Ken Aisin

Joined on Jun 8, 2011

Comments

Total: 150, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2756 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dan Vincent: Carey,

Canon and Nikon don't warrant against water intrusion in their bodies, even on the pro ones. The bodies are rugged, yes, but when the rubber hits the road, they won't cover it. I've taken my Sony a99 out into sea spray, rainy weather, and dusty conditions, and when I've had it serviced (for regular reasons like cleaning and adjustments) no one has mentioned anything about contamination.

If you want to believe, take one out yourself and you'll see that while no, you can't dunk it in the lake like a Pentax, it will shrug off the elements.

Found an article here on DPR,

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3864522077/survival-of-the-fittest-weatherproof-splashproof-waterproof-et-al

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 17:52 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2756 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dan Vincent: Carey,

Canon and Nikon don't warrant against water intrusion in their bodies, even on the pro ones. The bodies are rugged, yes, but when the rubber hits the road, they won't cover it. I've taken my Sony a99 out into sea spray, rainy weather, and dusty conditions, and when I've had it serviced (for regular reasons like cleaning and adjustments) no one has mentioned anything about contamination.

If you want to believe, take one out yourself and you'll see that while no, you can't dunk it in the lake like a Pentax, it will shrug off the elements.

Olympus OM-D EM-5 Mark II claim: " its all metal body is sealed for splashproof, dustproof and freezeproof protection. With a full array of similarly “proofed” accessories."

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 17:34 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2756 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dan Vincent: Carey,

Canon and Nikon don't warrant against water intrusion in their bodies, even on the pro ones. The bodies are rugged, yes, but when the rubber hits the road, they won't cover it. I've taken my Sony a99 out into sea spray, rainy weather, and dusty conditions, and when I've had it serviced (for regular reasons like cleaning and adjustments) no one has mentioned anything about contamination.

If you want to believe, take one out yourself and you'll see that while no, you can't dunk it in the lake like a Pentax, it will shrug off the elements.

Pentax 24-70/2.8 WR claim: "This lens features a dependable weather-resistant construction with special seals to effectively prevent the intrusion of water into the lens interior. By pairing it with a weather-resistant PENTAX Digital SLR camera body, it assures a durable, dependable digital imaging system that performs superbly in demanding shooting settings — even in rain or mist, or in locations prone to water splashing or spray."

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 17:33 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2756 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dan Vincent: Carey,

Canon and Nikon don't warrant against water intrusion in their bodies, even on the pro ones. The bodies are rugged, yes, but when the rubber hits the road, they won't cover it. I've taken my Sony a99 out into sea spray, rainy weather, and dusty conditions, and when I've had it serviced (for regular reasons like cleaning and adjustments) no one has mentioned anything about contamination.

If you want to believe, take one out yourself and you'll see that while no, you can't dunk it in the lake like a Pentax, it will shrug off the elements.

Canon 1Dx Mark II claims: "A robust magnesium alloy body design is both dust- and weather-sealed to permit working in harsh environments." " For professionals who demand nothing less than the best, the EOS-1D X Mark II camera is designed to perform superbly even in the most treacherous environments, every time.... The EOS-1D X Mark II and accessories like the new Wireless File Transmitter WFT-E8A have extensive gasketing for improved dust and water resistance, even at their connection points."

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 17:33 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2756 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dan Vincent: Carey,

Canon and Nikon don't warrant against water intrusion in their bodies, even on the pro ones. The bodies are rugged, yes, but when the rubber hits the road, they won't cover it. I've taken my Sony a99 out into sea spray, rainy weather, and dusty conditions, and when I've had it serviced (for regular reasons like cleaning and adjustments) no one has mentioned anything about contamination.

If you want to believe, take one out yourself and you'll see that while no, you can't dunk it in the lake like a Pentax, it will shrug off the elements.

Nikon D5 claims: " The Nikon D5 delivers with rugged construction and robust weather sealing." "... in a light and durable magnesium-alloy body with extensive weather sealing."

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 17:32 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2756 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dan Vincent: Carey,

Canon and Nikon don't warrant against water intrusion in their bodies, even on the pro ones. The bodies are rugged, yes, but when the rubber hits the road, they won't cover it. I've taken my Sony a99 out into sea spray, rainy weather, and dusty conditions, and when I've had it serviced (for regular reasons like cleaning and adjustments) no one has mentioned anything about contamination.

If you want to believe, take one out yourself and you'll see that while no, you can't dunk it in the lake like a Pentax, it will shrug off the elements.

Just FYI, below is a list of claims that I have come across from their advertising material.

Sony A7rII claim: " The body itself also features greater sealing for dust and moisture resistance, providing more protection when shooting out in the elements."

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 17:32 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2756 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dan Vincent: Carey,

Canon and Nikon don't warrant against water intrusion in their bodies, even on the pro ones. The bodies are rugged, yes, but when the rubber hits the road, they won't cover it. I've taken my Sony a99 out into sea spray, rainy weather, and dusty conditions, and when I've had it serviced (for regular reasons like cleaning and adjustments) no one has mentioned anything about contamination.

If you want to believe, take one out yourself and you'll see that while no, you can't dunk it in the lake like a Pentax, it will shrug off the elements.

@Dan, wetsleet, and Carey,

I think an article written on this subject at DPReview is warranted. Torture tests such as number 2 and 4 proposed by Dan are certainly welcomed.

Manufacturers are making so many claims about how robust and how extensively sealed their cameras and lenses are, and how they can withstand harsh environment. These claims may lead customers to believe that their equipment can be used in the rain without any extra protection. But in reality, when I contacted the tech support of Canon, Nikon, and Olympus about using their products in the rain. Only Olympus gave me a rather positive response that their splashproof products are usable in the rain. Canon and Nikon simply said they do not cover any damage due to water intrusion (Canon would however cover it if it's due to manufacturing defect).

I think we as consumers and reviewers should push manufacturers to start backing up their claims. At least they should give us IP ratings of their sealed products.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 17:31 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2756 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dan Vincent: Carey,

Canon and Nikon don't warrant against water intrusion in their bodies, even on the pro ones. The bodies are rugged, yes, but when the rubber hits the road, they won't cover it. I've taken my Sony a99 out into sea spray, rainy weather, and dusty conditions, and when I've had it serviced (for regular reasons like cleaning and adjustments) no one has mentioned anything about contamination.

If you want to believe, take one out yourself and you'll see that while no, you can't dunk it in the lake like a Pentax, it will shrug off the elements.

"Canon and Nikon don't warrant against water intrusion in their bodies, even on the pro ones."

FYI, I have contacted both Canon and Nikon tech support regarding this.

Canon's policy is that if the water intrusion is due to manufacturing defect, they would cover the damage.

Nikon's warranty does not cover any water damage.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2017 at 19:58 UTC

The A900 and a99's vertical grips are probably the best vertical grip designs ever. Full of buttons, plus joystick and dials. All at the right places.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 23:55 UTC as 36th comment
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wally Brooks: This goes to decisions by Nikon Management. This looks like lets get more money for less functionality by branding, marketing and trying to fool the public!

I give them the video and processing. The rest is largely a remade D5XXX. I get iteration. The branding to get money for less functionality--- less battery???? really????--- is a management decision.

Nikon management is less than stellar. A class managers hire A players and B & C managers hire C players because that is how to look good. Nikon management = C players making D level decisions.

Its telling in a year when we got lots of great products from Nikon; the 2-500 zoom, D5, D500 etc. that we also get mediocre management decisions.

The camera is good for what it is BUT not at $1200 which is the same price as a D 7200 - which I own - and is a better camera.

11) NFC: Another cost cutting move. But I won't argue with this one because I don't use it either.

Overall, I have to disagree that the D7500 has superior performance in virtually every single category when compared to the D7200. Indeed, with the $250 USD price difference. I personally find the D7200 a much better value proposition. Just my $0.02. Cheers :)

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2017 at 01:53 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wally Brooks: This goes to decisions by Nikon Management. This looks like lets get more money for less functionality by branding, marketing and trying to fool the public!

I give them the video and processing. The rest is largely a remade D5XXX. I get iteration. The branding to get money for less functionality--- less battery???? really????--- is a management decision.

Nikon management is less than stellar. A class managers hire A players and B & C managers hire C players because that is how to look good. Nikon management = C players making D level decisions.

Its telling in a year when we got lots of great products from Nikon; the 2-500 zoom, D5, D500 etc. that we also get mediocre management decisions.

The camera is good for what it is BUT not at $1200 which is the same price as a D 7200 - which I own - and is a better camera.

8) Battery grip: I disagree strongly about no one buying battery grip. With the battery grip, I find the camera much more stable when shooting hand-held vertically. I bought grips for all the DSLRs that I've ever owned except for the D70s. Give me a camera that has a square sensor, then I won't get a grip ;)

9) Second card slot: I learned my lesson when I broke an SD card with pictures in it. Better be safe than sorry with dual slots.

10) Screen resolution: D7500 got a lower resolution screen. Another cost cutting move by Nikon.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2017 at 01:52 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wally Brooks: This goes to decisions by Nikon Management. This looks like lets get more money for less functionality by branding, marketing and trying to fool the public!

I give them the video and processing. The rest is largely a remade D5XXX. I get iteration. The branding to get money for less functionality--- less battery???? really????--- is a management decision.

Nikon management is less than stellar. A class managers hire A players and B & C managers hire C players because that is how to look good. Nikon management = C players making D level decisions.

Its telling in a year when we got lots of great products from Nikon; the 2-500 zoom, D5, D500 etc. that we also get mediocre management decisions.

The camera is good for what it is BUT not at $1200 which is the same price as a D 7200 - which I own - and is a better camera.

5) Touch screen: Very useful when compared to physical buttons? Again, arguable.

6) Battery Life: Same? Let's wait for actual usages and reviews before we come to this conclusion.

7) Price: Virtually the same? There's a $250 price difference.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2017 at 01:52 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wally Brooks: This goes to decisions by Nikon Management. This looks like lets get more money for less functionality by branding, marketing and trying to fool the public!

I give them the video and processing. The rest is largely a remade D5XXX. I get iteration. The branding to get money for less functionality--- less battery???? really????--- is a management decision.

Nikon management is less than stellar. A class managers hire A players and B & C managers hire C players because that is how to look good. Nikon management = C players making D level decisions.

Its telling in a year when we got lots of great products from Nikon; the 2-500 zoom, D5, D500 etc. that we also get mediocre management decisions.

The camera is good for what it is BUT not at $1200 which is the same price as a D 7200 - which I own - and is a better camera.

3) Weight: True, everyone complains about weight. But 640g vs 675g is hardly a major weight reduction. I wonder if this is even noticeable.

4) Tilting screen: There are better cameras out there on the market for videographers. I doubt any videographer would pick up a D7500 for video. This, in my opinion, nullifies the usefulness of the tilting screen for video. For stills, Nikon's live view AF performance has always been poor. Again, nullifies the usefulness of the tilting screen for stills. I personally almost never use live view. The poor AF is an absolute pain. It's also very battery draining. Besides, tilting screen or articulating screen are more prone to failure when compared to fixed screen. Calling this an improvement is arguable.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2017 at 01:52 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wally Brooks: This goes to decisions by Nikon Management. This looks like lets get more money for less functionality by branding, marketing and trying to fool the public!

I give them the video and processing. The rest is largely a remade D5XXX. I get iteration. The branding to get money for less functionality--- less battery???? really????--- is a management decision.

Nikon management is less than stellar. A class managers hire A players and B & C managers hire C players because that is how to look good. Nikon management = C players making D level decisions.

Its telling in a year when we got lots of great products from Nikon; the 2-500 zoom, D5, D500 etc. that we also get mediocre management decisions.

The camera is good for what it is BUT not at $1200 which is the same price as a D 7200 - which I own - and is a better camera.

@Old Cameras. You have pretty much listed all the improvements of the D7500 over the D7200 in your post. But there are a few things that I would like to point out.

1) Sensor: There are some pluses with the new sensor, but also some minuses. Calling it a better sensor is arguable.

2) AF: There are only two upgrades. The180000 pixel RGB sensor, and the group AF option. The 180000 pixel RGB sensor should help with subject recognition and tracking. But by how much? No one knows until we see the reviews. Besides, the D7500 still uses the same old Multi-CAM 3500II AF sensor module in the D7200.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2017 at 01:52 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: Who the hell needs a battery grip?

Well, I know I do. Because none of my cameras came with a square sensor. Lol.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 02:47 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: Easy! The D7500 is unbuyable. I think most will either stay with the D7200 or get the D500.

I hope the reviews of the D7500 would proof me wrong. But spec-wise, it is really unbuyable for $1249 USD.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 12:26 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Maoby: Don’t forget that the Nikon D500 is a ENJOYMENT to use! :)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/sets/72157627624479529

I totally agree. D500 is an enjoyment to use. I shot an event with my friend's D500 and Sigma 50-100/1.8 combo. Totally fell in love with them.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 12:20 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (398 comments in total)

If I were to spend my own money on a new DX body, and had to pick between a D500 and a D7500, I would definitely spend more on the D500 for the best ever phase detect AF system that I've ever tried.

The D7500 is not worth $1249 USD in my opinion. Higher price but seems to have even fewer features than the good old D7200 :(

May I suggest a more interesting article title? "New vs Old, Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D7200: Which is better for you?"

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 12:15 UTC as 109th comment | 3 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: Nikon D70 (220 comments in total)

The D70s was my first digital SLR, and I loved it to bits. Loved the x-sync speed at 1/500 sec and the max shutter speed at 1/8000 sec. Overall, a very fabulous camera for the price at the time.

If I really had to nit pick, I didn't like the base ISO at 200 and the not so wide dynamic range.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2017 at 18:34 UTC as 63rd comment
In reply to:

Light Pilgrim: I would inmediately purchase 135 mm but I will not do it because of AF reliabity and consistency. Sigma is a fantastic company and what they do it amazing, but my experience showed me that nothing I can rely 100% other than my Canon lenses. So I will just wait for Canon new versions of 85 and 135.
14 mm is anotger story. You do not need AF there, so this is cool. But 12 mm would be nicer:-)

I'm a Nikon shooter, and the new Sigma Art lenses are very reliable and consistent when it comes to AF. I spoke with a Sigma technician, and he said they generally have quite a lot more AF issues with Canon than with Nikon.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 05:34 UTC
Total: 150, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »