ChapelThrill23

Joined on Dec 7, 2011

Comments

Total: 87, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

MrBrightSide: You guys are missing a huge opportunity by not mounting this lens on a Merrill....who knows how the elves in the Sigma lab have synergized the interaction between their amazing foveon sensor and the wonderousness of this lens? Who knows? Nobody, that's who because no other review site has the courage to dare try such a combo. Go for it!

It would be interesting to see if they could spur sales of their bodies and grow the mount by selling this for the Sigma mount at cost. A lot of people would potentially be interested in getting a lens lineup that was nothing but art lenses at a discounted price.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2017 at 17:03 UTC
In reply to:

Petroglyph: Nikon D750 = 1800$ => in round up. Pentax K1 = 1900$ => not in round up.

Nikon D750 would not use for pro landscape work.

Pentax K1 probably one of the best pro landscape cameras around.

?

That is just silly. People have used far lesser bodies than a d750 for professional landscape work. Plus Nikon has a much better collection of lenses for the landscape photographer.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2016 at 00:15 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Nikon D40 (173 comments in total)

These are still capable of producing great images. The best person in my local photography group still uses one. She is a college student who can't afford any better. Other people might come in with sharper images, with better dynamic range, and less noise but nobody comes in with images as compelling as she does. Her understanding of composition and ability to think outside the box allows her to make images more compelling than those with $10,000 worth of equipment in their bag. My point is that in the right hands a D40 with a kit lens can be used in creating amazing images that easily better someone without as much talent with a D810 and a top flight lens. I count myself among those with much nicer gear but nowhere near the imagination.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 15:39 UTC as 5th comment

I don't get it. The photographer, who is actually extremely good, at my son's pre-school took two dozen better portraits last week.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2016 at 02:08 UTC as 72nd comment | 3 replies

Incredible work!

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2016 at 11:58 UTC as 13th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Khairil: Why waste money on apple? Asus, Acer, HP and even Microsoft have far better high-end / flagship laptops..

Tell me which one of those runs OSX? I wouldn't touch a Windows laptop. Windows 10 is awful.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2016 at 11:44 UTC
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (765 comments in total)

My first digital was an Olympus C3030. Bought it in around 2000. I'm not even positive what the first film camera I used was but first I bought was a Minolta 7000.

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2016 at 00:52 UTC as 137th comment
In reply to:

Zakzoezie: Of course stock will be low, only diehard A-mount users who heavily invested in A-mount lenses will buy it. Looking at the price of this beast, the other part of the remaining A-mount users will simply continue to switch to other systems, no matter how good this camera is. That is a logical consequence of the superintelligent Sony strategy to abandon its former A-mount customers by introducing a completely new & different FF mount system in parallel. It almost looks like a suicide fairy tail ...

Minolta does have some good legacy glass (for instance the 85 1.4 is my favorite lens ever) but at this point a lot of that is very long in the tooth. The Minolta 70-210/4 for instance is very good for the money but can strugle on modern sensors and doesn't have great AF. It does have awesome colors though.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 13:24 UTC
In reply to:

Zakzoezie: Of course stock will be low, only diehard A-mount users who heavily invested in A-mount lenses will buy it. Looking at the price of this beast, the other part of the remaining A-mount users will simply continue to switch to other systems, no matter how good this camera is. That is a logical consequence of the superintelligent Sony strategy to abandon its former A-mount customers by introducing a completely new & different FF mount system in parallel. It almost looks like a suicide fairy tail ...

A big thing Sony is missing is more moderately priced glass. For instance Nikon has a fantastic 1.8G line that includes a 20mm, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm. Each is $800 or less and all are very good with some being exceptional. Sony can't match that. They have a slower 85mm prime and a reasonably priced 50 but can't match most of that. Nor do they have a sub $1000 wide angle. The 16-35 is good but $2250! Nikon has a fantastic 18-35G for $750. The Sony 70-300G is also laughably priced. I used to own it. It is a solid lens but not a $1150 lens.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 12:30 UTC
In reply to:

kobakokh: this is very good camera, but in this price its will be difficult for switch for Canon and Nikon users, but for rich beginners will be great...

With a system switch for a high end user the biggest investment is often the lenses. That $3100 is just the tip of the iceberg of what it would cost for me to go to Sony. It'd be a minimum of $10,000. Of course I'd make money selling my Nikon gear but wouldn't get what I paid for things.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 10:48 UTC
In reply to:

Zakzoezie: Of course stock will be low, only diehard A-mount users who heavily invested in A-mount lenses will buy it. Looking at the price of this beast, the other part of the remaining A-mount users will simply continue to switch to other systems, no matter how good this camera is. That is a logical consequence of the superintelligent Sony strategy to abandon its former A-mount customers by introducing a completely new & different FF mount system in parallel. It almost looks like a suicide fairy tail ...

Given the specs the price isn't bad. Personally though I wouldn't switch back to the a-mount. The lenses are too expensive and there isn't as good of a selection of them.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 10:44 UTC
On article Got Reach? Tamron SP 150-600mm F5-6.3 G2 sample gallery (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

shooter45: Pictures are good but what is the point? To let me know I can "reach" with this lens ? That it is sharp ? Ok .. good ... but the Sigma Sport has also the same reach and the Nikon ( lens that I own ) 200-500 on my D500 also has a great reach ( more than I really need ) and it is sharper than this lens and on par with the Sigma sport.
However, this lens is more affordable than the Sport version and lighter than its sibling. I shoot with the Nikon 200-500 and I am more than happy with this lens.

The Sigma Sport may well be better but it is $600 more expensive. I don't see them as being direct competitors. I'd imagine most after a 150-600 would be comparing the Tamron and the lower end Sigma 150-600 (which is much cheaper than the Tamron).

The Nikon is a more direct competitor as it and the Tamron are priced similarly. It is worth noting that Tamron often has big specials and discounts that reduce the cost of their lenses by a lot.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2016 at 13:59 UTC
In reply to:

Chris Yates: Sigma is the new Zeiss in terms of pricing.

Not really. Cine lenses cost way more than camera lenses. These prices are not that high. For instance a Zeiss 21-100 cinema lens is $10,000.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 15:47 UTC
On article Fast and light: Nikkor 24mm F1.8G ED lens review (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

shooter mclens: This is a really good, nice article which is made super-useful by the comparison with the Sigma 24/1.4. for the price differential, the sigma seems like a clear winner... except for the weight. the Nikon is so much lighter, i cant imagine that won't be a consideration, especially for street photographers. The Nikon appears to be good enough in terms of IQ, but the Sigma seems to beat it in a few key parameters, besides being faster. But if you are looking for a lighter kit, the Sigma is practically a clunker. Have to say i'm tempted by both lenses. I do own the Sigma 35 ART and love it, but it's relatively heavy for a prime. As much as image quality is a criteria for photography, so is weight and portability. with the price differential being about $100 USD, a choice might come down to those two factors.

Is the Sigma really better built? Subjectivity it feels more substantial but modern plastics are very good. I'd be interested to see if real world relibility and sample variation really are better or if people just say the Sigma is better build because it is heavier and feel as more substantial.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2016 at 14:45 UTC
In reply to:

Arizona Sunset: That must be the largest female model hand ever.

That was my first thought too.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 18:57 UTC
On article Under pressure: Canon vs. Nikon in a hydraulic press (287 comments in total)

Why bother giving hits to that idiot?

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 03:23 UTC as 91st comment | 1 reply
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1122 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: Really, this is sad. Sony already has a camera capable of faster shooting and higher resolution (24 MP with no AA filter). It has a tilt screen, like this D500, and it does 4K video too, but it weighs less than this D500, and it's only half the price! How great is THAT? Nikon REALLY needs to catch up to Sony!

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1222744-REG/sony_ilce6300_b_alpha_a63000_mirrorless_digital.html

I think the ONLY thing Nikon has going for them now is that their weather seals and deep raw shooting buffer might attract a few hard-core professionals. The rest will go to Sony. Sony needs only to create a line of A9 and A9000 series cameras with weather seals, and they'll have the whole market wrapped up.

I have used both Sony and Nikon bodies a lot. Nikon has a much better lens collection and a lot more reasonably priced high quality lenses.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2016 at 18:15 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1122 comments in total)
In reply to:

Douglas F Watt: Nice camera, and no doubt a great choice for pro sports shooters with a big library of Nikkor glass, but once again, the video is kind of a kludgey compromise, and the cost is higher than a lot of FF bodies. I suspect it will still sell, since it's a Nikon, but given that the A6300 has roughly the same abilities for half the price, it doesn't seem like a great value.

A huge difference is the A6300 does not have anywhere near the lens collection for both manufacturer and third party lenses.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2016 at 18:14 UTC
In reply to:

thxbb12: AF calibration: this is the very reason I switched to mirrorless about 3 years ago. I'm so glad I did.
Eventhough Nikon's implementation is very useful, it's still suffering from many downsides. The real fix is to achieve AF on the sensor. There is really no way around it, no matter how much duct tape we put around it ;-)

I've had a lot of lenses over the years and only two with focusing issues. Those issues were easily corrected with AF fine tune. I think the issue is very overrated and not enough to be a major factor when choosing systems.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2016 at 13:56 UTC
On article Student takes 2016 Zeiss Photography Award top prize (210 comments in total)
In reply to:

jonny1976: Unimpressed both technically and conceptually, cliche theme
With medium quality. But she is a nice young girl from germany. Good to win.

Absurd. The photograph does a tremendous job of conveying the mood of the scene.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 16:20 UTC
Total: 87, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »