Simon97

Simon97

Lives in United States SW, OH, United States
Joined on Oct 16, 2006

Comments

Total: 323, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon 70-200mm F4L IS II sample gallery (114 comments in total)
In reply to:

photoac: Looks very good. Possibly even better than my Canon EF-S 55-250 STM. Sadly, neither are able to eliminate heat haze.

Agreed. My copy of the 55-250 STM is amazing for its price at 250mm. It is sharp at 55mm as well. Its weakness is in the mid zoom range, but isn't all that bad. This new lens is full of strong lateral chromatic aberrations, soft corners and lacks punch at 200mm.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2018 at 16:30 UTC
On article Canon 70-200mm F4L IS II sample gallery (114 comments in total)

Perhaps a bad copy? Really soft on the left side at wide zoom and generally not that great in the corners all around at the zoom extremes. Heavy lateral chromatics at zoom extremes. At 200/4 the image lacks any punch. Highlights look bloomy and contrast is weak. I've been really impressed with Canon lenses, but this is a dog. APSC users should get the STM version of the 55-250. It is remarkable compared to what I see here.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2018 at 16:22 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Franz Weber: The problem with this clip is it is severely underexposed. They should have engaged somebody with knowledge about exposure and imaging.
Maybe the new sensor is faulty?
But apart frim that... well done.

It's called low key and I'm sure it was intended.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2018 at 21:02 UTC
In reply to:

Holscen: Looking forward to your next article "aperture - the truth, the hole truth, and nothing but the truth!"

"The hole truth". I see what you did there.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2018 at 21:55 UTC
On article Nikon counts down to new mirrorless (1057 comments in total)

People getting worked up over an electronic gadget. Imagine how an iphone forum would be.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2018 at 20:31 UTC as 166th comment | 1 reply

There are lots of good action cameras from various brands not normally associated with the photo camera industry at much lower prices. It probably seemed like a good idea at the time (like the N1 system), but it didn't work out for Nikon.

Nikon shed these failed products and unfortunately laid off a lot of employees a year or so ago. Now they are getting back on track (hopefully) with the SLRs and mirrorless cameras.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2018 at 18:56 UTC as 27th comment
On article Nikon Coolpix P1000: what you need to know (594 comments in total)

I'd be interested to see how good of image you could get with an APSC DSLR to get to the equivalent of 3000mm field of view. Take a 400mm/5.6 lens which has a 600mm eq. fov on APSC, put on two 2x converters and a 1.4x would get you to 3360mm and a slow aperture (equivalent aperture would be about the same, I think). The P1000 would be lighter than this rig plus it can zoom out to 24mm. It starts looking more desirable.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2018 at 02:41 UTC as 124th comment | 11 replies

I liked the N1 system. I had two cameras an four lenses. I wanted better than a compact camera with a tiny sensor but no interest in FF. The lenses for this system were so compact and great for travel.

Micro 4/3rds was the next logical step for me. The cameras and lenses are a bit larger, but still reasonably small. MFT has a good lineup of lenses and you can adapt old manual lenses. Nikon crippled that with the N1 cameras. In hind sight, I should have gone straight to MFT.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 22:13 UTC as 96th comment

Not too bad in the mid zoom range for a small sensor camera. The wide angle shot is really murky (perhaps they could have used a wider aperture) Diffraction blur would be pretty strong at 7.1. They had some shutter speed latitude unused. A wider aperture could have made the wide angle shot sharper. The long tele shot wasn't great but I actually expected worse. I think the long reach would work better for video. There are lots of P900 videos showing the amazing reach from that camera. The longer zoom and slower aperture might be overdoing it even for video. I guess we'll see when those videos start to show. Oh, and $1000 for a 1/2.3" sensor camera is just a little overboard.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2018 at 16:09 UTC as 88th comment
On article Fujifilm X-T100 sample gallery (207 comments in total)
In reply to:

TN Args: Naming your cameras X-T100 and X-100T. Have they not thought through the potential for mayhem? :)

It's like how Panasonic does it!

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2018 at 14:43 UTC

One of the hardest parts to copying film is getting the camera sensor parallel to the film plane so the results are sharp across the frame (when using a flat field lens, such as many macros). It would be nice to have a set of focusing rails to attach this to.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2018 at 18:57 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply

I recall the Kodak and Rapidcolor E6 developing kits. I used to go shoot some rolls on the weekend and come home and develop the slides that night. They looked every bit as good as the lab. You really had to mind your chemistry time and temps.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2018 at 01:47 UTC as 22nd comment | 4 replies
On article DPReview TV: A look back at APS film (372 comments in total)

I never got into the APS format. I had a Canon A2 SLR, but sold it to go full manual (K-mount) It was one of best times of the hobby for me.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2018 at 16:42 UTC as 93rd comment
On article Sony announces Cyber-shot RX100 VI with 24-200mm zoom (758 comments in total)
In reply to:

Simon97: Looks like a nice camera. $1,200 for a 1" sensor camera is just too much though. Should be priced around $800.

Can't afford what? I just got a camera and lenses that better meets my needs for significantly less. I still contend that this is too much for such a camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2018 at 16:06 UTC

You see folks, who needs megapixels and bit depth!

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2018 at 14:59 UTC as 45th comment
On article Sony announces Cyber-shot RX100 VI with 24-200mm zoom (758 comments in total)

Looks like a nice camera. $1,200 for a 1" sensor camera is just too much though. Should be priced around $800.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2018 at 14:52 UTC as 199th comment | 4 replies

I hope they do. Competition is good for the consumer. Oh, and Sony, you will need lenses.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2018 at 16:13 UTC as 125th comment

I notice quite a few people have a MFT (micro 4/3rds) camera along with their larger SLRs. The MFT system has an extensive lens lineup backed by 2+ manufacturers and the 2x crop factor means small telephoto lenses. Sure the smaller sensor will have limitations as compared to larger ones, but the system has a lot of merits. It is the direction I have moved when Nikon gave up on the N1 system.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2018 at 16:04 UTC as 312th comment | 1 reply

I hope Nikon takes its time and gets it right. Don't cripple the system like with the N1.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2018 at 14:56 UTC as 164th comment

I had it.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2018 at 15:33 UTC as 48th comment | 2 replies
Total: 323, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »