munro harrap

munro harrap

Lives in France France
Works as a none
Has a website at none
Joined on Dec 27, 2007
About me:

irrelevant

Comments

Total: 603, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Throwback Thursday: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 (171 comments in total)

There are advantages over newer Sonys in that battery. An R1 battery takes about vthe same time as a Nikon D800 battery to recharge and it goes all day. A Nex A7R 1 and 2 battery and an a 5xxx or 6xxx or Nex battery lasts at most 300 raw shots if you are VERY lucky and takes more than 5 hours to recharge!!! So users of the A7R series must take a half dozen newly charged with them on a days outing, but so far I have not met a single soul using an FF A series Sony. Because at the same price as a D810, with that stupid battery life, well, I just do not expect to! You can buy an R1 for £100 now, and it comes with a lens!! The 16-70 F4 e series is junk in comparison so now you know, even photozone dissed it good an proper

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2016 at 20:34 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 (171 comments in total)
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: "relatively low price of $999"

I'll say. A Nikon D200 body which came out at about the same time with a similar 10MP APSC CCD would have been almost twice that!

That would explain the low iso shadow noise-its major bugbear.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2016 at 20:08 UTC
On article iPhone 7 Plus real-world sample gallery (93 comments in total)

Shocked to be frank, as I reckoned it would have improved somewhat in the 6 years since my Nokia N8. At least in jpeg, it most certainly has not, no.Arethere perhaps RAW files available, as the difference may be huge- as on a G4 LG?

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2016 at 20:00 UTC as 18th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 (171 comments in total)

I had an 828 before that I had to return due to its Zeiss lens incurable and massive blue fringing, but when I got an R-1, the only real niggle I had was the lack of the twisting grip the 828 and 707 had, because it is so very useful when using the LCD looking down on it as will a Rollei or Hasselblad. But this time the sensor was big, it is still a good 10MP sensor, and there was not only no fringing but the zoom is still the best 24-120mm range ever made. It has almost no distortion compared to a DSLR zoom, and the R1 once focussed is STILL the world's most responsive machine with a 0.007 lag. IF Sony relaunched it with the same optics and a modern sensor, and better buffering it would certainly still compete. It is SILENT as well unlike the NEX and a series Sonys. IF you do not need more than 10 very detailed MegaPixels, or to work in the dark, or do sports, what I produced with it then matches anything made since doing street.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 21:54 UTC as 47th comment | 1 reply

IF the only car produced was a Mercedes or a Rolls, they would all cost the price of a Kia, and IF that had been the situation from the beginning of automotive history, the majority of cars would not ever have been made. To misquote Henry Ford " You can have any car, as long as its a Rolls". But you could all have a Rolls, or a Jag, or a Merc or a Beamer, and paint them yourselves, so as to be really personal and special to you. No need for Leitz or Hasselblad to do that!!

AS for cameras, most should never have bothered. When I look at the prices being charged for fast prime and zoom lenses to cover titchy crap sensors, when I consider the nature of the class struggle, and when I combine those two, I vomit at man's greed and stupidity, and the need many folk have, of real-world help!!! There is a big difference between freedom of choice, and freedom from want.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 00:10 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

munro harrap: I dont like it. I dont like having to start with the same pixel count as the Canon already has for a third of the price at all. I dont like being expected to afford a new set of lenses in a new format in a new bayonet, rather than an existing one-say Hasselblad, for example.... I do not like what Fuji have been doing at all. After all, just as Nikon took ages to arrive at decent resolution, trailing Canon for 5 years or so, Fuji started their mount and their Xxxx series at 12 MP, as had Nikon with the D3. They have just reached 24MP, years after Nikon and Sony. So buy the first body at your peril and then weep three years on when they manage the 80MP that Hasselblad have already left behind. Along with the existence of micro 4/3rds manufacturers, such folk embarass photography.

NO it is a true medium format machine, the crop refers to the focal length of the lenses, but WHY they put it that way, nobody knows, as it is not possible to crop a focal length! Time I took over Dpreview as in the olden times when I were a lad, they didn't louse it up as often, but Heaven knows, I would block most of you!!

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 23:57 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I dont like it. I dont like having to start with the same pixel count as the Canon already has for a third of the price at all. I dont like being expected to afford a new set of lenses in a new format in a new bayonet, rather than an existing one-say Hasselblad, for example.... I do not like what Fuji have been doing at all. After all, just as Nikon took ages to arrive at decent resolution, trailing Canon for 5 years or so, Fuji started their mount and their Xxxx series at 12 MP, as had Nikon with the D3. They have just reached 24MP, years after Nikon and Sony. So buy the first body at your peril and then weep three years on when they manage the 80MP that Hasselblad have already left behind. Along with the existence of micro 4/3rds manufacturers, such folk embarass photography.

Photokina floods the market with new models, but like Brexit, its best to wait until the dust settles- at least two years now, before switching systems, during which time we can only hope the silly folk who troll the site may , ever so slightly, mature....

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 21:39 UTC

I dont like it. I dont like having to start with the same pixel count as the Canon already has for a third of the price at all. I dont like being expected to afford a new set of lenses in a new format in a new bayonet, rather than an existing one-say Hasselblad, for example.... I do not like what Fuji have been doing at all. After all, just as Nikon took ages to arrive at decent resolution, trailing Canon for 5 years or so, Fuji started their mount and their Xxxx series at 12 MP, as had Nikon with the D3. They have just reached 24MP, years after Nikon and Sony. So buy the first body at your peril and then weep three years on when they manage the 80MP that Hasselblad have already left behind. Along with the existence of micro 4/3rds manufacturers, such folk embarass photography.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 20:55 UTC as 43rd comment | 7 replies
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)

Its like they all just cant stop themselvesfrom updating the necessary basics in design. If you take a look at the new Sigma mirrorless, or a Nex, it becomes immediately obvious that shooting video on this style and design of camera is the way to go . Yes, I know Sigma has not reached this point yet, but the layout of the new SD mirrorless is already where Canon and Nikon should have been ten years ago.
I love my fast responsive sharp big sensor DSLRs, and a big part of my choice of the D800 was HD video, BUT I never used it, or the 5DII Canon for video, at all, because of the faff the extras you need the tripod for live view, and the rest.

The 5D Mk1V SHOULD look like the Sigma and take all the CAnon EOS series of lenses with 4K video in a live view direct viewfinder, but....... it doesn't, and it cant.

Fz1000 and A7x are better for video. So why go on pretending and including it?? Why not just make a better neater cheaper stills only camera? Or go mirrorless (enfin!)

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2016 at 16:17 UTC as 43rd comment | 3 replies

Unfortunately it does not work on iPads, and there are reasons to wonder what is going on as usual, as screens are way to small to edit RAW files on an iPhone , or any other, and how many iPhones do RAW? Only the very latest.

Even the excellent G4 cannot match , on any level, old 808, or even 1020 Microsoft 8-10 Lumias, as Apple's sensors, like LG and everyone else's, are small, nasty, noisy things whose exposure latitude is tiny before you enter grot and grain regions of plague year sufferings . I have SOME useable shots from phones, but only after careful PP on a proper monitor from Raw. So, its a nice idea, but wait till it gets to high-res iPads and similar Androids, s.v.p

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2016 at 22:33 UTC as 4th comment

It really is extraordinarily expensive for what it is: its iPhone pricing now, and for what. An obsolete specification 23MP small sensor versus Nokias much bigger sensored machines, with neither their build quality, charm nor sheer creative class

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2016 at 01:18 UTC as 5th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: the Samsung NV10 (77 comments in total)

I am using an NX100 Samsung that is the same size as this one but has a 14 MP APS-C sensor AND shoots HD AND does 16:9 stills. Even with its 20-50mm zoom lens it is only a bit bigger , but of course the lens cannot collapse so you cannot pocket it.But the lens is really good,

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2016 at 01:12 UTC as 6th comment
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: AA filter? Shutter lag? And as noted elsewhere-it is still a DSLR, and a huge clutzy ungainly one at that (and I loved the 1Ds series!)

I cannot equate its 4K claims with such a mirror/prism viewfinder when an FZ1000 or Sony RX10 series offer excellent 4K image quality in a mirrorless body.

Granted the 1" sensor has huge low-light limitations, and you cannot change the lenses, but you CAN hold them steady yourself unaided. You cannot do so with a 5D and you cannot even see the image on the screen in daylight-just like any other DSLR.

It costs a little less than a 5DrS instead of the cost of the old 5D MkIII and this will deter many people. For Video you really do need a direct view live off the sensor through a viewfinder-there is no substitute now, nor any excuse.

To be pedantic, the SLR eventually usurped mirrorless Leica M, Nikon and Contax film cameras, whereas now in the digital arena the reverse is ocurring, but its advent is directly the result of the success of the mirrorless digital compact. I personally consider a D800 or 1Dx as a point and shoot, but right now I am delighting in the excellent performance to be had from a Samsung NX100 mirrorless interchangeable lens APS-C 14MP digicam, that is to me just another point and shoot compact because it is very small, like a Nex.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2016 at 01:03 UTC
On article All about control: Huawei P9 camera review (90 comments in total)
In reply to:

Antoneeo: I bought this phone 2 weeks ago. Unfortunately it is well below my expectation. Before this I had (and still own) a Samsung Galaxy Note 3. To be honest the bigger problem is that it misses the focus too often even in bright light. This carries to out of focus images. Sometime they are just slightly out of focus, some other they completely miss the focus. This is not acceptable by a phone at this level. I will sell it on ebay and save the money for the Galaxy Note 7...
To be clear, the few times that the focus is ok the pictures are really good. But to me this issue is too much annoying. This morning I went out with some friends and took a lot of pictures. They are 50% out of focus. The phone itself is great, nice HW, materials, shape and performances. But for me the camera department is the most important so.. I will go back to my reliable Note 3 until the Note 7 drops in price.

Just take it back and get a refund, duh!

Link | Posted on Sep 1, 2016 at 00:51 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: AA filter? Shutter lag? And as noted elsewhere-it is still a DSLR, and a huge clutzy ungainly one at that (and I loved the 1Ds series!)

I cannot equate its 4K claims with such a mirror/prism viewfinder when an FZ1000 or Sony RX10 series offer excellent 4K image quality in a mirrorless body.

Granted the 1" sensor has huge low-light limitations, and you cannot change the lenses, but you CAN hold them steady yourself unaided. You cannot do so with a 5D and you cannot even see the image on the screen in daylight-just like any other DSLR.

It costs a little less than a 5DrS instead of the cost of the old 5D MkIII and this will deter many people. For Video you really do need a direct view live off the sensor through a viewfinder-there is no substitute now, nor any excuse.

The RX10 IS a mirrorless camera, no question. The benefits of an FZ1000 or an RX seies body cannot be overstated, since their 4K resolution outclasses anything you can SEE properly to record on even the most expensive DSLR. I can film and photograph small shy birds close up because my FZ1000 is SILENT for stills, and its shutter lag outclasses all DSLRs.

reduced shutter lag and zero noise (and vibration) are key to getting a good result, because even if you are match-tough and capable of handholding a 100-400mm IS zoom for minutes at a time- and face it, you're not, you simply cannot get sharp results under a 500th second. Try an FZ and experience the delight of actually being able to see the image you are filming through the viewfinder instead of making stupid comments.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2016 at 10:48 UTC

THe Idea is fine, and the conceptual fixation on monochrome as a means of expressing YOUR take on landscape is fine, but the complete extinction of perception of reality involved in that, and the cult attached Dawkins-like to it, are not.
There are problems with only shades of grey. They are problems with black, as the Impressionist painters themselves made clear, yet AA's work is OK- but only because it is of its time.

I used to have problems with people I used to know, because after I got into colour full-time these guys would no longer speak to me. One, I could chat for hours on the phone to his wife, but he would refuse to come to the phone, and she claimed for him that he couldn't email because he was unable to use their computer (he has a website, duh!)

And all this because decades ago I decided on colour as soon as I could afford it: I had deserted the clan, abandoned the cult, was an heretic unto their Godless religion, and so anathema.

Color requires much greater awareness

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2016 at 10:35 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)

AA filter? Shutter lag? And as noted elsewhere-it is still a DSLR, and a huge clutzy ungainly one at that (and I loved the 1Ds series!)

I cannot equate its 4K claims with such a mirror/prism viewfinder when an FZ1000 or Sony RX10 series offer excellent 4K image quality in a mirrorless body.

Granted the 1" sensor has huge low-light limitations, and you cannot change the lenses, but you CAN hold them steady yourself unaided. You cannot do so with a 5D and you cannot even see the image on the screen in daylight-just like any other DSLR.

It costs a little less than a 5DrS instead of the cost of the old 5D MkIII and this will deter many people. For Video you really do need a direct view live off the sensor through a viewfinder-there is no substitute now, nor any excuse.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 23:16 UTC as 227th comment | 5 replies

So where is Raw Therapee! AND where is Capture one Pro? to name but two? THen if you own a Sony you get Capture One for Sony free too!

It needs to be made clear that LR6 OMITS, I believe the CC versions most valuable feature which is called dehazer or something. When I tried it out it is SO effective results could match Capture One quality-almost, as it certainly gets rid of the deadening effect of antialiasing to make the image look as sharp-almost- as a sans AA machine: a D810 for the cost of a D800 in other words....

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 23:07 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
On article Gallery update: Nikon 300mm F4E PF ED VR (54 comments in total)

F4,mmm £1400,mmm. On a D800 a 180mm f2.8 gets you more DOF, more speed, and a bigger image scale than this on a D5. I paid £150 for mine....mmmm

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2016 at 22:55 UTC as 13th comment

Anyone can download and then resell as theirs any digital image file possibly available online, not just Getty, who should be congratulated for pointing out this sadfact to photographers, millions of whom have no idea if Apple, and Microsoft have a vast hoard of stolen works of art plundered using their operating systems. This photographer was lucky in that she found out.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2016 at 12:42 UTC as 10th comment
Total: 603, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »