Horacecoker

Joined on Dec 17, 2014

Comments

Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ProDude: LOL I have to laugh at the Adobe lovers. They are living in the past. Even this review doesn't have a grip on the power capabilities of the program and slants towards Adobe (no surprise there). I dumped Adobe a half dozen years ago and don't miss it one bit. The control provided by DXO is another league if you have a clue what you're doing. Been at this over 25 years and have used just about every software package out there and came to this conclusion.

Of course, I meant somebody else. Isn't it obvious it's meant for @Produd? The guy who's owned/used every camera and software known to man!

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2021 at 17:14 UTC
In reply to:

ProDude: LOL I have to laugh at the Adobe lovers. They are living in the past. Even this review doesn't have a grip on the power capabilities of the program and slants towards Adobe (no surprise there). I dumped Adobe a half dozen years ago and don't miss it one bit. The control provided by DXO is another league if you have a clue what you're doing. Been at this over 25 years and have used just about every software package out there and came to this conclusion.

The trouble is you say the exact same thing about every single post-processing software you are using at a certain moment in time. The last one was ACDsee Ultimate. According to you it was the best ever! That's until you moved on to the next one then that becomes the best ever! You do exactly the same with cameras, lenses, tripods, flashes, bags, flash drives, batteries etc, etc. It doesn’t matter what it is, your current stuff is the best ever and anybody else that uses different stuff are fanboys or in denial. You have a particular fetish for slating folk who use Adobe products. For crying out loud give us a rest!

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2021 at 15:48 UTC
On article Tamron 17-70 F2.8 Di III-A VC RXD field review (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

ajroams: Just received this lens today. I found that my a6600 had "Distortion Comp" under "Lens Comp" set to "off" by default, so in camera jpeg files are not corrected. RAW files still have the EXIF lens correction data so correction can still be applied in editors such a C1. When my other Sony branded lens are attached this setting is always "Auto" and not selectable.

Thinking I'll just set "Distortion Comp" to be always "Auto" and I also usually shoot with RAW+JPEG files.

Puzzled as to why you jumped from wide open to F8. F8 is equivalent to F12 on FF and you will have diffraction creeping in. I would imagine the sweet spot for this lens would be around F4 to F5.6 max.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2021 at 22:10 UTC
On article Sample gallery: macro photos with a motorized slider (42 comments in total)
In reply to:

charlyw64: So many stacking artifacts! Most of these images depict things that are impossible to correctly stack as the physics are preventing this. I would be ashamed to publish these as they reflect badly on my own standards (there are no attempts at correcting even the worst of the stacking errors)...

I'll say!

If you look at the key image at 100% there is a river of artifacts running right across the image near the top, the likes of which I've never seen before.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2020 at 10:08 UTC
In reply to:

avatar77: Best check your math, 3.1km is not 5 miles.

Yes, it's the other way round 3.1 miles = 5 kilometres.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2020 at 17:07 UTC
In reply to:

C-M-S: - “Interface lag persists, leading to a feeling that you're waiting for the camera to keep up with you, rather than vice-versa.”

I’m still curious about what you mean with input lag. In your earlier article you mention lag when using the dials. I have still not experience that with my A6400 and I guess the A6600 should not be any different.

The only lag I could think of is with the “exposure guide”, I think is called, turned on. It’s that horizontal bar that shows up and with a "nice" animation move when you change value. I guess it’s there for new people but it’s in no way needed. You always see the actual values (shutter speed/aperture and so on) in the bottom of the screen and they change instantly for me when I turn the dials.
Are you saying that is not the case for on the A6600? Is it actually lagging in changing values or is it just that animation you speak of?

Of course it has the unnecessary bar. It's a menu option whether to display the silly thing or not.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2019 at 16:13 UTC

I don't know about other folk but I found the weird posterizing effect in the studio background very distracting.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2019 at 16:55 UTC as 12th comment
In reply to:

camedia1: Waiting for RX10 IV firmware update.

That will be the RX10v then. Since when have Sony ever provided an update with new enhanced features to its fixed lens cameras?

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2019 at 07:59 UTC
On article Nikon Coolpix P1000: what you need to know (600 comments in total)

Good grief - how many dead plastic bottles did it take to make that thing!

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 15:54 UTC as 170th comment | 1 reply
On article Nikon Coolpix P1000: what you need to know (600 comments in total)
In reply to:

Beckler8: I'd like to see side by sides of the moon with this and RX10. Up to the 3000mm on the P1000 and then scaling the RX10 image up to the same size on screen. It could be the super long lens is of no advantage. (Less expensive camera tho.)

You don't need to do this comparison. Just pick any image you want out of your vast collection and upscale 5x then crop it to 'what you want'. I'm telling you the image quality will be a joke!

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 15:31 UTC
On article Nikon Coolpix P1000: what you need to know (600 comments in total)
In reply to:

Beckler8: I'd like to see side by sides of the moon with this and RX10. Up to the 3000mm on the P1000 and then scaling the RX10 image up to the same size on screen. It could be the super long lens is of no advantage. (Less expensive camera tho.)

If you upscaled a shot of the moon taken with the RX10iii or iv by a factor of five (3000/600) the image quality would be simply ghastly! Added to that, you'd finish up with 23,040 x 17,280 pixel image (398mp) !

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 14:59 UTC
On article Sony a7 III Review (2195 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rolandigital: Impressive stuff. But A7R-III on high ISO shows better details though.

But surely you would only see this extra detail due to the much higher pixel count if the viewing option was set to full (original size) yet I can see, not so much more detail, but clearer sharper detail wherever I look when the view option is 'comparison - match smallest image'. It could be a lens difference if they didn't use the exact same lens. Are folk actually saying that you get better image quality when you downsize a 42mp sensor to 24mp and then look at both images at 100%?

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2018 at 16:12 UTC
In reply to:

tintifax: who exactly needs hair-thin depth of focus? Even with my Olympus MFT 45/1.8 I can decide, which eye is sharp and wich is not even when one eye is only 1 cm behind/in front of the other ......

we humans are crazy ... we need more and more and more and more (and higher and higher and higher or faster and faster and faster) and nowbody asks about the sense .....

With hair-thin depth of focus it is only possible to capture completly flat subjects ......

Not true! it will get the whole width of a single hair in focus and the last time I mentioned one it was 0.004".

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2017 at 16:43 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (590 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: For the people that own this camera how does it compare to the Panasonic FZ2500? Is the new phase detection focus system accurate?

Deadly accurate and very fast.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 18:34 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (590 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: I read online recently (Sony RX10 Flickr group) that the Sony RX10 IV shoots between f7-f12 majority of the time instead of f2.4-f4. Can anyone who currently owns this camera verify or deny this claim?

"More for me 2:36am, 3 November 2017
ATG says do not be fooled.
Many companies have lied when posting their camera models /or lenses.

This camera is really 24-600mm @ F7.20 to F12.0.
Most of the time this overpriced behave at F12.0 wide open."

The equivalent apertures for DOF and diffraction purposes are F5.6-F11. No difference for exposure. F4=F4 on any camera whether it be a phone or a medium format camera. So, if a light meter is telling you the the EV for a certain scene is 1/60th at F4 that's what you set on the camera regardless of senor size. Exposure is fundamental to photography so why would manufacturers advertise a lens as 24-600mm equivalent as F5.6-F11 instead of it's true apertures of F2.4-F4 when exposure is far more important than depth of field?

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 14:22 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (590 comments in total)
In reply to:

daguerre999: Have to agree with Wickblau here. I was ready to put my cash down for the M4, but not being able to focus while zooming (in CAF) is a deal breaker. I shoot wildlife, motorsports, horse racing and AFL, amoung other things. Focus while zooming is essential to maximise your chance of the "shot".
A pretty stupid omission in an "action and sports" camera.
It seems to do well enough in video mode, but if I wanted a video camera, I'd buy a video camera.
C'mon Sony. Pick it up.

Of course you can zoom in AF-C, you just can't rattle off shots in burst mode and zoom at the same time. So as you stop shooting (take your finger off the shutter button) you can zoom to your hearts content. Put your finger back on the shutter to focus and shoot a fresh burst, means you can no longer zoom at the same time. Hope this clears up any confusion. This behaviour is exactly the same in AF-S mode.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 16:25 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (590 comments in total)
In reply to:

HP1999: comparing the RX-10 ii, iii and iv. It almost seems the Mark ii is perfectly suitable if the zoom range is to the user

His statement of "Not so good for Sports and action photographers wishing to zoom while also maintaining focus on a moving subject" is correct but not complete. He should have added while shooting in burst mode. In other words in burst mode you can't zoom whilst firing the shots off. That is a failing for some but it doesn't make any difference to the fact that focusing ability of the RX10iv on moving subjects is in a completely different league to what's come before in the RX10 line. I should known having owned the RX10iii and now using the RX10iv. The new camera is fabulous for birds in flight, the RX10iii was absolutely hopeless.

Lots of pros use prime lenses for sports, you can't zoom with them full stop never mind just when shooting in burst mode.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 16:12 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (590 comments in total)
In reply to:

HP1999: comparing the RX-10 ii, iii and iv. It almost seems the Mark ii is perfectly suitable if the zoom range is to the user

Not true if you desire PDAF which makes a massive difference for focusing on moving subjects.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 08:18 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (590 comments in total)
In reply to:

dbo: I am using the RX10M4 since 5 weeks as stand-in camera until the A7R3 release (going to return today).
It is an almost perfect companion. Really! What Sony packed into this feature beast needs to be praised. And IQ is on a high level. Kudos to the 1" Sensor.
As usual (for me) the DPR conclusion list is little bit strange to me. Things I wouldn't complain about are listed while others are not mentioned. I know such listings are always somewhat subjective, but anyway.
A nice feature for me is the ( I call it so) "prime-step" zoom. You can set the camera that turning the zoom ring goes in steps from 24 (over 28/35/50/70/85/100/135/200/300/400/500) up to 600mm. Guess it has to do with my primary lens usage on FF. :-)
Did I find something negative?
Yes. Battery runtime is mediocre, and if you play a lot with the zoom it is ridiculous low. I suggest to incorporate the Z battery into the M5.
.........

dbo - To completely avoid the problem of your left hand nudging the zoom ring whilst holding the camera, you can swap the zoom function to the outer manual focus ring. Now your left hand can steady the camera without any worry of changing the zoom. Nudging what is now the manual focus ring does nothing when in auto focus modes and if you where using manual focus you be turning this ring anyway.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 15:49 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (590 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eric Ouellet: Thanks a lot! Great review. Lots of useful information. I wanted one but knowing that it can't focus in AF-C changed my mind.

Can't focus in AF-C? I think you mean Zoom - there's a big difference!

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 16:07 UTC
Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »