Demon Cleaner

Demon Cleaner

Joined on Jul 22, 2011

Comments

Total: 136, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85/G80 Review (677 comments in total)
In reply to:

Petar Veliki: Interesting Pana get "gold". As i am more on pictures i am more interested in Olympus PEN-F, since new E-M1 II will probably around 2000 eur here.

Wondering, what is image stabilization compared to PEN-F. Could see numbers, suppose 4-4,5 wont be captured by Pana ? I also miss Hi-Res shot, this is why PEN-F is for picture, while this is for video best for sure.

Yes bluevellet, different image processing for sure:

"The M1 Mark II applies color noise reduction filtration on the sensor data before it is written to a Raw file."

Eric Gensel, Olympus Technical Specialist

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 01:26 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85/G80 Review (677 comments in total)
In reply to:

Petar Veliki: Interesting Pana get "gold". As i am more on pictures i am more interested in Olympus PEN-F, since new E-M1 II will probably around 2000 eur here.

Wondering, what is image stabilization compared to PEN-F. Could see numbers, suppose 4-4,5 wont be captured by Pana ? I also miss Hi-Res shot, this is why PEN-F is for picture, while this is for video best for sure.

I think you may have just affirmed my theory @bluevellet! My partner and I both own and shoot current gen Oly and Pana cameras, and we're in agreement that your suggestion of marked difference in image quality is indeed a work of high fantasy. We happily concede that you've managed to persuade yourself that there is though. Happy shooting ;-)

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 00:17 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85/G80 Review (677 comments in total)
In reply to:

Petar Veliki: Interesting Pana get "gold". As i am more on pictures i am more interested in Olympus PEN-F, since new E-M1 II will probably around 2000 eur here.

Wondering, what is image stabilization compared to PEN-F. Could see numbers, suppose 4-4,5 wont be captured by Pana ? I also miss Hi-Res shot, this is why PEN-F is for picture, while this is for video best for sure.

I wonder if the "Olympus is for stills" narrative is one born from a cognitive dissonance fostered by those who struggle with just how closely the cameras from both m43 manufacturers mirror one another.

Aside for a few exceedingly minor differences (the high-res mode will remain a curiosity until such a time as it can be used without a tripod), there really isn't anything substantive on which to base such a claim.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2016 at 09:01 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85/G80 Review (677 comments in total)

A Panasonic m43 review while the camera in question is still in circulation? That's highly irregular. Nice job DPR :-)

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2016 at 18:50 UTC as 108th comment
On article Hands-on and in-depth with the Sony a6500 (556 comments in total)
In reply to:

Demon Cleaner: DPR can a camera be classified as being "weather sealed" if it is not rated to withstand a splash of water?

I ask because in the small print Sony clarifies: "This camera is designed for optimal dust and moisture resistance, but is not waterproof or splashproof."

I'm not trying to be mischievous; it's a genuine question. Do you consider it to be legitimately weather sealed or is this a matter of creative marketing?

Androole I'd rather see DPR come to their own conclusion as to what they consider constitutes weather sealing.

If the manufacturer doesn't stipulate whether a camera is capable of withstanding a light rain shower then I question whether review sites should be informing consumers that it is in fact weather sealed.

Because as far as Sony Marketing Division is concerned, moisture = humidity.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2016 at 21:20 UTC
On article Hands-on and in-depth with the Sony a6500 (556 comments in total)
In reply to:

Demon Cleaner: DPR can a camera be classified as being "weather sealed" if it is not rated to withstand a splash of water?

I ask because in the small print Sony clarifies: "This camera is designed for optimal dust and moisture resistance, but is not waterproof or splashproof."

I'm not trying to be mischievous; it's a genuine question. Do you consider it to be legitimately weather sealed or is this a matter of creative marketing?

Some manufacturers do actually attribute an IP rating to their cameras. I assume this has some relevance to warranty claims although that's purely speculation.

Anyway I asked because it wasn't Sony that I saw describe it as being weather sealed. If DPR considers 'moisture' to be 'weather' then that's okay by me :-)

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2016 at 20:45 UTC
On article Hands-on and in-depth with the Sony a6500 (556 comments in total)

DPR can a camera be classified as being "weather sealed" if it is not rated to withstand a splash of water?

I ask because in the small print Sony clarifies: "This camera is designed for optimal dust and moisture resistance, but is not waterproof or splashproof."

I'm not trying to be mischievous; it's a genuine question. Do you consider it to be legitimately weather sealed or is this a matter of creative marketing?

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2016 at 20:12 UTC as 105th comment | 11 replies
On article Great Eight: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 review (542 comments in total)
In reply to:

mastix: I have purchased the camera two months ago and have shot with it around 20.000 images. I also have the G7X. I was very wary about the GX8 bigger size when it came out, but I have to say it is really not a problem and now having both I like it better than the G7x. I love everything on this camera.the 20MP dinamic range,noise characteristics,AF, touchscreen,etc.

The one thing I dislike very much compared to the previous generations and that is the new retractable screen. I like much more the tilting monitor, it is much more discreet specially when you do street photography. I hope they go back to that screen. For video there are other cameras from Panasonic.for still images tilting is much more superior to the new implementation.

Shutter slap is also annoying although I mostly shoot with eshutter anyways...but when you are inside with fluorescent lamps it can be a problem

In any case when I do travel photography my DSLR stay at home....too bulky they draw too much attention.....

I find the fully articulating screen far superior for stealthy street work. Used creatively it enables you to get shots when turned at 90 degrees or more from your subject, ie, you don't even need to be facing the direction you're shooting.

It also has a nice synergy with the touch focus while looking through the viewfinder feature, as some people prefer the LCD swung outwards for this.

A tilting screen is just too restrictive and limits the types of shots one can get. I hope they keep it as it is.

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2016 at 21:12 UTC
On article Great Eight: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 review (542 comments in total)
In reply to:

art99: The video rec/pause red button seems extremely small on the top. Can any camera manufacturer ever, ever, ever come up with having the camera larger, more comfortable shutter button ALSO be used as the video rec/pause button. Seems insignificant but extremely important to those that do a lot of video. What happened to the headphone out jack ? another seemingly unimportant omission.

When in Movie Mode (on mode dial) the shutter button switches from stills activation to video record start/stop.

And you'll always be in Movie Mode when you record video, because if you're not, the camera shoots in Program Auto.

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2016 at 07:34 UTC
On article Great Eight: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 review (542 comments in total)
In reply to:

art99: The video rec/pause red button seems extremely small on the top. Can any camera manufacturer ever, ever, ever come up with having the camera larger, more comfortable shutter button ALSO be used as the video rec/pause button. Seems insignificant but extremely important to those that do a lot of video. What happened to the headphone out jack ? another seemingly unimportant omission.

Panasonic does that. In fact they have a camera called the GX8 where the shutter button can be used to start/stop video recording.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 16:09 UTC
In reply to:

DualSystemGuy: The slow lens is really a bummer on this camera. Only F2.8 on the wide end (RX 100 is F1.8) and F5.9 on the long end is brutal for a P&S. I realize it goes out to 250mm but by 50mm it's already at F4 which is pretty terrible. By 100mm you're already at F5.1 - clearly they cut lots of corners with the lens, and you aren't going to get much for DOF isolation on the already small 1" sensor at such small apertures. If they are targeting enthusiasts with this I think the lens kills it.

As DPR state above, the TZ100 is targeting a currently unoccupied sector of the market: "small camera with a big sensor and a long zoom."

And there's nothing wrong with that.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 19:11 UTC
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: I wish that the manufactures would concentrate on improving the QUALITY of the video, rather than trying to go beyond 4K resolutions. At least for the consumer/prosumer market.

The days of us having to put up with 4:2:0 8 bit video should be over. Instead all we keep getting is the same drek at higher resolutions.

That's an impressive level of entitlement you're expressing there GodSpeaks. The video capabilities we have at our disposal in consumer products would've cost in the --many-- tens of thousands of dollars even just a few short years ago.

The advances in video have far outstripped those of photography in recent times. So instead of the moaning and the whining how about engaging the intellect for a brief moment (challenging I know) and go and purchase a professional level camera if you want professional level output.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2015 at 16:38 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV Review (1579 comments in total)

"AF makes for very usable action shooting of moving subjects. You can expect in focus shots of crawling babies."

What if I ply it with red cordial?

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 02:50 UTC as 182nd comment
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review (481 comments in total)
In reply to:

Demon Cleaner: Another day another cut & paste job:

Page 4: "It lacks a couple of the more basic functions that can be really useful on some of its rivals. It would be really useful to be able to zoom in to the chosen focus point in playback mode, to check focus and shake, sadly this is something this is absent."

A double tap on the image enables selective zoom focus at up to 16x magnification. Every Panasonic camera has had this identical functionality for the past half decade.

Appreciate your patience and for taking the time to reply.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2015 at 11:44 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review (481 comments in total)
In reply to:

Demon Cleaner: Another day another cut & paste job:

Page 4: "It lacks a couple of the more basic functions that can be really useful on some of its rivals. It would be really useful to be able to zoom in to the chosen focus point in playback mode, to check focus and shake, sadly this is something this is absent."

A double tap on the image enables selective zoom focus at up to 16x magnification. Every Panasonic camera has had this identical functionality for the past half decade.

PS. Your arguments make all the sense in the world to anyone who:

* Currently owns or is downgrading from a high-end CaNikon camera; and
* Is consequently familiar with one-button 100% magnify; and
* Is intimately familiar with Samsung's and Sony's newest cameras; and
* Is aware that the DPR staff have been haranguing manufacturers to implement 100% magnify in lower end models.

So basically yourself, your DPR colleagues and a few select others (ie, camera nerds).

Which suggests the review is written BY dpreview staff FOR dpreview staff. The rest of us will be "misreading".

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 11:07 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review (481 comments in total)
In reply to:

Demon Cleaner: Another day another cut & paste job:

Page 4: "It lacks a couple of the more basic functions that can be really useful on some of its rivals. It would be really useful to be able to zoom in to the chosen focus point in playback mode, to check focus and shake, sadly this is something this is absent."

A double tap on the image enables selective zoom focus at up to 16x magnification. Every Panasonic camera has had this identical functionality for the past half decade.

All due respect Rishi Sanyal, but if you specify inside the review what the "rival" cameras are...

"makes it competitive with the likes of Sony's a6000, Olympus's E-M10 or Fujifilm's X-T10."

...then it is improper to claim the camera lacks the basic functionality of its "rivals", if the "rivals" you've nominated don't have that functionality either.

My point specifically is that if you read it from the perspective of someone who is not familiar with the cameras in question (therefore not yourself, nor I) then it will read very clearly and succinctly that the G7 lacks the ability to check focus and shake.

Which is an erroneous claim.

I happily concede that a one-button 100% magnify might be a more "efficient" means of accomplishing it, but I disagree with the implied assertion that a double-tap for between 100% to 800% magnification doesn't allow for focus/shake assessment at all.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 10:46 UTC
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1290 comments in total)
In reply to:

MXC: Amateur size sensor

Well suited to your amateur sized intellect.

Do you find that offensive? Perhaps I should've been more considerate.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 12:12 UTC
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1290 comments in total)
In reply to:

Demon Cleaner: * Panasonic users request IBIS to better enable the use of Olympus and other third party lenses;

* Panasonic listens and implements IBIS, so their users have stabilisation with Olympus and other third party glass;

* Richard Butler lambasts Panasonic for implementing IBIS, and suggests that in providing stabilisation for Olympus and other third party glass, Panasonic are in effect "building walls", and goes on to suggest that "it's sad if you end up being essentially constrained to Panasonic lenses."

Oh common sense, where art thou?

Revenant, your argument would have merit if Olympus lenses focused poorly on Panasonic cameras, but that's simply not the case. AF is every bit as alacrious on Pana bodies as it is on Oly bodies. In fact the low light AF is noticeably better due to the -4ev sensitivity.

So no, there are no walls. I own both the 45mm f/1.8 and 75mm f/1.8 and AF is lightning quick with both on the GH4 and GX7.

The suggestion that a lack of DFD means I'll use neither is ludicrous beyond belief. And the same goes for the IBIS argument. It's inclusion means I'm MORE likely to use non-stabilised lenses, not LESS.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 11:04 UTC
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1290 comments in total)
In reply to:

Demon Cleaner: * Panasonic users request IBIS to better enable the use of Olympus and other third party lenses;

* Panasonic listens and implements IBIS, so their users have stabilisation with Olympus and other third party glass;

* Richard Butler lambasts Panasonic for implementing IBIS, and suggests that in providing stabilisation for Olympus and other third party glass, Panasonic are in effect "building walls", and goes on to suggest that "it's sad if you end up being essentially constrained to Panasonic lenses."

Oh common sense, where art thou?

Ok G-D, I'll bite, how does IBIS "constrain" use to Panasonic glass, "undermine the Micro Four Thirds system", and constitutes Panasonic "building up walls around its part of the garden."?

Please answer constructively. I'm genuinely confused and am interested in your counterpoint.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 09:30 UTC
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1290 comments in total)
In reply to:

Demon Cleaner: * Panasonic users request IBIS to better enable the use of Olympus and other third party lenses;

* Panasonic listens and implements IBIS, so their users have stabilisation with Olympus and other third party glass;

* Richard Butler lambasts Panasonic for implementing IBIS, and suggests that in providing stabilisation for Olympus and other third party glass, Panasonic are in effect "building walls", and goes on to suggest that "it's sad if you end up being essentially constrained to Panasonic lenses."

Oh common sense, where art thou?

Fair comment there Narretz, but I was referring specifically to the inclusion of IBIS and Butler's fallacious argument that it will constrain use to Panasonic glass only.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 09:06 UTC
Total: 136, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »