nicolaiecostel

Lives in Romania Timisoara, Romania
Works as a photographer
Joined on Aug 16, 2011

Comments

Total: 625, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

nicolaiecostel: superb camera for photographers that use cameras to take photos. meh camera for internet experts.

If the light is so bad that you need ISO 30000, you probably won't get much in the way of color or dynamic range and you should be using flash or a tripod. And I know this is not a popular opinion but light quality is also important, not only the quantity.

If you need to use ISO30.000 at a concert, then you are probably shooting at f/8, and I really don't see the case for that. I have concert pictures at night shot at ISO200 with a stabilised lens, I'm not kidding. Yeah, there are those dark venues and pubs and those heavy metal bands shaking their heads, but I can't see more than ISO12.800 being necessary.

The only type of photography where ISO30000 would be useful (I'm sure that high of an ISO on the 5D4 won't be any good anyways) is astrophotography, to freeze yet properly expose that milky way.

Just my opinion

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2016 at 10:37 UTC
In reply to:

nicolaiecostel: superb camera for photographers that use cameras to take photos. meh camera for internet experts.

And you can use them with the 5D4 ? I shoot weddings for eight years and the highest I ever went was ISO11.000 (I rarely use autoISO), as selected by autoISO. Why on earth would you need ISO30000 ?

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2016 at 20:34 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

HenryDJP: At $3400 and no IBIS or articulating screen. Not worth it.

pros dont need either

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 18:01 UTC

superb camera for photographers that use cameras to take photos. meh camera for internet experts.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 22:21 UTC as 5th comment | 12 replies
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

role_of_72: I won't have one but it is a really nice camera!

And for those who are desperate because of the 1.65 crop factor in 4K mode: just mount a Sigma 10-20, Tokina 11-16 or Samyang 8mm on it and come back to thank me the good advice. :)

Yeah, great tips, except that the 5D4 cannot take crop lenses. It's not Nikon, you know ..

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 21:54 UTC
In reply to:

rfsIII: Buy this instead of the D500 and you'll have money for a trio of really nice lenses; the 20mm f1.8, the 50 1.8, and the 85 f1.8. What more could a photog want?

Proper focus, dedicated buttons, a good comfy grip.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2016 at 14:24 UTC

IFrom a customer perspective, Nikon has lost it. They release a lesser camera and call it an upgrade and they release a 70-300 with a slower aperture at max focal than the lens it replaces. Couple with retarded prices from my country (24-70 non VR is 2500 dollars, Tamron 24-70 VC is 1000 !!!), I can only see Nikon going one direction.

The only things I would buy right now to suit my D750 is the 35 1.8 G FX, with the current Nikon pricing in my country, I might just switch to Canon, since their glass is better and cheaper, and their bodies are much more reliable (my D750 has a bright white pixel, it freezes when the buffer fills up, it refuses to trigger the shutter from time to time, it doesn not trigger the flash sometimes.)

This camera should have had 4k, a new sensor and some of the bells and whistles that would have atracted mirorless folks. Instead, it comes with 1080p, 11 AF points, ONE crosstype and the same sensor ..

They should have called it the SE :))

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2016 at 11:48 UTC as 66th comment

I am a Nikon shooter but I would invest in the Canon. Why ? Because nikon AF isn't that fast in some lenses. I was very satisfied with the 5D2 and 70-200 2.8 combo simply because that lens is a gem in AF. Same said about the 135L. Not compare that to the 70-200 2.8 Nikon or worst, the 135 DC. Oh dear ..

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2016 at 16:27 UTC as 69th comment
In reply to:

PKDanny: DXO Mark say Pentax 645Z beat this cameras.!

😐

You mean that the IQ from the MF senzor is better than FF35 ? Oh no, what a surprise !!

How about autofocus, build quality, framerate, lenses, metering, video [....]

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2016 at 16:24 UTC
On article Rock Solid: Canon 1D X Mark II Review (428 comments in total)
In reply to:

PanoMax: Would be nice if they used a Foveon sensor

No, it doesn't. Come on ..

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 21:16 UTC
On article Nikon D500 versus D750: Which one is right for you? (372 comments in total)
In reply to:

raindance: Canon ;)

You're on the wrong page.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 11:55 UTC
In reply to:

rrrremus: I assume shooting wide open you would need to manually focus every time

I don't know man, my D750 focuses when and where I want it to ..

You could put that 105 1.4 on a D300 and I bet it would be spot on. Heck, glass focused right on my D80, let alone a modern camera.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 09:45 UTC
On article Rock Solid: Canon 1D X Mark II Review (428 comments in total)
In reply to:

PanoMax: Would be nice if they used a Foveon sensor

No, it does not, it's the opposit in fact, because the bayer is a single layer sensor while the Foveon has multiple layers thru which light must travel, so you lose light.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 09:42 UTC
On article Rock Solid: Canon 1D X Mark II Review (428 comments in total)
In reply to:

PanoMax: Would be nice if they used a Foveon sensor

The Foven sensor is the worst sensor in a camera, I believe. I laughed thru the TCSTV review of a quattro, I think.

I'd rather shoot with a camera phone rather than a camera that has a Foveon inside.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 16:03 UTC
In reply to:

kadardr: Another reason to buy the 105/2 DC-Nikkor...

If you think the price is bad then you should see what it will cost in Romania. I bet you any money it's going to be above 3000 US dollars.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 15:38 UTC
In reply to:

rrrremus: I assume shooting wide open you would need to manually focus every time

Mate, I shoot the 85 at 1.4 a lot and the photos are tack sharp. That's why we buy DSLR's, to have them do stuff for us properly.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 09:08 UTC
In reply to:

kadardr: Another reason to buy the 105/2 DC-Nikkor...

Yeah, and the big reason not to buy: The autofocus.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 08:46 UTC
On article All about control: Huawei P9 camera review (90 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: When would smartphone manufactors build-in at least an 1/1.7" sensor...size does matter...you can't overcome laws of physics with newer processing algorithms and faster cpus...Sony for instance decided it right back into 2012 with their very first RX100 iteration - the 1" sensor is so much better than a usual 1/1.7" which all other prosumers and highend compacts have had back at this day...and now smartphones...12.16..20 or more MP...it doesn't matter...the sensor size is still a mess, JPEGs in 1:1 100% mode look really mushy & like watercolors....they'd never compete with digicams if they wouldn't get a better, bigger sensor for better light gathering ability, low light performance and image quality after all....i am tired of all these smartphone cameras...it's been 2016 - and still no RX100 IQ into a smartphone besides the CM1 Lumix from Panasonic.

Manufactors should do it right that way - bring it on, or just fade away. The typical smartphone cam can never compete with an 1" sensor

The 808 Nokia had a 1/1.2" sensor ..

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2016 at 10:21 UTC
On article All about control: Huawei P9 camera review (90 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: When would smartphone manufactors build-in at least an 1/1.7" sensor...size does matter...you can't overcome laws of physics with newer processing algorithms and faster cpus...Sony for instance decided it right back into 2012 with their very first RX100 iteration - the 1" sensor is so much better than a usual 1/1.7" which all other prosumers and highend compacts have had back at this day...and now smartphones...12.16..20 or more MP...it doesn't matter...the sensor size is still a mess, JPEGs in 1:1 100% mode look really mushy & like watercolors....they'd never compete with digicams if they wouldn't get a better, bigger sensor for better light gathering ability, low light performance and image quality after all....i am tired of all these smartphone cameras...it's been 2016 - and still no RX100 IQ into a smartphone besides the CM1 Lumix from Panasonic.

Manufactors should do it right that way - bring it on, or just fade away. The typical smartphone cam can never compete with an 1" sensor

Larger sensors are already fitted to smartphones.

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2016 at 15:31 UTC
On article Comparison Review: Sony FE 50mm F1.4 ZA vs 55mm F1.8 ZA (244 comments in total)
In reply to:

Niala2: Maybe last time I repeat myself so grossly:
I believe a G-Master 42mm f1.4 plus a G-Master 70mm f1.2 would have been by very far more adequate (stunning, timely, compelling, usefull) then this one..
(I extensively use the gm85 and a variety of good WA and appreciate the 55.This 1.4 angers me somewhat.)

Then you have no choice. I'd have a 20-85 f/2 in a heartbeat, and I'd throw away all my primes. Maybe even a 2.8, but it would be ridiculously large, heavy and expensive. Hell, Sigma couldn't even do a 20-35.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 22:06 UTC
Total: 625, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »