ET2

Joined on Aug 25, 2010

Comments

Total: 1259, showing: 301 – 320
« First‹ Previous1415161718Next ›Last »
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

RidgeRunner22: One issue I see is the problem of handheld 42mp shoots. Without any form of IS I think this was meant for the tripod.

Photato , even your buddy here BorisK1 said the max shutter speed you need (for pixel level sharpness) is 1/200. This isn't a problem on high ISO sensor. I am pretty sure most people would be happy with sharpness they see even at 1/35 sec.

No, you don't need a tripod with RX1RII

I didn't know Canon now has 35mm OIS. Do they have 50mm OIS prime?

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 19:05 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

RidgeRunner22: One issue I see is the problem of handheld 42mp shoots. Without any form of IS I think this was meant for the tripod.

Photato, you really never answered my question. Let me try again. Given Canon doesn't have stabilized 35mm prime, are you telling us Canon DSLRs are unusable without a tripod? When are you switching brands?

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 18:30 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zakzoezie: I try to figure who will buy this toy. If photography is your hobby or profession you invest in a long term camera that gives you the flexibility to click-on any lens that you need for certain purposes, even if you start with 1 lens you have the flexibility to extend lenses later. In case you want a compact camera just to take decent family pictures, you expect it to be priced somewhere between $50 and $300 because other compacts are priced like that and because it's simply not worth more. And in case its a really high quality compact, you might even go to around $500 max. Another possibility is that you are a rich hipster that likes to show off anytime anywhere to friends & family you can also do photography with a nice & sexy looking compact camera. Well in that case there are very interesting brands on the market to do that, but believe me, it is not going to be this Sony. I mean, can you imagine your friends and family look at you and say: "OMG, pffff, he's holding a Sony ..."

"And finally we don't know his selection criteria why does he review one camera over another ? "

We know his selection criteria. He said it himself. He reviews cameras that he likes and doesn't if he doesn't like the camera. Plus your claim isn't true. He doesn't review every camera. He doesn't even review most cameras. You won't find his reviews of nikon cameras except a short review of D4. I don't think he has reviewed any Canon camera since 5D III

As for commercial benefits, he has publicly stated that he has never received money for any company. He works as a film maker, not as a reviewer.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 18:17 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

RidgeRunner22: One issue I see is the problem of handheld 42mp shoots. Without any form of IS I think this was meant for the tripod.

Photato, you are making claims even though you really don't have any practical experience with the camera. It's funny coming from Canon fan like you as none of Canon 35mm prime lenses are stabilized. I guess you can never use a Canon camera without a tripod. Better switch to A7RII with IBIS

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 18:10 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

RidgeRunner22: One issue I see is the problem of handheld 42mp shoots. Without any form of IS I think this was meant for the tripod.

"If you need 1/2000s to get a pixel-sharp shot on a 18MP sensor"

Yes, but you don't need 1/2000s on 35mm eqv lens. You need 1/35sec, which isn't a problem.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 17:55 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

RidgeRunner22: One issue I see is the problem of handheld 42mp shoots. Without any form of IS I think this was meant for the tripod.

RX1RIIis a streety walkaround camera, not a studio camera. If someone wants to walk around with a tripod, good luck to them. I am pretty sure a person can take sharper images and print larger with RX1R II than any 18 MP DSLR.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 17:50 UTC
In reply to:

shoevarek: If that is how 4K video looks like then I do not understand what is the fuss about.

"Plus, go look at 4K footage downrezzed to 1080p and you'll see a ton more detail than in most 1080p."

That's only true because many 1080p cameras were never really were truly 1080p (take for example all Canon DSLRs that have soft 1080p, real resolution is much lower). If the original 1080p is true 1080, you won't see sharpness increase by downsampling 4k to 1080

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 17:41 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

RidgeRunner22: One issue I see is the problem of handheld 42mp shoots. Without any form of IS I think this was meant for the tripod.

"Sure, except that FF sensors of this kind of resolution have existed just for a few months."

I will ask you again. Are you speaking for experience or just speculating? The pixel density on 42 MP FF is same as 18 MP APSC

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 17:26 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

RidgeRunner22: One issue I see is the problem of handheld 42mp shoots. Without any form of IS I think this was meant for the tripod.

Photato, you have been posted idiotic comments all day. Are you retarded or something? Photographers have been taking photos without tripods for decades. Are you telling us you can't take sharp photos without a tripod?

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 17:03 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

RidgeRunner22: One issue I see is the problem of handheld 42mp shoots. Without any form of IS I think this was meant for the tripod.

Are you speaking for experience or just speculating? There is absolutely no reason why you can't take sharp images with if you are using faster shutter speeds.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 16:50 UTC
In reply to:

shoevarek: If that is how 4K video looks like then I do not understand what is the fuss about.

You need a a very large 4K TV and sit close to see a difference. Seriously, it's just a hype. It's not the same difference as there was between SD and HD (which was real visible difference)

There is one real plus to 4K though. That is cropping ability during editing.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 16:41 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zakzoezie: I try to figure who will buy this toy. If photography is your hobby or profession you invest in a long term camera that gives you the flexibility to click-on any lens that you need for certain purposes, even if you start with 1 lens you have the flexibility to extend lenses later. In case you want a compact camera just to take decent family pictures, you expect it to be priced somewhere between $50 and $300 because other compacts are priced like that and because it's simply not worth more. And in case its a really high quality compact, you might even go to around $500 max. Another possibility is that you are a rich hipster that likes to show off anytime anywhere to friends & family you can also do photography with a nice & sexy looking compact camera. Well in that case there are very interesting brands on the market to do that, but believe me, it is not going to be this Sony. I mean, can you imagine your friends and family look at you and say: "OMG, pffff, he's holding a Sony ..."

How do you know how a rich hipster thinks? And this camera isn't just for rich hipsters. A lot of professional videographers who use cameras like FS7 will buy this too.

Want to bet? Philip Bloom and Andrew Reid both have RX1 and will buy RX1RII .. and several thousand other videographers like that.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 16:20 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zakzoezie: I try to figure who will buy this toy. If photography is your hobby or profession you invest in a long term camera that gives you the flexibility to click-on any lens that you need for certain purposes, even if you start with 1 lens you have the flexibility to extend lenses later. In case you want a compact camera just to take decent family pictures, you expect it to be priced somewhere between $50 and $300 because other compacts are priced like that and because it's simply not worth more. And in case its a really high quality compact, you might even go to around $500 max. Another possibility is that you are a rich hipster that likes to show off anytime anywhere to friends & family you can also do photography with a nice & sexy looking compact camera. Well in that case there are very interesting brands on the market to do that, but believe me, it is not going to be this Sony. I mean, can you imagine your friends and family look at you and say: "OMG, pffff, he's holding a Sony ..."

"serious brands with the right reputation"

LOL @ serious brand. Sony builds cameras that are used in Holywood. F55 was used to broadcast FIFA world cup. There is nothing more serious than that.

By the way, guys, Zakzoezie, is a obviously a sock puppet account created only to troll Sony cameras. Poor guy is jealous.

Why don't you post with your regular ID? Ashamed?

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 15:25 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

RidgeRunner22: One issue I see is the problem of handheld 42mp shoots. Without any form of IS I think this was meant for the tripod.

You don't need tripod if you keep shutter speed higher than 1/35. which should be no problem with this sensor given ISO performance.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 15:03 UTC
In reply to:

Beckler8: What's the reason again for this NOT having interchangeable lenses?

abortaborm, she is canon fangirl and usually rants incoherently like that. She is complaining about shutter shock on Sony cameras despite the fact that EFCS eliminated that issue . She just put that part in parenthesis.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 03:40 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zvonimir Tosic: As some suggested, I shall too; with this insane resolution, they could have gone wider, 28mm or 24mm lens.
And for this relatively small camera with nothing to grab on, how increased number of pixels will affect image quality? This camera will register even smallest hand or camera shake — is the lens stabilised?

Increase in pixels improve image quality. Given it's FF, pixel density isn't that different than APSC Ricoh GR. No, there is no IS on either camera

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 02:16 UTC
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: 220 shots per battery charge for a $3,299 camera? My, my! I hope they give a bunch of spare ones with it. My $350 Fuji F30 produces 590 shots per charge. No 4k video either. Nope, you can't have it all. Even if you pay big bucks.

"The battery life is substantially lower than other EVF cameras. "

Most canon EVF cameras, even the new G5X, has similar battery life despite the fact that RX1R2 has much larger sensor.

Price is high compared to what? No one else makes FF fixed lens cameras, except Leica is more expensive.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 01:58 UTC
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: 220 shots per battery charge for a $3,299 camera? My, my! I hope they give a bunch of spare ones with it. My $350 Fuji F30 produces 590 shots per charge. No 4k video either. Nope, you can't have it all. Even if you pay big bucks.

JeanPierre, why are you comparing CIPA rating vs reported to have "400 shots per charge". I am pretty sure you can shoot well over 500 with RX1 depending on the shooting style. What's the CIPA rating for Leica Q?

"Sony may be king of sensor technology but they should definitely invest in some research for battery performance."

Sony cameras actually have better battery performance with similar size/sensor Canon/Nikon cameras. Compare for example RX100 series with Canon variants with the same sensor body style cameras

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 00:51 UTC
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: 220 shots per battery charge for a $3,299 camera? My, my! I hope they give a bunch of spare ones with it. My $350 Fuji F30 produces 590 shots per charge. No 4k video either. Nope, you can't have it all. Even if you pay big bucks.

It's not one of the most expensive. To claim that this is one of the most expensive cameras, you have to compare it with other FF cameras with built in lens. Oh let me guess, there are no such cameras except Leica and Sony.

The original RXRI was close to $3000 with only 24 MP sensor back in 2013. Leica Q is more expensive with even less battery life.

Don't tell me your tiny sensor Fuji is a competitor to RXRII

It's expensive compared to what?

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 00:04 UTC
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: 220 shots per battery charge for a $3,299 camera? My, my! I hope they give a bunch of spare ones with it. My $350 Fuji F30 produces 590 shots per charge. No 4k video either. Nope, you can't have it all. Even if you pay big bucks.

Richard Murdey, a fundamental flaw according to who? It's not a DSLR. The battery live is about average for all EVF cameras. The price is not high. It's significantly cheaper than FF camera like D810 with 35mm F2.0 lens. The difference is that RX1 is much smaller with better sensor than D10

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 23:42 UTC
Total: 1259, showing: 301 – 320
« First‹ Previous1415161718Next ›Last »