nicolaiecostel

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

Comments

Total: 625, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »

Check out Broncolor's youtube channel for in depth demonstrations and real life usage of the L heads.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2016 at 09:47 UTC as 4th comment
On article Samsung offers NX1 and NX500 firmware updates (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

tinternaut: You can still paint me stunned that Samsung pulled out of the photography market at s time when they had the best APS-C body bar none (and a growing system of decent glass)...

Please check the camerastoretv review, the NX1 has trouble locking focus on a static subject in daylight, in a shaded area. Nevermind tracking.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2016 at 15:02 UTC
On article Samsung offers NX1 and NX500 firmware updates (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

tinternaut: You can still paint me stunned that Samsung pulled out of the photography market at s time when they had the best APS-C body bar none (and a growing system of decent glass)...

Profit rules the game. Bar none ASPC ? It couldn't focus properly in low light even on static subjects, as reviews showed.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2016 at 10:23 UTC

Guys, I looked up an M65 online since so many of you say that it is a replacement for this and the Alpha industries one looks horrible, though some other derived versions do look good, whereas this is a (overpriced) but quite stylish jacket.

Fashionable men would know how hard it is to find a fashionable jacket and how much they cost. That being said, for use in the winter, I would definitely look for an alternative.

Since jacket pockets gather up dust and flakes at the bottom, that is the last place I would put a lens or a camera.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2016 at 13:31 UTC as 3rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

BostonC: The water drops on cloth pic concerns me: does the fabric have any Teflon or its equivalent PTFE coating?

PTFE is Teflon.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2016 at 13:25 UTC

I was expecting this announcement right after the Profoto one. Now it might be too little, too late, and without TTL or HSS.

Making great quality products isn't enough to ensure you're at the top.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2016 at 13:20 UTC as 8th comment | 6 replies
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1989 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: Glad the 810 'rivals medium format image quality at ISO 64' since it is the size and weight of a medium format camera.

It's enormous. Every time I look at it I think; 'why is it so big?'
And; 'How come it's so big but it still doesn't have IBIS?'.

How did you injure your right wrist ? lol

Link | Posted on May 13, 2016 at 06:34 UTC
In reply to:

nicolaiecostel: I thought Limited Pentax lenses were the best ever, as claimed by pentax aficionados.

Robbie, butthurt much ?

Link | Posted on May 7, 2016 at 17:32 UTC

I thought Limited Pentax lenses were the best ever, as claimed by pentax aficionados.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2016 at 21:34 UTC as 36th comment | 7 replies

Must be a bet between the company's CEO's. They must be laughing their head off at this point.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 18:47 UTC as 288th comment
In reply to:

endofoto: In this review, we do not see Raw comparison. I compared it with D750 (same price), there is a huge difference, I think Nikon is trying to justify 2000$ for a crop sensor camera. D7200 has the same performance with half price and lighter, perfect for birding. For sports D500 is not suitable, as the quality degrades with high ISO. Even D750 is much better than D5 at high ISO. I dont understand what Nikon is trying to do with these two cameras.

What ? The D750 is maximum 1 stop better than the D500, while the D500 has a crop factor. This baby is made for sports !

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 06:32 UTC

The D750 is better, with cleaner files and better detail retention at any ISO. Plus more megapixels.

I don't know what people were on about.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 06:31 UTC as 62nd comment
In reply to:

sdh: I've been wondering for years now if DSLR makers would ever go this route. Good to see someone making a first pass, but I can't help wondering if it's a bit late. I'm hoping that on-sensor phase focus systems are on the brink of becoming commonplace, at least for mirrorless/live view systems.

And as for optical VF cameras, it seems to me that it should be possible to design a sensor with embedded phase-focus pixels, where only the focus pixels are active all the time (for focusing), while the rest of the sensor is idle until exposure time, at which point the whole sensor wakes up, the mirror flips, etc etc.

They're not in a hurry to provide a complete, comprehensive calibration tool because their service network makes good money out of calibrating cameras and lenses ;)

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2016 at 05:43 UTC
In reply to:

lemonadedrinker: The noise from the photos taken at night of the motorcycle and the car crash seem pretty dreadful for a camera body costing £6000.
I could take pics that noisy with either of my Sony cameras which were one twentieth of the price.
Other than that, a great camera.
In fact, quite apart from my facetiousness, why haven't these been through some sort of in-camera process to de-noise them a bit? I think the Sonys can do that, so I'd be fairly certain Nikon do the same...or is this the best it gets?

I guess this isn't Nikon's best effort. Maybe they'll improve it with firmware.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 14:03 UTC
In reply to:

racin06: I suppose that if you are primarily a sports/action shooter, then the $6500 may be justfied. However, from a pure image quality standpoint, sorry...I just don't see it. The low-light image quality of the D5 is only slightly better than what the best APS-C and even Micro 4/3 cameras are producing with good glass attached. Under adequate lighting conditions, the difference is even more minuscule. Let the flamming begin! I have thick skin.

These images are very noisy for some unknown reason, this is not what I have seen the D5 do, and I have seen a lot of galleries with clean files even at 25.600.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 07:05 UTC
In reply to:

lemonadedrinker: The noise from the photos taken at night of the motorcycle and the car crash seem pretty dreadful for a camera body costing £6000.
I could take pics that noisy with either of my Sony cameras which were one twentieth of the price.
Other than that, a great camera.
In fact, quite apart from my facetiousness, why haven't these been through some sort of in-camera process to de-noise them a bit? I think the Sonys can do that, so I'd be fairly certain Nikon do the same...or is this the best it gets?

I have seen D5 galleries, multiple ones, with very clean files up to the higher ISOs, even here on DPR. My guess is that these pictures have been pushed in postprocessing/processed with a crappy converter or you're just looking at the jpegs.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 07:02 UTC
In reply to:

nicolaiecostel: Some of the lenses used in this series need calibration. Some images are really noisy at kinda low ISO values (Jpeg).

Other than that, very nice gallery.

Sure thing.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2016 at 16:01 UTC

Some of the lenses used in this series need calibration. Some images are really noisy at kinda low ISO values (Jpeg).

Other than that, very nice gallery.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2016 at 15:17 UTC as 37th comment | 3 replies
On article Hands on with the Hasselblad H6D 50c/100c (267 comments in total)
In reply to:

skytripper: The question is: Why are such absurdly expensive cameras so unbelievably butt ugly??? :D

They're designed to be modular and functional, not marketing tools.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2016 at 21:57 UTC
On article Hands on with the Hasselblad H6D 50c/100c (267 comments in total)
In reply to:

fzrTom: A little question : who is using this kind of camera and what for ?

As many companies sale medium format cameras with a very high pricing (10k$, 20k$, 30k$, much more$) I'm curious to know who use them ?

Fashion photographers, portrait photographers, people that print large or in high quality publications.

Anyone who can afford them and doesn't shoot sports or wildlife, basically.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2016 at 21:56 UTC
Total: 625, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »