zorgon

Joined on Nov 14, 2006

Comments

Total: 213, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Cameras should be designed by engineers and scientists, not lawyers.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2018 at 21:38 UTC as 22nd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: It's an interesting idea with one major fault...at least for me. When someone critique's my work I always look at their portfolio....if they have good work and obvious skill then I tend to take their opinion seriously. If on the other hand I see poor compositions, a lack of artistic vision, and all around poor photography then I tend to dismiss those opinions.

In this case since it is anonymous there is no way to filter people out this way...

I don't agree with that at all. The appreciation of art and the creation of art are two very different skill sets. e.g. You don't need to be an expert painter to be an influential art critic.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2018 at 21:33 UTC
In reply to:

vFunct: Why would you want a critique from a random person instead of a critique from a photo editor?

The opinions of the people who are going to be viewing the photos (i.e. the general public) can often be more insightful than the opinions of an elite group of "experts" who make up a tiny percentage of the population.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2018 at 21:18 UTC
On article Photokina 2018: First look at new Ricoh GR III (641 comments in total)
In reply to:

dpthoughts: This cam with its tiny fixed wide angle, has no justification aganst good contemporary smartphones.

"minus much slower, tiny, cheap lens of only f/2.8 rather than f/1.5:"

The lens of the Ricoh is bigger, more expensive and gathers more light overall.

"minus cheap sensor without BSI, whereas good smartphones such as the S9 have BSI sensors these days:"

Absolute nonsense. BSI or not, the efficiency of a tiny smartphone sensor is still well below that of the APS-C Sony sensor.

"in darkness: The GR III doesn't have a flash"

That what the hotshoe is for.

"including the negative effect on candid shots (much less inconspicuous than a smartphone)."

The GR looks like a cheap 1970's compact film camera. The latest Samsung or iPhone does not make you more inconspicuous.

"The eventual advantage..."

Any decent photography enthusiast can shoot RAW and edit photos to give better results than a smartphone.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2018 at 13:52 UTC
On article Photokina 2018: First look at new Ricoh GR III (641 comments in total)
In reply to:

dpthoughts: This cam with its tiny fixed wide angle, has no justification aganst good contemporary smartphones.

Correction: 20x sensor area is > 4 stops advantage. So a 3-4 stop advantage overall.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2018 at 08:58 UTC
On article Photokina 2018: First look at new Ricoh GR III (641 comments in total)
In reply to:

pro photo 2011: The Fuji XF10 has already set a price low bar at @$499.

The XF10 has a built-in flash while the GR III won't have one.

The XF10 has a pancake 28mm f/2.8 lens that barely extends when the camera is switched on, making it truly compact when ready to shoot.

The XF10 also has a touchscreen.

And it has a snapshot mode that can be set at the press of a function button. In this mode, the focus is preset at 2m @f/8 or 5m @f/5.6.

So other than IBIS, what can the GR III add to the feature set to demand a higher price?

Remember it won't have a built-in flash.

Oh, and the XF10 has a microphone input port. I don't know if the GR III will have this feature.

The Ricoh has a sharper lens and base ISO 100.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2018 at 08:44 UTC
On article Photokina 2018: First look at new Ricoh GR III (641 comments in total)
In reply to:

dpthoughts: This cam with its tiny fixed wide angle, has no justification aganst good contemporary smartphones.

1) An APS-C sensor is about 20x the area of a smartphone. That's more than a 3-stop advantage. So even with the small lens, the GRIII still has a 1-2 stop advantage over a modern smartphone in low light. Factor in sensor efficiency and it's more like a 2-3 stop advantage.
2) The GR III has 24MP and a lens capable of resolving a lot of detail. A smartphone sensor and lens doesn't come close to that.
3) The GR III has massively lower base ISO noise. Even in bright sunlight, smartphone images have smudged out fine textures and details due to noise reduction.

If you only ever view your photos on a smartphone and you can't be bothered editing, then a smartphone camera is ideal, but view your images on any decent computer monitor, and the image quality just doesn't cut it.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2018 at 07:48 UTC
On article Zeiss expands Batis lens range with 40mm F2 Close Focus (222 comments in total)
In reply to:

Saaaaaaad: Sure it's zeiss batis, but $1300 for an F/2 lens is ridiculous.

@HowaboutRAW
When did I say the lens is not going to be optically good? Try actually reading comments before replying to them, or maybe consider going outside and taking some photographs instead of wasting your time here arguing over nothing.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2018 at 18:42 UTC
In reply to:

MannyZero: It seems to me that those guys at Ricoh G III will be back at the drawing board...

The GRIII is a pocket camera. The ZX1 is the size of a DSLR.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2018 at 20:02 UTC
On article Zeiss expands Batis lens range with 40mm F2 Close Focus (222 comments in total)
In reply to:

Saaaaaaad: Sure it's zeiss batis, but $1300 for an F/2 lens is ridiculous.

The reviews will determine what the lens is worth, not the specs. I'd gladly sacrifice 1 f-stop for lighter weight and better image quality.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2018 at 19:54 UTC
On article Shooting with Nikon's new 500mm F5.6E PF in Kamchatka (276 comments in total)
In reply to:

janist74: Ok, the bear photo maybe shows, that one lens is a bit sharper than the other, but it also shows, how pointless is to carry an f4 vs f5.6 lens. The background is virtually identical for a simple mortal humanoid. True, you get more light for focusing, but with the today cameras this does not seem to be a real reason...

If anything, I'd say the PF had slightly smoother bokeh, but there's nothing in it really. Neither lens is particularly good in the bokeh department in this comparison.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2018 at 17:27 UTC
On article Shooting with Nikon's new 500mm F5.6E PF in Kamchatka (276 comments in total)

It looks sharper than the F4 lens, at least in that comparison shot. Maybe it is worth the money after all.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2018 at 13:45 UTC as 60th comment | 2 replies
On article Fujifilm X-T3: what you need to know (454 comments in total)
In reply to:

noisephotographer: After the Canon Eos R another camera with no progress jn computational photography...

Artificial intelligence is the way forward for photography, but many enthusiasts are too arrogant to see that. People don't like to accept that machines will soon be able to do a lot of things better than humans.
I believe that it won't be long before cameras will be able to do a better job than humans of selecting settings & focus, then post processing the final photograph. This will leave the photographer to concentrate 100% on composition, lighting, interacting with subjects etc. IMO, this is what creativity is all about, not fiddling around with buttons and dials then spending days post processing on a computer. I know a lot of people here will disagree with this.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2018 at 11:43 UTC
In reply to:

Aaron@Utah: Wow remember when everyone was complaining about having large lenses on small mirrorless bodies (ie sony's) and here canon releases a 1430g 28-70 f2 and I thought my 15-30mm tamron was massive on my A7II (which it is btw) but this puts that to shame for massive lens on a mirrorless

They will undoubtedly release a 24-70 f2.8 in the future

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2018 at 20:54 UTC
On article DPReview TV: First thoughts on the Canon R (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

wcan: In the video it was lauded that focusing is done wide open. I get this from a max light point of view. However, I believe it is also true that for many lenses, the focal point varies depending on the aperture setting. So if the lens is focused wide open and the picture taken stopped down, you would not have optimal focus. Therefore, aren't there times when you would be better off focusing at the aperture you would be shooting at?....is there a way to make this camera operate that way?

My A7R3 stops down when focusing. In theory this should make it more accurate as it compensates for focus shift at narrower apertures, but in practice I've found that the AF can be a little bit off when shooting landscapes at f8 for example. I think the problem is that the AF system has difficulty calculating where the sharpest plane of focus lies due to the deep DoF of the lens when stopped down.

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2018 at 20:05 UTC
In reply to:

zsedcft: Nikon - this is what your 35mm f/1.8 was supposed to look like! Lose some elements and make one that is compact. They don't even need VR because (unlike Canon) they have it in the body.

I know some people are all about optical quality and looking at MTF charts, but I'd like the option of a compact lens to attach to a compact body.

There's no point in a compact lens if the IQ is terrible (I'm sure it won't be), but the only way to know that before buying is by looking at tests and MTF charts.

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2018 at 09:40 UTC
In reply to:

photog4u: The lack of IBIS, a second card slot and A7 III battery life would seem to be more forgivable on the R than was on the Z as the Auto focus and Eye AF appear to be superbly implemented. Also, early shots from the promo videos do indicate that those Canon colors are there. Can't say I love the shutter sound though, which to me sounds very A7R-ish. Props to Canon for delivering on the EVF (3.6M) and LCD (2.1M) as well.

I've seen no mention of eye AF

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2018 at 09:33 UTC
In reply to:

dansclic: Ibis ? If not, it is a looser before selling....

*loser

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2018 at 11:14 UTC
In reply to:

mariuss: New infos about the 4 RF lenses:

https://www.canonwatch.com/more-details-about-the-four-upcoming-rf-lenses-for-canon-eos-r/#disqus_thread

Canon 28-70 F2 is 1430 g. I see no tripod socket there. Should not be one for that size/weightiness ?

That's crazy. It weighs the same as a 70-200 2.8 zoom. I'm not sure if I'd rather carry the 28-70 f2 around or 2 bodies with primes e.g. Sony RX1RII + A7R3 with 85mm 1.8.

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2018 at 10:52 UTC
In reply to:

LessMirrored19: -6 EV ... that is 2 stops better than anything on the market.....
A99ii is rated at -4 EV.
But seriously I never had problems with -3 EV.

That means nothing until it's tested.

Link | Posted on Sep 1, 2018 at 14:09 UTC
Total: 213, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »