atodea

atodea

Lives in Romania Bucharest, Romania
Joined on Oct 11, 2016

Comments

Total: 39, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Panasonic GH6 video sample gallery (44 comments in total)

Chris and Jordan are sooooooo good!

Link | Posted on May 13, 2022 at 11:29 UTC as 7th comment
On article OM System OM-1 studio tests published (415 comments in total)
In reply to:

janist74: Interesting video om1 6400 vs mk3 1600: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6KUnoXxSfs

I think it's interesting if you want to see the photographer's approach to noise reduction.
Other than that, it's an OM Ambassador trying to sell the 2 stop BS by comparing OM-1 ISO 6400 vs EM-1 III ISO 1600 and explaining that... with lots of processing... some parts of a test image can look better in some regards...

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2022 at 12:55 UTC
On article OM System OM-1 review (1798 comments in total)
In reply to:

TerryV81: Problem is that one f2.8 ff zoom replaces many f1.2 m4/3 primes. In the end I think the weight and price penalty is more on the mft side but that's just how I thought of this.

The moment m4/3 has the same noise, DR and color rendition at the same iso on ff (100 vs 100, 3200 vs 3200, etc.) I will probably chose my system differently because the only difference left will indeed be the DOF. With this generation of m4/3 sensors I still have to take noise, DR and color rendition into account.

I don't think the same generation MFT sensor will ever have the same noise levels and DR as FF.

However, it seems that MFT (which was said to be dead by many years), while still lagging FF image quality, can provide an image quality that is just good enough for most photographers/videographers.

While better IQ is nice to have, it's not the only thing that matters.
I prefer MFT for its size and DOF advantages. I need to shoot in very small venues where I cannot bring large equipment and I shoot groups of people with the lens wide-open and this system helps get more people in focus. I also want to shoot 400mm equiv. with a lens that I can carry in my bag on holidays.
Others have other needs, of course.

I think if MFT can survive another sensor iteration, it will be able to provide an image quality good enough for 90% of the market (or something like that).

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2022 at 11:15 UTC
In reply to:

syberman7: Woops - the top pic of the 40-150 is the old f/2.8 version.

The top pic is really, really confusing.
In an article about two lenses, if the first pic is of two lenses, you expect the pic to be of those lenses in the title :)
I had to maximize the image to look at the lens focal length / aperture to understand it's actually a (very interesting) comparison between two 40-150 lenses.
If you read the article on a desktop you can see '40-150' on the small lens easily but on a phone it's quite difficult.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2022 at 17:08 UTC
In reply to:

George1958: Is there such a thing as a vlogging camera, seems to me that many utube content producers use a wide range of cameras from M4/3 all the way up to FF.

I think professional vloggers would use at least an external mic. Probably a better lens, too.
However, I found this video interesting. It seems these 'vlogging' cameras are not much better than a good phone. So, if not very serious about vlogging one can just go with their phone and if they are serious they need a GH5 or better/bigger with a good Rode or whatever external mic they want.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2020 at 17:19 UTC
In reply to:

Zorro73: For gods sake, please admin, pleeaase would you put the following sentence under EVERY mft related article:
On microfourthirds systems is the aperture value f in terms of gathering light alway the same as on every other system!

You will always get the same shutter speeds with every system!
Thing that changes with crop is the aperture related depth of field.
Which means: an 25mm f1.7 mft lens is FF equivalent to an 50mm f1.7 lens (shutter speed related) and f3.4 depth of field related.

When you think of F numbers you should not only think of DoF. It's also about the amount of light. Yes, if you compare it to FF you would get the DoF of F3.4 (or something like that) but you would also need to increase your ISO 2 stops.
The latest FF sensors are around two stops better than latest MFT (which have not improved too much recently), or maybe even less.
Keep that in mind when comparing equiv aperture.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2019 at 12:49 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Panasonic S1R preview from Barcelona (151 comments in total)

Love the Vicky Cristina Barcelona tribute :)

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2019 at 20:36 UTC as 14th comment
On article Olympus OM-D E-M1X review (2395 comments in total)

It is very sad the latest feature-rich flagship has a sensor from 2016.

This shows sensor development isn't keeping up with other formats. As a MFT user, I really hope this will be a success but I am not sure we will see many new MFT models.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2019 at 12:51 UTC as 357th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

DS HK: For Z system, what is the different between:
1) IBIS only (i.e. VR off);
2) both IBIS & VR enable;
3) VR only (disable IBIS)

joe_leads, While I can't think why you would want not to use both of them, as there are still many lenses without VR, I think it would also be really interesting to see how IBIS alone performs.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2019 at 12:59 UTC

What does Equivalent mean in "24mm Equivalent", "55mm Equivalent", "200mm Equivalent" (in the case of a "full" frame camera)?

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2019 at 10:14 UTC as 28th comment | 3 replies

"Enthusiast mirrorless camera"... with a built-in grip? What have you been smoking?

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2019 at 10:38 UTC as 108th comment
On a photo in the Nikon Coolpix P1000 sample gallery sample gallery (5 comments in total)

Interesting framing. Never seen worse :)

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2018 at 15:15 UTC as 3rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Rensol: Look at hair edges blur!
Totally unnatural and disgusting. More than enough for 99% of users though but still far away from what regular larger sensor camera can do.
So leap forward? Maybe quantum leap forward then.
:)

Wow. Didn't notice that.
I think the border area between the hair and the blurred part in "portrait_ellie.jpeg" is just ridiculous.
Still, this is still a new thing and it may improve enough to cover 99% of photographic needs for most users.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2018 at 14:25 UTC

I know I am not the first one to notice this but... no IBIS? Today?

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2018 at 17:16 UTC as 133rd comment | 3 replies

Did Nikon share any F mount details to third party lens manufacturers? Sigma, Tamron and others have made superb F mount lenses...
If they can do the same thing again then this shortcoming article is just click bait.
I am no longer into FF cameras but don't find this mount issue worrying at all.
Am I wrong?

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2018 at 15:24 UTC as 226th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

atodea: Wow, there is a huge interest in Nikon's first FF mirrorless. The same will probably happen when Canon's first FF mirrorless will be close to launch. They will probably be great, too.

I just hope they don't kill MFT cameras because I think they are becoming a great alternative, providing superb quality for the size/price.
The most demanding photographers might not accept the MFT compromise but I believe most photographers would be happy with MFT.

Myself, I sold my D800 a while ago and moved to Olympus EM5 and now Panasonic G9.

So, good luck Nikon, just please don't kill MFT :)

I get you point but I stick to "demanding" :)

While the larger sensor offers better low light performance, etc., IMHO today's MFT sensors offer good quality for most purposes. Up to ISO 800 images are very clean and you can use ISO 6400 for web pics. I think most people would find this good enough. Also, they evolve so at some point you can expect almost clean ISO 6400. And then, I really think MFT would be good enough (for amateurs and enthusiasts).

I hope I am not wrong as I spent a lot to move to MFT :))

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2018 at 11:02 UTC

Wow, there is a huge interest in Nikon's first FF mirrorless. The same will probably happen when Canon's first FF mirrorless will be close to launch. They will probably be great, too.

I just hope they don't kill MFT cameras because I think they are becoming a great alternative, providing superb quality for the size/price.
The most demanding photographers might not accept the MFT compromise but I believe most photographers would be happy with MFT.

Myself, I sold my D800 a while ago and moved to Olympus EM5 and now Panasonic G9.

So, good luck Nikon, just please don't kill MFT :)

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2018 at 09:26 UTC as 19th comment | 7 replies

The article claims Xiaomi is just starting to use dual cam. You need to edit the first paragraph.
I don't know all their models but at least last year's Mi A1 and this year's Note 5 Pro have dual cams.
It's amazing you could write something as ridiculous like Xiaomi joining the dual cam now.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2018 at 18:35 UTC as 1st comment
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (1039 comments in total)
In reply to:

atodea: The Panasonic G9 RAW test seems much sharper than the GH5, Olympus E-M1 MII and on par or even sharper than the Nikon D7500.
Is this true, is this test flawed or I am not getting something?

ISO 200, RAW: https://photos.app.goo.gl/Sq4uB3IEnmIv1gYB2
ISO 1600, RAW: https://photos.app.goo.gl/B3yx2e4IG77MNl8f2
(Above tests from Image Comparison tool: Low light, comparison mode)

Thank you!

Dr_Jon, not sure what you are trying to point out. I think at high ISO the noise will be too big to compare sharpness. If you adjust ISO to 200, the G9 will seem so much sharper than the GH5 (e.g. look at the yellow paint tubes in both corners). It seems DPReview's Comparison Tool is useless.

Congrats on your new camera!

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2018 at 13:50 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (1039 comments in total)
In reply to:

atodea: The Panasonic G9 RAW test seems much sharper than the GH5, Olympus E-M1 MII and on par or even sharper than the Nikon D7500.
Is this true, is this test flawed or I am not getting something?

ISO 200, RAW: https://photos.app.goo.gl/Sq4uB3IEnmIv1gYB2
ISO 1600, RAW: https://photos.app.goo.gl/B3yx2e4IG77MNl8f2
(Above tests from Image Comparison tool: Low light, comparison mode)

Thank you!

Thank you. So the comparison tool is flawed...

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 12:04 UTC
Total: 39, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »