io_bg

io_bg

Lives in United States Chatham, MA, United States
Joined on Aug 15, 2011

Comments

Total: 240, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

cosinaphile: as a loyal fuji customer who owns or have owned an x100 x100 se x100s xe1 xe2 x10 x20 x30 and xpro2 i am dismayed that an xe3 has not been forthcoming ... my xpro is excellent but it sometimes stays home cause its just a bit too large

my xe2 is my favorite camera ever and it deserves the same refresh that the xa3 is receiving .... i know this is extremely popular is some asian countries and thats fine... but please fuji do the right thing and dont abandon the xe shooter lets be fair and lets ensure that a midsize corner evf machine stays in Fujis lineup with a 24 mp sensor
i understand fuji has some localized success in certain geographic regions with this line and is thus inspired to refresh it , however , i dislike the lack of direct shutter speeds on a dial and the dumbed down lens without aperture values on a dial

I think they will release a mid-tier camera next year, once the X-T2 craze settles down. Whether they'll keep both the X-E and X-Txx line though is yet to be seen.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 05:32 UTC

It's larger than most people hoped but at least it's very reasonably priced. The choice between this and the 27mm f/2.8 is going to be tough.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 05:21 UTC as 46th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

shooter mclens: $2200, though. not sure this is a lens anyone expected, though some will be tempted by the 1.4. the 105mm focal length is generally reserved for macro, but this is a 157.5/1.4 on ASPS-C, which would make it a blazing mid-tele, assuming the AF is speedy. Too bad that at that price, not too many APS-C buyers will bite. Still, good to see Nikon come up with an interesting spec, which proves they're not dead.

I just wanted to respond to your comment before the f-stop equivalency police has appeared commenting about the lens being an effective 160mm f/2 on DX.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 04:40 UTC

Interesting. Now do a 135mm f/2 VR!

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 04:22 UTC as 125th comment

How about a 5" flagship? Not everyone wants a phablet.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2016 at 10:11 UTC as 9th comment | 3 replies
On article 2016 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $800-1200 (216 comments in total)

No Fuji cameras in this price segment?

Link | Posted on May 16, 2016 at 13:45 UTC as 44th comment

Does the price of €400 include a camera as well?

Link | Posted on May 14, 2016 at 08:21 UTC as 38th comment
On article Benchmark performance: Nikon D810 in-depth review (255 comments in total)
In reply to:

Light Pilgrim: I mean no disrespect and I think it is still better to have a review of D810 2 years after the camera was released than not to have it at all, but it is hardly relevant today. I bet a new camera is just around the corner and I hope it will not take another 2 years to review it.

The D810 is still relevant today and will be for many years to come.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2016 at 12:01 UTC
On article Benchmark performance: Nikon D810 in-depth review (255 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Silver Nemesis: Is Nikon D810 awesome? Yes, please believe me it is.

Has industry leading DR bla-bla? Yes, it has (I am not joking).

Is it D810 perfect? No, it isn't (that I can tell you, first hand).

Now, examine a bit DPRs wording: I have never seen, for the 5DsR, the following sentence: "industry leading resolving power, for 24X36". However, for DR, the sentence is frequently used for Sony (mostly) and Nikon (far better than Sony, but you got the point).

See, this is what I was talking about.

One has DR, the other resolving power, but one has the Gold Award, so it was judged "better". In real life, apples vs oranges. But here, the apple is "better" than the orange. In an "objective" way.

I haven't used any of them. But I also haven't called any of them poor.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2016 at 21:13 UTC
On article Benchmark performance: Nikon D810 in-depth review (255 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Silver Nemesis: Is Nikon D810 awesome? Yes, please believe me it is.

Has industry leading DR bla-bla? Yes, it has (I am not joking).

Is it D810 perfect? No, it isn't (that I can tell you, first hand).

Now, examine a bit DPRs wording: I have never seen, for the 5DsR, the following sentence: "industry leading resolving power, for 24X36". However, for DR, the sentence is frequently used for Sony (mostly) and Nikon (far better than Sony, but you got the point).

See, this is what I was talking about.

One has DR, the other resolving power, but one has the Gold Award, so it was judged "better". In real life, apples vs oranges. But here, the apple is "better" than the orange. In an "objective" way.

The resolving power doesn't mean much when your camera's output has a low DR or poor low light performance.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2016 at 19:14 UTC
On article Benchmark performance: Nikon D810 in-depth review (255 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wil Helm: Benchmark performance until the Pentax K-1 in depth review comes out.... in two years or so :-)

Don't keep your hopes high ;)

Link | Posted on May 12, 2016 at 19:12 UTC
On article Benchmark performance: Nikon D810 in-depth review (255 comments in total)

So the D810's IQ is better than the D800(E) and miles ahead of the 5Ds yet the scoring doesn't reflect on that. In fact the all category scores but one are higher on the D810 vs the 5Ds.
The comparison between the A7R II and the D810 is also interesting - the former has worse DR while its Raw quality is still higher.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2016 at 19:12 UTC as 75th comment | 1 reply
On article Heavenly bodies: Nikon D810 & D810A field test (112 comments in total)

I love your field test videos but this one in particular was really involving, probably your best to date. Thanks for doing it!

Link | Posted on May 11, 2016 at 18:22 UTC as 50th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

noflashplease: I have to disagree with the use of the term "flagship" for the Nikon D500.

It still is Nikon's flagship DX camera.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2016 at 14:47 UTC
On article Making a splash: Nikon D500 real-world sample gallery (228 comments in total)
In reply to:

bwoodahl: After shooting with my D500 for five days, I can say that Nikon hit this one "out-of-the-ballpark". There's some magic in that 21 mp crop sensor that reminds me of film, but I'm not sure what it is. (Did I say crop sensor?)

Just noticed the nonsense I'd posted. Read my previous post as "Nikon always adds their unique touch". Lol.

Link | Posted on May 5, 2016 at 10:51 UTC
On article Making a splash: Nikon D500 real-world sample gallery (228 comments in total)
In reply to:

bwoodahl: After shooting with my D500 for five days, I can say that Nikon hit this one "out-of-the-ballpark". There's some magic in that 21 mp crop sensor that reminds me of film, but I'm not sure what it is. (Did I say crop sensor?)

Nikon always adds their unique sensor to sensors, no matter whether Sony- or Nikon-made.

Link | Posted on May 3, 2016 at 19:40 UTC

Good! Now bring on the X-T2, 23mm f/2 and 56mm f/2!

Link | Posted on May 2, 2016 at 20:04 UTC as 5th comment | 5 replies
On article Video: Meet the Nikon D500 (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

shademaster: I don't really understand the point of having a "flagship" APS-C body when the "flagship" lenses are all full frame. Why not just make a full frame sensor with an optional crop readout mode where you can (quickly) read out only the center pixels (in APS-C crop mode)? Maybe the design is prohibitively expensive or noisy?

So how about canon/nikon/sony offer some "flagship" APS-C zoom lenses? Then I could see having flagship bodies to go with these flagship lenses. Otherwise, a fast crop-mode readout on the FF sensor would make much more sense (if technologically possible).

PerL, the 55-300's FX equivalent is the 80-400mm. So yeah, it's quite a reduction.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 13:13 UTC
On article Video: Meet the Nikon D500 (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

shademaster: I don't really understand the point of having a "flagship" APS-C body when the "flagship" lenses are all full frame. Why not just make a full frame sensor with an optional crop readout mode where you can (quickly) read out only the center pixels (in APS-C crop mode)? Maybe the design is prohibitively expensive or noisy?

So how about canon/nikon/sony offer some "flagship" APS-C zoom lenses? Then I could see having flagship bodies to go with these flagship lenses. Otherwise, a fast crop-mode readout on the FF sensor would make much more sense (if technologically possible).

The point of a flaship DX camera is the lower cost (thanks to the smaller sensor). The lack of pro DX lenses however is disturbing indeed.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 12:45 UTC
In reply to:

Sirandar: To those that think you can replace this with PP. With a really good camera with the very best dynamic range and low noise, perhaps you can to some extent.

Water just doesn't behave in panorama and HDR because of its patterned but changing nature.

I have spent a good deal of PP fixing moving wave anomalies in panoramas. In light light environments you minimize with burst shooting and cherry picking frames. In low light well ... good luck with that.

The problem with these filters is framing ... what happens if you don't want the light boundary in the middle of the frame. This should come as a set of 3 not 2 with the extra one with the light boundary 2/3 up/down the filter.

Yes you can replace this with PP. It works well with non-panorama images. Take a photo exposed for the foreground / waves / sea and another one for the sky. Then merge both and you're done.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2016 at 09:57 UTC
Total: 240, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »