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: 1337, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
On article Review: Nikon D7500, speed and capability (537 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Have we moved throw back Thursday to Wednesday?

Keep those pearls coming trolltran, you sound more like a pathetic 12 year old trapped in his momma's basement every time you open your mouth. She should have listened to the doctor when he said "never let him go off his meds".

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 06:32 UTC
On article Review: Nikon D7500, speed and capability (537 comments in total)

Nikon offers 4K but no on sensor phase detect, Canon does not offer 4K but has on sensor phase detect. Can these two please get together and offer a complete solution. Canon's FHD is rubbish, it might be rated 1080p but it's actually closer to 700p. Nikon is only useful for static subjects unless your DoF is so great focus is not critical.

Assuming 7D3 ever comes out, it'll probably still stick to worst FHD but have best LV AF around. With D820 about to be announced, will Nikon on soldier on with antiquated CDAF in a flagship DSLR?

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 03:25 UTC as 88th comment | 5 replies
On article Review: Nikon D7500, speed and capability (537 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Have we moved throw back Thursday to Wednesday?

Ignore trolltran88, he goes into every single thread trying to be a smart a$$. Might have been funny the first few times, after several thousand attempts it's long beyond a pathetic cry for help.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 03:20 UTC
On article Sony a9 banding issue: fact or fiction? (734 comments in total)

It's not a really a Sony issue, but going forward LED lighting will eventually dominate and this issue won't be limited to a few instances at sporting events. Hopefully there will be a industry wide discussion to see what can be done to minimise the effects of this. More and more cameras will be fully electronic, so whether anything reasonably can be done to mitigate or eliminate this effect I'm not sure. Is there something the LED manufacturers can do in the way the LED's are driven that might help?

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2017 at 00:35 UTC as 142nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

eazizisaid: Brace for Canon's fanboys : 11mm is worth the 1000$ more !

More like brace for the insecure Sony fantroll. No one has said such a thing, but if that makes you feel better good on ya.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 12:32 UTC
On article Canon unveils ultra-compact EOS Rebel SL2 / EOS 200D (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: When will Nikon put the articulate screen to their D3xxx? Not only that but the Dual Pixel AF for live view.

Nikon would have to invent DPAF first or license it, which won't happen. They need to act fast, with D820 coming soon it would be a joke to see flagship camera with antiquated CDAF for video.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 06:20 UTC

Yikes screen dots 104000, that's an order of magnitude error dpreview

Ok even if you don't want to shoot 4K, here's why Canon must offer it; their 1080p is the second worst on the market, only Pentax is worse for video quality. The pixel binning Canon do results in about actual res of 700-750p, it's mushy crap. The only way to get good 1080p from Canon is to resample 4K. To think that adding 4K to this camera would impact on 5D4 is ludicrous. Why offer DPAF which makes video shooting so much nicer, when the video quality blows chunks.

Rest of the camera is as expected, I always said it would use 80D AF, would only have 1 SD slot and still stick to the pathetic UHS-1 standard. The worst gripe other than no 4K, no 1/8000 shutter and still USB 2. I can only imagine that Texas instruments if they are the ones still making digic for Canon are incapable of incorporating it in their chip. Given they can't offer good video codecs either, Canon needs to look elsewhere IMO.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 06:12 UTC as 47th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Kwick1: Image stabilization = No? You sure about that DP Review?

Yes they are sure about that, it's electronic stabilization, not sensor stabilization.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 06:03 UTC
In reply to:

Kaso: Consumer market is tough. A consumer looks for bargains and buys only one item in the space of 15 months or so. There are people who upgrade their camera bodies twice, yet still reuse their initial SD cards!

Well most people record their precious memories with their crummy phones, as long as it looks ok of social media quality is not important. How many people even have a phone that has an SD slot, not the iCrap for sure.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 02:21 UTC
In reply to:

karlx: "And despite costing $1000 less, the Sony 12-24mm at least matches the excellent measurements from Canon's 11-24mm F4."

It seems like the the advantage of mirrorless over DSLR when it comes to wide angle lens designing is really showing here.

The statement doesn't make sense. The SIgma is no match for the Canon, and has much worse distortion as verified by a number of reviews inclkuding this own site, and Roger says the Sony matches the SIgma. I have no doubt the Sony is better than the Sigma and is so much smaller and lighter too it's worth the extra coin. But let's see a proper head-to-head against the Canon.

The first lens that finally shows FF mirrorless has some advantages.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 02:16 UTC
In reply to:

Moon0326: Who's gonna use 14mm f/1.8? For astro, you can just buy 20mm or 24mm then stitch. Those two focal length with the same F or faster (1.4) absorbs much much more light (at least 3x). I expected 14mm f/1.8 to be cheaper. At this price range, I don't really see a reason to buy one.

Moon0326 is correct, the actual improvement in going from say 14 f/1.8 to say 24 f/1.4 is

[(24/1.4)/(14/1.8)]^2 = 4.85

Thus the 24mm gathers nearly 5x as much light for same exposure. If you go to 35 f/1.4 the improvement is 10.3x.

Far better to use a longer faster FL and a tracker than an UWA if you can.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2017 at 06:42 UTC

Not if the competition rightly includes Tamron. New 24-70 f/2.8 VC G2 to be announced at $1199 isn't that the current models price.

Having seen the MTF curves for the Sigma, I think they meant it to be a Contemporary lens not and Art lens

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2017 at 23:18 UTC as 2nd comment

If IQ is good, this would make a terrific back-up Safari lens. While I'd have my big prime on one camera, having a such a great zoom range would help enormously for those cases when say an animal is closing fast and even the 100-400 is just too long. Of course will the AF be adequate along with the IQ. If they are halfway decent for the cost I could see plenty of potential with this lens as a back-up at worst.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2017 at 00:29 UTC as 19th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

dash2k8: Probably not entirely on subject, but here's a thought regarding zooms:

Too often newbies will allow the zoom of a lens to become his/her crutch: they don't remember that you should move to get the shot and just let the zoom save them from walking a few steps forward or backward. The problem with this over-dependence of zooms is that you have to take into account the scale of objects at different zoom lengths. Wide produces a stronger sense of 3D, while telephoto helps project density. A shot at 18mm looks far different than 100mm, let alone 200mm or the 400mm offered here. Instead of using the various zoom ranges for effect, it often becomes a trap of laziness for newbies. It's something to keep in mind for the inexperienced.

Well to me good glass is good glass, it doesn't matter if it's a zoom or a prime. If you have used lenses like the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L II IS, 24-70 f/2.8L II or 100-400L II IS, you know zooms can be prime quality and for travel and hikes the most effective solution that doesn't compromise quality.

I'm intrigued by what a 2017 superzoom quality could be like. The last super zoom I used was way back in film days, when they were garbage. I'd love to see shots of how the Tammy performs on a D500 or D7200, 7DII.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2017 at 00:26 UTC

Simply can't be true, Sony reps were boldly claiming Canon lenses work faster on Sony A9 than Canon camera.

Just keep waiting for those Sony 300/400 f/2.8 FE lenses to be announced, won't be too long, now

;o)

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2017 at 00:15 UTC as 88th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

NilsBV: Come on, since when can't we just write heck? The whole idea is that it's a euphamism for hell. We're not 5 years old.

This takes the cake as the most pathetic censorship I've ever seen in my life. The most violent country on earth and they censor the word heck, you've plumbed new lows dpreview

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 11:10 UTC
In reply to:

jim seekers: Ok just seen still's and video comparison's between the one plus 5 and Samsung Galaxy S8 and the S8 is miles better at capturing detail, The Camera on the Samsung Galaxy S7 and S8 will be better than the One Plus 5.
Tiny Little Sensor and 20 Million Pixels, Far Too Many, I was not impressed at fine detail being very smudged while the Galaxy S8 resolved it easily and the S7 will do the same.
go on to YouTube and type in OnePlus 5 Vs Samsung Galaxy S8 Camera Comparison.

The Sony camera sensors are rubbish, and no need for 16MP or 20MP. Galaxy S6/S7/S8 are all excellent, just wish Samsung would turn down sharpening on the jpgs.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 01:27 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): 90th anniversary had titanium fittings.
https://www.google.ca/search?q=titanium+gitzo&tbm=isch&imgil=1NmBxTTCInJCrM%253A%253BCJr05iFu5-Y79M%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.photographyreview.com%25252Freviews%25252Fgitzo-limited-edition-titanium-traveler-tripod-press-release&source=iu&pf=m&fir=1NmBxTTCInJCrM%253A%252CCJr05iFu5-Y79M%252C_&usg=__iXeiL9-l0ukoaWaR7Bl-FfNEELQ%3D&biw=1920&bih=984&dpr=1&ved=0ahUKEwiL0O2mp8vUAhUlIsAKHQerDvgQyjcIOg&ei=EH9IWYuIJqXEgAaH1rrADw#imgrc=1NmBxTTCInJCrM:

Given the pricing the 100th anniversary must use Unobtanium

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2017 at 11:27 UTC
In reply to:

dialstatic: Limited edition anniversary tripods. Hmm. I guess there's a market for anything.

Donald Trump knows that all too well.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2017 at 11:26 UTC
On article Report: Ricoh announcing cost cuts in face of crisis (326 comments in total)
In reply to:

matthew saville: On a more serious note, I somehow doubt that Pentax' market is big enough for Ricoh to be able to afford to do anything more than just barely afford to keep the doors open. Compared to their other business, I bet that it's roughly equivalent to a doctor or lawyer who drives for Uber in his spare time.

Of course, I'd absolutely love to be wrong there. I think the K-1 was a huge step forward for Pentax, and hopefully they have another full-frame camera on the horizon, maybe even a mirrorless one. If they could come up with one, even if they do the same silly thing of sticking with their existing mount / flange distance, that'd be huge for them.

At best, if the price is right, some other camera company could buy the Pentax IP. Not exactly sure what the portfolio would contain that would be of real benefit to others, but I'm sure they have something worthwhile. Maybe pixel shift. Certainly not AF that's for sure.

Maybe re-invent themselves and go mirrorless, this time properly not like that abomination they offered up earlier.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2017 at 00:01 UTC
Total: 1337, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »