john Clinch

Lives in United Kingdom Milton Keynes, United Kingdom
Works as a Teacher of physics
Joined on May 23, 2005

Comments

Total: 101, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

On there website..

Genuinley couldn't tell whether shots were before or after. The uncontrolled flashing between was awful

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 20:29 UTC as 5th comment
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1220 comments in total)
In reply to:

showmeyourpics: Hi, I had an interesting and enjoyable discussion with "entoman" about the current role of camera technology in the photographic process. My 2c on this subject are as follows. Technology surely is a great enabler. In today's cameras though it has reached a point where any "serious" model you buy is going to be very competent and give you great IQ even with poster size prints (follow "Fun 4 all" links). I am not the only one I know who takes advantage of the launch of a new camera to buy the deeply discounted previous model. Also, you can keep the camera you have much longer and spend money on upgrading your lenses and improving your technique by, for example, attending reputable workshops. There is no perfect camera system and different sensor size ones should be judged independently. I am a fine art, part-time pro and what this review has shown me is that, while I drool on it, I don't "need" the E-M1II because my E-M5II is already capable of elegantly handling anything I throw at it.

Yep I agree. I bought my D70 and 18-70 for £350. launch price £1200

I then 7 years later it was getting flakey. So i bought a D90 mint be used for about £245

Spending bucket loads of cash is an option

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 19:40 UTC
On article Fast Five: Sony Cyber-shot RX100 V Review (405 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jersey Shore: A solid, fair review that Sony needs to read. You know what amazes me? How much Sony is still fleecing people for the original RX100. That camera should cost no more than $299 at this point.

I bought a rx100 and £250 and I thought it was a great buy. Thank you Sony for giving me that chance. Apple would never have left an old model remain at better than half price.

For me the only real benefit of the the 3 and 4 are the view finder, which I'm getting on fine without

The lens of the newer models is probably better but it isn't a slam dunk. I've taken loads of great shots at 100mm equivalent or cropped to upto 200mm equivalent. The newer lens would be worse for these shots. I've also really enjoyed the F1.8 at 28mm equivalent in social situations. The newer cameras can't do that they are something like f2.4 at 28mm equivalant

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 18:30 UTC
On article Fast Five: Sony Cyber-shot RX100 V Review (405 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hachu21: So 24fps burst is one of the main selling point of this new RX100.
Great.
But the french website "les numériques" is claiming a slightly different story :
To reach 24fps the camera double 1 image every 3 images taken.
this means that on 24ips, you have 16 real images taken and 8 that are doubled.
http://www.lesnumeriques.com/appareil-photo-numerique/sony-rx100-v-p35601/test.html

16fps is still an impressive score, but this marketing BS (if confirmed) is a bit irratating and useless.
Any details on this?

Surely you can't shoot 24 frames a second with a 1/24th of a second shutter speed. There must be time between frames digital or mechanical

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 17:59 UTC
On article Fast Five: Sony Cyber-shot RX100 V Review (405 comments in total)
In reply to:

User3723086768: I don't get it how DPreview can asses that the RX100 IV has better Build quality, Ergonomics & handling, and Connectivity than the RX100 V, if they are exactly the same. Perhaps Ergonomics & handling has something to do with shorter battery life, but apart from that, everything remains equal.

I don't think that you can read scores like that. They are scored in the market they are launched in.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 17:57 UTC
On article Setting new standards: Nikon D5 Review (492 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joed700: I don't understand why the Nikon D5 would receive such a high rating from DP. Looking at the spec sheet from DXO Mark, the D5 is ranked number 8 compared to other Nikon, Sony and Canon bodies in ISO noise performance, way below D4s or Canon1Dx Mrk I. In terms of DR, the D5 is even below Canon 5Ds/r and way below the Canon 80D and most of the Nikon FF bodies. FPS - Nikon never caught up the Canon 1Dx... I'm not trying to be difficult here...I do shoot both Nikon and Canon.

Because its an action camera. It isn't an accident that the camera doesn't have high DR range at low iso. An Engineers working with photographers decided this was the correct compromise. They felt it was more important to have more DR beyond iso 1600. This is a camera for people who are trying to keep the shutter speed at around 1/2000 under stadium lighting. Not for people shooting landscapes at base iso.

On a technical not the older arrangement of having an analogue is o amplifier gives better DR at high iso and lower DR at low iso. This camera has the older analogue amplifier

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 08:09 UTC
On article All about that lens: Sony Cyber-shot RX10 III review (466 comments in total)
In reply to:

unbelievable: I kindly have to disagree on calling the RX10 III an ideal hiking camera. It definitely ticks quite some proper boxes: reach, image quality, weather resistance. But at 1kg+ it is simply too heavy (at least for me, considering that my total long trail pack weight is 7.6kg including backpack, tent, sleeping gear, clothes, raingear, snow clothes, cooking stuff, electronics, navigation stuff, medkit, etc).
Having had several lightweight superzoomes (FZ20, FZ7) but let down by image quality I moved on to enthusiasts camera (rx100, xz1, lx3). These are capable of making acceptable pics, but unfortunately do sacrifice reach to the extent that you can capture a bird in just 2 pixels.
In my opinion the optimal hiking camera is currently the tz100. It has respectable reach, decent image quality and most and for all, it is truly portable (small and lightweight). It neither excels nor fails in any field

Not an ideal back packing camera. But that still leaves day hikes.....

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 22:04 UTC
On article Setting new standards: Nikon D5 Review (492 comments in total)
In reply to:

endofoto: This is a very good camera. However crop sensor 1000$ Nikon D7200 has much better dynamic range value (D5: 12,3 vs D7200: 14,6). This is a real shame. I dont understand the reason for this failure. Nikon may have decreased sensor performance to get more speed. If you dont need speed D810 is still the king for Nikon users. FF does not mean better results, for macro FF is useless, for wildlife crop sensors are much better. Money is not everything.

I think you fail to understand the compromises made. Look at the graph. The D5 has better dynamic range than the D7200 at iso 800 and above. For a low light camera that means?

Surely to buy this camera and take base iso landscapes would be a waste of money

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D5-versus-Nikon-D7200___1062_1020

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2016 at 08:43 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1104 comments in total)
In reply to:

Old Cameras: I think customers would accept an all- carbon fiber camera body and the deletion of the auto focus motor for screw drive lenses, and the aperture ring, making this camera like a D5xxx, compatible only with AF-S lenses. They could make a top of the line camera that weighs little more than a pound.

Surely a D500 doesn't have an aperture ring?

My hunch is that you are wrong any way. I think the weight is across alot of components. Like the pentaprism, mirror motor, battery etc.

Also I don' t t think magnesium is exactly heavy

Link | Posted on May 30, 2016 at 21:49 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1104 comments in total)
In reply to:

philo123: Since I got into photography about 6 years ago I've been a Pentax User - Loved the K3 a great camera with DA* Lenses. However my preferred style is bird/wildlife which really pushed me and the Pentax, which isn't the best at fast autofocus. I decided to sell all my Pentax gear recently to fund the D500 and the 80-400. Finally got it a few days ago. First impressions on unboxing were....Hmmm, build quality not as good as Pentax and more "plasticky" bits . However I bought it for birds etc. so I could forgive this. Overpriced? Most definitely compared to the Pentax system. Performance? Oh WOW. I am absolutely blown away, staggering AF and sharpness. Virtually every shot I've taken is sharp. I've even tracked a swallow and the AF just glued itself to the fast moving thing! I'm not used to the Nikon system yet but I'm one happy convert. I know there's lots of negativity but this is the PERFECT camera for my type of shooting. Not yours? Well, move on to something that does suit you.

At last a really helpful comment

Link | Posted on May 30, 2016 at 21:44 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1104 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: Another home run for Nikon. It's good to be king.

I suppose King was well thought out, the King is in charge but has no need to rely on popularity

Link | Posted on May 30, 2016 at 21:29 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (490 comments in total)
In reply to:

utomo99: Please test Indoor and on Low light condition.
I hope Sony improve the image quality too, by using better sensor

So just let us know how we improve on a back side illuminated CMOS centre with the EXMOOR system

I'n sure the Sony guys would love to know

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 17:36 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (490 comments in total)
In reply to:

Haim Hadar: This week will be remembered as the "D-word" tantrum week... IMO it's great that DPreview staff is sharing the enthusiasm over an impressive piece of equipment.

Wish sony could have pulled out a little extra magic and shave off a few hundred grams of this camera as 1.1kg seems too heavy for long hikes - It weighs the same as my tent.

This is the camera for a 1.1kg tent hiker. Even at 900g it would be too heavy.

I think an RX100 is the camera you wanted

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 17:34 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (490 comments in total)
In reply to:

biza43: Given that it is double the price of the competition, it better be better than the competition?

I agree Barney it is camera that changes things for the better.

When the RX100 came out it was expensive. It changes a sectuer of photography for the better. Even I own one now

But I don't like the headline. In part as it doesn't actually tell us about what Sony have achieved

I'd rather have seen "Sony in a class of its own"

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 17:32 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (490 comments in total)
In reply to:

dpr4bb: Looks like a lot of people are hung up on the word "destroys" in the headline. Well, when a company is confident enough to put a really good lens on a camera with a smaller sensor, thereby risking sales of more high-end models, that is a praise-worthy act and should be called out, which is what the DPR team have done here. Sony didn't go for the weasel games that some manufacturers play in the name of product differentiation, and they deserve some credit. Canon would never ever do this. Just look at the lenses on any of their "enthusiast" compact cameras. I say this as a Canon shooter, by the way. I have never owned a Sony camera.

All true words. It is a camera that moves the world of cameras forward

But it is still a silly headline

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 17:27 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (490 comments in total)
In reply to:

Clayton1985: I get that some people take exception to the headline but I find it far more interesting how many people seem to desperately need that headline to be wrong. Apparently far more people have a vested interest in needing to feel better about their FZ1000 than actually wanting to know more about the RX10III. If you were reading this article to learn more about the RX10III you would be far less worried about the headline.

I disagree. I'm glad this sectuer has a new camera that works well

The headline is still silly at best

the more i think about it the sillier it gets

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 17:26 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (490 comments in total)
In reply to:

Franz Weber: Here is my problem: I already own a FZ 1000 and I have planed to get a RX 10 III, so I would use both cameras alonside and the FZ would be my backup. If the Sony destroys my Pany where should I send it in for repair? Do I need to seperate bags to seperate the two rival cams to avoid damage?

Back up

That is such a uphamism for gather dust while I play with my new toy

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 12:24 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (490 comments in total)
In reply to:

abi170845: I'd rather get a new 100-400mk1 L for the same price.

Presumably you own a Canon Body already?

oh and you're not bothered by weight or size. I owned a 400m f5.6 back in the day. It's quite chunk to carry around. Hardly a consumer option for a carry around and then happen on a situation where you need the reach

I'd say you express a reasonable opinion. But one which doesn't really help in this context

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 12:21 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (490 comments in total)

I dislike the use of the word destroy in the context

Or maybe after the shoot the Sony jumped up and through the Panasonic of a balcony

Perhaps the headline should have been. Expensive camera has slightly superior resolution to cheaper Camera.

I think the RX10 iii is a great direction for photography and I'm pleased that it works

PS can you test these cameras through less atmospher

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 10:33 UTC as 79th comment
On article 2016 Roundups: Fixed Prime Lens Cameras (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

john Clinch: I don't suppose Fuji will mind too much. Surely in terms of actually sales the X100T must be the leader here. The x100 sort of defines the sector

There must a few people who are prepared to loose out on ergonomics and pay for wall size printing potential. But most people will surely not expect their carry around camera to need 42Mp or cost that much

It seems a bit like a car review magazine concluding that a Ferraro is faster than a 3 series BMW. It is, but most people will happily save cash and go for practicality

I'm not sure I was correct to say the RX1R has less good handling. I probably meant the permanently placed view finder that has the option to be direct view

I own a Sony RX100 and despite all the complaints I think the handling is good for a small camera

I agree with Malikknows they could have a couple of pics. Money no object and best value pick

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 17:12 UTC
Total: 101, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »