john Clinch

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

Comments

Total: 152, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

NumberOne: ...So a brand - Sony in this case - should work and perform at 100% with other manufacturers gear?! :)
This is so pathetic - The compatibility is already an excellent gift - What do you want more?! :(

Amazing, to say the least! :)

I think what is wanted is a body and lens combination to do the bread and butter jobs of sports photography

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2017 at 10:12 UTC
On article Now we know: Sony a9 is sharper than we thought (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

john Clinch: It does feel like we are debating how many angels we can balance on the tip of a pin.

If we are now at the point where to realise the full resolution of the sensor you need to correct lens, the correct aperture and to focus with in a set of iterations with an external monitor.

Surely we can just say that sensor resolution is adequate. Your only ever see it through luck

PS quite surprised that contrast detect auto focus can't focus the lens accurately. Presumably that will show up as a negative in the review?

Rishi thanks for replying. I certainly knew the SLRGEAR had to do focus bracketing for their lens tests. But your point about the need for bracketing to tests lenses and sensors really supports my first point. The "photographic testing industry" is now testing that in a lab cameras are capable of resolving detail that in the real world non of us will ever be able to achieve. Which is a bit odd isn't it

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 18:31 UTC
On article Now we know: Sony a9 is sharper than we thought (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

john Clinch: It does feel like we are debating how many angels we can balance on the tip of a pin.

If we are now at the point where to realise the full resolution of the sensor you need to correct lens, the correct aperture and to focus with in a set of iterations with an external monitor.

Surely we can just say that sensor resolution is adequate. Your only ever see it through luck

PS quite surprised that contrast detect auto focus can't focus the lens accurately. Presumably that will show up as a negative in the review?

They used manual focus because the AF couldn't accurately focus the lens

"Multiple AF-S attempts yielded shots varying slightly in sharpness, but this is not unique by any means to the a9: all cameras exhibit some tolerance when it comes to critical focus of a flat chart (which is why we always manually focus)."

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 13:33 UTC
On article Now we know: Sony a9 is sharper than we thought (398 comments in total)

It does feel like we are debating how many angels we can balance on the tip of a pin.

If we are now at the point where to realise the full resolution of the sensor you need to correct lens, the correct aperture and to focus with in a set of iterations with an external monitor.

Surely we can just say that sensor resolution is adequate. Your only ever see it through luck

PS quite surprised that contrast detect auto focus can't focus the lens accurately. Presumably that will show up as a negative in the review?

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 10:14 UTC as 30th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: False economy of the Japanese camera systems
→ Leica T/TL (practically same models, differences are small), with some of its "slow" lenses available at a very good combo price, delivers image quality that surpasses any other crop camera mentioned here, taken with a so called premium lens for that camera.
So what the Japanese ask for a premium and then barely deliver compared to Leica, Leica delivers by default. That is why Leica don't waste time on two lineups of "budget" and "premium" lenses. I have found Leica T sold in combo with 18-56 Vario Elmar is *CHEAPER*, *smaller*, delivers *more amazing* optical results and is overall *more satisfying* deal than any camera mentioned above plus its "premium" comparable lens.

I think this is a some what limited view of what a camera is.

I accept that the leica TL might work really well for you. I also accept your point about IQ

But it seems to me that the IQ debate is over for most of us. My D70s with failed to deliver what I needed just once. My D90 and Rx100 almost always have enough IQ for the sizes I print.

So I think loosing a view finder and decent autofocus aren't a good trade off for me

PS where are your photos online

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2017 at 14:26 UTC

I've never used any of these cameras. I bet they are all great in their own way. I see no evidence that the conclusions here are wrong.

But I do think the term "cropped" seems wrong.

You can argue that the D500 is cropped in that its a smaller sensor than the mount allows. But the Fuji and Olympus aren't a crop of anything. They are just systems build round a certain size sensor.

Should the could be called "medium size sensors". "APs-c and mft" or just a linear dimension or area range

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2017 at 14:07 UTC as 15th comment | 4 replies
On article Nikon D7500 vs Canon EOS 80D (265 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kaso: These days, most cameras are better than their users. What's the point of focusing on minute differences between the cameras? I understand: you have a writing job; you must publish.

A friend of mine, having used a Brand A Model X camera (a mid-level one) for over 3 years, decided to buy a Brand B Model Y camera. Six months later, I asked him whether he enjoyed the new camera. He said he felt more comfortable holding and operating the new camera, and had been more motivated in taking pictures. To me, this is key: the user is enabled and enchanted by the tool; the tool encourages the user to do more and better.

With all due respect, I think this website should be called Digital Gear Review. Its articles -- which justifiably have to delve into mundane technical details -- have little to do with Photography or, in other words, creating photographs.

Surely the way most people will choose based on the lenses they already own

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2017 at 13:28 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Canon EOS 80D (265 comments in total)
In reply to:

UneVache: Does Nikon has that much difficulties to sell this D7500 that it needs that kind of article to convince potential customers not to get a cheaper D7200 instead ?

What about all the D7200 owners who kept moaning about they tiny buffer

Krisrtinnk 7% less linear resolution. Really you care. How big have you printed this year....

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2017 at 13:27 UTC
On article Video: Nikon D7500 first look (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fotoni: Nikon and video doesn't fit together. Mediocre video performance is common among many brands and models. 4K is not a magic cure for that. Internal 10-bit 4:2:2 full sensor readout supersampled 4K video is the standard for good video recording nowadays.

I assume it's not possible. The D500 had the same issue

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2017 at 17:48 UTC
On article Video: Nikon D7500 first look (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

Artak Hambarian: To be interesting as a DX camera for me it needs to be higher MP, e.g. 28-32 MP, instead of high buffer or frame rate, and GPS and all connectivity is needed and even more: should have a wireless network connection, like a smart phone. Certainly tilt touch high res monitor is a big welcome. Even bigger, e.g 5 inch monitor, @4K resolution. Its not a bad idea to look at mirrorless directions as well.

You need 30Mp?

Go on then, what do with your pictures that need that?

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2017 at 17:45 UTC
On article Video: Nikon D7500 first look (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

surlezi: No EVF, come on Nikon, this is 2017 !

Phazelag

cheaper to buy a new body for existing lenses though isn't it

Some people like a real view finder

But hay lets not let people make their own minds up

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2017 at 22:26 UTC
On article Video: Nikon D7500 first look (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

phazelag: Its amazing when I see new DSLRs I don't even click on them anymore at all. I haven't for years now. I remember when I was so excited to see a new one and now I just smirk when I see them released. I try not to be jaded, I just can't play that game anymore.

But still looking at DPreview and commenting on new releases...

Your like me. We only think we have moved on....

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2017 at 22:23 UTC
In reply to:

mosc: OSDPDAF should make old lenses an adapter away from as relevant as they ever were. Isn't that obvious to all? You release a body, bundle in a physical adapter if you must, and let the sensor do the work the AF module used to and be done with it.

Lens isn't built with contrast AF in mind? Why is this relevant when both solutions support PDAF. In fact, on sensor PDAF aught to offer a much more sophisticated solution.

"DPAF sensors only use OSPDAF in liveview or mirrorless cameras. that's the way it is for the 70D onwards."

No idea what DPAF is

"the reason they are not known as the "fastest" is that they are calculating phase difference and distance from 20 million AF points."

20 million. That is impossible even for contrast detect. You can't do contrast detect on one pixel. Phase detect is a physical thing on a sensor which actually leaves a gap in the image. They don't put 20 million of them in do they.....

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 12:05 UTC

It's a good article. I can only really see the new mount and adapter being the viable option.

I suspect their are labs full of engineers looking at how to drive an older lens properly from hybrid AF system. Its all about which compromise is best. Or does the adapter or body have some sort of old style PDAF sensor that can pop out on a little stalk when you need it....

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 12:12 UTC as 172nd comment
In reply to:

mosc: OSDPDAF should make old lenses an adapter away from as relevant as they ever were. Isn't that obvious to all? You release a body, bundle in a physical adapter if you must, and let the sensor do the work the AF module used to and be done with it.

Lens isn't built with contrast AF in mind? Why is this relevant when both solutions support PDAF. In fact, on sensor PDAF aught to offer a much more sophisticated solution.

I think the point is that current on chip PDAF isn't very accurate and the final focus is done beCDAF

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 12:02 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: the absurdly small 1/2.3 sensor with its poor performance lousy iso latitude and sub par pixel area about 28 sqmm for its 12 mp seems rather ungenerous for a camera costing 450 usd before taxes... i do understand that these tough
amphibious cameras have special needs and limitation related to hermetic sealing and a long history of using these tiny sensors [as do many superzooms] ....but i think its time to move forward and use a 1 1.7 [43 sq mm] or 2\3 [ 58 sq mm] at a minimum

these refreashes are meaningless untill advances in resolution and image quality start appearing .... this class of useful cameras deserve better

So there is a 1" sensor tough camera. But its pricey

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/world-s-first-waterproof-camera-with-1inch-cmos-sensor-30226

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 19:34 UTC
In reply to:

panther fan: Image quality will be a problem with that lens/sensor combination.
Many inexperienct photographers will buy this camera and get dissapointing results, because their smartphones get better pictures.
Fox example the Pixel has an F2.0 28mm prime on an 1/2.3 inch Sensor. An that with just 9mm depth and a much less space consuming camera.
With the additional space you have in the TG-5 you should be able to make a set of 3 primes 28mm F1.4 / 50mm F1.7 / 85mm F2.0 on a 1/2.3 inch Sensor and get far better results. And yes 3 cameras will be smaller than 1 internal zoom.
Maybe you can even get a larger sensor behind these primes.

Ok that would work. But I think in this market really wide would be good

So maybe 21, 35 and 70 equivalent. Sell it is an action Cam as well....

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 11:07 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: the absurdly small 1/2.3 sensor with its poor performance lousy iso latitude and sub par pixel area about 28 sqmm for its 12 mp seems rather ungenerous for a camera costing 450 usd before taxes... i do understand that these tough
amphibious cameras have special needs and limitation related to hermetic sealing and a long history of using these tiny sensors [as do many superzooms] ....but i think its time to move forward and use a 1 1.7 [43 sq mm] or 2\3 [ 58 sq mm] at a minimum

these refreashes are meaningless untill advances in resolution and image quality start appearing .... this class of useful cameras deserve better

I think you just don't understand the market or perhaps even what a camera like this can do. Imaging resource are stating good 8 by 10 prints are possible at 400 and OK at iso 800. I'd say I was really quite keen on photography and really print alot. But rarely bigger than 8 by 10 and even then I have a white border. So the reality is that in my photo books my camera phone shots sit side by side with DSLR shots and no one can tell the difference

As well as waisting my life here I use climbing and Mountain biking forums. Over and over again the Olympus tough camera get recommended. These people aren't wrong are they. They like that they don't brake the camera and they like the photos

Me I do like a bit more DR and a touch less noise for B&W conversion so I use an RX100. But that doesn't mean people are wrong to buy a camera like this

Link | Posted on May 17, 2017 at 14:57 UTC
In reply to:

panther fan: Image quality will be a problem with that lens/sensor combination.
Many inexperienct photographers will buy this camera and get dissapointing results, because their smartphones get better pictures.
Fox example the Pixel has an F2.0 28mm prime on an 1/2.3 inch Sensor. An that with just 9mm depth and a much less space consuming camera.
With the additional space you have in the TG-5 you should be able to make a set of 3 primes 28mm F1.4 / 50mm F1.7 / 85mm F2.0 on a 1/2.3 inch Sensor and get far better results. And yes 3 cameras will be smaller than 1 internal zoom.
Maybe you can even get a larger sensor behind these primes.

Yes because If I was in mud, sand or under water i would be thinking. "I think I need a narrower angle of view. Great I'll just remove the lens from may camera, whilst I'm trying to remove it with gloves on I'm sure i won't drop it and of course no mud, sand or water will go into the camera and coat the sensor..."

Link | Posted on May 17, 2017 at 14:10 UTC
In reply to:

Bambi24: Would have been at least semi-interesting if they provided a bigger sensor than 1/2.3". You can find so many "rugged" action cams and smartphones with those sensors too. And since smartphones have almost no physical buttons, the waterproof smartphones are probably way more waterproof than this olympus.

And $450? *gulp*. Get real olympus, this isn't going to sell.

Just no way. Most water proof phones aren't proof. 1 metre for 30 minutes ....

Link | Posted on May 17, 2017 at 14:07 UTC
Total: 152, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »