keepreal

keepreal

Lives in United Kingdom Enfield, United Kingdom
Works as a Retired, was Information Technology Manager
Joined on Mar 24, 2007
About me:

Amateur with a passion for pictorial photography of more than fifty years. Likes to communicate and learn from others with expert knowledge, especially if they also live in the real world, have galleries or links to really good photos and put their camera to good use.

Comments

Total: 282, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (892 comments in total)

So many comments to "Reading some of the comments here" - replies there are hidden.

I prefer CDs to digital but only to avoid bad clicks and pops which are very distracting. If high end audio surpasses digital and the reason is audio engineers buggering up the signals, then we cannot stop them doing it - just like we cannot stop the overlays in digital cameras which you cannot always turn off.

The problem with digital is that it is so easy that quite unnecessary info is forced upon us. The media is overwhelmed with crap, so it is a chore determining correct factual information. The President violently complains about it but is quite happy to invent facts to his agenda...

I used to work in MISinformation Technology. Hated it. Many of those who prefer EVFs over OVFs were born into the electronic age, so ignorant of the real world deferring to an artificial interpretation of it. They do not have a clue so lose nothing by not seeing it through the EVF eyepiece. Not all of them though.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 17:00 UTC as 291st comment | 8 replies
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (892 comments in total)
In reply to:

Magnar W: When I had some Sony A900 cameras, with one of the best full frame camera OVF's on the marked, I got an Sony A55 just to test out an EVF/SLT camera for some intensive weeks of commersial shooting at the west coast and northern parts of Norway. After a week or so, I missed the EVF information and the reference to the final results so much when I used the A900's that I rarely picked up those cameras any more. Also, I spent a full afternoon to learn how to shoot action with this jaggy and pretty poor EVF. After adjusting my technique a bit, the EVF worked amazingly well for this kind of shooting. For low light work, like polar light photography and astro, the EVF was a clear winner, with it's superb focusing tools. Some months later I left the OVF and sold my A900 cameras, and since that moment I have never looked back.

Sure, the viewfinder is about personal taste, so I understand those going for OVF cameras. I could not use both, but others happily combine OVF and EVF cameras! ;-)

Maybe because some people are more interested in taking picures than being overloaded with unnecessary information. Just because, with digital, they can put everything there under the sun, does not mean they have to do so.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 16:24 UTC
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (892 comments in total)

Reading some of the comments here, my fear is that many people prefer EVFs so, in the future, I may have limited choice of OVF or even none.

When I switched from analogue audio I waited ten years to let the new technology overcome its teething troubles. Yet in a hi-f- store when I took the opportunity to make the comparison, a £25 cartridge in Linn turntable sounded better. With that the ambience of the hall where the music was being played was fullsome, with digital there was none.

I used to work in Information Technology, did so for forty years, so I hardly am prejudiced against it. Yet on the internet fake news is making it a problem with real news, which is which? In photography, I like to see what I am taking, not a fake digital compromise.

Maybe EVFs are a craze that will pass, just like in Britain vinyl sales of music are growing faster than CDs again!

Not sure about this but I suspect analogue always is better unless you go to digital for something analogue cannot provide.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 13:45 UTC as 330th comment | 8 replies
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (892 comments in total)
In reply to:

rev32: It will be interesting to see if people coming into photography with EVF start developing a strong preference for them. Personally I grew up with OVF so thats what I prefer. EVF just seems weird.

Very interested in what you say and I am sure you are right. A large transparency looks better than an image on any monitor and that looks better than any print.

Yet my preference is for an A2 size print on matt paper framed and hanging on the wall and a picture good enough to warrant that treatment. It is for that reason I thought my D300 was perfectly good enough even if more recent cameras are better. Recently I bought a D610 and the primary benefit is that lenses I bought when using film and still rel;y upon now give me the wider angles I most like for landscapes. If the images with it are better quality that is also worth having.

However, image quality is not the only consideration. I think it must be psychological - if it is good enough to hang on the wall, it might be good enough to see in a gallery - the picture that is, not the image quality.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 13:25 UTC
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (892 comments in total)
In reply to:

Luisifer: ... i prefere http://www.photoextract.com/photo/568263.html
(it looks like electronic, isn't it) ,-)

Not sure what this has to do with anything - unless you are saying that EVF images look like this!

But WOWWWWWWWWWWWW. Best collection at http://www.photoextract.com I have ever seen by a long, long way.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 13:10 UTC
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (892 comments in total)

I once picked up a Leica M3 in a store many years ago and found that the focusing through the rangefinder is optically so precise you turn the lens focusing ring one way and know immediately when to stop without going past the right point. This was the case even the first time you ever tried the camera. That is amazing.

A Leica rangefinder OV > any OVF > any EVF and so much so even having to have an accessory viewfinder for ultra wide on a Leica M would not put me off.

The film Leica M was the gold standard, especially the viewfinder / rangefinder. I expect it still is. If I could get an accessory Albalda viewfinder for it to cover 20mm, better still even wider, I would not be put off, might even get an M10 and a Tri-Elmar and, if I have to, sell the house and live in the car.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 12:47 UTC as 345th comment
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (892 comments in total)
In reply to:

PowerG9atBlackForest: Strictly electronic, and tiltable is a must.

Bothering to say just as much as this conveys more about the writer than what he writes.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 12:27 UTC
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (892 comments in total)
In reply to:

UneVache: I presume that if you use finder only for framing and don't really pay attention to its content, any kind of finder will do (and so will a display screen too). If you need to see the controls displayed in the image, then EVF would be preferred. But, if you don't want your vision to be disturbed or oriented the way the camera manufacturers have decided it, then OVF is the best. I'm more in this last league. To me, WYSIWYG means "What you see is what they decided" and as I shoot raw to be able to extract from shots the most I can, this WYSIWYG is really useless. I'm only interested in what I see and what I can do with it, not what the camera is rendering as a manufacturer's standard JPEG. Though, I must say focus peaking in EVF is cool.
Anyway, when EVFs will be able to show also a "real scene TTL" vision then they will be perfect. For the moment, I find them to give only a limited vision of what I see. Hybrid View Finders are a cool feature though.

Totally agree and beautifully put.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 12:25 UTC
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (892 comments in total)

And why do camera reviews say so little about the viewfinder that you are totally left in the dark about their strengths and weaknesses. I get the impression that some of the latest Leicas may have overcome some of the shortcomings of EVF, maybe even all of them. But I only can guess that might be so, given the lack of sufficently detailed information.

But the reviewer never says enough that you have the slightest clue on that, unless you are already totally sold on an EVF under any circumstances.

In that case the omission does not matter, But is he only writing for them?

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 12:24 UTC as 352nd comment
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (892 comments in total)

I have both. I bought the EVF as an add-on to my second camera to avoid the LCD screen which I only ever use to go into the menus.

No EVF I have seen gives detail from highlights to shadows looking into the sun. Either the shadows are solid black or the contrast is so low that I cannot judge what the result will look like. With an OVF it looks natural and I can always figure it out.

In lower dynamic range lighting , there is no problem at all with an EVF.

A black cat lit by candle demands an EVF just to find where it is, but an OVF works fine in normal situations - the only ones I am interested in. I can easily judge from what I see. Not so with an EVF - I often have to think about it and I do not enjoy looking at something rather odd through the viewfinder.

For me that is the deciding factor. OVF every time regardless of the burdensome size and weight. Some of the latest mirrorless with EVFs are as large and heavy as DSLRs, which I think makes them totally ludicrous.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 12:08 UTC as 355th comment

There seems to be quite a few new high quality, large aperture, wide angle lenses coming onto the market. Here is another with a couple of pictures.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59208794

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2017 at 14:13 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

keepreal: IMO Sigma would have done better to produce a smaller aperture version up to Art standards, but weighing in at no more than about 600 gm and costing half as much.

Unlike goactive, I sold off my D300 and bought a D610, keeping the full frame lenses I had bought while still using film. I also bought the AF-S Nikkor 20mm f/1.8G ED as I mostly like to shoot landscapes very wide. Had a suitable shorter focal length lens been available, I probably would have bough that instead. Perhaps the Irix 15mm would have done.

I will be keeping my Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM Mk I. Testing it on the D610 last week I found that it was even across the frame and was already performing close to its optimum even at full aperture. Mine is quite sharp and has negligible distortion. On the D300 it was only so-so.

So why does it happen then? Currently, there is a lunatic craze to produce large, heavy and expensive wide aperture lenses. Is the intent to turn photography into an exercise in weight lifting?

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 08:54 UTC
In reply to:

geekyrocketguy: A gallery of f/5.6 images isn't very helpful. Any non-crap lens should be able to produce sharp photos at f/5.6. We need lots of images at f/2.8 and faster, ESPECIALLY with detail in the corners. The images in this gallery with objects in the corner tend to have them very close to the camera, so it's difficult to tell whether the massive softness is due to lens aberrations or just focus limitations.

Come on, DPR, you can produce a more helpful sample gallery than this.

The single most important test for this lens, a field of stars at various apertures, wasn't included. That single scene tells you everything you need to know about a lens: corner sharpness, vignetting, astigmatism/coma, and field curvature!

All the reviews of lenses here and almost elsewhere else are totally haphazard and next to useless. When they go into such detail about many cameras, it is utterly ludicrous that they bother so little.

If I am interested in a new lens, I have to spend hours on the web trying to find useful pictures to judge by, but in the end I always have to resort to guesswork and a large serving of hope.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 08:48 UTC

IMO Sigma would have done better to produce a smaller aperture version up to Art standards, but weighing in at no more than about 600 gm and costing half as much.

Unlike goactive, I sold off my D300 and bought a D610, keeping the full frame lenses I had bought while still using film. I also bought the AF-S Nikkor 20mm f/1.8G ED as I mostly like to shoot landscapes very wide. Had a suitable shorter focal length lens been available, I probably would have bough that instead. Perhaps the Irix 15mm would have done.

I will be keeping my Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM Mk I. Testing it on the D610 last week I found that it was even across the frame and was already performing close to its optimum even at full aperture. Mine is quite sharp and has negligible distortion. On the D300 it was only so-so.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 08:36 UTC as 28th comment | 9 replies

The results look good but the size, weight and high price are off-putting, considering you will also need to pay for a caddy or daily exercises in the gym.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 08:01 UTC as 29th comment | 3 replies
On article Leica SL Review (1092 comments in total)
In reply to:

matthias jurisch: The biggest market for Leica cameras is Asia...specifically Japan and China. A few years ago I was in Tokyo and I can say from my own experience that the Japanese are crazy (nuts) about Leica cameras. There is even a exclusive Leica Photoclub in Tokyo..
The upbeat photostore where I buy my Canon gear from here in Berlin also has one of the best Leica collections in Europe and the salesman told me that the best Leica customers are tourists from Japan, China, Russia, England and North America...very few Germans buy into the Leica system...to me it seems that Made in Germany is the strongest selling point...

The predecessor of the company, formerly known as Ernst Leitz GmbH, is now three companies: Leica Camera AG, Leica Geosystems AG, and Leica Microsystems GmbH, which manufacture cameras, geosurvey equipment, and microscopes, respectively. Leica Microsystems AG owns the Leica brand and licenses the sister companies to use it.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2017 at 21:59 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1092 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: Now if Leitz made proper Leica quality lenses (not that compact and MFT stuff) to fit full frame Canon, Nikon and Sony cameras that would be much to the liking of those who aspire to Leica lens quality without having to have a pointless camera like the SL.

Since lenses with the Leica name are available for other cameras - I am not going to assume Leitz has much else to do with them than literally that - then Leica ought to be persuaded to do us and themselves the favour, for those of us with deep pockets that is.

Really

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 22:09 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1092 comments in total)

Now if Leitz made proper Leica quality lenses (not that compact and MFT stuff) to fit full frame Canon, Nikon and Sony cameras that would be much to the liking of those who aspire to Leica lens quality without having to have a pointless camera like the SL.

Since lenses with the Leica name are available for other cameras - I am not going to assume Leitz has much else to do with them than literally that - then Leica ought to be persuaded to do us and themselves the favour, for those of us with deep pockets that is.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 17:35 UTC as 51st comment | 4 replies
On article Leica SL Review (1092 comments in total)
In reply to:

matthias jurisch: The biggest market for Leica cameras is Asia...specifically Japan and China. A few years ago I was in Tokyo and I can say from my own experience that the Japanese are crazy (nuts) about Leica cameras. There is even a exclusive Leica Photoclub in Tokyo..
The upbeat photostore where I buy my Canon gear from here in Berlin also has one of the best Leica collections in Europe and the salesman told me that the best Leica customers are tourists from Japan, China, Russia, England and North America...very few Germans buy into the Leica system...to me it seems that Made in Germany is the strongest selling point...

IMO Leitz tarnished their reputation making lenses for Panasonic and the like or, more likely, licensing the name and letting others do the construction - just as Voigtlander have with Cosina, but I am guessing that last point.

It is fair enough for Leitz to diversify but, like car manufacturers, they should have used different brand names to differentiate their premium products. This is not a cosmetic distinction, for Leica on a product should mean there is no better, not just that it is another also ran.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 23:30 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1092 comments in total)

This review restores my faith in DP Review. Even less costly cameras deserve this frankness, even if their flaws sometimes are less obvious. Especially in the post truth society, saying it as it really is is very refreshing.

Few people aspire to Leica and, as far as I am concerned, with this camera they have done me a favour. I do not aspire to Leica prices, did aspire to Leica M quality in the days when we only had film. So now, I am even happier with the Nikon D610 I bought recently. There is nothing that suits me better at any price.

I do prefer optical viewfinders but if Leica have contrived to make the view through their EVF look like an OVF even in HDR lighting into the sun, then that would be real progress. However this camera is as heavy as mine without a mirror, so for most people what's the point?

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 23:12 UTC as 61st comment | 17 replies
Total: 282, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »