BobT3218

Lives in Australia Sydney, Australia
Works as a Retired Engineer
Has a website at www.bobtrlin.com
Joined on Apr 28, 2011

Comments

Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (662 comments in total)
In reply to:

vwert: question: What kind of lenses to support phase autofocus?
Thanks

Phase detection AF in the E-M1 is to allow the use of the older 4/3rds lenses. Micro4/3rds evolved out of 4/3rds which had a mirror and larger flange focus distance. These lenses were considerably larger and used phase detection.

Link | Posted on Sep 24, 2016 at 22:37 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (662 comments in total)
In reply to:

sneakyracer: 4/3 sensor is dated imho. They date back to when larger sensors were really expensive. Enthusiasts demand better performance nowadays at the $1000+ pricepoint. All TV/Monitors today are 16:9 as well so the 4/3 format is a bit awkward except for more traditional applications like print (magazines). In very small form factors the 4/3" format is nice but on larger cameras it makes little sense except maybe for the smaller lenses and increased affordability (if any). That does not mean that the OM-D cameras are bad cameras. On the contrary they are excellent just that there are better options for most folks available today.

Off topic but while we are at it, check this out:
http://petapixel.com/2016/04/07/digital-camera-sensors-circular/
http://petapixel.com/2010/04/01/circular-sensors-for-your-circular-lenses/

Link | Posted on Sep 24, 2016 at 08:45 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (662 comments in total)
In reply to:

sneakyracer: 4/3 sensor is dated imho. They date back to when larger sensors were really expensive. Enthusiasts demand better performance nowadays at the $1000+ pricepoint. All TV/Monitors today are 16:9 as well so the 4/3 format is a bit awkward except for more traditional applications like print (magazines). In very small form factors the 4/3" format is nice but on larger cameras it makes little sense except maybe for the smaller lenses and increased affordability (if any). That does not mean that the OM-D cameras are bad cameras. On the contrary they are excellent just that there are better options for most folks available today.

I love 4:3 also but if I could afford it, I would love square even more. Actually it shouldn't take much for Oly to go to square, call it micro Hassy if you like. It would mean a camera no more than 4.3mm higher. Keeping the pixel density the same, the count would go from 16Mp to 21Mp but better would be to keep the pixel count to 16Mp and increase dynamic range. No change will be required in the stable of lenses. E-M1 II perhaps?

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2016 at 02:30 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (662 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tom Caldwell: I don't like the fully articulated screen to the point it is a deal breaker for me. Has Olympus decided that fully articulated LCD screens are now an "Olympus signature"?

Have the managed to put two batteries in the grip? as having to remove the grip to replace the inner one is idiotic.

Have they reworked the menu system that has been growing like Topsy and quite out of control.

Nice camera but I am afraid I am not a videographer and I can already create more images with the E-M1 than I can rationally deal with. I need even more images like a hole in the head. It is not necessarily good to be able to gather images like confetti.

Two SD cards? Why not just one larger card?

Think, think ... oh and the body still has too many buttons on the back plate with to little to do. Olympus should check out the other brands who seem to actually make fewer buttons do more things quite gracefully.

I sold and E-3 for an E-M1. I was spoilt and really miss the articulated screen and two card slots. When shooting in confined spaces a fully articulated is a must. Also, I can't tell you how many time I've gone out forgetting to put the main card back and being very grateful that the second card was there. It's a matter of having a backup card rather than capacity.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2016 at 02:09 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (662 comments in total)
In reply to:

ARB1: Well, my D800 is now sold and all the lenses will be gone by weeks end, so now it's time to preorder the new E-M1 II as my main go to camera for traveling. I am a bit hesitant though since some cameras have their issues with the first launch.

There will certainly be issues. My E-M1 has been to Oly hospital three times already but each time it comes back it's better than before and I love it even more. Luckily I live just 15min from Oly hospital.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2016 at 01:58 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (662 comments in total)
In reply to:

sneakyracer: 4/3 sensor is dated imho. They date back to when larger sensors were really expensive. Enthusiasts demand better performance nowadays at the $1000+ pricepoint. All TV/Monitors today are 16:9 as well so the 4/3 format is a bit awkward except for more traditional applications like print (magazines). In very small form factors the 4/3" format is nice but on larger cameras it makes little sense except maybe for the smaller lenses and increased affordability (if any). That does not mean that the OM-D cameras are bad cameras. On the contrary they are excellent just that there are better options for most folks available today.

True in many respects but remember that the 3:2 form factor was first introduced as a standard for 35mm film in 1909. Also, clearly the more a sensor approached the shape of a circle, the better it can take advantage of the full image circle and therefore more versatile and efficient. There are some moving in that direction. Anyway, why limit your view of the wold by looking through a letter box? Just making a point.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 22:27 UTC
In reply to:

BobT3218: This could be the FF killer. If one wanted to spend big bucks to impress, why wouldn't one go for MF. Looking at the world through a letter box is so passé anyway.

Yeah, I was thinking more of the upper end pro market.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 23:30 UTC
In reply to:

BobT3218: This could be the FF killer. If one wanted to spend big bucks to impress, why wouldn't one go for MF. Looking at the world through a letter box is so passé anyway.

Just realised the format is not square but 4:3, my favourite format anyway.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 08:59 UTC

This could be the FF killer. If one wanted to spend big bucks to impress, why wouldn't one go for MF. Looking at the world through a letter box is so passé anyway.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 08:26 UTC as 33rd comment | 3 replies

Is this just someone trying to cash in on nostalgia? I need to be convinced that an 80 year old 5-element MF design can compete with a modern 9-element extra-low dispersion aspherical lens.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 21:00 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

Cameracist: OK, but you could have written very similar article about Microsoft Lumia :D

Is that true? No biggy if you are talking about phones but in terms of competing with cameras other than P&S, the iPhone's a no show. Who would buy a camera without IS these days?

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 09:09 UTC
In reply to:

Shifter: I once said that I was happy with the iPhone 5s (still owe $480 on it) that some people here got severely bent out of shape at the audacity of such a statement even tho I mainly use a EOS7D. The Canon's and Nikon's should take note that often a smart phone is sometimes better. A lot better.

Yep, if you can't afford to pay for anything outright, you can't afford it... simple!

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 08:51 UTC
In reply to:

BobT3218: People are missing the point. No matter how much lens and sensor technology improves, phones will always be limited to sensors the size of a match head while cameras will have sensors from postage stamp size up whatever one can afford. They are different animals for different purposes.

You are still missing the point. Whatever Apple can do, camera manufacturers can and will do 100 times bigger.

Yes, phone take great looking pics if you are into "look at me, look at me" selfies and oversaturated "look where I am landscapes" but not all of us have self image issues. Many of us want our phones for communications and our cameras for art and business.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2016 at 22:46 UTC

People are missing the point. No matter how much lens and sensor technology improves, phones will always be limited to sensors the size of a match head while cameras will have sensors from postage stamp size up whatever one can afford. They are different animals for different purposes.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2016 at 02:19 UTC as 142nd comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Ran Plett: Good thing they made it waterproof, because these things are slippery like little bars of soap. And I'm so tired of dropping my soap these days.

It's ridiculous that it has taken so long for phones to be waterproof. It's not that one needs to go swimming with a phone but active people get wet, rain happens, snow melts, waves crash.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:35 UTC

I have a similar problem but in my case it's with an Olympus E-M1 and a couple of Lexar SD HCI 32GB cards. The first image after switch-on is often but not always corrupted. I've had the camera's CPU replaced for other reasons but the problem persists. I format often and always in camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2016 at 00:27 UTC as 7th comment
On article Looking Sharp: A focus stacking tutorial (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

BobT3218: OK, so now how about a follow up for us Oly E-M1 shooters who have a very useful in-camera focus stacking facility but precious little guidance from Olympus as to how to get the best out of it?

The old way certainly produces great results but takes time both shooting and PP. Sometimes in the field one wants to shoot wide open for blur but with sufficient DOF to totally cover the object. With Oly focus stacking, with a press of the shutter button, it is all done in a couple of second right there in the camera. I'm sure other manufacturers will introduce their own and probably better versions shortly. It really can't be that difficult. BTY, in a pinch, with a very very steady hand, it will work hand held but don't rely on it.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2016 at 23:42 UTC
On article Looking Sharp: A focus stacking tutorial (224 comments in total)

OK, so now how about a follow up for us Oly E-M1 shooters who have a very useful in-camera focus stacking facility but precious little guidance from Olympus as to how to get the best out of it?

Link | Posted on May 30, 2016 at 05:13 UTC as 40th comment | 6 replies

Back to the future. I find rear LCD a PITA anyway.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 23:42 UTC as 210th comment
In reply to:

Muster Mark: Surely it wasn't a 100% positive experience using the camera? Or was it?

With Olympus supporting it, I'm sure there were a few caveats on what could be said.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2016 at 23:19 UTC
Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »