mick232

Joined on Oct 23, 2011

Comments

Total: 450, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Now we know: Sony a9 is sharper than we thought (335 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: Will the 89% score be modified soon?

This was answered by DPR already, scroll down. The score won't change.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 10:02 UTC
On article Now we know: Sony a9 is sharper than we thought (335 comments in total)
In reply to:

walker2000: I thought mirrorless camera did not have AF problems for still. I'm curious why?

The AF may be able to determine the exact point of focus, but that doesn't mean that the lens can navigate to that point with the same level of accuracy or reliability. So, much of the chain is eliminated, but not all of it.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2017 at 20:59 UTC
On article Now we know: Sony a9 is sharper than we thought (335 comments in total)
In reply to:

oldfashioned: not to worry: nobody looks at pics at 100%. What I'm kinda suspecting is that the 100% rule only applies to this particular camera. But it's absolutely true that a photo taken by Marino Parisotto will look spectacular at any pixel count (he shoots on film btw) , and a 300 2.8 shot of the 4mp 1D mark I of a baseball player at night looks breathtaking and iphones look amazing on those little screens and the only reason why pro sport photographers insist on using 400 2.8 on FF instead of iphones is because iphones don't have 400 2.8 lenses. So it all comes down to reality, when it fits the needs of the moment?

If nobody looks at pictures at 100%, then why are people willing to pay big money for high megapixel sensors or lenses that are three times as much for a bit more resolution?

In reality, people crop images, print large, or simply spot a lack of resolution even at less than 100%. So it does matter. Not all the time, but often enough.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2017 at 20:54 UTC
On article Now we know: Sony a9 is sharper than we thought (335 comments in total)

Wouldn't that correction justify an increase of the overall score in the review by 1 point? Or does the sharpness not have any influence on the score at all?

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2017 at 18:22 UTC as 79th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Nice little project/demo. Foolish me, I would have moved the film plane to focus... the electrowetting is so much cuter. ;-)

It's obviously a demo of what is possible, not of what is easiest. Otherwise they could have just used a stock camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2017 at 00:13 UTC
In reply to:

maxnimo: I once brought a water lens with me on a trip, but I got so thirsty that I drank it before I got to that scenic overlook.

Why didn't you wait a bit longer and reclaim the water?

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 21:16 UTC
In reply to:

dennis tennis: water lens is too heavy to use on mirrorless.

You don't have to use heavy water, also because it's radioactive. Just take tap water.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 21:15 UTC
In reply to:

Andystack: wondering if you could use a "yellow" drop of liquid as a b&w filter on this rig.

I don't think people would appreciate that, for hygienic reasons.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 21:13 UTC
In reply to:

Snapper2013: Could this be done with tap water?

Unless the mineral is fluorite. Then you have a fluourite element for maximum sharpness.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 21:02 UTC
In reply to:

Lord Lucan: Is this idea going to be threatening to lens industry?

And even worse, will we all die of thirst because all water is used for such lenses?

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 20:59 UTC
In reply to:

Jim Keye: When can we start talking about how much 3D pop these water droplet lenses have?

Lenses made from soda have even more pop.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 20:57 UTC
In reply to:

paulski66: These look sharper than the Sony 70-200 f/2.8 samples Lloyd Chambers was posting on his blog last week. Probably less banding than the a9, too...

Maybe you should switch then? Keep in mind that the water company isn't at risk of going out of business, unlike Nikon.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 20:46 UTC

Awesome. But is it weather sealed?

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 20:44 UTC as 52nd comment | 1 reply
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2635 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zoom Zoom Zoom: The problem of Sony, the history of Sony, the curse of Sony is that every single product they make, is half-baked. There is not ONE thing they have EVER made that actually got finished up. Never. Every single Sony product is like this. So now I've reached the conclusion that there is a "half-baked" department in each of the company's divisions, to un-tweak, screw-up & remove certain features before something goes into production.. cannot be a coincidence that this happens every single time on every single thing they do.

Without going any further on a longer list, let's see.. humm, USB3.1 came out in 2013 (4 years ago), USB3 came out in 2010 (7 years ago) & USB2 came out in 2000 (17 years ago). 17 years ago Sony was making cameras like the 2.6MP DSC-F55. Fast forward to today & Sony's most advanced & expensive digital still camera, uses a 17 year old interface.

There is no way this is because of an overlook or "technical difficulty". This was on their "let's f..k something up" list.

So what? CompactFlash came out in 1994 and cameras still use it today.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 18:59 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2635 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: DXO Mark sensor scores:

A9: 92
1DX II: 88
D5: 88

Some facts at last!

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2017 at 16:38 UTC
On article Nikon announces prices for 100th Anniversary products (114 comments in total)
In reply to:

telecomprofi: I used to work at asian consumer electronic company and remeber how they once wanted to introduce "exclusive smartpone" the only difference they had proposed was to put a big number on a back in gold (0- 9999) and put it into tin box with certificate... we laughed out loud (whole central european department). They couldn't understand why

I think you were the ones who didn't understand.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 20:17 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2635 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: Is Sony a9 the Nikon D500 & Olympus E-M1 M2 killer? 🤔

Is a Ferrari a Honda Civic killer?

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2017 at 18:29 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2635 comments in total)
In reply to:

rsf3127: almost 1400 comments in 23 minutes...it may be a new record in dpreview.com

No. This is just an updated article. Scroll down and you will see comments written a month ago.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2017 at 18:26 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2635 comments in total)
In reply to:

jay jay02: So this is supposed to be a 1dx2 killer... lol. No telephoto lenses, poor dynamic range, overheating issues (as usual).. Just another piece of programmed obsolescence from Sony...

Honestly, I'd rather trust what Ken Rockwell has to say on this subject than what you say.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2017 at 18:21 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2635 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lea5: The Canon 1DX MarkII is a tad sharper right?

No. The test image taken with a particular lens on the 1DXII may be a tad sharper than another test image taken with a different lens on the A9.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2017 at 18:19 UTC
Total: 450, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »