6x9

6x9

Lives in Belgium Brussels, Belgium
Joined on May 8, 2007

Comments

Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

"Womans photo" is this correct wording? I was taught at school to use "women" for plural.
Native English speakers - correct me if I am wrong.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 16:52 UTC as 43rd comment | 1 reply
On article Close-up: Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 (127 comments in total)

It is getting hot in the $2000 niche - Fuji XT-2, Olympus E-M1 MK2, now GH5. I hope that competition will bring prices down over time.
Besides this, I like the new body style - similar to G80/G85.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 17:09 UTC as 29th comment | 1 reply
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1638 comments in total)
In reply to:

6x9: "In lower light and at higher ISO values, the EOS M5 is behind the competition by around one stop, which is a significant disparity at this point".

Yep. This is the price to pay for dual pixel PD. Smaller pixels mean lower S/N ratio, in general. Even if amplified signals are combined further in circuitry (after phase detection information is read), noise is already there. Aeraging two signals will (theoretically) improve S/N, but not enough to compensate for 2 times lower input signal (compared to a standard pixel).

Richard: If Canon would disclose the two imagers' topologies (conventional and split-pixel) with key components' dimensions, then those could be compared.
I was searching for this detail, but could not find anything useful.
Objectively, the sensor (or better to say - camera) is under performing in low light situations. Still, there may be more than one reason for this.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2016 at 17:54 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1638 comments in total)
In reply to:

6x9: "In lower light and at higher ISO values, the EOS M5 is behind the competition by around one stop, which is a significant disparity at this point".

Yep. This is the price to pay for dual pixel PD. Smaller pixels mean lower S/N ratio, in general. Even if amplified signals are combined further in circuitry (after phase detection information is read), noise is already there. Aeraging two signals will (theoretically) improve S/N, but not enough to compensate for 2 times lower input signal (compared to a standard pixel).

Some people here have objected my statement about split-pixel sensors having higher noise levels.
OK. In ideal world averaged signal from two or more independent pixels will be equivalent to a signal obtained from one larger pixel with area equal in size to the sum of the smaller pixels. This is assuming no loss, etc.
However, split-pixel requires additional components (at least 3 MOS transistors for amplification and control per channel, plus interconnect circuitry). Unless all these components can be proportionally downscaled in split-pixel layout compared to standard layout, total effective area of split-pixel photocells will be less than effective area of a "conventional" pixel. Reduction of the amplifier size (in order to maximize the size of the photodiode) improves the signal-to-noise ratio as this frees up room for photocells, however it makes the sensor more susceptible to RTS noise (which is typically the major noise contributor).

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 23:00 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1638 comments in total)

"In lower light and at higher ISO values, the EOS M5 is behind the competition by around one stop, which is a significant disparity at this point".

Yep. This is the price to pay for dual pixel PD. Smaller pixels mean lower S/N ratio, in general. Even if amplified signals are combined further in circuitry (after phase detection information is read), noise is already there. Aeraging two signals will (theoretically) improve S/N, but not enough to compensate for 2 times lower input signal (compared to a standard pixel).

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2016 at 18:11 UTC as 164th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

hammarbytp: Chris Williams- The A7R II has only been out a year, so to expect a replacement now seems a bit previous. especially compared to the 5 year old A99.

Personally I think the A99 II was a huge announcement because it meant that Sony is not putting all its eggs in the mirrorless basket.

Also the A99 II may well be one of the best all-rounder FF out there while significantly undercutting the price of equivalent Nikon and Canon equivalents. even if you are not a Sony fan, you have to agree that competition in this space is a good thing

I tried the A 99 II at Photokina. My biggest disappointment was the viewfinder. EVF resolution does not seem to be on par with the best offerings on the market. Not sure if it was a pre-production model though.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2016 at 10:54 UTC
In reply to:

6x9: After two recent announcements of medium format cameras by Fuji and by Hasselblad Pentax 645Z started looking somewhat ... outdated. It is still a nice camera (especially considering the price), but the current trend is clearly to make MF truly portable. Ricoh/Pentax need to start thinking in the same direction and will go mirrorless. A new mount is imminent. Hopefully they can keep compatibility with their current 645 lenses (via adapter).

I totally agree about the pentaprism viewfinder. The one in Pentax 645 cameras is great. Size and weight do not matter for studio work. But they certainly matter for the field. People buying such cameras are not always professional photographers. Squeezing the camera into smaller volume is a big selling point. Also, EVF (although being not always ideal) has certain advantages over pentaprism finder. I know many people who prefer EVF over pentaprism. I still keep all my AF 645 lenses, hoping to use them one day when I can afford the 645Z or its successor.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2016 at 10:22 UTC

After two recent announcements of medium format cameras by Fuji and by Hasselblad Pentax 645Z started looking somewhat ... outdated. It is still a nice camera (especially considering the price), but the current trend is clearly to make MF truly portable. Ricoh/Pentax need to start thinking in the same direction and will go mirrorless. A new mount is imminent. Hopefully they can keep compatibility with their current 645 lenses (via adapter).

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 22:00 UTC as 8th comment | 3 replies
On article Photokina 2016: Canon EOS M5 quick look video (259 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: what is the viewfinder magnification? The specs say 0.39 type evf. I hope that's not it.

Approximately 0.62x. Here is the link to the source :

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/reviews/compactsystemcameras/canon-eos-m5-review

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 23:59 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1638 comments in total)
In reply to:

6x9: I do not see viewfinder magnification data. Or have I overlooked this?

Maybe there is a reason for Canon not to show viewfinder magnification in specs. I am afraid that if magnification is lower than this in competition cameras - e.g. Olympus E-M5 II or E-M1, or Panasonic GX8 - or the worst case - less than x0.7, this camera will not be as compelling for many potential buyers, as it could be.
While people write in comments that the price is right and that it is in line with competition, I personnaly do not feel so. ~1000 USD or Euros is quite some money, and general public will not be prepared to pay this amount. It may be an interesting camera for enthusiasts. However, this category value certain things which are not in or may be not in the M5 (large viewfinder, long(er) battery life, up to date videography features). It looks like with this camera Canon did not put all aces on the table, possibly trying to avoid competition between EOS-M and EOS product lines and avoid EOS users drifting towards the M line.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2016 at 11:31 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1638 comments in total)

I do not see viewfinder magnification data. Or have I overlooked this?

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 18:20 UTC as 280th comment | 3 replies
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2204 comments in total)
In reply to:

6x9: 4k - fine.
No IBIS - HUGE disappointment. I had the X-Pro1 but sold it. The main issue was absence of IBIS - real problem when using Fujifilm primes (not stabilized) in low light. Well, it had ~ 1-stop advantage over my Olympus m4/3 cameras and I loved the image quality. However, in real life absence of stabilization killed the difference.

@ The Davinator:
My old and only digital Nikon - D80 - is dramatically outdated. No need to sell it. :)
Pity, it is not a collectible item.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 16:35 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2204 comments in total)

4k - fine.
No IBIS - HUGE disappointment. I had the X-Pro1 but sold it. The main issue was absence of IBIS - real problem when using Fujifilm primes (not stabilized) in low light. Well, it had ~ 1-stop advantage over my Olympus m4/3 cameras and I loved the image quality. However, in real life absence of stabilization killed the difference.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 15:24 UTC as 322nd comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

zakaria: The sweeden company hasselblad learned well the lesson from its neighbour Nokia that the name brand is not all the things but you have to treat with the new technology.
i think this is a new born to hasselblad.

We will know soon, if this is the case. Hasselblad already made mistakes in the past - e.g. trying to sell re-branded Sony cameras at ridiculous price. The new mount, new lenses, no phase detection AF... But lighter and cheaper camera. With manufacturing costs being significantly lower due to elimination of high-precision mechanics Hassy could go down with price and make this camera more affordable.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2016 at 20:06 UTC
On article Hands on with the Hasselblad H6D 50c/100c (267 comments in total)
In reply to:

6x9: Nice, but too expensive for me.
Waiting for the new 645D from Pentax. Rumors say that it is almost there :) Should be times cheaper.

I hope so. Still have a few FA 645 lenses bought at the end of the film era.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2016 at 20:41 UTC
On article Hands on with the Hasselblad H6D 50c/100c (267 comments in total)

Nice, but too expensive for me.
Waiting for the new 645D from Pentax. Rumors say that it is almost there :) Should be times cheaper.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 17:52 UTC as 31st comment | 4 replies
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1056 comments in total)

A nice camera.
However, while watching the video I got really disturbed by the interviewing person. First off, he is wearing a badge with a Sony-branded badge. This is sort of impolite when interviewing an Olympus rep. Secondly, the hand-held recorder looked annoying. Why not to put it on the table?

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2016 at 23:58 UTC as 136th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Frank_BR: Nano coating? Oh, no, another manufacturer who tries to tell other version of the same old fairy tale about lens coating!

It all started in the '60s when Asahi Pentax created a hype with SMC (Super Multi-Coating). Since then, the world has had to hear all this blah blah blah about the magical qualities of the various types of coating used in photographic lenses.

Some acronyms created since then by the fertile imagination of the lens manufacturers:
SMC Pentax
EBC: Fuji
T*: Zeiss
MC: Pentacon, CZJ, Tokina
SSC: Canon
C: Nikon
N: Nikon
SHMC: Hoya
UMC: Samyang
VMC: Vivitar

... and HTMC of Hama

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2013 at 15:40 UTC
On article Canon announces EOS M2 in Japan (616 comments in total)
In reply to:

Frank_BR: According to legend, the acronym EOS was created by Canon to represent the Goddess of Dawn. However, the market failure of the EOS M suggests that EOS stands now for End Of Success…

It seems Canon is starting to lose its commercial magic

I am not convienced... I think that perception of the EOS M (or of any other camera/system) on Japanese market may be quite different comparted to other markets. It is very different mentality.
Also, if you check here on Dpreview how many people actually own the EOS M, you may be quite surprized. This is times more than some "better known" cameras.
The positive thing is - Canon made the market aware of their "M" model. The camera is well built (although it is not without some drawbacks). All three lenses are extremely good - I do not recall seeing any negative feedback. The best advertisement is a word of mouth (and price). People are buying and will keep buying the "M".

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2013 at 18:49 UTC
On article Canon announces EOS M2 in Japan (616 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peter Bendheim: The EOS-M in it's current form with the firmware upgrade is a surprisingly nice little camera to use. It's really small with the pancake lens, absolutely solid build that is all magnesium alloy, a tempered glass LCD and pretty good image quality. I like it's ergonomic simplicity, it's easy to use, the lenses are metal bodied, and the IQ is great. The pancake lens is razor sharp, for example. Really as good as anyone could wish for. It would be nice if it had a viewfinder that one could attach. It's also a refreshing design break from all the fake retro, fake leather, Leica look a-likes, and other gimmicks.
Hate it as much as you like, folks, especially those of you that have never tried it, but it occupies a deserved place in my camera bag along with the bigger and flashier gear, and has produced images I am very happy with and that form part of my portfolio. I'm sure Canon will eventually produce a more pro model, but this camera isn't half as bad as most of you would like it to be.

EOS M is an excellent camera taking into account its current price. It is not perfect, but I do not see any point to complain.
Still the new M2 does nor seem to make any sense. However, it probably makes some sense for Japanese market, since it has been released only there.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2013 at 11:40 UTC
Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »