Lives in United States United States
Joined on Feb 19, 2010


Total: 59, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

great Javier: Sony Price: $1,400 US and $1,750 CA
DPR Price: $1400/€1700
Are you sure? Because it doesn't make sense to me.

If I'm not mistaken, €1700 is not a "DPR price" (whatever that may be), but was shown on a slide during a Sony press event.

It may begin to make at least a bit more sense if you take into account that the €1700 quoted will include 20ish % VAT.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2016 at 20:34 UTC
In reply to:

mmarian: I've had Gitzo tripod for over 10 years and it looks and works as when new. They make a Ferrari product with the price to match. I for ones do not regret forking out the top $$ for this premium product. There are other options, so noone should have reason to complain.

@mmarian: There's (at least) one thing that you don't know and don't consider: Maybe today Gitzo doesn't make them like they used to do in the past. Some reviews on bhphotovideo.com certainly give that impression.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2016 at 10:13 UTC

Unfortunately there's bafflingly little information in this lengthy essay of theirs. Sharpness, bokeh, and colors, yeah right.

We will have to wait for information about focus shift when stopping down, coma, LoCas, vignetting, chromatic abberations, and focusing speed. If this were a shorter version of the Zeiss 135mm f2 with autofocus, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

Sidenote: now Nikon is making sure nobody uses their lenses on other bodies, by introducing "electromagnetic aperture control technology" for guaranteed incompatibility. I'm not sure whether this is a clever move.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 14:13 UTC as 43rd comment
On article Bentley creates a 53 billion pixel car commercial (189 comments in total)

LMAO. Kudos to Mr Stock and his chuzpah to scam Bentley's corporate bigwigs with the most preposterous bullsh!t I've heard in a long time: "To capture the giga-pixel image we used multiple robotic heads based on the NASA technology developed for photographing the surface of Mars."

Oh dear. That's a mouthful for an ordinary Gigapan Epic Pro, owned by everyone and his dog.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2016 at 20:53 UTC as 33rd comment | 2 replies
On article Nikon D5 real-world low light, high ISO samples (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

nathantw: Let's look at it this way, if your livelihood depended on your camera to capture "The Moment" which camera would you buy? I know I would go with the D5 instead of a $3k Sony.

Quote: "if your livelihood depended on your camera to capture "The Moment" which camera would you buy?"

This depends on what "The Moment" is in any particular situation. If it is the moment when the mountains are illuminated by the evening sun, while dark storm clouds and lightning bolts are gathering behind said mountains, then you most definitely do NOT want the Nikon D5. If faced with the artificial choice D5 vs. A7R2, you'd pick the A7R2, but in reality you'd want a Phase One.

If it is the moment when Donald Trump gets in a fist fight, you'd probably prefer the D5 over the A7R2, but in reality any cell phone camera will do.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2016 at 09:25 UTC
On article Nikon D5 real-world low light, high ISO samples (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

Arizona Sunset: This sensor in the D750 body would be amazing.

I just re-checked with files from the studio comparisons: Imatest suggests that the D750 seems to be a bit MORE noisy than the D5 at 51200 ISO, albeit not by very much.

It seems like my first impression misled me. Still I think the D5 sensor is not that much better to fret about it. I'm not even sure whether the A7R2 sensor would be.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2016 at 18:36 UTC
On article Nikon D5 real-world low light, high ISO samples (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

bernardly: Why does Nikon insist on designing its own FF sensor for their flagship DSLR? They then outsource the manufacture of the sensor to Renesas foundry. But Sony is the the undisputed champion of image sensors with the best IQ. So what is Nikon thinking and what is their rational? Perhaps, for so important a product they do not want to rely on an external vendor. Another reason could be that with the D5 / D4S / D4 the high price of the product subsidizes the development of their sensor. Their more mainstream cameras with lower prices might not be able to afford the development of Nikon designed and Renesas fabbed sensors.

"Why does Nikon insist on designing its own FF sensor for their flagship DSLR?" Beats me. I think it's painfully obvious that their in-house sensors can't hold a candle to those from Sony.

OTOH this is not a bad thing for my bank account. If Nikon had offered a D5 with an articulated screen, the sensor from the A7R2, and IBIS to boot, I'd have been sorely tempted to buy this thing although I can't really afford it. But as things are, I'm not tempted at all.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2016 at 18:06 UTC
On article Nikon D5 real-world low light, high ISO samples (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dave C 150: Of course night concerts look fine with grainy pics as it adds to "mood" and who needs detail. They look very noisy above 32000 to me. I would be more interested in shots in poor daylight of wildlife, especially birds where any noise ruins a shot. I'd like to see what ISO produces the breakthrough point for this type of shot. I'd say it's around ISO 1600 currently for most modern full frame cameras for this type of shot although I am completely happy to be shot down as I don't own one!

@Deliverator: These are stunning pictures from a pro photographer, no doubt. Unfortunately, the pictures don't prove much about his gear, except maybe the quality of the glass, plus autofocus speed perhaps. The thing is, when you scale down a FF sensor to 2.4 MP resolution, even the output from a 2004 Canon would look good enough in terms of sharpness and noise.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2016 at 17:56 UTC
On article Nikon D5 real-world low light, high ISO samples (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

Arizona Sunset: This sensor in the D750 body would be amazing.

I think it's exactly the other way round. No doubt the D750 body is less than perfect, physically, but its sensor damn near is! At least compared to that of the D5:

I just imported the raw files from Mr Bracaglia's concert shoots @ 51200 ISO and compared them to ISO 51200 files from the D750, with NR set to 0 in both cases. In my opinion the D750 sensor shows less noise than that of the D5.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2016 at 17:45 UTC
In reply to:

MikeManr: Tony Montenga from Scarface!

Yeah, right. Tony Montenga and his mistress Elsie Humperdinck. From Scarface.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2016 at 09:48 UTC
On article Ultra-compact: Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II review (550 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Waiting for a Canon or Nikon version....

@BigOne: A Canon or Nikon version of a camera with Sony's 42 MP BSI sensor, I suppose.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 10:27 UTC

Too bad, I had hoped for a BSI or Stacked Sensor in the next generation of Olympus cameras.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2016 at 10:20 UTC as 37th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

MrTaikitso: I am intrigued to know (not aiming to start a flame war, I like Oly's design and lenses), but beyond ISO 80 what has this over a GX8 that has twin multi function dials (there is only one on the Pen-F), articulating viewfinder, 4K video and more user definable function buttons. Assuming it will be about £750 for the body in the UK, it's priced the same as the GX8.

I would expect the PEN-F's IBIS implementation to be a bit better than that from Panasonic, and the video much worse. Apart from that, the PEN-F probably *is* a GX8 made by Olympus, for all I care. Doesn't have to be a bad thing, if you prefer one brand over the other.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2016 at 10:18 UTC
In reply to:

Thorgrem: Apparently Olympus hit a home run with this amazing lens. Otherwise the non m4/3 users wouldn't be shouting about this lens in the 3 different articles. Apparently they feel m4/3 more and more as a threat. But even more and more as a serious option.

@Thorgrem: I'm not sure where you get the idea that it's only "non m4/3 users" who think that this lens is a 600mm f8 equivalent, and criticize the price point of this lens accordingly.

More likely it's m4/3 users like me who acknowledge the laws of physics, and who realize they get fleeced and defrauded.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2016 at 09:50 UTC
On article Readers' Showcase: Scott Matthews (45 comments in total)
In reply to:

rahul shukla: It's people lIke you who keep us inspired.

More importantly, it's people like you who keep us buying gear. Well done, sir.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2016 at 10:20 UTC
In reply to:

stevez: I too am surprised at how large this lens is. Considering that its almost identical in size, weight and dimension as my Nikkor 300mm AFS f4, I can't help but think that Olympus might be considering a full frame mirrorless down the road. Another thought is that the lens was designed with an overly large image circle in order to assure excellent edge to edge sharpness. Hmmmm?

@falconeyes: If I were you, I wouldn't bother. Me, I find it just too damn tiring to try to educate ungrateful people with delusions of knowledge or intelligence. Especially when they talk back.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 16:49 UTC
In reply to:

fmian: 'the sensor is 53.7 x 40.4mm'
'The 'full frame' MF sensor guarantees that the full field-of-view of MF lenses can be realized'

I'm pretty sure 645 format has a larger frame size than 53.7 x 40.4mm, with the longest edge of the exposed frame being 55mm or 56mm. So does this camera give a cropped field of view or does Phase One actually make their lenses for a smaller 645 format than everyone else?

The exposed frame used to have dimensions of 56*42mm, therefore sensor dimensions of 53.7*40.4mm would give you a crop factor of ca. 1.04167. In my book, this is negligible.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 08:47 UTC

And still no articulated LCD with this Phase One. This is madness!

In order to punish Phase One for this engineering failure, I will not, repeat: NOT fantasize about buying one of their pathetic cameras, and will instead resume fantasizing about being able to afford a Pentax 645Z.

Sorry, Phase One, but you asked for it!

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2016 at 19:58 UTC as 31st comment | 10 replies

DPReview about the Pentax 645Z: "the larger sensor area does mean more light is gathered than comparable full-frame 35mm DSLRs."

I'm afraid this is patently false. Pentax's fastest medium format lenses are so much slower than those available for full-frame DSLRs that it completely obliterates any light-gathering advantage that the larger sensor might otherwise have.

To wit, a full-frame DSLR sensor behind a lens @ f1.4 gathers more than twice as much light as the 645Z sensor behind a lens @ f2.8, and f2.8 is the fastest there is in Pentax's current 645 portfolio.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2015 at 21:28 UTC as 35th comment | 49 replies
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1495 comments in total)
In reply to:

Woodlink: Petax design team is off the hook for "ugliest camera of the year".

Funny that you should say this. My first thought was that they let Marc Newson off the leash again, the guy who designed the truly abominable Pentak K-01, IIRC not without bragging that he never designed a camera before.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2015 at 14:51 UTC
Total: 59, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »