mark 2 has excellent image quality, I have not read a single review that states the Mark 2 has better image quality than the 3, much less the 4. The 4 will have better dynamic range, more resolution and better low light capabilities. On top of that, the auto focus system is leaps and bounds better. Lastly, it has autofocus while shooting video, which, to me, is a really nice and needed feature. I hope this helps.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 22:20 UTC
On article TIME releases 100 most influential images of all time (160 comments in total)

lol these comments. Yall need to chill out. Seriously. Time was founded in the USA in the 1920s of course most of the photos are based in the USA. This anti US stuff is irritating and myopic to say the least. You can like/dislike them and not have to join a bandwagon rant can't you? Maybe not...evs

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2016 at 05:19 UTC as 18th comment
On a photo in the Sony a6500 Sample Images sample gallery (4 comments in total)

Probaby testing the ibis...also, on a scene like this, if he wanted everything in focus I would assume he would want to stop it down a bit.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2016 at 05:04 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Woof! Sony a6500 sample images are here (365 comments in total)

IQ will be nearly identical to the a6300 if not entirely. The only improvement I could see would be the inclusion of uncompressed raw, or 14bit raw in all modes, due to the better processor. As for its IQ in comparison to the rest of the market, it's still tops.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2016 at 05:00 UTC as 44th comment
On article Video: Capturing nature with the Canon EOS 7D Mark II (206 comments in total)

I loved this! Was watching on my laptop, but enjoyed it so much I shot it over to my 50 inch tv and watched it with my family. Very entertaining and informative! Such high quality, I didn't think I should need to write a comment like this, to encourage dpreview to do more like this, but just in case you weren't sure, I didn't want to miss an opportunity to reinforce, that YES this is very much great content and will keep me coming back for more. (Sorry for the run on sentence.) Great Stuff! Felt like I was watching natgeo.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2016 at 16:27 UTC as 16th comment
On a photo in the Nikon D600 Preview Samples sample gallery (14 comments in total)

Canon guy here so I don't know, but isn't the 24-120mm f/4G ED VR a DX lens? So is this shot in DX mode?

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 01:53 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply
On photo DSC_3937 in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (14 comments in total)

Canon guy here so I don't know, but isn't the 24-120mm f/4G ED VR a DX lens? So is this shot in DX mode?

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 01:53 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply

Is this still using the same sensor found on the 7D, 60D, t2i(550D), t3i(600D)???

Link | Posted on Jul 4, 2012 at 16:13 UTC as 25th comment | 2 replies
Total: 64, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »