lnsmr

Joined on Jul 26, 2018

Comments

Total: 145, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

"Another thing is to listen and trust your creative instinct. For example, I started creating composites at a very early stage of my learning process. Compositing has always been a creative way for me to express myself but it has always attracted negative comments. I’ve often been told that my images were too contrasting, too blue or too Photoshopped."
I suppose Ms. Simard already dealt with plenty of negative comments. Great work and great locations!

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2020 at 03:58 UTC as 16th comment
In reply to:

lnsmr: As numerous people pointed out, continuous shooting time itself is not that big a concern, as long continuous shots are rarely needed. However, the poor recovery time is just terrible. Isn't doing video hard enough? Does Canon want to distract users with thermal management issues all the time? Are people that committed to Canon that they need to carry multiple Canon bodies just so they can keep working?

To be honest, if Canon can bring the price down a competitive level, both R5 and R6 are attractive still cameras. I have a many expensive Canon EF lens and really want to move to a great Canon R body. But with A7M3 selling for $1800 and A7R4 for $3200 (both with good video outputs), I have a hard time justify buying either camera.

This comment is probably a little of the topic. I have not tried eye AF on new R5/R6 yet, I am guessing Sony bodies are still better, based on my experience with A7R4. That being said, after using the eye AF on M6II, I found the eye AF on Canon mirrorless being good enough for most still photos. Also, I can see that the DR and low light of Sony being slightly better than Canon counterparts, but probably not meaningful IQ difference for most applications.
The AF of EF lens with Sigma MC-11 adapter on Sony bodies is actually pretty decent, but I rather not deal with lens adapters. It is simply better to use EF on Canon R.
But looking at the EF line up, the writing on the wall seems to suggest that Canon leaving the EF mount sooner or later. I now question myself for being irrationally holding on to the EF lenses. Might be better to sell all my Canon EF gears and switch to whatever.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2020 at 09:11 UTC
In reply to:

nabpaw: As a professional I carry 2 cameras anyway.

The recovery time for 30 minutes of 4K HQ shooting is 2 hours. You need 5 camera bodies, not two.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2020 at 23:34 UTC

As numerous people pointed out, continuous shooting time itself is not that big a concern, as long continuous shots are rarely needed. However, the poor recovery time is just terrible. Isn't doing video hard enough? Does Canon want to distract users with thermal management issues all the time? Are people that committed to Canon that they need to carry multiple Canon bodies just so they can keep working?

To be honest, if Canon can bring the price down a competitive level, both R5 and R6 are attractive still cameras. I have a many expensive Canon EF lens and really want to move to a great Canon R body. But with A7M3 selling for $1800 and A7R4 for $3200 (both with good video outputs), I have a hard time justify buying either camera.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2020 at 23:32 UTC as 142nd comment | 6 replies

I applaud anyone beside Dennis Rodman who can get away with it.
It is a cheap lens lens, but anodized with gold, and still cheaper than Leica/Zeiss. If you are into status, you get more status with an old beat up Leica lux than this thing.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2020 at 22:15 UTC as 46th comment
On article Sony a7S III initial review (1624 comments in total)
In reply to:

Canon5DSmith: I hate to say this but Sony has done an amazing job in the marketing and releasing this camera the way it has.

Counter that with the embarrassed way Canon has been doling out information on the R5. It is telling that Canon had something to hide there.

It can't be clearer that this is the case when some went from "this is a 8k revolutionary film maker tool " to "no one needs more than 1080p" or "get a cinema camera instead" in matter of a couple of days.

Sony seems to have gone to the sensible in what can be done and Canon shot itself on the foot by trying to get gimmick features in body that could not accommodate its "revolutionary features".

And I am only talking about the marketing here, did not even get into the features of each camera.

The video review got a good point: the 12MP allow the A7III3 work all day long without worrying about overheating issues. This reliability advantage is huge for pros, as you can always get second body for high res stills. Canon R5 and R6 are solid cameras for sure, and it is good that there are competition and choices.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2020 at 23:58 UTC
On article Leica M10-R sample gallery (DPReview TV) (40 comments in total)
In reply to:

wats0n: Pricey for smart phone quality images....yikes...

Is the smartphone you referred to from the future? I hope in 10 years my iphone can simulate the 50mm APO Leica lens.
I also downloaded the DNG files. The sensor quality is pretty good, but nothing outstanding in today's standard, but the contrast and transition of the lens is nothing shorting of astonishing.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2020 at 08:55 UTC
In reply to:

LakeSuperior1: Well, the image quality is pretty bad based on those examples. But, that's the nature of mirror lenses. I suppose if you need the focal length only occasionally this might be an option.

They look bad even at 3MP images! I assume that's already down sampled? Remember buying such design many years ago for film camera. Seems a total waste of time for modern digital cameras.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2020 at 20:15 UTC
On a photo in the Canon EOS R6 sample gallery (DPReview TV) sample gallery (5 comments in total)

Does R6 output HEIF format directly? How much shadow/highlight recovery can you get from HEIF compared to RAW? Really getting tired of processing RAW all the time.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2020 at 09:44 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

lnsmr: So many comments lamenting the SaaS model. Are there deeper analysis of ONA performance? In terms of pricing, this is actually pretty close to LR (the $9.99 LR comes with 1TB or PS). Does ONA perform better than LR?

There is nothing wrong with company adopting the SaaS model. Adoble profit went through the roof after switching business model, and obviously the increased profit comes out of our wallets. But that is not a bad thing. If you are willing to rent a lens for $20/day, what's the big deal paying $10/mo for LR?

I do have a problem with this cloud workflow thing. Do people actually benefit from transition between ipad and desktop? I suspect this cloud thing has more to do with Adobe wanting our files so it would be hard for us to switch. I have long resisted the LR CC flow due to speed. My raw files are 80MB each (my iPad pro crashes), and it takes forever to download/upload to have a reasonable workflow. BTW, AWS backs up photos for free with unlimited storage.

@AlwaysLearning4 Time is definitely the biggest cost for all of us. I am trying to be more efficient as well, as I rarely print large. For social media sharing, I am relying on editing on google photos for most pictures. Looking at my LR edits, most are DR and WB tweeks. I am encouraged that Canon R5 now provides HEIC capture, and perhaps that there is enough room in the files that I don't have to use RAW.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2020 at 18:55 UTC
In reply to:

lnsmr: So many comments lamenting the SaaS model. Are there deeper analysis of ONA performance? In terms of pricing, this is actually pretty close to LR (the $9.99 LR comes with 1TB or PS). Does ONA perform better than LR?

There is nothing wrong with company adopting the SaaS model. Adoble profit went through the roof after switching business model, and obviously the increased profit comes out of our wallets. But that is not a bad thing. If you are willing to rent a lens for $20/day, what's the big deal paying $10/mo for LR?

I do have a problem with this cloud workflow thing. Do people actually benefit from transition between ipad and desktop? I suspect this cloud thing has more to do with Adobe wanting our files so it would be hard for us to switch. I have long resisted the LR CC flow due to speed. My raw files are 80MB each (my iPad pro crashes), and it takes forever to download/upload to have a reasonable workflow. BTW, AWS backs up photos for free with unlimited storage.

1TB is pretty good size if that's for the photos that you are currently working on, but definitely too small if that's your photo library with RAW files. BTW, why bother with LR if you are not working on RAW? Snapseed is plenty good for editing jpg files.
Also, photo storage is free (even with 80MB DNG files) part of Prime Membership from amazon. I suppose if Amazon offer editing capability similar to LR, I wouldn't mind paying AWS.
For photo sharing applications, google photo is still the best by far, as it allows for keyword searching without prior tagging. The "high quality" free storage from google photo at 16MP is more than enough for sharing purposes. Instead of 10 minutes, search people's face (or search things like bicycle or tower) take few seconds.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2020 at 05:08 UTC

So many comments lamenting the SaaS model. Are there deeper analysis of ONA performance? In terms of pricing, this is actually pretty close to LR (the $9.99 LR comes with 1TB or PS). Does ONA perform better than LR?

There is nothing wrong with company adopting the SaaS model. Adoble profit went through the roof after switching business model, and obviously the increased profit comes out of our wallets. But that is not a bad thing. If you are willing to rent a lens for $20/day, what's the big deal paying $10/mo for LR?

I do have a problem with this cloud workflow thing. Do people actually benefit from transition between ipad and desktop? I suspect this cloud thing has more to do with Adobe wanting our files so it would be hard for us to switch. I have long resisted the LR CC flow due to speed. My raw files are 80MB each (my iPad pro crashes), and it takes forever to download/upload to have a reasonable workflow. BTW, AWS backs up photos for free with unlimited storage.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2020 at 21:07 UTC as 19th comment | 8 replies
On article Hands-on with Canon's new RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM (190 comments in total)
In reply to:

lnsmr: Wondering if the IQ of this lens is that much better than the old 85mm. Most likely I am keeping my old 85/1.8, which is actually lighter than this lens. I guess both weight an price look attractive when you anchor with 85/1.2L as comparison.

The 85/1.8 is sharp enough (at for 20MP), but the CA is pretty terrible wide open. I am hoping for optical improvement to justify the upgrade.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2020 at 08:02 UTC
On article Hands-on with Canon's new RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM (190 comments in total)

Wondering if the IQ of this lens is that much better than the old 85mm. Most likely I am keeping my old 85/1.8, which is actually lighter than this lens. I guess both weight an price look attractive when you anchor with 85/1.2L as comparison.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 18:51 UTC as 36th comment | 3 replies
On article The Canon EOS R6 is the R5 for the masses (157 comments in total)

Interesting value proposition. I have too many EF lenses so I am biased toward R6. But this announcement makes the Sony's A7M3 that was released three years ago to look like a better option.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2020 at 18:28 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

dereken: Most people would prefer a cheaper used Leica M8/9 over this, if they want a simple rangefinder experience.

On the other hand, I think there must be a market for an m-mount camera with full frame sensor and great EVF. Leica doesn't make that kind of camera now.

What are you talking about! This is the price for used 240! I understand the challenge of making such niche product, but the pricing makes it so attractive. Used M or a new CL/TL now seem much more reasonable.
PIXII really accomplished the objective of making Leica camera pricing attractive.
I hope the company succeed, but unfortunately don't have $3K to pay for something like this.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2020 at 02:30 UTC
On article Canon EOS-1D X Mark III review (1366 comments in total)
In reply to:

lnsmr: With R6 rumors around the corner, with 20MP sensor, the performance of 1DXIII sensor is very encouraging.
It is sad to see that AF is worse through viewfinder. DSLR as a product category seems have fewer reasons to exist. For people who are used to DSLR (similar to people who are used to rangefinder), it is good to see a new pro DSLR body. But for practical purposes, there seem less and less reasons using them.
Seeing objects through viewfinders (DSLR or rangefinder) is a joy. But for photographic applications, the costs, weight, size, and inaccuracy of mechanical constructs are becoming indefensible.

@Thoguhts R Us.

I agree with you that that there are plenty of reasons to use pro DSLR bodies. Durability and reliability are both more important. I have abused my Canon DSLRs for a long time and haven't had any failures yet. Can't say the same about the Sony bodies that I bought. There is no deny that optical viewfinders are more enjoyable to use than EVF/screens, at least for me.

But I don't think these AF tests are splitting hairs. On AF performance, the difference is definitely not splitting hair. Have multiple Canon DSLR bodies, both 5D4 and 1DX2, and their AF has never been as accurate as Canon R. And my Sony A7M3 has even better AF. All these comes from my own experience, with many slightly out of focus shots from DSLR bodies. The only way I obtained more accurate AF from DSLR was using Sigma lenses and USB docket to calibrate, and it was a big pain and only work for specific camera/lens combination (I now have a Sigma 50/1.4 "permanently" mounted on a 5D4 body).

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2020 at 20:30 UTC
On article Canon EOS-1D X Mark III review (1366 comments in total)

With R6 rumors around the corner, with 20MP sensor, the performance of 1DXIII sensor is very encouraging.
It is sad to see that AF is worse through viewfinder. DSLR as a product category seems have fewer reasons to exist. For people who are used to DSLR (similar to people who are used to rangefinder), it is good to see a new pro DSLR body. But for practical purposes, there seem less and less reasons using them.
Seeing objects through viewfinders (DSLR or rangefinder) is a joy. But for photographic applications, the costs, weight, size, and inaccuracy of mechanical constructs are becoming indefensible.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2020 at 18:33 UTC as 95th comment | 2 replies
On article Will vlogging change your next camera? (303 comments in total)

If would be great if they actually produced vlogging cameras from scratch, so both features and ergonomics are vlogging specific. Slightly modifying existing camera doesn't make much sense. I have DJI Osmo for a while now, and it is much suitable for vlogging. I would love to see DJI Osmo with 1" or larger sensor.

On the other hand, adding "vlogging" features (what are they specifically?) to what essentially still cameras doesn't make these camera more appealing.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2020 at 15:44 UTC as 108th comment

Many great points from Mr. Gold, and much of this is technical, as DPreview should be. On what is better, let's not forget about the human psychology. It is not about what is "better", but what is unique. Once something becomes a rarity, the rare status itself becomes an attractive feature.

Digital cameras were really cool when most people were still shooting film, precisely because digital cameras were rare and expensive. Now film is cool because it is such weird thing. We find similar example in watches, cars, audio gears.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2020 at 18:19 UTC as 162nd comment
Total: 145, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »