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: 1217, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »
On article A comfortable fit: Panasonic Lumix GX850 overview (119 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jefftan: using micro sd is stupid
with 4k, high capacity , high speed card very expensive compare with SD

micro SD is stupid because it's too small in physical size in the field, need tweezers to pick the things up. Imagine that on a cold day and if you don't have slim ladies fingers.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 22:52 UTC
On article A comfortable fit: Panasonic Lumix GX850 overview (119 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: Bigger sensor for half the price of the Sony RX100M5 😍

Yeah, no comparison at all to the Sony and now add in the AF system of the Sony compared to the Panasonic and the gap just grows

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 22:51 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 Review (1185 comments in total)

"It's not the most misleading marketing statement we've ever seen"

But it's up there alright.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 22:48 UTC as 199th comment
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 Review (1185 comments in total)
In reply to:

kobakokh: again stupid expensive price! ooh...

Sad to see how many m4/3 users only seem to enjoy their purchase by denigrating users of other formats. Why I never go on the m4/3 forums since purchasing Oly E-M5 3 years ago.

BTW you can buy 20 corollas for the price of 1 Ferrari too if you want to make inane comments.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 22:47 UTC

At what FL does it become f/4? If it were a Sony that would occur at about 16mm, it would be nice if it were f/2.8 until around 30mm but I highly doubt that given the price.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 21:29 UTC as 23rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

tkbslc: A weather sealed 600mm eq. for $650 is pretty amazing.

But it's a very slow 300mm, the sensor size is irrelevant, so it's poor value. Imagine how cheap a FF 600 f/11 would be. Btw Sigma's real 150-600 C can be found for $799 often, that's a bargain

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 21:25 UTC
In reply to:

Aroart: I hope they improved the low light to be clean at ISO 6400 and make focus tracking reliable...

Are you talking video or stills? If the latter dream on.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 21:17 UTC
On article Sony Xperia XZ scores 87 in DxOMark Mobile testing (35 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: Dx0 gave good marks to previous Z Sonys that had flabberghastingly poor IQ that I completely lost confidence in them.

Then they produced their own camera.

Time for dpreview to rethink their 'friendship'?

The sensor has great potential, at 12MP and in the hands of someone else, under Sony their 20MP+ phone sensors have always been rubbish. Appallingly IQ in anything but excellent light at lowest ISO setting.

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2017 at 02:59 UTC
On article Sony Xperia XZ scores 87 in DxOMark Mobile testing (35 comments in total)
In reply to:

Betico: I think it is about time that Samsung takes over Sony and purchase it. Samsung has enough cash for that and they better do it before Apple does it (remember how Steve Jobs admired so much Sony).

Nah Microsoft should buy Sony, after the stellar job they did with Nokia.

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2017 at 02:57 UTC
On article Sony Xperia XZ scores 87 in DxOMark Mobile testing (35 comments in total)
In reply to:

naththo: <REPEAT>
Same old Sony problem, artifact, noise, halo on edge on all of Sony phone. Thats why I
stay away from any Sony mobile phone. It looks awful even I have seen sample post of Sony Xperia picture on facebook and it just still look awful. It is nice colours but lots of detail are lost due to artifact, noise and halo including zig zag on edge.
</REPEAT>

Most decent phones flog Sony phones on IQ. They are over-hyped and under-performing. Not sure what's wrong with Sony's phone division, but how they turn good sensors into rubbish is gob smacking.

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2017 at 02:56 UTC
On article Sony Xperia XZ scores 87 in DxOMark Mobile testing (35 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peter62: SONY builds the best sensors. But in their OWN smartphones they fail - every time! Again and again.

So true.

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2017 at 02:53 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1638 comments in total)
In reply to:

livelong: The question is, why such an ugly camera body?

Maybe worry looking through the viewfinder than staring at the camera. Seriuslt who cares what it looks like and there are uglier cameras for sure.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 23:42 UTC
On article Canon 16-35mm F2.8L III real-world sample gallery (121 comments in total)
In reply to:

DualSystemGuy: Over FOUR stops vignetting? Holy crap. That is unacceptable on a lens at this price IMO. If you correct that you will get an awful, noisy looking perimeter to the image. Some crop sensor lenses don't even vignette that bad on full frame.

Looks very much like a niche lens for PJ use. The average user is probably much better served by a third party option or something like the 16-35/4 IS.

It doesn't matter what you think it looks like, wide open the lens has been tested to show 4 stops of more in the corners. Easy enough to find reviews that do actual measurements. It won't matter for landscape photography, but this is not aimed at that crowd as much as those doing low light work or event photography etc and who shoot wide open often.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 23:10 UTC
On article Canon 16-35mm F2.8L III real-world sample gallery (121 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: It will have to be pretty fantastic to beat the Tamron 15-30 2.8 at less than half the price.

@AshMills

And I guess the Canon is better @31-35mm. ;-)

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 21:44 UTC
On article Canon 16-35mm F2.8L III real-world sample gallery (121 comments in total)
In reply to:

DualSystemGuy: Over FOUR stops vignetting? Holy crap. That is unacceptable on a lens at this price IMO. If you correct that you will get an awful, noisy looking perimeter to the image. Some crop sensor lenses don't even vignette that bad on full frame.

Looks very much like a niche lens for PJ use. The average user is probably much better served by a third party option or something like the 16-35/4 IS.

Yes DualSystemGuy is correct, over 4 stops! Simply ridiculous in this price range and considering they have an 82mm filter requirement. I thought the purpose of the larger front element was to capture more highly skewed rays and reduce vignetting.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 21:41 UTC
On article Have your say: Best midrange ILC of 2016 (53 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Just put the K-1 in every category will you? I like to vote for it.

How are they mid-range cameras when they are at top of their ranges.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 22:37 UTC
In reply to:

Jorginho: Very difficult pick this one. To my mind Oly is the best out there all things considered (all things that matter to me that is), but the price....D500? X-T2? K-1? All pretty different, all with their own strengths...I feel the K-1 is severly underrated by dpreview especially. It is not a pro cam because...of its price??? I'd say D500, EM1mk2, X-T2, K-1 and of course D5 are all professional cams that will do very well in all situations (one better here, the other there etc).

Oly specs are great but that little sensor can't beat even the APS-C sensors. It's way behind the D500/XT-2/a6500 at high ISO, and it's AF can't match the D500. If the price drops $500 I might replace my E-M5 with one though. In Australia the Oly is an absurd $2900 or so. Almost double what the M1 cost. I can get the D500 easily for $2400.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 22:35 UTC
In reply to:

mikeodial: Nikon D810 not considered on either list? Seems strange.

D820/D900 will be on next year's list. A7RII is much newer than D810 and isn't on the list.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 22:32 UTC
In reply to:

Kharan: The A6500 feels very out of place here... it's like it got lost looking for the enthusiast poll :-/
The K-1 is duplicated, but it only belonged in this poll, in my view. It's too much dough for a midrange model.
I'm surprised at the popularity of the E-M1 Mk.II, in my mind it is soundly defeated by the X-T2 - it offers better raw IQ, more high-end lenses, excellent video, and it costs significantly less.
But the true winner here should be the A99II - it does most of what the competitors do, moves the largest amount of data the fastest, has a number of features not replicated anywhere else, shrunk in size quite a bit, and is as close as one can get to a "perfect" camera for $3K. People will say that A-mount is dead, but the lenses are very plentiful and cheap, and if one doesn't have very niche lens requirements, everything is covered.

I would have put 5D4 3rd if priced $500 less. I put K1 first for sheer value and excellent IQ, A99II for specs and D500 for being best can do anything crop camera. I've looked at E-M1 II AF and IQ and it does not match the D500 and above ISO 1600 it gets smashed. At $1400 it would have done a lot better. Fuji XT-2 is almost perfect and if it had the AF capabilities of the D500 it would have been #1.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 22:30 UTC
In reply to:

majorpaul: If the a99 II was from either Canon or Nikon it would be number 1by far

Yes, I've been saying this since it was announced. Sony are mad not to offer EF/F mount version. I guarantee it'll be biggest seller in years.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 22:24 UTC
Total: 1217, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »