thx1138

thx1138

Lives in Australia Sydney, Australia
Works as a Senior Researcher - Canon Australia
Joined on Jul 17, 2004
About me:

Canon 1D X, 5D III, 17-40 f/4L, 45 f/2.8 TS-E, Sigma 50 f/1.4 Sigma 85 f/1.4, 135 f/2L, Canon 100 f/2.8L IS macro, 70-200 f/2.8L IS mk II, 300 f/2.8L IS, 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS, 500 f/4L IS mk II, 1.4x TC III, 2x TC III, 600 EX, Sigma 24 f/1.8 EX, Canon 24-7 f/2.8 mk II, Sigma 150 f/2.8 Macro EX HSM DG

Comments

Total: 1431, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »

Such a novel idea, must be the first reverse grads on the market!

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 04:44 UTC as 5th comment | 2 replies
On article Canon G1 X III vs. Sony Cybershot RX100 V (632 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gesture: If Canon were to knock $400 off that price, they might have a winner. Even the RX100 V is far too expensive.

Price is actually the weakest spec of this camera. it makes no sense other than they think you should pay a huge premium for a lightweight camera. Maybe if the IQ of the lens is superb corner-to-corner, the AF is excellent in servo mode and the IQ overall clearly impressive it might be worth it in the long run. But given you can get a Fuji X-T20 + 18-55 for $200 less, albeit it weighs 300g more, how much is that lightweight worth. For some they'll have no dramas paying for others it's too steep a premium.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 23:24 UTC
On article Canon G1 X III vs. Sony Cybershot RX100 V (632 comments in total)
In reply to:

CaPi: I remain unimpressed by either

I cannot be unimpressed yet, since no one has tried one yet. Specs are one thing and what generates endless ridiculous comments, how the thing shoots, handles and the images it produces are all that really matters. 4K would have been nice and a 4x zoom range preferable, but even though I think the camera is grossly overpriced it might be a very good camera in most ways.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 23:18 UTC
On article More Nikon D850 samples images added (167 comments in total)

All I can say is that 24-120 VR is rubbish for this quality sensor. I wouldn't even use on the D810 let alone the D850.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 10:26 UTC as 36th comment | 2 replies

Wow looks like and arms race to see who can build the heaviest lenses at any FL. 1.22kg and I thought the 1.19kg 85 f/1.4 Sigma Art was ridiculous. Imagine a bag of Milvus lenses, need a pack horse. As much as I'd love the IQ, I'd settle for 90-95% of the quality from the much lighter Sigma Art 24/1.4 and 1/3rd the price.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 12:12 UTC as 4th comment | 4 replies
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)
In reply to:

Coliban: @Richard Butler, as an amateur with more than 40 years experience in photography i can agree with every word you wrote. I am afraid of converting thousands of nef and psd photos to dng and tried to avoid it until now. I know, i have to do it, maybe at christmas holidays.

This is an example how vulnerable digital world is, it has many advantages, but some big disadvantage: the access to data and pictures is heavily depending on software tools and operating systems. While i can pull my photo film out of the folder any time and take a digital copy, i will not be able, maybe in one, two or ten years, to access all the millions of photos i´ve made until now, because of operating systems, tools or something else. One solution is to convert all files to dng and hope that the tools will still be available for me.

The other opportunity is to come back to the last centuries and make again copies on film of digital photos. Like they do in museums because analogue last longer than digital

Huh, why would you even consider Literoom CC, you would at least use Lightroom Classic CC, no need to convert anything or upload anything. I agree subscription sucks, but you don't have to touch the new cloud-centric version.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 06:02 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)

This in 2013:

Q. How much will Lightroom 5 cost?
A. Lightroom 5 is available for an estimated $149 US. Customers of previous versions of Lightroom can upgrade to Lightroom 5 for an estimated $79 US.

Q. Will Lightroom 5 be included as part of Adobe Creative Cloud?
A. Yes. Lightroom 5 will be delivered to Creative Cloud members at no extra charge when it’s available.

Q. Will I still be able to purchase Lightroom 5 outside of the Creative Cloud
A. Yes. Lightroom 5 will continue to be available as a standalone product, available for purchase as an Electronic Software Download(ESD) or as a boxed product with a traditional perpetual license.

Q. Will there be a different version of Lightroom called Lightroom CC?
A. No.

Q. Will there be features of Lightroom 5 that are exclusive to Creative Cloud members?
A. No.

Q. Will Lightroom become a subscription only offering after Lightroom 5?
A. Future versions of Lightroom will be made available via traditional perpetual licenses indefinitely.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 06:00 UTC as 410th comment | 2 replies

One should have been called Literoom, the other Lightroom Advanced. Lightroom CC is of zero interest, the idea of spending approximately 20 years uploading 3TB of files when you have an upload speed of 500kb/s and it counts as part of your monthly quota is absurd. Even more absurd is putting your precious files in the 100% insecure cloud.

Apart from the improved speed of Lightroom CC Classic, what real changes have occurred. Is the same aging RAW engine that's been around for nearly 6 years. Is it the same overly contrasty colour profiles. Will we even notice one bit of difference in output between 6.0 and 7.0? While Lightroom is easy to use, it's trailing other converters like DxO Elite, C1 Pro in many areas these days.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 13:19 UTC as 348th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

HeyItsJoel: For crying out loud, how hard is it to turn on HDR with previous iPhones? You see that button that says "HDR" up at the top? Push it.

@ Viking, alas it is clearly not, stronger HDR does not equal better HDR. Too bad the iPhone 6/7 flash is so pathetic as to be useless, you could use it to fill a bit of the shadow and the HDR could protect the highlights

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 01:12 UTC

iPhone 8 overcooks it, I prefer the more natural iPhone 7 version of HDR. Tech companies thinking they know how to make a great photo using silicon and AI. They should at least offer a slider to change the amount of HDR processing. Be default it should be at the iPhone 7 level.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 01:10 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Nikon D850 Review (2116 comments in total)
In reply to:

thx1138: With a list of cons about 1/4 the length of your typical Sony, this should have scored 105%. Lack of on-sensor PDAF is only real nit. Complaining that AF is not quite as good as 2x dearer D5 is ridiculous. The D5 has had several fw updates, let’s see how D850 performs when it’s a bit more mature. D850 blows the D5 away in so many other areas it’s ridiculous, makes D5 look shocking value. Also who cares about lack of pop-up flash, it was done for weather sealing, a small dedicated unit is 10x better than any pop-up and only adds 100g.

Well you shown yourself to be a true mirrorless fanboy, your momma must be so proud.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 11:25 UTC
On article Nikon D850 Review (2116 comments in total)

With a list of cons about 1/4 the length of your typical Sony, this should have scored 105%. Lack of on-sensor PDAF is only real nit. Complaining that AF is not quite as good as 2x dearer D5 is ridiculous. The D5 has had several fw updates, let’s see how D850 performs when it’s a bit more mature. D850 blows the D5 away in so many other areas it’s ridiculous, makes D5 look shocking value. Also who cares about lack of pop-up flash, it was done for weather sealing, a small dedicated unit is 10x better than any pop-up and only adds 100g.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 04:28 UTC as 95th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

thx1138: Funny how they quote FF equivalent FL but not aperture, really an f/4.5-9 lens if they want to go that route. So hardly fast for maximum brightness. It's actually slower than the lens in the G1X mk II taking sensor size into account, even when that lens was fully zoomed to it's 120mm FF equivalent FL.

Yes but the sensor 60% smaller, so the ISO equivalency is f/9, ie the APS-C sensor at f/5.6 gathers same amount of light as FF at f/9. It needs the faster lesn to equalise it's noise, but you cannot just choose which part of equivalency you want to mention. You need to go the whole shebang.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 03:02 UTC

Funny how they quote FF equivalent FL but not aperture, really an f/4.5-9 lens if they want to go that route. So hardly fast for maximum brightness. It's actually slower than the lens in the G1X mk II taking sensor size into account, even when that lens was fully zoomed to it's 120mm FF equivalent FL.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 23:51 UTC as 41st comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Like the sensor size and range but f/2.8-5.6 is too dark. f/2.8 constant or f/1.8-2.8 would be amazing

People talking crap. What other cameras with APS-C sensors not 1" sensors has fast fixed lenses and weighs 400g. I don't think much of this camera for the price, frankly it's entry level stuff at premium price, but get real about the physics and compare apples-to-apples.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 23:26 UTC

For the sake of 50g, would have preferred a 24-96 f/2.8-5.6. One thing I liked about the mk II was the 24-120 provided a very nice range for travel. For that price lack of 4K is sad, but otherwise specs are solid. Will appeal to those that are put off by Canon's woeful lack of lenses for the M5/M6. EOS-M is a joke, after 4 years lens line-up is appalling, which is a shame, M5/M6 are very nice cameras. Compare to Fuji and Olympus's excellent line-up.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 05:29 UTC as 218th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

El Chubasco: Very ugly camera. Canon needs a new designer

That's your take away, it's ugly, Thanks for the insight and of course conveniently ignoring that all cameras are inherently ugly

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 05:24 UTC
In reply to:

Fujica: Still the same conservative Canon approach.
Wake me up when Canon will bring out a Full Frame Canon Mirrorless camera that has the same offering as a 5D MKIV or beyond.

For god's sake give it a rest, how many times are you going to beat that dead horse. The camera is coming next year just like Nikon's, until then enjoy what you have. Nothing at all to do with this camera.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 05:23 UTC

Awesome 0.4K video.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 22:53 UTC as 23rd comment
On article The magic of ultraviolet nature and macro photography (72 comments in total)

Damn I thought this was a story about ultraviolent photography, was hoping to see the gibs fly, not the dragon fly.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 04:45 UTC as 11th comment
Total: 1431, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »