sceptical1

Joined on Jun 1, 2013

Comments

Total: 18, showing: 1 – 18
On article Hands-on with the Canon EOS R5 (538 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotoFactor: Notice the progression over the past few years:
1 - "I don't need/want a mirrorless camera, I love my DSLR, EVFs suck, I need an OVF" (said by Canikon shooters)
2 - Canon/Nikon come out with initial mirrorless models
3 - Canon/Nikon come out with next-gen mirrorless models that start competing with their DSLRs
4 - Canikon shooters "I'm going to get their new mirrorless camera"

Reply to balios - exactly. I am currently using Nikon DSLR's (D5 / D500) and they have amazing AF. Mirror-less have clearly caught up and arguably surpassed the best DSLR's and you get many other advantages. Because I shoot action, my primary concern is getting the shot and cameras like this and the Sony A9II are amazing for this purpose. As a Nikon shooter, I hope they produce something in this class so I will have a mirror-less to upgrade to when the time comes. Great job Canon!

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 23:57 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Canon EOS R6 (305 comments in total)
In reply to:

k4J98: I don't shoot Canon or Sony, but I'm comparing the A7III and the R6. Is there a meaningful difference?

A7III benefits:
-MP
-Price, ~$1000 cheaper(!)
-Size & weight, I suppose
-Lens selection
-Battery life

R6 benefits:
-Durability
-Screen & EVF (better, probably)
-Video specs
-IBIS (better, probably)
-Continuous shooting speed

Toss up:
-AF performance (they're likely comparable)
-IQ (Sony may have an edge, but the 1DXIII's sensor is comparable)
-Handling (different bodies for everybody's [preference])
-Video quality (at this point, who knows, but they'll likely be comparable)

These are both great cameras, but if I chose today, it'd be the A7III. When the R6 hits the shelves, the A7III will be a bit cheaper yet. I still see myself choosing the $1000+ in my pocket.

If this Canon's AF is similar to the IDX MII it is better and faster than the Sony. They are not comparable. The EVF is WAY ahead. That alone is enough to justify the difference. As for video, it is also way ahead - flip screen, dual pixel AF and higher bit rates. I know people want to criticize (I am a Nikon shooter) but let's be honest, they just changed the game. It's simply better. That doesn't mean I am switching from Nikon (no reason, I shoot action and I have their action / sports cameras) but it does mean that for now, Canon has the best value in this price range. In a few months it will be $1999 (just in time for Black Friday sales) and that is when more people will grab it. Sony and Nikon need to up their game to stay competitive. Canon has given nearly all their DSLR owners a reason to upgrade to either the R6 or R5.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 23:48 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Canon EOS R6 (305 comments in total)
In reply to:

NathanUCF: If I were buying into a Mirrorless full frame system today and I insisted on buying new this would probably be the best option to buy IMO because it fixes all of the ergonomic and interface problems of the A7III while sacrificing nothing except battery life and sometimes dealing with an adapter. However when you’re opened to used, and a A7III is $1,600 and a Z6 with the F4 kit and an XQD card can be had for $1,800. It becomes really hard to justify why the QOL improvements the EOS R6 are worth $700-$900 more, but if you’re a Canon DSLR person then this feels like a much better step into mirrorless than the R.

I sort of don't care because I am a Nikon shooter and am waiting patiently for them to introduce a mirror-less camera that can keep up with this. No, the Nikon Z6 (or the Sony A7III) are not comparable. For someone that shoots wildlife and fast moving dogs, the AF and speed blow the competition out of the water. The Z6, even with the latest firmware, is not good for action. The Sony is better but then you have to deal with their ergonomics and relatively lame viewfinder. Neither is as fast, especially with the mechanical shutter. Gotta give Canon credit here, they are ahead of the competition and, depending on what you are photographing, easily worth the extra premium. If this were a Nikon with similar specs, it would already be pre-ordered.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 23:39 UTC

How come no firmware update for D500? Ticks me off as Snapbridge is so unreliable with that model.

I so wish there was a 3rd party app that worked with it.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2019 at 21:50 UTC as 12th comment | 4 replies
On article Nikon D850 Review (2110 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike Oo: This camera is a bit of a swan song for Nikon. It could be the last top-of-the-line DSLR for them. I don't believe we will see another high end Nikon with a mirror when this camera's lifespan is over.

Having a little fun with you here, because I agree completely with your point. That said, the Iphone X seems to do a bunch of tricks that no DSLR can do. I know it's not the same but from the look of it, I might just get one to go along with my DSLR's (very wonderful Nikon D500's. Crop sensor heaven!)
I haven't noticed a decline in the quality of my photos since the D850 came out, so I guess the D500 is holding up well :)

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2017 at 16:22 UTC

I must admit I am underwhelmed by this announcement. About a year ago I purchased a Yongnuo YN-622N-TX controller and 4 YN-622N transceivers to work with my existing Nikon and Metz flashes. This replaced both an SU-800 and Pocketwizards. They worked better then either. Obviously, they overcome the limitation of the SU-800 line of site since it is not optical. It is also easier to configure then the Pocketwizards and just as reliable in use. I sold the SU-800 and the Pocketwizards, purchased the Yongnuo's and had money left over. Now Nikon is releasing a product I might have considered purchasing but it really only works with the D500 / D5. As someone said earlier, if they had introduced a radio SU-800 to control this flash with a built-in transceiver they would have gotten my business. I am excited about the faster recycle times and over-heating protection. Good stuff but not enough.
I will now research the new Yongnuo YN-685 for Nikon (just introduced) as my next flash. Sad.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2016 at 21:50 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review (1307 comments in total)

I am a long time Nikon user and former full time wildlife photographer (I still shoot wildlife "professionally" but only to maintain a stock library that provides some residual income) I really appreciate this camera. I don't have one and shoot instead with a D7100 (I know, small buffer, but I don't need a big buffer. When I had it, I didn't really use it. I still shoot wildlife like I shot with film so very short bursts) Regardless, I like the quality, but would love to have a body like this Canon. I can imagine mating this with their new 400mm primes / TCs and getting a relatively lightweight wildlife machine. I hope Nikon matches it!

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2014 at 21:16 UTC as 96th comment

Bummer! Metz makes great products! I have 5 flashes and 4 are Metz. The last two I purchased were the lower-end AF-44's and I love thier simplicity and pretty much perfect Nikon compatibility. Hopefully they can reorganize and continue.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2014 at 00:20 UTC as 9th comment
On article Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD Lab Test Review (267 comments in total)

I have a pretty hard time believing this in real life, quite honestly. I think the Nikon 80-400 G stomps it in just about every way. I got to do a nice comparison and purchased the Nikon. It's sharper at every common focal length and the AF was much better (at least on my D7100) It was faster with little hunting and much sharper wide open at 400mm.. Note that I do handhold the Nikon most of the time but when comparing these too, I used a Gitzo tripod with a Wimberley Gimbal. I have been shooting long lenses including some pro lenses like the 200-400 F4 and 500mm F4.
Of course, the Nikon costs a lot more, comes with a crappy tripod collar and only has a 400mm reach. Still, I greatly prefer it.

In general, I have not had any luck with Tamron lenses. I am now buying Sigma lenses like the 18-35 and 50mm Art prime instead of Nikon because I think they are better. After testing a couple of Tamrons I have always returned them. Maybe I am consistently unlucky with the samples.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2014 at 22:48 UTC as 36th comment | 5 replies
On article Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM review (592 comments in total)

I love the new Sigma mid-range zooms and primes. I have 3 - the 18-35, 17-50 and 17-70 (17-70 is for travel, walk-around, not for professional shoots, but very good for what it is) I like them so well that I replaced Nikon zooms of a similar range including the very expensive and unstabilized Nikon 24-70. I actually prefer these Sigma's for their VR, and excellent bokeh. I would consider this lens, but I have the Nikon 50 1.4 and its a sharp bokeh monster, so there is really no need for me. That said, anyone looking for a great 50mm lens will probably be happy (despite the size) and I can now say that without even seeing it. Sigma has come a long way.
That said, the Nikon is much lighter, much less expensive and gives great bokeh.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2014 at 14:54 UTC as 134th comment
On article Fujifilm X-T1 Review (655 comments in total)
In reply to:

sceptical1: This is obviously a great camera. I almost hate looking at the specs and comparing it to my D7100's. (I love them, and appreciate the low cost primes, the Nikon 50mm 1.4 is never far away, and some of the great Sigma's like the 18-35 1.8, among others) That said, I would have considered this a couple of years ago, but I am probably moving on to the 4/3's system over the next 2-4 years. I want lighter / smaller. I recently purchased the Olympus OMD-M10 and I am integrating it as a backup into my photography business. With the right lenses and enough practice, I am getting "good enough" results...and its just so much lighter / smaller. In a generation or two (meaning 2 years) I can easily imagine the 4/3 system matching the DoF capability of APC cameras. It is close now with the Olympus 45mm prime. At that point, I will leave APC just like I left FF. If this had been available a couple years ago, I would have gone to this. It's always another shiny object...now lets go take some pics

Ah, you are technically right about that. That said, I can do a very good facsimile with a longer prime or zoom at f1.8, something that will be available at usable focal distances soon enough. I am quite practical about this. Can I blur my subject enough and get the bokeh I want with a 4/3s camera. The answer is "yes" but only with one lens I have seen. There will be more, probably lots more.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 23:01 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T1 Review (655 comments in total)

This is obviously a great camera. I almost hate looking at the specs and comparing it to my D7100's. (I love them, and appreciate the low cost primes, the Nikon 50mm 1.4 is never far away, and some of the great Sigma's like the 18-35 1.8, among others) That said, I would have considered this a couple of years ago, but I am probably moving on to the 4/3's system over the next 2-4 years. I want lighter / smaller. I recently purchased the Olympus OMD-M10 and I am integrating it as a backup into my photography business. With the right lenses and enough practice, I am getting "good enough" results...and its just so much lighter / smaller. In a generation or two (meaning 2 years) I can easily imagine the 4/3 system matching the DoF capability of APC cameras. It is close now with the Olympus 45mm prime. At that point, I will leave APC just like I left FF. If this had been available a couple years ago, I would have gone to this. It's always another shiny object...now lets go take some pics

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 19:13 UTC as 104th comment | 3 replies
On article Am I missing something here? (627 comments in total)
In reply to:

ollieye: What did I do? Did I just waste my hard earned money? According to these comments I did just that. I am not a professional photographer. I shoot with a Nikon D7000 and an iPhone 5. I am becoming an older woman who is uncomfortable carrying around the weight of the D7000 and a couple lenses. I did not research which I normally do. I just figured a lighter weight smaller NIKON which I have trust in would be a good choice. At the present time I shoot a lot of pics at Church, low light and children jumping and running. What ya'll think. Did I screw up?

Love Eco pix post. 90% of the comments are splitting hairs. Non of the big makers (Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic etc.) really make "bad" cameras. Pick the features /size you want and go enjoy taking pictures. Your choice sounds good to me.
Funny anecdote along these lines. .. I recently did a pet photography shoot.. After I was done I put my equipment away then came back into the customers home. I went back in and his dog was busily chewing his bone. I sat down next to him and snapped two quick shots with Samsung smartphone resting on the floor to keep it steady. They turned out to be the best, most natural shots of the whole shoot. So my least capable camera was used to capture the best shots. If the smartphone can give those results anything better than that is good enough for nearly any use. It's the photographer...
.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2014 at 19:14 UTC
On article Am I missing something here? (627 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shan Som: I am a bird photographer. I use mostly Canon gears (1D Mk3, 50D with 100-400L). I also own a Nikon 1V1 with FT1 and 70-300 VR. The results of the Nikon combo often are better than my Canon counterpart. Advantages are:

1. Lightweight - can be taken anywhere without much fuss.
2. Offers more range - 810mm/F5.6 eqv.
3. No mirror flapping sound - does not alert a bird/ wildlife.
4. Low cost of ownership.
5. Small size is non-aggressive for birds/ wildlife.

I welcome the release of V3 and particularly the new 70-300 for 1 system. I expect superb focusing using all or selected focus points and better high ISO performance. Even 1V1 with a CX lens can beat any pro SLR system in focusing speed IMO. I also hope that the new lens offers super sharp results at 300mm. If the combo can even produce 90% of D4/1D-X + 500F4 results, i am for it. Why? Because it performs at a much lower cost, light weight, faster focusing, low noise making, non aggressive combo ideal for birds and wildlife.

This is a very interesting post to me. I have a similar interest / background but shoot Nikon with d700 FF (very rare, moving from FF) and D7100's and the new 80-400 plus the old heavy 200-400.
I want to get smaller and lighter. I recently purchased a new Olympus omd m-10 with that in mind - but not for wildlife. I purchased it for my pet photography business. I figured it would be less intimidating than a d7100 with a 70-200mm lens, that it would be easier to maneuver as a second camera on a dual strap and that it would be easier for hip level shots. So far, I really like it, but it doesn't track fast moving dogs as well as the DSLR's. I didn't really expect it too.... So, what if you could get a camera with AF good enough for fast moving subjects with fast telephoto or long primes for wildlife. From what you are saying this camera is getting close to that. I am very interested in such a camera and would consider anything that could deliver that. Thanks for sharing your experience / thoughts about this.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2014 at 16:23 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Review (346 comments in total)
In reply to:

Brixham Steve: I've had this camera and the Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 zoom for just over a week now. It is a total joy to hold and use with no noticeable drop in image quality compared to my Nikon D7000 with good lenses. The big thing that has dropped though, is the bulk and weight compared to my Nikon set up.

The build quality and feel of this camera is just fantastic - it seems a much better engineered product than the slightly plasticy Nikon.

I had been looking for a while to replace my Nikon as I was finding that I used it less and less due to the size and weight making it inconvenient to just take along with me casually. This little OM-D must be less than half the size & weight with no sacrifice in image quality.

A little cost saving tip for UK residents: I paid £699 for the pancake zoom lens kit then sold the little pancake lens on ebay for £299. It sold almost instantly. So the 'body only' cost to me was just a fraction over £400 compared to the £529 retail price :-) A complete bargain!

Hi Brixham,

This is in reply to your comments about depth of field. I must admit, the Nikons have the advantage of being compatible with the Sigma 50mm 1.4 lens. This lens is fairly sharp, but produces really creamy bokeh. It's easy to create, so some of the difference is likely the lens. I will look at the lens you suggest (also mentioned in the review...) and see if it helps produce better results. Right now, I am using the Olympus 12-40 2.8. I am waiting on the Olympus 40-150 2.8. The 12-40 2.8 is very nice and super sharp but the bokeh is only okay, IMO. I will need to get roughly a 25mm and 40-50mm primes as budget allows and these will probably help.
Regardless, as I previously stated, I am very happy overall.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 11:42 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Review (346 comments in total)
In reply to:

Brixham Steve: I've had this camera and the Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 zoom for just over a week now. It is a total joy to hold and use with no noticeable drop in image quality compared to my Nikon D7000 with good lenses. The big thing that has dropped though, is the bulk and weight compared to my Nikon set up.

The build quality and feel of this camera is just fantastic - it seems a much better engineered product than the slightly plasticy Nikon.

I had been looking for a while to replace my Nikon as I was finding that I used it less and less due to the size and weight making it inconvenient to just take along with me casually. This little OM-D must be less than half the size & weight with no sacrifice in image quality.

A little cost saving tip for UK residents: I paid £699 for the pancake zoom lens kit then sold the little pancake lens on ebay for £299. It sold almost instantly. So the 'body only' cost to me was just a fraction over £400 compared to the £529 retail price :-) A complete bargain!

I use d7100's and was going to get the m1 as a lighter 2nd backup. I got this m 10 instead as I was satisfied with the feature set.
I had d7000' s before the 7100 and I must mildly disagree that the quality is comparable. It's not on two common situations.
First a little background so you see why I have different conclusions. I am a longtime wildlife photographer and earned a decent part time income doing after many years of having a portrait studio ( that was a long time ago.) Recently a good friend and pro pet photographer decided to retire early for health reasons and asked me to take over his business. So my photography is now mostly pets, with some landscape / wildlife to try to maintain a stock portfolio.
For both of these applications the Nikons produce somewhat better results. Here is why.
1. For pets, my style involves creating a shallow depth of field frequently using a fast zoom or 50 and 85mm primes. Due to the smaller sensor size, it is more difficult duplicate that effect . After a couple weeks of practice with the Oly, but I doubt I can completely close the gap. The difference is not huge, but noticeable.
2. For wildlife, the platform lacks a great fast tele zoom. It also doesn't track moving object s a well.

I just want people to know the limitations.

That said, I just love it! First, it's a perfect second camera for dogs that are initially nervous about the bigger camera / lens. It's size is wonderful because it is really easy to maneuver on a dual strap. It stays out of the way until you need it. The tilt able LCD makes shooting from the hip a breeze ( of course, the Nikons lack this feature). The builtin HDR makes natural HDR shots a breeze by lining it all up for you. It does all this while delivering more than good enough quality in nearly every situation. Finally, as a frequent traveler, it will be great to leave my DSLR home. As an older photographer this is a real boon. I switched entirely from heavy full frame to DO when I knew I could get good enough quality in a lighter package. Now I am looking forward to the day where I can completely replace my DSLR's with something good enough in an even lighter package. These Oly's are close and give it another couple years and it will be here. In the meantime, I will get the best results from this Oly given its small limitations.
Enjoy

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2014 at 21:01 UTC

Hi All,

The new Nikon 80-400 VR is quite a bit better than the Bigma and it should be for an extra $1100. I have one and it's the best long zoom I have tried. Only primes are sharper. At 400mm wide open it is very close to 300 F4 with TC. and much easier to shoot with - even hand holdable at the long end (it is heavy, so I wouldn't want to use it all day handheld...) in many situations. The Bigma takes refined technique and a tripod to come close and it still won't match the contrast. The Nikon is just better.
That is not to say you can't get great images with the Bigma and that it is a bad lense. It isn't. A colleague uses it all the time and sells plenty of images, so, as always, the photographer trumps the lens. If you know the limitations and understand how to get the most out of it, you can't really argue with the results - especially for the money.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2013 at 00:43 UTC as 5th comment
On article Sony A3000 First Impressions Review (628 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biro: Wow. There's way too much hand-wringing over the A3000. Yes, it's an NEX-3 with the form factor of a compact DSLR. I find nothing wrong with this - and I'm speaking as a person with a full-on three-body Pentax DSLR kit and a three-body micro four-thirds kit.

Yes, it would be nice if the EVF had more resolution. But it's still better than any rear LCD in bright sunlight. And as far as that rear LCD goes, the 230K-dot display on my Pentax K200D was perfectly adequate - just as it is on a number of Leica digital cameras.

My take: The A3000, at $399 with stabilized kit 18-55mm zoom, is a great deal. Maybe add the Sigma 19mm and 30mm primes in E-mount for a compact package with high image and video quality that you won't be too worried about trashing. Then go out and have fun.

Don't like it? Then don't buy it. Me? I may pick one up just for jollies - and to reward Sony for thinking a bit outside of the box.

I am not really defending Nikon (longtime user) or Canon, but Canon seems to be innovating nicely - see video / focus on the Canon 70d. The Nikon 800e is pretty awesome as well :) Further, the Nikon 7000/7100 are wonderful still camera machines.
If Sony can push them to go faster, we all benefit, but its not like you can't take fabulous pictures with a whole bunch of these Nikon and Canon cameras and that is the point. BTW - Oly, Panasonic, Pentax, and Samsung also take great pictures with great IQ.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2013 at 00:21 UTC
Total: 18, showing: 1 – 18