BillGarrett

Lives in United States Silicon Valley, CA, United States
Joined on Apr 3, 2003

Comments

Total: 48, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

ROFL that $1700 is "more affordable". Sell it at $899 and it's the kind of lens that I could see picking a system for.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2021 at 23:26 UTC as 42nd comment | 1 reply
On article Nikon Z fc Review (2140 comments in total)

Beautiful retro styling, though why not design it with a good handgrip? And why iterate another DX body when there's such a paucity of lenses? I left Nikon DX in frustration over limited lens selection years ago to go Fuji. If I ever return to Nikon it's FX or nothing.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2021 at 23:21 UTC as 321st comment | 5 replies
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm XF 70-300mm F4-5.6 review (61 comments in total)

The 70-300 is a tempting replacement for my Fuji 55-200. When shooting birds and flowers there are enough times I'd appreciate the extra reach. On the other hand, giving up the 55-70 range at the short end is not painless. I shoot a fair number of shots in that range, and the 55-200 delivers great image quality down there. Reach-wise it pairs perfectly with the 16-55.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2021 at 00:13 UTC as 9th comment

A camera with latest generation internals vs. a camera with warmed-over bits from a few years ago -- how is this a competition?

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2020 at 05:47 UTC as 44th comment | 4 replies
On article Opinion: Camera names are getting ridiculous (706 comments in total)

All these cameras named after Mark.... When are we going to see other books of the bible recognized? Anybody ready for Luke 12:15?

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2020 at 17:35 UTC as 218th comment | 5 replies

I like the concept of a stills-oriented camera that saves money by having a light video spec. I shoot video only occasionally and am not interested in 4k. I said months ago that as long it shoots HD video competitive with costlier cameras it'd meet my needs. From DPR's review it looks like the Z5 does exactly that.

BTW, on the argument not to buy entry-level cameras: I've often bought a camera at the lower end of an enthusiast/semi-pro range and invested my money in good glass. I feel this has worked out well. The trick is not to buy a truly low-end camera; otherwise you miss out on basic pro features like good manual controls. I like that I can get solid IQ, accurate AF, and plenty of manual controls for well under $2k.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2020 at 16:05 UTC as 36th comment
On article Nikon Z6 II and Z7 II coming October 14 (926 comments in total)
In reply to:

Funny Valentine: Ken Rockwell reviews the Nikon Z 70-200mm:
https://youtu.be/RHuzTOgJY6c?t=64
And he's right about the business practices of Nikon and why they have trouble gaining new customers.

Ken's "reviews" always read like post-facto justifications of whatever he decided to buy. There was little to no real analysis there, but lots of self congratulation.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2020 at 01:34 UTC
On article Nikon Z6 II and Z7 II coming October 14 (926 comments in total)

It seems there's a win-win opportunity here for buyers like me, who've been on the fence about buying Nikon Z. If the new cameras really move the ball forward, I can buy one and enjoy a class-leading product. If the Mark IIs are refreshes that add only incremental updates (e.g., second card slot) then I can buy an older model hopefully a few hundred dollars cheaper and still have a great camera.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2020 at 16:17 UTC as 98th comment

This seems to be a great product for the low price point. I'm not bothered about the 1.7x crop factor on 4k video. I'm mostly a stills photographer and I don't own a 4k display anyway. (Neither do most people I know.) 1080/60p video is plenty for me, as long as the quality of those 1920x1080 pixels is good. And as long as the quality of the stills is good. I'll be watching reviews to see how the different sensor performs vs. the Z6. If IQ is comparable this will be a great product for enthusiasts who don't need cutting edge video.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2020 at 18:10 UTC as 72nd comment

I'd definitely like to see how the 56mm compares on quality and price to native offerings from Fuji. It'd be awesome to have an inexpensive yet competent portrait range lens.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2020 at 19:23 UTC as 5th comment

I'm disappointed with how large the 20mm f/1.8 lens is. I'm looking for something compact and go-anywhere a la the classic 20/f4. I get that this lens is a few stops faster... but when I'm shooting landscapes and architecture with my ultra-wide angle lenses I rarely want to go shallower than f/4. What's the app for shooting 20mm full frame at f/1.8, anyway? That's a portrait DOF. When I shoot group portraits ultra-wide there's always a challenge with the geometric distortion near the side borders.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2020 at 23:28 UTC as 38th comment | 1 reply
On article Fujifilm X-T4 to be unveiled on February 26th (135 comments in total)

1) IBIS. It would be awesome if they folded this into the X-Tx line instead of keeping it separate in the X-Hx model/line. It's also very sensible from a business perspective. The ILC market is declining overall, and Fuji is at best a 4th place player in it. They've got way too many overlapping models for that position. They need to rationalize their lineup by offering fewer, compelling models.

2) Keep improving focus speed & accuracy.

3) Sensor improvements... but in terms of quality, not quantity of pixels. 26MP is plenty of pixels to work with. I'm not keen on a jump to 36+ MP and the storage challenges it will bring. I prefer better acuity and dynamic range (which is already very good IMO) in a 24-26MP array.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2020 at 00:45 UTC as 34th comment
On article Fujifilm X-T4 to be unveiled on February 26th (135 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jesaja: TOO EARLY TO ARRIVE!

As an X-T3 owner since only May 2019 I also think this comes too soon. I didn't expect my camera purchase to be outdated/superseded in less than a year!

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2020 at 00:30 UTC

Dumb idea. Nobody's buying film cameras anymore. At least not anything older than the Nikon F4.

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2019 at 20:19 UTC as 42nd comment | 5 replies
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm 16-80mm F4 hands-on quick review (136 comments in total)

Notice how the reviewers repeatedly praise the Fuji 16-80 as a great "kit" lens. It is not a kit lens! It is designed like a mid-range lens and, more importantly, PRICED like a mid-range lens. Seriously, what other kit lens costs $800US? How many kit lenses cost even HALF that? "Great as a kit lens" means sub-par for what the lens is sold as. DPReview should have had the guts to come out and say that.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2019 at 04:53 UTC as 18th comment | 5 replies

I could see this camera being good for beginner-enthusiasts like my wife, who wants better IQ a) in low-light and b) for telephoto shots than a smartphone offers, with good auto controls that allow manual overrides, in a package that fits in a jacket pocket. She'd want more reach than the 15-45mm lens, though. With the 55-200mm zoom it looks like the M100/M200 is not close to pocketable.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2019 at 00:11 UTC as 49th comment

Nikon appears confused about who this camera is really for. It's a tough sell for Instagrammers and other social media mavens looking to upgrade from using their cell phone's built-in camera because the workflow to share pictures online remains so primitive. Shrinking the size or number of dials doesn't close that huge gap.

Meanwhile, this could be a good camera for enthusiasts looking for something smaller, lighter, and cheaper than a full frame Z6. It *could* be a good choice... but the fact there's a new lens line for it has got to give pause to anyone who's aware of how poorly Nikon built out their last DX lens line. Attaching ff lenses onto an crop sensor camera harms the propositions of smaller, lighter, and cheaper.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2019 at 22:34 UTC as 122nd comment

I've been waiting for this lens for a while. The 16-80mm (APSC) length is so useful. I had the similar length Nikon 16-85mm when I shot Nikon DX for several years. I used it for 80% of my shots even though I also had ultrawide and telephoto lenses in my bag. 16mm is wide enough that I only need wider on extreme shots, and 80mm is long enough I rarely reach for telephoto outside of wildlife shots. But it's got to be a QUALITY lens. I'll definitely be watching reviews before hitting the "Buy Now" button for this lens. Here's hoping Fuji works their mojo to make it a class leader.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2019 at 16:43 UTC as 43rd comment
In reply to:

Kharan: C’mon Fujifilm, you got this one right, so where is the 70-300mm all around nice zoom for consumers? That 100-400mm is just too damn heavy for casual outings...

+1 to having a 70-300mm lens at the "pro-sumer" level. I own the 55-200, which renders great pictures, but when I'm shooting wildlife I'd really like the extra 50% reach without going to a lens that has pro weight and pro cost.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2019 at 16:25 UTC
On article Minolta DiMAGE V hands-on review (286 comments in total)

Nice bit of nostalgia here. Reminds me of my first digital camera, a Sony DSC-S75 purchased in 2001. With just 3mp but a Zeiss-designed lens in front of it I was able to capture some pictures that, printed at 8x10", still look fine today. That's topical as just this past weekend I was taking photos under similar conditions (outdoors, bright sun, strong colors) with my 16-years-newer 12mp iPhone 7, and they do NOT look as good at comparable resolution.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2019 at 17:36 UTC as 115th comment
Total: 48, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »