Photomonkey

Lives in United States CA, United States
Works as a Photographer
Joined on Oct 28, 2002

Comments

Total: 1162, showing: 221 – 240
« First‹ Previous1011121314Next ›Last »
In reply to:

I have a dream: That's crazy...
Latest Sony and Nikon have reduced DR (D5 < D4) while Canon, who was always weaker on DR, has improved a lot lately...

As others have noted, the DR "limitations" of cameras over 5 years old did not prevent the taking of epic photographs.
Highlight and shadow correction can be done with startling effect by even the most modest of cameras.
I have used only high end FF cameras since the first Canon 1Ds and at no time ever was DR a limiting factor in the production of images for my clients. Ever.

Suggesting it is a make or break issue is BS considering we are talking about lab differences and ignoring the equalizing factors of the field and artistic representation.

I also take issue with the idea that in a sports image someone may say "Well, that is a nice image of Usain Bolt but I think we need to see the detail in the weave of his black shorts a bit better." Really?
Get over to Imaging Resource where they have a superb comparison tool that gives a much closer approximation of real life results and you will see how little the DR debate matters.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 02:55 UTC
In reply to:

DPPMetro: The tradeoffs seem very reasonable for the ones who prioritize that speed and focusing. Basically, this is not a toy for hobbyists, though no doubt a large number of spec-sheet photographers on DPR will buy it so they can take challenging flower photos with it and then will complain.

@DPPMetro, I think you mean cat photos.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 23:30 UTC
In reply to:

I have a dream: That's crazy...
Latest Sony and Nikon have reduced DR (D5 < D4) while Canon, who was always weaker on DR, has improved a lot lately...

@beatboxa, The DR hit is meaningless. Most people quack on about DR and then have no idea what they might do with it, often citing 6 stop pushes of a crap file.
I have no real love or hate for any camera but there are no images in the world that could only have been made with a file that has 13-14 stops of DR.
The real fact is that DR is a new metric to fuss over and has never made a cat or food photo better.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 23:27 UTC

Huh, no free lunch.
Who Knew?

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 23:22 UTC as 22nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Photomonkey: I proposed this solution back when the GFX was first announced.
I was particularly thinking of using a Canon 17 TS-E.

The aperture problem is not impossible. Sigma could do this easily.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 22:23 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (820 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photomonkey: Far too many are plastic cameras from the 90's.
Let's look at real metal.
Nikkormat, Nikon F, F2,F3,F4.
Minotla SRT-101., Pentax Spotmatic, Fujica ST-701, Topcon Super D
Canon FT or Pellix or Canon A-1. Leicaflex SL2 is not even too expensive. Zeiss Contarex Super.
Even an Exakta VX 1000 is more amusing and fun than this lot of largely white bread gear.
As for film, that is what kept people out of the hobby. Too expensive! Too much learning about exposure!
Digital removed the barrier to those technically indifferent and allowed more people to have fun making images.
Film will be interesting to many raised on digital but the number remaining true devotees will be small.

@KAllen, I think interest is what motivates people over the obstacles of an endeavor. I think of myself as terribly lazy but I have been involved with photography for over 40 years.
This started with an interest in bird photography that transitioned to mastering my darkroom skills and eventually led to a career in photography.
I have met countless people "interested" in photography (nearly everyone it seems) but few actually get busy with it because their interest rarely rise above the casual.
I find this true in every field where the shiny , appealing bits attract interest but the pastime dulls the interest.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 18:34 UTC

I proposed this solution back when the GFX was first announced.
I was particularly thinking of using a Canon 17 TS-E.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 18:10 UTC as 31st comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

rfsIII: Cameras have never been the same since they abandoned the M42 screw mount—screws have been serving mankind since 400 BC. Why the sudden need to "improve."

I can only guess you never tried to change lenses quickly at a wedding in the dark.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 15:33 UTC
In reply to:

photenth: Will dpreview now start adding electronic shutter read out times in future camera reviews?

The manufacturers have these specs and have released them in the past.
If they see a marketing advantage to doing so they will hype the spec like any other.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2017 at 19:15 UTC
In reply to:

Herkybird: One thing going for the ol' obsolete CCD is none of these problems existed. Good example would be the Nikon D40 with its hybrid electro-mechanical shutter arrangement; reasonably clean up to ISO 1600, TTL flash sync up to 1/500 second and non-TTL sync up to 1/4000 second.

One thing the D40 had was a very low DR which these days is a stake through the heart as far as enthusiasts go.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2017 at 13:16 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (820 comments in total)

Far too many are plastic cameras from the 90's.
Let's look at real metal.
Nikkormat, Nikon F, F2,F3,F4.
Minotla SRT-101., Pentax Spotmatic, Fujica ST-701, Topcon Super D
Canon FT or Pellix or Canon A-1. Leicaflex SL2 is not even too expensive. Zeiss Contarex Super.
Even an Exakta VX 1000 is more amusing and fun than this lot of largely white bread gear.
As for film, that is what kept people out of the hobby. Too expensive! Too much learning about exposure!
Digital removed the barrier to those technically indifferent and allowed more people to have fun making images.
Film will be interesting to many raised on digital but the number remaining true devotees will be small.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 16:15 UTC as 327th comment | 4 replies
On article Sony a9: more speed, less dynamic range (669 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): Be it a sports camera or not. People who want to spend big bucks on a flagship camera expect the best technology and quality in every way. Professional cameras are not just meant for sport but have to be reliable powerhouses that handle everything well. Having the camera fall short of the established competition is a dealbreaker. The once famous Sony dynamic range has now dropped below Canon level. Same happened with the a99II which is even worse than its five year old predecessor.

This is an action camera. Since when are we caught by surprise in an action venue and need a 6 stop push?
Moreover, the performance of a massive shadow lift is still very good, just not at A7RII levels.
In real world use the "shortcomings" will never been seen except by pixel peeping hobbyists staring into the shadow areas of their cat photos.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 13:47 UTC
On article Sony FE 12-24mm F4 G sample gallery (60 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZeneticX: such image quality for an ultra wide f4 zoom with an impressive size, can't complaint much

just wish its a bit lower in price

The price is not far from Sigma's 12-24 lens.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2017 at 17:56 UTC
On article Alpha-better: Sony a9 versus a7R II (506 comments in total)
In reply to:

matthew saville: OK, it's pretty clear the A9 is worth $4,500, if you're coming from a D5 or 1Dx2.

However, it's NOT as attractive if you're "only" coming from a 5D4 or D810. Sure, the A9 might be superior, but that's still a huge price jump.

The REAL question is, ...what next? A7R mk3, or A9R?

These *could* be the exact same camera: an A9, with a ~50 MP sensor and fewer FPS.

HOWEVER, they could also be totally different cameras: an A7R mk3 being "just" an A7R mk2 but with a new sensor, and maybe one or two trickle-down features from the A9, but not all. Say, for example, still just a single card slot and the A7R mk2 AF system, but maybe the new battery and ergonomics.

The price point of these two potentially different cameras is what I'm curious about. If Sony does a true A9R, they will still not attract 8xx and 5-series shooters if they price it at $4,500. Alternately, if they price it at $2,500-3,200, they'll be angering a whole lot of A9 buyers who really didn't need $4,500 worth of camera...

I see your point but my point is that the 1DxII and the D5 are not high MP cameras but premium high speed cameras. Precisely the category Sony is aiming at. I would note that they lead with "20 FPS!!!!"

The high MP niche ironically has evolved to a lower price point evidenced in the 5Ds and the A7RII.
Trying to compare the A9 to the high MP category is missing the point.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2017 at 00:55 UTC
On article Alpha-better: Sony a9 versus a7R II (506 comments in total)
In reply to:

matthew saville: OK, it's pretty clear the A9 is worth $4,500, if you're coming from a D5 or 1Dx2.

However, it's NOT as attractive if you're "only" coming from a 5D4 or D810. Sure, the A9 might be superior, but that's still a huge price jump.

The REAL question is, ...what next? A7R mk3, or A9R?

These *could* be the exact same camera: an A9, with a ~50 MP sensor and fewer FPS.

HOWEVER, they could also be totally different cameras: an A7R mk3 being "just" an A7R mk2 but with a new sensor, and maybe one or two trickle-down features from the A9, but not all. Say, for example, still just a single card slot and the A7R mk2 AF system, but maybe the new battery and ergonomics.

The price point of these two potentially different cameras is what I'm curious about. If Sony does a true A9R, they will still not attract 8xx and 5-series shooters if they price it at $4,500. Alternately, if they price it at $2,500-3,200, they'll be angering a whole lot of A9 buyers who really didn't need $4,500 worth of camera...

Good points but I would note both Canon and Nikon offer lower res high speed cameras ata a premium.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 19:49 UTC
In reply to:

Photomonkey: This should satisfy the minimum DOF fans.....if they can focus them.

@JACS. I am referring, of course , to the obsession with ultrafast lenses not because of their light gathering but for their shallow DOF.
Note that EVERY complaint about sub FF formats is the greater DOF at a given distance and AOV.
Note too, the flood of desperately close cropped images made solely to display the effect.
Back in the 70's we actually learned all the principles of format size, lens AOV and DOF. We also were not obsessed with fast lenses as they were generally regarded as nice but not a real benefit other than being able to more easily focus in low light.
We were interested in getting some decent DOF to ensure sharpness of the subject.
These lenses will sell fairly well I predict and we will have to suffer through more boring photos of faces with one sharp eye.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 04:32 UTC

This should satisfy the minimum DOF fans.....if they can focus them.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 20:12 UTC as 45th comment | 11 replies
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2746 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: Article coming: warning!

The Sony A9 is not merely an evolution/tweak for the popular a7 line of cameras, it's something much more.

It's the first mirrorless camera that boldly puts an end to the SLR superiority as a camera design. That's revolution not evolution.

Up to this point the SLR was always defended by being more capable cameras due to a few elements that kept shrinking over time, but the Sony A9 checks the last few ones that remained untouched by mirrorless cameras: battery life, burst rate, buffer, dual cards, sports AF, and quick menus/buttons.

That's it. We can no longer claim the DSLR is accurately superior to mirrorless cameras per design and concept, and as time keeps going on, the very minor remaining differences will be easily tackled as well (such as more telephoto lenses and weather sealing, uncompressed raw bursts, higher-end service support) and most importantly, the Sony Alpha 9 features will trickle down the mirrorless camera concept, making it a worthy of a neck-to-neck competition with Canon and Nikon DSLRs, not just a different parallel type of cameras for a specific purpose.

The Alpha A9 is a cornerstone of a product in the camera-making industry, being the first of a product in changing the landscape of the camera choice throughout the image-makers' world, bringing the DSLR benefits to mirrorless cameras, but perhaps more importantly, bringing the mirrorless design benefits to DSLR cameras in concept, such as unlimited video-like bursts, no VF blackouts, Eye detect and large coverage AF, adaptable mounts, fullframe sensor stabilization, silent shooting, better video shooting experience with a working viewfinder, moving LCDs, peaking/zebras/LOG/custom curves/customizable buttons, and more.

Well done, Sony Co.

This is going to start an in-country Japanese war among three major camera makers. Which can only benefit you and I, the end consumer.

The real significance of these advances will be in the next couple of years as others bring these features and performance to cameras at the $1500 price point.
I dont need 20 FPS but 10FPS with no blackout and no rolling shutter will get my attention.
Of course once I can get 1/1000 sec flash sync and silent shutter I can die happy.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 05:39 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2746 comments in total)

"Sony's looking to storm the sports photography market with its new a9 mirrorless camera."

Storm some wallets more likely.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 03:38 UTC as 401st comment | 2 replies
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1865 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: > The new α9 also supports uncompressed 14-bit RAW, ensuring users can get the most out of the wide dynamic range of the sensor.

Still no lossless compressed raw.

@falconeyes. I understand what you are saying as Hensel pioneered this idea with their Freemask flash feature.
However I have yet to hear of anyone actually using it or any variation of your technique.
As flash cannot be used with the e-shutter this is a non-issue. It may have applicability with a 1Dx or D5 but again, I haven't heard of anyone really trying to set that up.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 00:20 UTC
Total: 1162, showing: 221 – 240
« First‹ Previous1011121314Next ›Last »