Robert Garcia NYC

Joined on Jul 25, 2010

Comments

Total: 153, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Fujifilm X100F pre-production sample gallery (181 comments in total)

Not excited. Even the things in focus don't look sharp and the image lacks shape. I never like the jpegs anyway. But the colors are fine.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2017 at 13:58 UTC as 53rd comment
On article F is for '4th': Hands-on with Fujifilm X100F (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

kobakokh: This Fijifilm has just one small problem: lens is much less sharper then 28mm lens of Ricoh GR. And also if Fuji will add to AF system something like Ricoh's Snap focus, its will be absolutely great camera. That Snap focus is way better then maybe any focus system in the world...

True, but Ricoh is sharp at 2.8. I'm sure Fuji can pull it off too.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 13:36 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Fujifilm X100 (163 comments in total)

This has the best image quality of all the x100's.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 12:49 UTC as 72nd comment
On article F is for '4th': Hands-on with Fujifilm X100F (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

kobakokh: This Fijifilm has just one small problem: lens is much less sharper then 28mm lens of Ricoh GR. And also if Fuji will add to AF system something like Ricoh's Snap focus, its will be absolutely great camera. That Snap focus is way better then maybe any focus system in the world...

Same soft lens at f2, shame. Sharpens at f4 it is common knowledge.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 12:48 UTC
In reply to:

Fixx: Now if Epson would make also 24" model compact and not too expensive.

+1

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 01:00 UTC
In reply to:

Fujica: Too bad, but I do think there could big business in selling their knowledge to camera manufacturers as default 'digital film rolls'. Just like Fujifilm is doing with their JPEG film simulations into their cameras.

There is nothing wrong with having your camera digitally developing the JPG/'film' and then have the RAW file as an extra bonus for extra creativity.

+1

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2017 at 13:57 UTC

Hurry up.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 11:15 UTC as 14th comment
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (764 comments in total)

Olympus Epic i think it was called.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2016 at 15:25 UTC as 173rd comment
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2199 comments in total)
In reply to:

thx1138: So comparing the RAW output to say the a6300, similar sensor or even the D500 the Fuji is not producing as much detail, and looks a little soft even smeared. Is this more the fault of the RAW converter or the X-Trans filter array?

Interestingly the D500 4K also looks crisper but the a6300 is noticeably better than both, too bad about rolling shutter.

Yes, you need irident to give the file a bayer look. Why not just have a high end bayer xt2 instead?

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 09:41 UTC
On article Hands-on and in-depth with the Sony a6500 (554 comments in total)

I might have missed it. Did anyone catch if it can go -2, -3 lowlight?

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2016 at 23:52 UTC as 87th comment

such a great looking camera.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 19:47 UTC as 23rd comment
On article Olympus announces PEN E-PL8 entry-level mirrorless (24 comments in total)

I wish they stop wasting their time with this camera and stick the good stuff.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 23:48 UTC as 5th comment

When can I see some images? How about low light shooting ? How low can you go? -3,-4?

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 22:26 UTC as 61st comment
On article Fujifilm X-E2S real-world samples (100 comments in total)

I never found Fuji files good at detail at all but they do have a nice certain look that I do like.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2016 at 00:31 UTC as 15th comment
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2199 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: camera is so expensive,fuji lesnses are so expensive too
they cheat in iso chart but jpeg quality is good
but the cost for a apsc lineup is so funny
i dont think 1600$ pluse 2000$ glass is worthy for a apsc lineup
they should made FF like sony or they will be destroyed like olympus
for apsc users that begins the photography a6000 with 500$ or 1000$ a6300 can be better option,they can buy FF lenses and use FF camera too
they biuld good cameras and good lenses but in paper always lost

I have Fuji and Leica not the same at all. Leicas images have pop and microcontrast/bite. Fuji goes for a softer rendering they are doing their own thing some people appreciate it, some don't. Lenses are not the same either, sorry.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 14:22 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2199 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: Easily Fuji's best body yet, but at the end of the day, still no IBIS, still weak RAW file support in the most popular PP software, still really expensive. If they could make an X-A2 follow up with an EVF and DNG output they could have a real mainstream winner.

So true

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2016 at 20:19 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2199 comments in total)

How is the shutter sound compared to the xpro2? Anyone caught that?

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2016 at 13:32 UTC as 247th comment | 2 replies
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2199 comments in total)
In reply to:

Robert Garcia NYC: Sorry, I might have missed this but not one word regarding lowlight focus? Anyone spot that?

Thank you Richard. That's probably one of my top features I first look for when I'm looking to purchase. I'm hoping your right sir. :)

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 23:07 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2199 comments in total)

Sorry, I might have missed this but not one word regarding lowlight focus? Anyone spot that?

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 22:37 UTC as 286th comment | 4 replies
On article Making a splash: Nikon D500 real-world sample gallery (225 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thematic: Uh oh. Very disappointing image quality.

I was praising this camera because 2 friends own it and said the picture quality was as good as the FF Nikon D750. These pictures, and the RAWs they sent me are underwhelming.

At the end of the say its a tool for speed and the 1.5x crop people need but I can't image anyone shooting portraits, fine art, macro, landscape, architecture etc using this over a cheaper Pentax K-1 or the Nikon D750.

As for the price people are complaining about - No issue with me there, Pentax is the value champ but the Nikon mount is great for their lineup and Zeiss Milvus options.

Next up is Sonys a9 and the Canon 5DMK4.

Fun times!

that's jpeg? I just tried the raw myself very quickly this is what i got.

check out the original:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/2427869311/photos/3442177/dan_d500_1958

Link | Posted on May 5, 2016 at 01:28 UTC
Total: 153, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »