Deliverator

Joined on Sep 17, 2011

Comments

Total: 539, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

PhotoUniverse: Can I return it if it was purchased within the "return and refund policy"?

:-)

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2017 at 21:17 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoUniverse: Can I return it if it was purchased within the "return and refund policy"?

I wish there were a laugh emoji button for this one, as on Facebook.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2017 at 22:01 UTC
In reply to:

T3: I think the fact that we're even talking about the focus capability of adapted lenses is pretty extraordinary. Up until very recently in camera history, the only "focus capability" of adapted lenses was manual focus! So I find it a rather silly thing to be complaining about. It's like complaining about that the new Image Stabilization feature in a body or lens only offers 2 or 3 stops of stabilization instead of 4 or 5 stops, when the prior alternative-- up until that moment in history-- was having no Image Stabilization at all.

That's the Sony fanboy mantra: spin it positively in the face of all facts:

"No native long glass? - That's not a bug, that's a feature!"

"Adapting off-brand glass won't work in a certain application? - It's the adapter's fault! And it's amazing that you can even adapt the lenses! Who cares if it won't work for what you need to do!"

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 17:08 UTC
In reply to:

citrate: How about adapting Sony's A mount lense?

"The longest is the 70-200 f/2.8 IS L II which works like a champ with the A9 for my needs."

Are you shooting action/sports at high frame rates with it? Because that was the point of the article...

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 16:59 UTC
In reply to:

Fujica: In short: "The A9 is NOT the D5 and 1Dx II killer Sony claims it is".

Which was fully to be expected.
No need to say that the A9 is aimed to be solely used with the electronic shutter.

When the mechanical shutter is needed it performs really bad, the viewfinder experience is then more then horrible with much blackout and no real good possibility to follow your subject and then its max speed of 5FPS is laughable for a camera that claims to be a sport and action orientated camera.

With its ES on it can't be used with flash, and with its mechanical shutter selected the sync speed of this A9 is nothing compared to what a D5 or 1Dx can do.

It is just NOT the D5 or 1Dx killer Sony and its fans claims it is. The A9 just falls shorts on everything except for its electronic shutter capabilities.

"I think it is rather shameful of Sony that they want to purposely mislead people into letting them think this could replace a D5 or 1Dx."

Those bodies are generally used by pros, who won't be fooled into buying a system that doesn't suit their needs.

Pro sports shooters likely won't make the switch, but there are likely a bunch of wedding photographers out there currently using 1DX's and D5 that will love what this camera has to offer.

When Sony fills out their lens line and improves the body haptics, then sports shooters might make the switch... of course by that time, Canikon might have pro mirrorless offerings of their own...

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 16:56 UTC
In reply to:

turvyT: I bet it still works faster than Canon bodies with Sony glass.

"Canon's 50s and 85s are so old they only shoot black and white."

Damn, that was funny!

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 16:47 UTC
In reply to:

T3: I think the fact that we're even talking about the focus capability of adapted lenses is pretty extraordinary. Up until very recently in camera history, the only "focus capability" of adapted lenses was manual focus! So I find it a rather silly thing to be complaining about. It's like complaining about that the new Image Stabilization feature in a body or lens only offers 2 or 3 stops of stabilization instead of 4 or 5 stops, when the prior alternative-- up until that moment in history-- was having no Image Stabilization at all.

It's not silly at all. It's answering the question a lot of people have been asking, namely, "Can I effectively use my fast Canon primes/zooms to shoot sports with the Sony A9?"

The answer is no. Whether it's impressive or not that you can AF with adapted glass is beside the point.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 15:17 UTC
In reply to:

Mister Joseph: This is cool as long as 18mm is indeed 18mm, and 400mm is indeed 400mm.

For example, my Nikon 28-300 is significantly "shorter" than my Tamron 70-300 at 300mm.

At what subject distance?

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 16:18 UTC
On article First pictures from the new Nikon 8-15mm fisheye (139 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: The ability to shoot photos like these are why I have wanted the Tokina 10-17mm fisheye in Nikon mount for years and years. I need to get off my duff and buy a D5300 and that lens . . . or this new Nikon lens.

There is no difference in image quality between the D7100 and the D5300. Same sensor. The D5300 has full AF-P compatibility, while the D7100 only partial (can't turn off VR). That said, the handling improvements of the twin dial D7100 body might and superior AF system make the choice a no brainer for some.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2017 at 00:06 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2688 comments in total)
In reply to:

AngularJS: Any thoughts on overheating?

Angular, give it up. His antennae are on full alert. There must have been some chemtrails in his area.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2017 at 21:31 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2688 comments in total)
In reply to:

AngularJS: Any thoughts on overheating?

So, your first thought is to shoot the messenger, and not, say, guess that he might have done something odd, or had a bad copy, or something else far more reasonable.

Tin foil hat much?

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2017 at 20:38 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThatCamFan: One of the main reason I am switching to Canon myself from Nikon: "19 (all cross-type)" Plus the lenses tend to be cheaper as well as the bodies.

I hear you CamFan. I got a bad copy of the 70-300 VR, which by most accounts is a bargain. It's made me very leery of that lens - I won't buy another. It's just human nature, I guess.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2017 at 03:13 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThatCamFan: One of the main reason I am switching to Canon myself from Nikon: "19 (all cross-type)" Plus the lenses tend to be cheaper as well as the bodies.

ThatCamFan: I was responding to the utter BS that kobakokh posted. If you like Canon better, then switch to it. No problem there - they make great cameras and great lenses. And the all-cross-type focus sensors in the price range you're looking at is a very valid reason for doing so. Preferences are never wrong. Dual pixel AF in live view video would be another very good reason, just to name one more.

But saying that their lenses are all so much sharper and faster focusing than anything Nikon or anyone else has to offer, and they are more wonderful than fairy-dusted unicorn horns is just nonsense that needs to be called out.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 18:18 UTC
In reply to:

davids8560: I dunno. It just seems to me that the ultimate answer is never in the specs. If you are fortunate enough to try all of these fine cameras like me you may find you prefer using one or another more frequently than the others just because you like it or shall we say "connect" with it for unspecified reasons. Call it "chemistry" if you will. I don't see how someone could go wrong with any of these choices. I just hope we continue to have such a broad field to choose from in the years ahead. So we can argue and stuff! :-)

I get your point, but the ISO button is on the top on the D7500 and the D500. They moved the metering mode button to the left side.

Still, you're absolutely correct. Think about what you want to shoot (do they move? are they near/far?, etc.), see what can handle that with the lenses available (and with lenses you can actually afford), and then go to the store and hold them in your hand. The last part is probably what is going to make the decision for you.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 17:02 UTC
In reply to:

Cheezr: How is the EM1.2 pricey at exactly the same MSRP as the D500 which is apparently not pricey? It includes more functionality and comparable image quality, just asking.

Fortunately, there are tons of full-frame OEM and APSC third party lenses to fill in the gaps.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 15:42 UTC
In reply to:

wondrouslightdotcom: Hi, I do believe that these roundups are inherently flawed. While all modern digital cameras are very good, there is no such thing as the best camera for all possible subjects (and video). When I read camera reviews, my main concern is how good it is for MY kind of photography - no fast action, no video, walking and scrambling on rocks, snow and ice, possibly heavy weather, always 2 bodies and lens redundancy, fine art quality prints up to 24x36" -. This made me decide to buy into the Olympus M43 system, specifically the EM5II. I am not even considering the EM1II because in my case it is over-engineered and is larger and heavier. With all due respect and admiration for the exceptional Nikon D500, the fact that it weighs 1.9lb vs the 1.03lb of the EM5II and it has almost 3 times as much all-out volume disqualifies it for my attention right off the bat. As another personal choice, my lens set costs much more than my camera bodies.

Translation: These comparisons are inherently flawed because my camera choice was not picked as the best.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 15:17 UTC
On article Shooting experience: how the Nikon D7500 won me over (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: Sorry to interrupt here, but....again, another D7500 article? It seems this time, this D7500 would get the Gold Award...Nikon should better developing fast and affordable DX prime lenses, like a 23/1.8 DX (35mm in FF- terms) which i say for years....and the same for let's say 24mm, 85mm & 100mm or 135mm Format (FF-equal).

And also not again another one of these endless 18-55 iterations, instead a 16-50/3.5-5.6 or 16-55/3.5-5,6 sharp & contrasty, low budget kitlens would have been way more better..

Nikon also should release finally the D750 & D810 Successor to the crowd within this year, in oder to stay profitable...people are changing brands...mostly to Sony, it seems.

"That's not going to stop it! It isn't mostly to Sony either, it's pretty much Mirrorless that has people jumping. I dropped Nikon FX for Fuji X because I wanted more from the camera than fast auto focus tracking and full frame."

Too bad you didn't get either from your Fuji.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2017 at 02:27 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2688 comments in total)
In reply to:

35mmBlueSky: Tried it in the store alongside the D500, egonomics and build quality is way better with the D500, plus as soon as you put any decent sized lens on it, the balance and handling are way off compared to the D500. I would imagine Nikon D5 would be far better for the audience it's targeting. Decent specs on paper though.

"Well, that's why there's a huge market for iron weights to add onto camera bodies, I guess. "

No, but there's a very large aftermarket grip market. I wonder why that is?

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 21:00 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2688 comments in total)
In reply to:

bolt2014: So, with a huge list of cons, this camera gets a 89%, gold rating?

Sports shooters typically shoot jpeg because they have extremely tight (in minutes) deadlines. But then they'd typically use custom white balance and not rely on Auto.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 19:15 UTC

I'd be more interested in a tool that did something like this, then indicated what each of the adjustments were, so one could learn to do it on their own.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 19:05 UTC as 23rd comment
Total: 539, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »