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: 1595, showing: 161 – 180
« First‹ Previous7891011Next ›Last »
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1225 comments in total)
In reply to:

dieubussy: "Noise performance appears very slightly improved over the Mark II, which puts it ahead of the Nikon D850 and some distance beyond the Canon EOS 5DS R."

Look at your own test pictures, DPR. Above 12800 both cameras show significant noise: the a7R seems blurred and filtered whereas the D850 retains more detail and sharpness.

Yes you said it, but do take those blinkers off, it helps enormously Clayton.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2017 at 10:50 UTC
On article LG V30 camera review (139 comments in total)

LG's phone OLED screens are garbage, give this and the Pixel 2 XL a wide berth. Not sure why their small screen OLED is so poor compared to their TV OLED.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2017 at 05:20 UTC as 17th comment
In reply to:

Jan Chelminski: Great example for why I easily choose the m4/3 system over a large format mirror-less system. The a7III and 85mm f/1.8 cost about $3,850, and as Carey says, balances well, etc, its a nice combo. The E-M1.2 and 45mm f/1.2 cost about $2,900 and also balance well. One could argue they are in the same weight/portability class. But for me, I know I will prefer the results from the smaller format. Resolution/noise isn't everything, with m4/3, I can have the very best optics drawing my images, while keeping size and cost under control. Like the MZD 45mm f/1.8, the FE 85mm f/1.8 is a great, light lens for the money, but its no FE 85mm f/1.4. That's how it breaks down for me. Nothing wrong with Carey's approach, but its not something I could be happy with, because I demand both cutting edge optics and portability, which is not possible in a large format camera system, at least with the current optical technology. Thanks Carey, I liked your write-up.

The words m4/3 and value cannot be used in the same sentence anymore. Thought about the E-M1 II for a while then I compared prices:

D500 + 200-500 $3400AUD
E-M1 II + 300 f/4 Pro = ~$6000AUD

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2017 at 01:32 UTC

They also called Trump person of the year in 2016, so it's more of a joke award.

Seriously camera is not even out or just barely, maybe A9 I could understand, but let's wait a year.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2017 at 04:46 UTC as 40th comment | 2 replies
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1225 comments in total)

Rather than tell us the obvious how unreliable Lock on is, why not tell us how the manually selected AF point method works. No one would shoot real action using the Lock on or 3D tracking other than in a very specific case of super clean background. In the real world we always use the manually selected point and expansion for servo tracking. Yet this article didn't test that all just a throw away line to use it.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 22:04 UTC as 112th comment | 5 replies
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1225 comments in total)
In reply to:

KeesvdHave: I badly need the adobe raw converter for this camera. Lightroom and photoshop cant't read the files and I don't want to learn the other programmes that do offer conversion. Is there anywhere a beta version available?
Other than that, the camera is fab, your review is spot on. In Europe the A7R III is already available and I own one for a couple of days now.

They did say they used an ACR beta (eg page 7 the bike rider under "Use Cases") and they only ever use ACR, even though it's about the worst converter nowadays.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 21:58 UTC
In reply to:

photoMEETING: No full frame ... no Leica CL.

Of course every car needs a V8! What are you a Toyota driver or something.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 21:30 UTC
On article UPDATED: Sony a7R III is still a star eater (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

sts2: I have no idea what I'm looking at. I love a Sony-critical review as much as the next guy, but those night sky images look fine to me and I can't spot any relevant differences.
Am I the only one who thinks this issue is blown "just a tad" out of proportion?

Yes, it's just you.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 00:26 UTC

I suppose it could be the gift for someone that literally has everything, but I can think of better ways to waste my time than degrade classic B&W photos. Ask yourself did the addition of colour add anything at all to the impact of the photos? IMO absolutely not.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 02:25 UTC as 72nd comment | 10 replies
On article Sony a7R III added to studio scene comparison (446 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael Ma: What's up with camera manufacturers removing their AA filters when it's obvious they still need it? I would rather not have false color in my images at the cost of losing some detail that I'll have to discard anyway. Camera manufacturers need a reality check on what's more important.

Owning a 5DsR almost never see issues due to lack of AA filter. Very occasionally in the feathers of parrots I’ll see moire, but for landscape, architecture etc it’s a huge non-issue.

Also as the sensor res increases you tend to push interference effects to smaller and smaller scales, the pattern needs to have pitch similar to that of the sensor (taking into account lens magnification of course). Something that might have caused moire on a 20MP camera at a set distance, will not cause it or it’ll be less noticeable on a 50MP camera, as now the pattern scales are not commensurate. Of course a finer pattern will cause moire on the 50MP camera, but in the real world that gets harder unless you are deliberately shooting repetitive patterns like fly screens or very fine high thread count fabrics say. It’s highly variable but in general it’s not something you have to worry about as the resolution increases.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 00:26 UTC
On article Sony a7R III added to studio scene comparison (446 comments in total)
In reply to:

xPhoenix: Interesting. I would take the sharpness differences with a grain of salt. I sincerely doubt the D850 is sharper. As for noise, when viewed at full size, the Sony seems close to the D850. Difference is probably negligible. What I still find interesting is that the D500 looks cleaner at high ISO (when viewing 1:1). Also, if you're interested in the cleanest shots at high ISO, the D750 is still king, unless you want to drop $6500 on a D5.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a7riii&attr13_1=nikon_d850&attr13_2=nikon_d750&attr13_3=nikon_d500&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=6400&attr16_3=6400&attr126_0=1&attr171_3=1&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0&y=0.07071072883657764

The D500 is not cleaner at high ISO, I own the D500 and 5D4 and 1DX and they both are much better than the D500 above ISO 1600. The 5D4 and 1DX are as good as the A7RII/III and D850 at high ISO.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 00:19 UTC

Wow a whopping 8 replies, looks like the mobile space is of no interest to dpreview readers. Stick to real news.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 07:16 UTC as 11th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Mike Davis: "In fact, their 2018 sensor lineup includes two new MF sensors: a 100MP BSI 44x33 sensor and a 150MP BSI 55x41mm sensor."

100 MP on a 44x33mm sensor = a pixel density of 185.5 pixels/mm, requiring we stop down no further than f/11.3 to secure 5 lp/mm worth of actual subject detail in an uncropped, unreseampled 360 ppi print.

150 MP on a 55x41mm sensor = a pixel density of 257.9, requiring we stop down no further than f/8.1 to secure 5 lp/mm worth of actual subject detail in an uncropped, unresampled 360 ppi print.

In other words, thanks to diffraction, the larger yet denser 150 MP sensor cannot deliver 5 lp/mm worth of actual subject detail in unresampled 360 ppi prints without opening up one stop further than the smaller yet less dense 100 MP sensor.

I'll take the 100 MP sensor and be content with smaller prints at any given desired print resolution goal, to enjoy one additional stop worth of creative freedom, without concern for diffraction inhibiting my print resolution goal.

Yeah, the pixel density is almost th same, so same diffraction limit as mosc says.

I get 262.4 pixel/mm vs 257.9 pixels/mm for the 100MP vs 150MP.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 00:04 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (535 comments in total)
In reply to:

caravan: $15,000 worth of reach for $1,700 is a bargain.

Nice job Sony.

Sorry reach is only a function of pixel density. If the Sony had 1MP does it have the same reach as if it had 20MP? Guess what I got an actual 150-600mm zoom for $899 and if I use it on an APS-C camera I get 900mm reach, making that a much much better bargain and my lens is faster.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 23:42 UTC

"If you're curious how well the 50MP Canon 5DS R compares: not so well."
Cough BS cough

Firstly 5DsR looks to be 1/3rd stop darker than others, and you guys ares till using way too contrasty crap ACR profile for the camera after all this time, love those crushed blacks. For the love of god it's easy to fix this and no other RAW converter exhibits this level of lameness. Secondly other than the reds, it holds up very well against the A7RII, which also shows lots and lots of colour aliasing. Secondly it's res is usable anywhere, even outdoors when the winds blowing and things are moving.

If your going to be this biased at least be subtle about it and make it a fairer fight.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 02:44 UTC as 121st comment | 2 replies
On article Cinematic 4K footage shot with the Apple iPhone X (310 comments in total)
In reply to:

cdembrey: Here's another iPhone X 4K video https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=DQRJSxV2lLs that is actually Cinematic—a real documentary story is told.

Great video, great food, hot chef.

of course the video was not shot just using a handheld iPhone, lots of expensive equipment required for the panning and what not, but the quality is impressive.

What I find interesting the video is 10x better than the quality of the stills.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 23:27 UTC
On article Sigma's new 16mm F1.4 will cost $450, ships this month (359 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Regardless of these good news, Sony APS-C is doomed there’s still no pancake 16-55mm f2.8 for $499..

It should be doomed just due to the appallingly bad ergonomics of the Sony APS-C cameras. Why don’t they just make the a6700 in a A7 style body and call it A5. In APS-C mirrorless, there’s Fuji then there’s daylight.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 20:36 UTC
On article Sigma's new 16mm F1.4 will cost $450, ships this month (359 comments in total)

Hey Panasonic, why don’t you release a Leica equivalent and charge $3K, I’m sure it’ll be worth 6x as much because of that m4/3 special sauce you guys cook with.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 20:34 UTC as 48th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

thx1138: Ha ha ha ha. $2999, so I guess it is 4x better than the Canon 200 f/2.8L II, currently about $750. m4/3 makers are smoking crack, thanks Panasonic I needed a laugh.

Look up danile medisn it's river in Egypt. I can get a ff 70-200 f/2.8 zoom with all those features for $1K less. It's a $1.2K lens at best.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 07:06 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix G9: What you need to know (243 comments in total)
In reply to:

thx1138: Since they make no mention of it, I assume this is not a stacked sensor and read-out speed will be inadequate to capture 20fps without extensive rolling shutter. If so, it's already a waste of effort. Sony at least went to the trouble to make their 20fps usable and massively increase sensor read-out speed with the A9.

What that have to do with capturing movement. Rolling shutter is never an issue if the camera and/or subject aren’t moving. The EVF is low resolution compared to the sensor. Prove to me that at 20fps while panning rapidly to capture fast flying bird, or moving car you won’t get enormous rolling shutter. If you don’t I be the first to say well done Panasonic. The fact they don’t alert us to this like Sony did with the A9 indicates to me they haven’t gone to the same trouble.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 03:48 UTC
Total: 1595, showing: 161 – 180
« First‹ Previous7891011Next ›Last »