billzilla

billzilla

Lives in Japan Sendai, Japan
Joined on Nov 5, 2007

Comments

Total: 36, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

The Zony 35 is an underrated lens and its best qualities aren't all immediately apparent in a 'shootout' with emphasis on sheer acutance or vignetting. In truth, it has good clarity, great color and contrast reproduction, a certain amount of pop and generally produces images that are similar in feel to the much-touted RX1 fixed lens (despite being 2.8 vs. 2.0). It's about $200 overpriced these days, but for a carry-around all-purpose lens it's difficult to beat if you can find it cheaper. The only real flaw in the mix is vignetting - which is mostly correctable.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2021 at 09:19 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Which is better: Nikon Z7 vs Sony a7R III (1506 comments in total)
In reply to:

mholdef: Amateur Photographer (Andy Westlake ex-DP Review)
https://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/reviews/compactsystemcameras/nikon-z7

"I’m a big fan of Sony’s superb A7R III, but on balance I think the Z 7 is even better in many respects, thanks to its superb handling. There are areas where the Sony is still ahead, most obviously its superior continuous AF and tracking, along with the inclusion of two memory card slots. But not every photographer needs these features, and the Z 7 delivers image quality that’s every bit as good at the A7R III while being distinctly more pleasant to use. Nikon has produced the best mirrorless camera it believes it can make right now, that will handle more-or-less like a mini-D850. This sets it apart from Canon’s EOS R, which feels more like a design experiment that’s trying to be different for the sake of it...on balance, it’s the best camera on the market right now, either mirrorless or DSLR."

At some point, 'handling' has to be defined, otherwise it's just as subjective and nebulous a term as 'better'. I no longer even want a DSLR handling-type experience if it means clunky sluggish live view, bulk, weight, size increases.

To Nikon fans with a lot of money to spend, the Nikon probably appeals. To those of us who defected years ago, the Sony remains the better choice for its maturing lens selection, third generation features and improvements, etc.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2018 at 05:40 UTC
On article Which is better: Nikon Z7 vs Sony a7R III (1506 comments in total)
In reply to:

Trebor129: I really want the Z7 to be great, but lets me real. This article was unfair to Sony. The Z7 is an A7RII competitor - a camera that you can buy for $1200. And the Sony is not $3200 retail. It is $3000 now (and buyable for $2400).

Where is the A7rii reliably $1200 used? That doesn't have a shutter with 25K clicks on it? I got mine for $1500 with 4K shots, with box and 6 batteries. That was as good as I could find for that, give or take maybe $100.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2018 at 04:27 UTC
In reply to:

StevenN: A very good pro photographer friend of mine two months ago traded in a ton of Nikon equipment and bought a Sony system, including A7 III and A7R III bodies, many Sony lenses, accessories, etc. He took a killing (lost mucho $$) on the trade at a local camera store. I'm sure he is kicking himself now ... especially when he sees me show up with a new Nikon mirrorless!

I'm a 'Sony Fanboy' (I guess, I've owned an A7 and A7II since the year the original A7 launched) and I think the Nikon looks cool. It's beyond what I'd pay right now in order to switch but if it winds up performing better on the counts that matter most to me, I'd buy one when the price goes down. I personally don't care if it lacks a second card slot or Eye-AF, but that's me. The top LCD is very nice. You should remember that all A7-series owners today were owning something else not long ago, so calling us 'fanboys' is a little silly.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2018 at 07:44 UTC
In reply to:

StevenN: A very good pro photographer friend of mine two months ago traded in a ton of Nikon equipment and bought a Sony system, including A7 III and A7R III bodies, many Sony lenses, accessories, etc. He took a killing (lost mucho $$) on the trade at a local camera store. I'm sure he is kicking himself now ... especially when he sees me show up with a new Nikon mirrorless!

Did you mean 'he took a bath' or 'beating'? Never heard of 'took a killing'. That's usually used in the money loss/gain context as 'made a killing'. LOL

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2018 at 22:46 UTC
On article Rokinon AF 35mm F2.8 FE sample gallery and impressions (142 comments in total)
In reply to:

nir-vana: Although pricing is lower than the direct competitor, it's still expensive relative to faster Sony lenses like:
FE 28/2 ~ 50$ more, but 1+ stop, great quality and Sony original.
FE 50/1.8 ~ 150$ less, 1.3+ stop, Sony original.

I have a nice bridge to sell you if you think DxO testing is the end-all metric by which any lens should be measured. It's acceptably sharp, maybe sharper wide open than some other 28mm lenses but that's where its optic qualities cease to be competitive, IMO. The only benefit of this lens is its size and price. I couldn't ditch mine fast enough. You're far better off with the Zeiss 35/2.8 or the actually pretty nice 50/1.8. For wide shots, I have a great copy of the original Rok/Sam 14/2.8 that does a fine job and has pretty good pop. The 28/2 is basically the antithesis of 'character' or 'pop' and the bokeh is truly awful.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2018 at 00:08 UTC
In reply to:

Marlin Green: Looks like a YouMavic :) My brother has one of these brand and I pick on him calling his drone a You Need It....you need new parts cause it's gonna fall. Sure enough after he bought it and flew a couple times things fell of sky and was done with. 33 minutes...who cares...4K..who cares. All I care is for is.......DJI when matched with You Need It Drone..lol. DJI will continue to just keep passing by others. Had a phantom 4 for awhile and that sucker had no problem and quality was just awesome on video. If you are going to pay that kind of money buy something good. I saw a Kia top of the line sporty car for $50K at a mall and was like really? I rather buy a Vette than a Kia at $50K. Same here.... $1K plus for a You Need It drone or DJI...choice is clear.

You do know Kia is Hyundai now, and they do make rather good vehicles? I'd certainly bet on a Genesis going without problems longer than a Mustang...and I've owned, let's see: Seven Mustangs, all with V8 plants. When Ford put the 4.6 in that thing, reliability went down the drain. I also owned a 1994 Firebird Formula. It needed three replacement radios, a driveshaft, a rear main seal and the steering wheel would occasionally not unlock from park. This was all within the first year. My brother had a Z06 Corvette, which was even more of a lemon than my Firebird or my 2000 Mustang GT.

I recently drove a Hyundai (same as Kia equivalent) Elantra from LA to SF and back. Awesome little car. Surprising power at freeway speeds, handled well, very quiet, pretty stylish and comfortable. I'd own one. They have 10yr/100k mi. warranties. When was the last time one of the Big Three offered that? Don't even get me started on Chrysler garbage.

Link | Posted on Aug 20, 2018 at 06:29 UTC
On article Rokinon AF 35mm F2.8 FE sample gallery and impressions (142 comments in total)
In reply to:

nir-vana: Although pricing is lower than the direct competitor, it's still expensive relative to faster Sony lenses like:
FE 28/2 ~ 50$ more, but 1+ stop, great quality and Sony original.
FE 50/1.8 ~ 150$ less, 1.3+ stop, Sony original.

Anyone saying that 28 is 'great quality' is in need of an eye exam. Or a new monitor, perhaps.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2018 at 03:45 UTC
On article Quick look: Canon's new compressed Raw format (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

Petak: With the current prices of storage file size is the least concern for most people. Introducing yet another file format that is not compatible with older software, on the other hand, could be an issue.

File size is certainly more than the least of MY concerns and I find folks most credible when they don't presume to speak for most others.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2018 at 22:17 UTC
On article Quick look: Canon's new compressed Raw format (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

Docno: How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Sony faced a lot of heat for lossy RAW compression in its A7x cameras and others. Most of it was on principle. In fact, compression artifacts were only visible when pixel-peeping very high contrast edges in atypical/unusual scenes. The example I best remember was someone's image of sun coming through stained glass windows in a dark cathedral. But I never saw the issue in my own images and I continue to use Sony's lossy compressed RAW even now that they have made (much larger) uncompressed RAW files available....

No posterization issue. And they do (now) offer a lossless option for the II and later models. And again - the lossy artifacts were mainly only visible when bumping exposure after the fact by several stops (or worse) and even then only on contrasting areas such as stained glass, etc. -- This Canon compression looks ATROCIOUS by comparison. Seriously awful.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2018 at 08:54 UTC
In reply to:

Island Golfer: I don't care what's under the hood (isn't that a hood on top of the body-sure looks like it); this mistake is uglier than ugly. They should have used the first rumored version that had the clean lines of today's compact camera bodies. This will be a total sales failure. The only thing that may have given it a chance would have been a full frame sensor. And, $1299! What are they smokin' over there?

Why are 'anti humpers' so obnoxious? Go buy a camera you prefer. There's a lot of options without a prominent EVF on top... But there will always be concessions to any consolidated design. That's reality. There's a reason so many cameras from the film era have an optical bump to house the viewfinder and why that design continues, today.

$1299 is a lot, though.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 05:09 UTC
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Looks great to me but I think it would be cathartic if we all get this out now:

No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K!
No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K!
No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K!
No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K!
No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K!
No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K!
No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K!
No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K!
No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K! No 4K!

The A7R2 has 4K ($2700 or less depending on sales) and the 4K A7S is still a pretty solid choice at $1998 with SLOG, full readout HDMI and so forth.

This 'oh yeah well Sony doesn't have 4K for cheap either' isn't true.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2017 at 22:02 UTC
In reply to:

Fauler_Beamter: Canon like... you want 4K? Gotta pay 4K.
Five years in the making for... THIS?
For a second i thought to myself: "please, don't make me regret my switch to sony". Well, they didn't... that display seems nice to have, though.

You can get an A7R2 (now) for $2700 new, non-grey market. That's not quite $1999 but it's close enough that buying sans tax would make up a lot of the difference. However the A7S (I) does 4K and is now $1998 retail. It also does SLOG2 and full pixel readout, full HDMI output.

So nice try with the 'what FF 4K Sony did you get at this price point?' quip. Canon had an opportunity here to pioneer FF 4K at an introductory $2K price and blew it. Doesn't make Canon a total failure or the 6DII worthless or anything. Just not quite a cutting edge product.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2017 at 21:58 UTC
In reply to:

lhkjacky: A99II have the same BSI 42MP sensor as A7Rii, with better AF, the AF sensitivity is down to -4EV @F2.8, which is 3 stops better than A7Rii -2EV@ F2.0.
The A99II also have dual card slots, EYE AF and a new menu system.
The buffer of A99ii is 3 times larger than A7Rii, the write card speed is 50% faster than A7Rii and the burst rate is 2.5 times faster than A7Rii. (12fps vs 5fps)
You can also review image immediately without waiting the buffer clear completely.

If you love the form factor of DSLR, you will love the form factor of A99II too. The better ergonomic, larger buttons, AF joysticks, comfortable grip.

The A99ii also have longer battery life than A7Rii, It build in 5-axis IBIS, Zeiss 85mm F1.4 ZA, Zeiss 135mm F1.8 ZA are both extremely sharp lenses and stabilized by 5-axis IBIS. A99II also have a new Front-End LSI, Hybrid PDAF (79+399), 79 Hybrid Cross AF, “S&Q” Video, fully articulated LCD, Spot metering link to AF point, highlight priority metering, Slog 3, 12fps, etc.

A99II sure does have features... It's a different class of camera and most here already know its pros and cons - a blown FF DSLR with the bulk, functions and pricetag of same. True, some great AF at -4+ EV! But A99 cameras adapt to a huge variety of MF and AF non-native mounts and suffers a hit from the transmissive SLT mirror. There's also most probably non-measured IQ artifacts (like A9 banding at stressed exposure) due to stuffing 399 AF points on chip.

A99II has much better focusing and handles A-Mount lenses better than an LA-EA3/4 E-Mount camera but it lacks the same adapter scene, weighs half a pound more, has lower IQ and costs about $500 USD more than the A7RII. The aging/stalled A glass library is good when you factor Minolta Maxxum stuff but E-Mount is growing and can be adapted to use anything.

If you gotta do sports/BIF and have A-Mount glass, A99. Most others will consider the A7 series.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2017 at 20:26 UTC
On article Updated: Sony a9 samples with Raw support (446 comments in total)
In reply to:

vadims: Bringing in (and using) a gray card would have been nice.

I'm generally OK with "processing to taste", but not when green cast is replaced with magenta cast, as is the case with the first image. Having a gray card would have removed an unnecessary variable.

As to the second sample (tennis), I'm a bit surprised you draw attention to the background track: the biggest difference (to me) is the table color, which looks almost purple on the OOC JPEG, while (properly?) blue on RAW conversion. But... the biggest difference in perception comes from the increased contrast of the second (processed RAW) image; I have a feeling we're comparing apples to oranges here.

Getting WB right by the camera *is* important, whatever folks relying on PP-only WB adjustments of their RAWs might think; it's a a big extra bonus that should not be underestimated. Hence properly testing it is important. So, DPR team, please do bring gray card next time ;-)

I get that they wanted to test 'just point and shoot' AWB performance but yeah, there should have been at least some shots with a WB tool of some sort. Definitely agree some of their PP is way off, too. Could be preproduction color software and/or using the Adobe color profile, too.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2017 at 19:16 UTC
On article Updated: Sony a9 samples with Raw support (446 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): Great! 20fps that gives you photos that have to be all edited and adjusted for white balance because the colours​ are off. Just want professional photographers want

It's a pre-production A9 using an ADOBE color profile which is also pre-release. Most Sony photographers used to editing RAW in Lightroom know to avoid Adobe's color profiles. Further, the lighting in some of these shots would certainly have given other cameras AWB issues... And in some of these I find DPR's 'revised' versions actually less realistic than the JPEG (like the pole vaulter, too much yellow shift in shadow/background).

IMO, DPR's track record with post processing 'test shots' is iffy. Far better to get Imatest and similar data where you can find it, or forget the clickbait DSLR fan trolling (on both sides) and learn/use the camera to the best of your/its abilities. I'm sure the release A9 will produce perfectly good color images even with OOC JPEG. You want to see goofy color cast? Try a Sigma DP and get back to me.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2017 at 18:58 UTC
On article Alpha-better: Sony a9 versus a7R II (502 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): As this is the 1st of the A9 series it is better to await its successor. Think Canon 1Ds, Canon 1Ds MkII, or Nikon D700, Nikon D800 or Sony Nex7, Sony a6000. It'll be better and cost less, and maybe a case and an extra battery and Capture one or DXO ?

Or you could just never buy anything because the second gen will always be an improvement.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 22:32 UTC
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1822 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nikon Guy UK: Sorry Sony fanboys, it will never will as rugged as a Nikon or Canon nor have the pro level backup.

I envy your cool NIKON username. Nothing like wearing your fanboyism like a face tattoo and then calling everyone else a fanboy. LOL

Oh, now it's 'color science'. There's always some reason people cling to their old time religion.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 19:22 UTC
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1822 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jefftan: Suddenly A6500 looks like a bargain

So does this, compared to a D5.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 19:21 UTC
On article Comparison Review: Sony FE 50mm F1.4 ZA vs 55mm F1.8 ZA (264 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: For about the same size and weight, I think I'd get the 50mm f1.4 Art lens with the adapter, from Sigma. It costs about the same as the cheaper Sony, but it can be used on a Sigma SD Quattro H, which should out-resolve anything else under about $10,000.

I do find it weird that these tests show the f1.8 to be sharper on the right side of these samples, while the f1.4 lens is sharper on the left side.

What does 'reliability is poor' mean, and on what reference is is based? How do you know your camera shut down due to the MC-11?

The way Sony is doing AF these days, I'd bet adapted lenses will perform at least as well stopped down with Live View.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2016 at 22:03 UTC
Total: 36, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »