urix
Lives in
Saint-Petersburg, Russian Federation
Joined on
Oct 3, 2006
|
Comments
 |  |  |  |
| Steam Season by cjf2 from Mamiya C330 challenge | Janiskoski by Kaappo from My best photo of the week. | Firefighter by FVDS from The Fire brigade | Autumn Light by F5Nikon from 2020 |
Many people need serious stuff for a serious event or project. But far less people want to own it. Maybe some just can't.
RomanLevin: I'm user of first LX100! It's amazing camera, but I will not buy new one, because there are no critical improvements.
I wait for:
1) Articulated display - none
2) Swap of focus and aperture ring (focus ring is very close to body in v1.) - none
3) Highspeed video (more than 100 fps) - none
4) Increasing of sensor resolution - yes
5) Some kinds of dust and weather protection - none
Anything else was great in Mark 1. Anounced improvments are very weak:(
Maybe not everyone wants a dedicated 28mm wide-angle camera. LX100 is like a jack of all trades. It has 24-28mm wide-angle, 40-50mm normal, and 75mm 'portrait' capabilities in one package.
> This ... means using a slightly smaller sensor region than the 1"-type sensor found in rivals such as the RX100 V. Video quality, particularly in low light, will be reduced accordingly.
I'd say the difference in a physical size is almost negligible: 12.8 mm wide of LX100 mk II against 13.2 mm of Sony's RX100 V. Less than 4% actually.
urix: Wow! Nikon D750 aside, this new EOS 6D mk II looks worse than its smaller-sensor sibling EOS 80D :(
And the cheap Rebel T7i isn't worse than the 80D in this department.
Wow! Nikon D750 aside, this new EOS 6D mk II looks worse than its smaller-sensor sibling EOS 80D :(
Gmon750: $1,000 less for a Windows machine isn't a better deal. It's just a cheap junk laptop. Try selling it in a year and see what you get for it.
The rest of the article is just typical Apple-bait. As a software engineer, I use both Windows and Macs every day. At the end of they day when I go home, I'm on my Mac to get real work done. To even debate this never-ending contest is just not worth the effort.
Use what makes you happy. In my job, by machine is a tool that needs to get the job done and make me money. That is a Mac. Anything else is a step backwards.
Are you a really great engineer if you're completing your tasks at the end of the day, being at home?
Look at left side of the eye. The colors are dull in the right image. An aggressive color noise reduction could produce the same effect.
urix: Thank you, DPReview!
Low Light, ISO 100 CR2, converted to DNG, pushed up by 5 EV, resized to 3300 x 2200 (about 7 MP):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/jlf8if1msrbdmgv/760D.png
go left to get 700D crop, go right for D5500 one
Well, actually I wanted to show difference among 700D, 760D, and D5500:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/dswmyj31chb3ljd/AAB9UcVtFt3d74eR4DWT3mJNa
Thank you, DPReview!
Low Light, ISO 100 CR2, converted to DNG, pushed up by 5 EV, resized to 3300 x 2200 (about 7 MP):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/jlf8if1msrbdmgv/760D.png
go left to get 700D crop, go right for D5500 one
WGVanDyck: An interesting article, however, there is a fallacy within “Fallacy 2”. The manufacturers introduced a false premise that the APS-C lenses would do the same things as the FF lenses they try to emulate (35DX=50FX). The reality is; you are going to get the native characteristics of a lens’ focal length regardless of the sensor you put it on. As an example: a 35mm DX lens is going to give you 35mm lens distortion and DOF characteristics when mounted on an APS-C sensor. Other than angle of view, it (or any 35mm) is not equivalent to a 50mm lens. But, with the DX 35mm, you have all of the light falloff, distortion, and filter vignetting issues that would be reduced or nonexistent if a 35mm FF lens were used. The only APS-C lenses that make any sense are the wide to ultra-wide focal lengths. I love my Nikkor 12-24mm DX, but otherwise I find FF lenses don’t have the DX lenses' edge problems. So, there is a good reason to buy FF lenses, even when one doesn’t plan “upgrading” to a FF camera.
And vice versa. If you like a 35mm FF on your APS-C body, you'll be unpleasantly surprised by its distortion and light falloff with your new FF body :)
urix: What did you mean with "3EV at the center" of low-lit scene? Is it correct to assume that the center illumination is 20 lx? Thanks.
@yabokkie
Really? Illumination of 25-30 lux can be learned from EXIF data.
What did you mean with "3EV at the center" of low-lit scene? Is it correct to assume that the center illumination is 20 lx? Thanks.
TWIZEEL: I know the way - OVERPRICED product never sells. Even 600 bucks for conveyor style of production for lens still expencive. 20 years ago hand-adjusted on optical bench Carl Zeiss was cheaper.
But 20 years ago the Buck has been much more valuable ;)
Mike Cialowicz: Odd... they claim it has front and rear control dials, but all I see is a rear dial. Is the front dial the toothed thing surrounding the shutter button? Is that awkward to use?
Mike, did you count the dial around a shutter release button?
(unknown member): http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studio-compare#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=nokia_pureview808&masterSample=2012-07-20-0469&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=nokia_pureview808&slot0Sample=2012-07-20-0469&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=nikon_d800e&slot1Sample=dsc_0098&slot2Camera=nikon_d7100&slot2Sample=dsc_0175&slot3Camera=canon_eos5dmkiii&slot3Sample=5d3_5213&x=-0.27194256828511937&y=1.209516054661301&extraCameraCount=0
Yes, sir. A Digicam like Sony RX100-II is more capable than Lumia 1020, giving a better sensor, a tilting screen, etc. But it is dedicated photo tool which price tag is similar to the one of the multi-purpose Lumia. Except that, we are unlikely to find a dozen of P&S digicams, justifying easily the fuss with a separate photo gadget.
DSLRs are in a diferent league. But not all ILCs of course. Personally, I had a chance to play with RX100 and NEX-6 side by side at a local store yesterday. It's all about an optics, but I find the RX100 to focus quicker and more reliably at any of its focal lengths than the NEX with conventional kit lenses. Not to mention size difference.
When I try to download original movie samples I get a message that an access denied. How can I get them?
Well... Where did you see an LX7 for $300 and a D-Lux 6 for $500?
kewlguy: Why is the 24-70/4 IS much more expensive than 24-105/4 IS? The new zoom better be as good as the best primes! But then it's still f/4...
Because 24-70/2.8 II is much more expensive than 24-70/2.8
:-)
These RRPs would be ok only if Canon is going to follow the Sigma's way. Compare Sigma 24-70 prices: $1400 MSRP and the street prices being less than $900.
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/24-70mm-f28-if-ex-dg-hsm-sigma
(and click FIND A DEALER)