Henrik Melander

Lives in Sweden Sweden
Joined on Jun 25, 2009

Comments

Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

lecoupdejarnac: Their tests don't evaluate the black and white output from the dedicated monochrome sensor. What makes a compelling black and white photo is hard to evaluate subjectively anyways. But this is definitely a phone worth considering for B&W photography fans (I have the Huawei P9 which has a similar, though lower resolution B&W sensor).

I realy like the bw output from my p9. I prefere to use it over the colour sensor. Better detail, more dynamic range, good contrast etc

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2016 at 11:05 UTC
In reply to:

MasterWayne: Interestingly, photozone.de got greatly different results regarding vignetting wide open at 16mm. They measured a whopping 4.6EV light fall-off, which also can be seen in some sample photos (it looks ridiculous).
No hating/trolling intended, now I really just ask myself how these huge differences can occur. Did you find different results on different bodies?

Lenstip got -4 wide open at 16 mm. And that the vignetting is still there when you stop down.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 05:24 UTC

Why dont you have the BW sensor on the P9 in this comparison?
Would be interesting to see

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 06:13 UTC as 16th comment | 2 replies
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

mxx: Well, as a Pentax user I'm convinced now that the K1 cannot take pictures of people on moving bicycles. But luckily that still leaves cars, aeroplanes, birds etc. So all is not lost.

RX10iii has an 1" inch sensor that you used at 100mm f4.0
Thats exuivalent to 300 mm but the depth of field is quite large at f4.0 with a 2.7 crop.
If the camera didnt nail focus there I would be suprised.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 13:19 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

silversalts: @Rishi We all know the K-1 AF is not tuned for sports / action 10fps bursts with 90% hits. We understand the PDAF module groups the AF points inside the APSc crop frame. We know there are fewer f/2.8 and cross points than other cameras. We don't expect a reviewer to say the K-1 has ground-breaking AF. We only expect fair reviews, free of Confirmation Bias, selection of pejorative adjectives not found in other camera reviews and please - no snarky Amazon Kindle references. That's why we're responding as we are.

At what point do you stop this emotional defense of your flawed AF review, cease bitterly clinging to sock-puppet supporting posts, man up and just do the test again, correctly this time?

I've owned a K-1 since May 6th. I assert your review is unfair and incorrect. Unfortunately I am not a level-headed professional photographer, willing to arrange repeatable tests and post images to educate you. Rather, I'm one of those crazy Pentax people.

I'm sure there are plenty of level-headed K-1 users who - understanding as I do that Pentax documentation is unsatisfactory - will offer recommendations on how to set up the camera to perform your tests such that the results will actually indicate the K-1 capabilities.

After all, your goal is to accurately reflect truth to the buying public, isn't it?

how can you defend a test that you constantly change what was in focus, first jersey, then lining between jersey and pants when it came to light that no focus point covers the jersey. Then when exif was examined it came clear that the focus point was on the knee. (center point nr 17)
How can you defend that?
Why is it so hard to admit that mistakes where done?
Thats what happened with the PS test a couple of weeks ago. Dpr admitted, ok, we messed up and people was less upset.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 13:05 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

pentaust: More argumentation isn't necessary. I encourage everyone having access to a Pentax K1 to do the test himself and publish the results online. And there are already plenty of examples online showing Pentax K1 tracking capability, but, one review ignore them all. Interesting.

And stressing a focus point not intended for f2.8

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 13:49 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

Henrik Melander: So the head of the biker is outside of autofocus points yet you use this point evaluate focus?

Instead of justifying all the errors in your test. Why not focus on how to make a test that acually works and that is repetable?
My guess would be that the energy it would take would be much less. It took me 1 minut to come up with a better repeatable test.
A test where you can actually use on of the f2.8 autofocus sensors when the lens is set to f2.8 and not like you did in your test.
I see the same defencive behaviour here from you as when dpr released the flawed Pixel shift test.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 12:38 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

LightBug: KKsniper analyzed how DPR's AF tracking test may have some issues, such as failing to keep focus points on the subjects head:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58016586

rashi sanyal: So you are using a non f/2.8 focus point to test focus with a lens at f/2.8?
Things starts to get better and better

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 11:11 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

LightBug: KKsniper analyzed how DPR's AF tracking test may have some issues, such as failing to keep focus points on the subjects head:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58016586

So why dont they use this point as evaluation point for these shots?
And the highest point they could have chosen would have been the groin area

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 05:43 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)

So the head of the biker is outside of autofocus points yet you use this point evaluate focus?

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 21:36 UTC as 268th comment | 4 replies
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

SBS: "While the AF system of the K-1 can't keep up with some of its peers, it is an improvement over previous Pentax DSLRs.

Single point AF, which we expect DSLRs to excel at, proved to be highly inconsistent and failed about half of the time," Say what?! My K5ii does much better than that and it is two (and a half) generations behind the K-1. This doesn't make sense. Are they talking only about action shots?

Apparently single point af is single point af-c and not af-s

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 10:00 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

locke_fc: "Single point AF, which we expect DSLRs to excel at, proved to be highly inconsistent and failed about half of the time, while subject tracking proved to be even more problematic..."

Ouch.
I swear, AF will be Pentax's undoing. Dubious AF has been dragging down most of their major releases since at least the K5. Fix it already, Pentax!!!

On second thoughts, and based on users' experience, it's hard to believe the claim that AF-S fails about half the time. Must have been a faulty lens, camera, or combination of both.

Sorry, but your wording on the af page is also crap

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 09:46 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

Billious: I would order one today, but the b*****d weighs a ton, and I'd need to replace my tiny, super-sharp "M" series lenses (which I love) with "A" or later ones.

Using green button on my "m" and "k" lenses works wonderfully. Except that I still sometimes hit the "play" button

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 18:44 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

Max Iso: Many will feel vindicated here. I remember commenting on a few Pentax threads where people would ask about the AF tracking. I said i had owned 2 bodies with 5 different lenses and that in all cases, tracking was not reliable. Many others showed up with bird shots claiming it was all due to a lack of skill, or people "just don't know how to use the AF system".

The AF segment in this article clearly shows the reality of it. If you don't need AF tracking, Pentax are at the top of the heap. If you do need tracking, buy something else.

Maby because in alot of reviews they use the wrong settings. They just put it in AF.C and expect magic to work.
My miss rate with AF lenses on my K-1 is below 5%. But I dont shoot action, and the misses I have is from me trying to focus on realy close packed flowers and get something just infront of the one I needed. If they miss 50% of the shots, I would say user error or malfunctioning camera. Never heard of anyone having this bad focus on a K-1 on any forum.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 18:38 UTC
On article D500 owner formally accuses Nikon of false advertising (473 comments in total)
In reply to:

spencerda: certainly reasonable to expect a new model to have the same functions or better than previous models.
If it's advertised as Wi-Fi capable one would expect it to be similar to previous models.

The logical thing to do for nikon, would be to develope one system of wifi transfer for all cameras. Instead they are wasting money on appcreation and development of several different hardwares.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2016 at 20:22 UTC
On article Waterfails: We test Pentax K-1's Pixel Shift (225 comments in total)

Why dont you make a "this works great with PS and this does not" article. Instead of baching it saying its useless (or that is what everyone will think because 10% acutally read the text and the rest looks at the picutres).

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2016 at 07:09 UTC as 58th comment
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: I think the review should be drawing a negative conclusion about Nikon's failure to implement any kind of IBIS.

The technology is mature and has been present in DSLRs from other manufacturers in some cases for some more than ten years. Nikon don't even have the excuse that that they're using a FF sensor and the body is very large.

Norseman, i change camera while my lenses stays forever. And the investment in lenses far exceeds camera investments, and the need to change lenses to get the newest os would cost a small fortune.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 11:17 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: I think the review should be drawing a negative conclusion about Nikon's failure to implement any kind of IBIS.

The technology is mature and has been present in DSLRs from other manufacturers in some cases for some more than ten years. Nikon don't even have the excuse that that they're using a FF sensor and the body is very large.

Pentax have had ibis sence 2007 i think, in all dslr released, and in their full frame dslr.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 15:39 UTC
In reply to:

LWW: What a load of rubbish about lack of lenses, if you would all get off your sorry rear ends and create some 'image impact' and distract with that lofty ideal, you'll do just fine with what is already available.

Lense tests higher on a fullframe than a aps-c body at dxomark. Pentax have not had a ff camera to test their lenses. Therefore pentax lenses seems to be worse than canikosony lenses.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2016 at 19:41 UTC

Busted lens aside (as confirmed by DPR staff below in this thread) Noise looks realy promising compared to D810
The K-1 has the same amount of Chroma noise at 100k as the D810 at 50 k.
Retention of details is hard to compare at the moment

Link | Posted on May 5, 2016 at 20:00 UTC as 151st comment | 10 replies
Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »