Mark B UK

Lives in United Kingdom Surrey, United Kingdom
Joined on Nov 24, 2007

Comments

Total: 27, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Opinion: Enthusiast compacts have finally come of age (497 comments in total)

Er, the Panasonic LX100 is larger than the one-inch sensor cameras because it has a larger chip (micro four-thirds, cropped slightly according to aspect ration choice).

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2016 at 18:40 UTC as 92nd comment | 1 reply
On article Snapseed for Android update brings DNG Raw editing (24 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark B UK: Which Android phones can shoot RAW? Is there any way I can make my Sony Xperia Z3 do it?

Thanks Megaframe; that table suggests the 5X is a very good choice. I'm tempted...

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 16:07 UTC
On article Snapseed for Android update brings DNG Raw editing (24 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark B UK: Which Android phones can shoot RAW? Is there any way I can make my Sony Xperia Z3 do it?

Thanks. Does the new Nexus 5X have RAW? Also is it yet known whether the BlackBerry Priv will?

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2015 at 17:48 UTC
On article Snapseed for Android update brings DNG Raw editing (24 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark B UK: Which Android phones can shoot RAW? Is there any way I can make my Sony Xperia Z3 do it?

Thanks; I'll pursue the leads you've suggested.

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2015 at 09:30 UTC
On article Snapseed for Android update brings DNG Raw editing (24 comments in total)

Which Android phones can shoot RAW? Is there any way I can make my Sony Xperia Z3 do it?

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2015 at 20:35 UTC as 12th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Mark B UK: Looking at the body and lens prices, and the specification, it seems to me that Panasonic and Leica have crafted a carefully-designed stupidity tax. I'm not paying!

I'm not blaming Panasonic. I own one of their products (LX100) and the electronics in it are good.

All I'm saying is that I think the end product is ridiculously expensive for what it is, to the extent that I see those who buy it as somewhat gullible - hence my original comment about a 'stupidity tax'.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 18:32 UTC
In reply to:

Mark B UK: Looking at the body and lens prices, and the specification, it seems to me that Panasonic and Leica have crafted a carefully-designed stupidity tax. I'm not paying!

Nor me. However I look at the price/specification mix and to me it doesn't stack up. Way too expensive for what it does.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 14:32 UTC
In reply to:

Mark B UK: Looking at the body and lens prices, and the specification, it seems to me that Panasonic and Leica have crafted a carefully-designed stupidity tax. I'm not paying!

It's rumoured that much of the electronics in the SL is from Panasonic. Possibly also the sensor.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 11:07 UTC

Looking at the body and lens prices, and the specification, it seems to me that Panasonic and Leica have crafted a carefully-designed stupidity tax. I'm not paying!

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2015 at 18:11 UTC as 94th comment | 7 replies
On article Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? (1076 comments in total)

Sony comments that 14-bit lossless RAW might affect shooting rates. Lossless need not mean uncompressed. Nikon has been doing lossless compressed 14-bit RAW files for years, including 36MP ones from the D800/800E/810's Sony sensor. Can't Sony replicate this, with files maybe 20 percent larger due to the 42MP sensor?

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2015 at 21:33 UTC as 195th comment | 4 replies

I owned a Leica M6 in the film era and do a lot of travel and available light photography, so am a potential customer for the Q. Tempted though I am, I probably won't buy, for a reason Barnaby alluded to in his think piece.

When I invested in my M6 I did so as a gift to myself for landing my first management job, in my mid-20s, expecting it to last, literally, a lifetime. Spread over half a century or thereabouts, I considered the price a bargain. Had digital not supplanted film I would still be using it now, almost halfway through its expected lifespan.

Not only are today's digital cameras unlikely to last even a fraction of that time, but technology moves so fast that it makes more sense to buy camera bodies costing less than the Q and quality lenses, upgrading the former periodically. Had the Q's lens been removable, I might be persuaded; otherwise, sadly, not. But I'm sure I'd love using one...

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 16:10 UTC as 114th comment
On article Nikon D750 Review (1989 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark B UK: This seems to me like a mini-review, with many sections missing from the normally excellent DPReview full test. Will it be added to in due course, or is this a sign of cut-backs?

I appreciate the principle of tailoring reviews to camera type. However there are elements in the previous test format that would be very relevant to the D750. For instance:
- RAW image quality
- Noise and noise reduction
- Dynamic range (which covered both RAW and JPEG and included an excellent chart and analysis of the effect of any DR expansion modes)

Would you consider reinstating these for future tests, and maybe retrospectively adding them to the D750 review?

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2014 at 10:44 UTC
On article Nikon D750 Review (1989 comments in total)

This seems to me like a mini-review, with many sections missing from the normally excellent DPReview full test. Will it be added to in due course, or is this a sign of cut-backs?

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2014 at 21:39 UTC as 337th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Mark B UK: I know the number of CD-AF focus points (25) is relatively low, but is it yet known what proportion of the frame they cover? Is it a central diamond, such as the E-M1, or pretty much the whole frame, as with the a6000?

Apologies, yes I meant PDAF; thanks for clarifying that it covers 60% of the frame. That's better than the E-M1 but less good than the a6000 I believe.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 18:02 UTC

I know the number of CD-AF focus points (25) is relatively low, but is it yet known what proportion of the frame they cover? Is it a central diamond, such as the E-M1, or pretty much the whole frame, as with the a6000?

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 16:21 UTC as 155th comment | 4 replies
On article Apple to cease development of Aperture (425 comments in total)

The writing was on the wall, because Apple failed significantly to update the program for a long time.

IMO it's a strategic error. The cost of updating Aperture to make it best in class would be tiny for a company with the world's largest cash reserves, especially since much of that cash is offshore, preventing the company from repatriating it but providing the resources to upgrade the program locally. And Apple's brand and heritage are with the creative and imaging communities, who will now have one fewer reason for sticking with the brand.

Granted, a free program will be offered with future versions of the OS. But I cannot believe it will be anything like as powerful as a paid-for package such as LightRoom.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2014 at 18:39 UTC as 132nd comment
Total: 27, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »