Dester Wallaboo

Dester Wallaboo

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jan 7, 2011

Comments

Total: 90, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1196 comments in total)
In reply to:

Truebar: Hey guys what the story about the silent shutter, no one says a word about that. Is there a silent shutter on this new cam? Anyone?

Looking at their specs it says it has silent shooting.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 17:55 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1196 comments in total)
In reply to:

PorscheDoc: Why limit the shot buffer to only 17 raw (https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/explore/see-legendary/comparison )? At this price point I expected a larger buffer.

If they had gone CFast it likely would have been more..

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 17:50 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1196 comments in total)

My only disappointment is that the camera doesn't use CFast 2.0 cards. It may limit the ability for MagicLantern to do 4K RAW video.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 17:49 UTC as 131st comment | 4 replies
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1196 comments in total)
In reply to:

woerd: This sure will be a very good drsl body. Unfortunately the camera concept with mirror is becoming old fashion and chunky. I owned a number of full frame drsl bodies from Canon but i changed to Sony (A7RII) and i never wanna go back.
My opinion: unless you are an action shooter you better choose the Sony for it's new technologies and image quality.

I should add that mirrorless also increases heat on the sensor as it must always be active when viewing. Not a great thing.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 16:56 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1196 comments in total)
In reply to:

woerd: This sure will be a very good drsl body. Unfortunately the camera concept with mirror is becoming old fashion and chunky. I owned a number of full frame drsl bodies from Canon but i changed to Sony (A7RII) and i never wanna go back.
My opinion: unless you are an action shooter you better choose the Sony for it's new technologies and image quality.

Relying on a screen for everything isn't a plus... as a screen cannot reproduce what your eye can see. My experience with mirrorless is that you'd best bring a bag of batteries.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 16:55 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1196 comments in total)

I just came to read the comments from the haters........ <munching on popcorn>

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 16:53 UTC as 144th comment | 1 reply
On article DxO OpticsPro 11 brings advanced Raw noise reduction (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dester Wallaboo: DXO and On1 software are both fantastic for RAW workflows.....

I haven't used either one of those cameras... so I can't speak for them.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2016 at 00:54 UTC
On article DxO OpticsPro 11 brings advanced Raw noise reduction (110 comments in total)

DXO and On1 software are both fantastic for RAW workflows.....

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2016 at 18:20 UTC as 28th comment | 2 replies
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Why am I surprised that people continue to misunderstand the beauty of a fixed-lens solution?

These cameras are the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras.

They don't replace larger, heavier, bulky, multiple lenses in a backpack just yet; but as this technology matures, more and more people will come to appreciate these wonderful bridge cameras. I've waited for a decade for these cameras to arrive. It's still not quite there yet, but they are getting closer and closer to "bridging" the gap between good image quality and utter silliness of the DSLR's need for a backpack full of lenses just to take a picture.

A Nikon 80-400mm on an APS-C DSLR is 120-600mm. That one lens costs $2300. It's also large and heavy.

Some are suggesting 3rd party junk lenses like the 16-300mm. I would not ever use a super-wide to super-telephoto on a DSLR. The whole reason for a DSLR is changing lenses and image quality. Why put 3rd party anything on it???? Even a filter, even a battery. I *ONLY* use genuine!

Hate to say it... but you're the one that started the negativity in this conversation. I responded in kind. That being said... I certainly know how to use Photoshop intimately. I spend 8-10 hours per day in Photoshop, After Effects and Maya or C4D. I have a dozen cinematographers, artists, and animators that work for me at my studio. I've been in this business for 20+ years. Like I said in previous comments... cameras like this DO have a proper use in the professional workspace. But I was speaking specifically to the comment that small camera would catch up to full-sensor cameras..... and I was pointing out the flaw in the argument.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 22:02 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Why am I surprised that people continue to misunderstand the beauty of a fixed-lens solution?

These cameras are the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras.

They don't replace larger, heavier, bulky, multiple lenses in a backpack just yet; but as this technology matures, more and more people will come to appreciate these wonderful bridge cameras. I've waited for a decade for these cameras to arrive. It's still not quite there yet, but they are getting closer and closer to "bridging" the gap between good image quality and utter silliness of the DSLR's need for a backpack full of lenses just to take a picture.

A Nikon 80-400mm on an APS-C DSLR is 120-600mm. That one lens costs $2300. It's also large and heavy.

Some are suggesting 3rd party junk lenses like the 16-300mm. I would not ever use a super-wide to super-telephoto on a DSLR. The whole reason for a DSLR is changing lenses and image quality. Why put 3rd party anything on it???? Even a filter, even a battery. I *ONLY* use genuine!

Small sensors will never, ever have the same bokeh abilities as a large sensor. You need to seriously study up on optics and how they work. It's not just blur.... nor is it blur with added highlight blowout. Aperture, distance, focus... these are all optical. Masking and placing a blur will not create a realistic bokeh. It may fool Instagram users... but anyone that knows real optics knows it's faked.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 20:46 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Why am I surprised that people continue to misunderstand the beauty of a fixed-lens solution?

These cameras are the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras.

They don't replace larger, heavier, bulky, multiple lenses in a backpack just yet; but as this technology matures, more and more people will come to appreciate these wonderful bridge cameras. I've waited for a decade for these cameras to arrive. It's still not quite there yet, but they are getting closer and closer to "bridging" the gap between good image quality and utter silliness of the DSLR's need for a backpack full of lenses just to take a picture.

A Nikon 80-400mm on an APS-C DSLR is 120-600mm. That one lens costs $2300. It's also large and heavy.

Some are suggesting 3rd party junk lenses like the 16-300mm. I would not ever use a super-wide to super-telephoto on a DSLR. The whole reason for a DSLR is changing lenses and image quality. Why put 3rd party anything on it???? Even a filter, even a battery. I *ONLY* use genuine!

Still untrue... faked bokeh still looks fake and it cannot reproduce real bokeh. Study up on some physics before you respond. And it's not ALL about the Bokeh... crikey. And I HAVE shot medium-format when needed for specific commercial shoots.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 20:40 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Why am I surprised that people continue to misunderstand the beauty of a fixed-lens solution?

These cameras are the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras.

They don't replace larger, heavier, bulky, multiple lenses in a backpack just yet; but as this technology matures, more and more people will come to appreciate these wonderful bridge cameras. I've waited for a decade for these cameras to arrive. It's still not quite there yet, but they are getting closer and closer to "bridging" the gap between good image quality and utter silliness of the DSLR's need for a backpack full of lenses just to take a picture.

A Nikon 80-400mm on an APS-C DSLR is 120-600mm. That one lens costs $2300. It's also large and heavy.

Some are suggesting 3rd party junk lenses like the 16-300mm. I would not ever use a super-wide to super-telephoto on a DSLR. The whole reason for a DSLR is changing lenses and image quality. Why put 3rd party anything on it???? Even a filter, even a battery. I *ONLY* use genuine!

I agree that cameras like this have their place in the pro world. Poor dust conditions, or needing a smaller, lightweight, or sometimes you need a camera that shoots great that you don't care if it gets killed in the process of the shoot.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 17:44 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Why am I surprised that people continue to misunderstand the beauty of a fixed-lens solution?

These cameras are the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras.

They don't replace larger, heavier, bulky, multiple lenses in a backpack just yet; but as this technology matures, more and more people will come to appreciate these wonderful bridge cameras. I've waited for a decade for these cameras to arrive. It's still not quite there yet, but they are getting closer and closer to "bridging" the gap between good image quality and utter silliness of the DSLR's need for a backpack full of lenses just to take a picture.

A Nikon 80-400mm on an APS-C DSLR is 120-600mm. That one lens costs $2300. It's also large and heavy.

Some are suggesting 3rd party junk lenses like the 16-300mm. I would not ever use a super-wide to super-telephoto on a DSLR. The whole reason for a DSLR is changing lenses and image quality. Why put 3rd party anything on it???? Even a filter, even a battery. I *ONLY* use genuine!

Fake bokeh doesn't look even close to real Bokeh.... tell you what.. get a nice 200mm lens and shoot an object at about 1.5m away. Make sure you have glowing lights 30-40m behind them. Show me how you would replicate that bokeh in Photoshop...... impossible. You couldn't even get close. You'd have to create an entirely new background and composite it in. LOL

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 17:30 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Why am I surprised that people continue to misunderstand the beauty of a fixed-lens solution?

These cameras are the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras.

They don't replace larger, heavier, bulky, multiple lenses in a backpack just yet; but as this technology matures, more and more people will come to appreciate these wonderful bridge cameras. I've waited for a decade for these cameras to arrive. It's still not quite there yet, but they are getting closer and closer to "bridging" the gap between good image quality and utter silliness of the DSLR's need for a backpack full of lenses just to take a picture.

A Nikon 80-400mm on an APS-C DSLR is 120-600mm. That one lens costs $2300. It's also large and heavy.

Some are suggesting 3rd party junk lenses like the 16-300mm. I would not ever use a super-wide to super-telephoto on a DSLR. The whole reason for a DSLR is changing lenses and image quality. Why put 3rd party anything on it???? Even a filter, even a battery. I *ONLY* use genuine!

And you miss the entire point of DoF.... which is to create separation aka contrast between foreground and background. It's not that they refuse to see the background as part of the image. It's a conscious creative decision to draw the eye to the foreground content.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 22:56 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Why am I surprised that people continue to misunderstand the beauty of a fixed-lens solution?

These cameras are the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras.

They don't replace larger, heavier, bulky, multiple lenses in a backpack just yet; but as this technology matures, more and more people will come to appreciate these wonderful bridge cameras. I've waited for a decade for these cameras to arrive. It's still not quite there yet, but they are getting closer and closer to "bridging" the gap between good image quality and utter silliness of the DSLR's need for a backpack full of lenses just to take a picture.

A Nikon 80-400mm on an APS-C DSLR is 120-600mm. That one lens costs $2300. It's also large and heavy.

Some are suggesting 3rd party junk lenses like the 16-300mm. I would not ever use a super-wide to super-telephoto on a DSLR. The whole reason for a DSLR is changing lenses and image quality. Why put 3rd party anything on it???? Even a filter, even a battery. I *ONLY* use genuine!

Faked Photoshop bokeh is easy to spot. It's not the same... you cannot recreate the creaminess of real FF bokeh. I spend 8-10 a day in Photoshop and After Effects... I own a post-production studio with a dozen animators. This is a field I know intimately well.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 22:54 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

dennis tennis: Less hyperbole, more info. It would be a sad day when DPR succumbs to the disease afflicting many DPR members, hyperbolitis. Examples are: I "dumped" my brand X gear. May I suggest a different title to this article: the Sony RX10 iii betters the competition. Must DPR resort to "destroy" to generate clicks? Will we find one day in the future DPR proclaiming in bold ALL CAPS " DPREVIEW is the most AWESOME photo forum in the universe, researchers conclude. Or All photo forum sites SUCKS with DPREVIEW the lone beacon of quality. I hope not.

His comment: "...sensors are so good today that it doesn't matter anymore." is total nonsense. I'd love to see Ken try and get the bokeh and depth of field you can get from a full-frame sensor. It will never happen. This guy needs a simple course in physics.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 21:56 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Why am I surprised that people continue to misunderstand the beauty of a fixed-lens solution?

These cameras are the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras.

They don't replace larger, heavier, bulky, multiple lenses in a backpack just yet; but as this technology matures, more and more people will come to appreciate these wonderful bridge cameras. I've waited for a decade for these cameras to arrive. It's still not quite there yet, but they are getting closer and closer to "bridging" the gap between good image quality and utter silliness of the DSLR's need for a backpack full of lenses just to take a picture.

A Nikon 80-400mm on an APS-C DSLR is 120-600mm. That one lens costs $2300. It's also large and heavy.

Some are suggesting 3rd party junk lenses like the 16-300mm. I would not ever use a super-wide to super-telephoto on a DSLR. The whole reason for a DSLR is changing lenses and image quality. Why put 3rd party anything on it???? Even a filter, even a battery. I *ONLY* use genuine!

There are some things you'll never accomplish with a small sensor that you can get with a large sensor..... bokeh being one of them.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 21:46 UTC
In reply to:

Marksphoto: I like how Capture renders my raw files from the Canons, Photoshop does a worse job. Nothing is mentioned here on the quality of the conversion, which is more important than speed I think...

On1 has a tremendous reputation for great RAW conversion. Comparison sites are easily found.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 19:38 UTC

First photo editing app I've been excited about in a very long time.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 19:31 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Why am I surprised that people continue to misunderstand the beauty of a fixed-lens solution?

These cameras are the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras.

They don't replace larger, heavier, bulky, multiple lenses in a backpack just yet; but as this technology matures, more and more people will come to appreciate these wonderful bridge cameras. I've waited for a decade for these cameras to arrive. It's still not quite there yet, but they are getting closer and closer to "bridging" the gap between good image quality and utter silliness of the DSLR's need for a backpack full of lenses just to take a picture.

A Nikon 80-400mm on an APS-C DSLR is 120-600mm. That one lens costs $2300. It's also large and heavy.

Some are suggesting 3rd party junk lenses like the 16-300mm. I would not ever use a super-wide to super-telephoto on a DSLR. The whole reason for a DSLR is changing lenses and image quality. Why put 3rd party anything on it???? Even a filter, even a battery. I *ONLY* use genuine!

I strongly disagree with this assertion.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 18:39 UTC
Total: 90, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »