DKG

DKG

Lives in United Kingdom Perthshire, United Kingdom
Works as a Geologist
Has a website at https://www.davidgoold.com/
Joined on Jan 29, 2004

Comments

Total: 14, showing: 1 – 14
In reply to:

Photo-Wiz: I recall having a Leica 35mm film compact camera. It was a jewel of a camera. But, it was actually a re-badged Panasonic camera. No doubt the Leica "label" on the camera resulted in better images than the "Panasonic" label. :-)

And Leica’s edition of the Minizoom is still very highly regarded... currently fetching between £350 and £1050 used on fleaBay which is much higher than the other Panasonic collaboration film compacts such as the Minilux. I hope you’ve still got yours in a cupboard!

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2021 at 07:50 UTC
In reply to:

Photo-Wiz: I recall having a Leica 35mm film compact camera. It was a jewel of a camera. But, it was actually a re-badged Panasonic camera. No doubt the Leica "label" on the camera resulted in better images than the "Panasonic" label. :-)

Ken & James, both the Minilux and the C1 were manufactured by Panasonic. May have been others.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2021 at 23:52 UTC

Maybe lens dust is an issue for those interested in unblemished bokeh balls. If it is, then a fly could be troublesome...

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2019 at 17:46 UTC as 89th comment
In reply to:

Alex Zeee: Never heard of this guy in my life but some of the things he says in the article are just bizarre to someone my age. I'm guessing it's a generational thing though, to me and many of my friends/people my age that I know, the idea of "The heat of the gazes between people, the charged mystery that arises from capturing chance moments on the fly" is honestly creepy. To each their own though

Maybe best not to say you haven’t heard of Meyerowitz on a photography-oriented Web site.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2018 at 10:08 UTC
On article Ultra-compact: Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II review (592 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zoom Zoom Zoom: OK, so, is anyone else seeing what I AM SEEING on this review? In fact, lets backtrack a little because the review of the RX1-R was already the same anguish..

I mean, I dont know if it is the setup or bad RX1-R & RX1-RII units, or what.. but from corner to corner, both their test scenes are a complete, tragic & miserable blur & lack of sharpness, all across the image area! But this is not reality! I have an RX1R & can certainly avow that the Carl Zeiss 35mm f:/2.0 lens is an amazing piece of sharp glass. It certainly has NOTHING to do with the IQ horror on the DPreview's test scene of the RX1-R a couple years ago & again now of the RX1-RII. So whats up with this?

This is almost as hilarious as DXO's mark on the RX1-R that scored substantially lower than the original RX-1, which in 2 words is both LAUGHABLE & IMPOSSIBLE!..DXO's ratings are, by the way, the industries greatest joke!

Anyway, this test scene has positively no resemblance of the true IQ coming out of this camera. None!

Agreed. What isn't obvious (to me) from the scene comparison tool is which setting was used for the anti-aliasing filter. Maybe I have missed something in the review text or switch on the tool - apologies if I have. It looks to me as if the variable low-pass filter was set to 'full' and that may explain the strange softness and lack of definition. I wonder if DPR could possibly clarify.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 12:25 UTC
In reply to:

dylanear: A Pen F that was closer to a GM1/GM5 would amazing. High end, not for selfies, no scene mode dial. Small, very small, but for enthusiasts. Front and rear command dials, drop the EVF if you ask me.

Just big enough to hold and adjust shutter speed, aperture and focus modes comfortably.

Agreed. Basically an E-PL8 or GX800/850 with 20MP sensor. Tilting (*not* flip-out) screen. Plug-in EVF option for difficult light. Silent electronic shutter option for street photography...

Then add the Panasonic 15mm 1.7 or 14mm 2.5.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2017 at 11:38 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Knowing Iceland, I can say this with certainty:
This camera renders a very poor service to landscape photography.
Knowing photography, I can venture this:
It's most probably because it is an MFT camera. The format, especially the aspect ratio, simply does not cater for this particular type of photography.

Ansel Adams must have really struggled with his 5x4 'sensor'...

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 15:08 UTC
In reply to:

JT26: This is the most interesting fuji release for a while in my opinion. These things are so small. 24mp apsc camera that would be amazing with the little 23 27 35 lenses. Just need a 14mm pancake and maybe a 55mm 2.8 and you'd have an awesome little kit here.

Completely agree. This could sell well. The new 23 combined with the 18 would complete a great compact street camera. But where is the stealthy all black body of the X-M1? Humphhh :O(

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 19:36 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E2S real-world samples (99 comments in total)
In reply to:

sonics: Quite a few seem out of focus or slightly blurred. Most with the photos with the 23mm lens. Coincidence?

Hmmm... I don't see anything soft that shouldn't be on my 4K screens. What I do see is a suprisingly narrow DOF on those 23mm shots. In fact, in my opinion, these photos are outstanding and make me want to blow the dust off my X-E2 and stop waiting for the X-E3.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2016 at 18:49 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2497 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: A6000 is sharper than X-PR02 while both lens are in the very much same price range and same FL.

Look and try to read all the text:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a6000&attr13_1=fujifilm_xpro2&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr16_0=200&attr16_1=200&attr171_1=off&normalization=full&widget=99&x=-0.44080672164242946&y=-0.702912468175104

Tim, completely agree that RT resolves more luminosity detail than ACR. It also avoids the 'van Gogh effect' on thick foliage better than ACR (as do several other converters). But colour detail is lacking in RT conversions of fuji XTrans RAWs compared with ACR and, as a result, images lack pop to my eyes which is difficult to restore in post processing. This colour detail issue with RT is most apparent in real world examples where colours (to me) are 'thin' and lifeless. I like the solid and intricate colour detail of ACR images and am willing to trade a little luminosity detail to get it. ACR is also unbeatable in restoring blown highlights for XTrans - nothing I've used even comes close in this respect. Well, we shouldn't start another XTrans converter debate... they all have their advantages and failings.

Cheers, David

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2016 at 22:05 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS100/TZ100 Review (373 comments in total)
In reply to:

vanselm66: New owners seem very happy. Some of them have written very detailed explanations about their first impresions.
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-DMC-ZS100K-Digital-Megapixel-25-250mm/product-reviews/B010NU5AX8/ref=cm_cr_dp_see_all_btm?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&sortBy=recent

Really a I think there's something weird with the Studio scene samples quality compared with other samples you can find elsewhere.

I'm also wondering if there may be a problem with DPR's sample of this camera. There are downloadable RAW files now of Imaging Resource's TZ100 test scene on their Web site and, in an ISO-for-ISO comparison with the Nikon J5 (using ACR 9.5), there is very little between the two cameras using IR's samples but they are worlds apart in the same comparison using RAW files downloaded from DPR. Admittedly, DPR tested the J5 with the Nikkor 1 32mm and IR used the 18.5mm, but they are both sharp lenses. So I'm not sure I understand why the DPR images with the TZ100 are so soft and hazy when comparing RAWs because DPR's images aren't. Not to my eyes anyway. Puzzled!

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2016 at 13:55 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2497 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: A6000 is sharper than X-PR02 while both lens are in the very much same price range and same FL.

Look and try to read all the text:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a6000&attr13_1=fujifilm_xpro2&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr16_0=200&attr16_1=200&attr171_1=off&normalization=full&widget=99&x=-0.44080672164242946&y=-0.702912468175104

At your selected ISO 200, yes. But above ISO800? Choosing X-Trans has always meant making this trade-off. Personally, for street, I will live with the softness if it means I can shoot at higher shutter speed when the light is going. Different cameras, different uses...

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2016 at 19:27 UTC
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1289 comments in total)
In reply to:

xeriwthe: looks like fuji and sony mirrorless designs crossbred

Exactly my first thought. X-E2 x A6000. Not necessarily a bad thing though.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 08:07 UTC
In reply to:

Beckler8: I guess one awkward thing is the RX100iv outclasses RX10ii in some areas? How does that make any sense. Like the 16/14 fps - tho they don't specify how many frames at those rates. Anyway the big RX10 should have some more hardware advantages - with what are they filling all that extra room inside, if it is, seemingly, the same electronics as RX100?

What you see of the lens is just the tip of the iceberg.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2015 at 08:24 UTC
Total: 14, showing: 1 – 14