Peter 1745

Lives in United Kingdom Sussex, United Kingdom
Joined on Mar 23, 2007

Comments

Total: 109, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous3456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

macropaul: 45mm macro?

"45mm macro?"?
What about it? It gets a firmware update for Dual IS.
Not a bad lens but over shadowed by the Oly 60mm macro.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2015 at 19:33 UTC

CameraStoreTV have a GH4 that has a Log profile in beta firmware.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9A3Y2l1Ou6U

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2015 at 19:47 UTC as 4th comment | 2 replies

@ Richard Butler

Danny Macaskill used Panasonic GH4s for his video "The Ridge".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ_IQS3VKjA

Could you recreate this video for me with using the E-M5II instead of the GH4 so I can compare their video capabilities please?

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2015 at 18:25 UTC as 2nd comment | 2 replies
On article Readers' Choice Awards 2014: The Winners (126 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peter 1745: 4749 votes cast 17.2% = 817 votes.
0.1% =4.7 votes so it really was very close.

The real take home message is that only 4749 people voted. Of course lots of DPReview forum members didn't vote and some may have voted more than once but in the grand scheme of things this isn't a big number.

It's easy to see why the camera companies ignore our frequent demands in the forums. We represent only a tiny fraction of their customers and are no where near as important to them as we like to think.

Not that's going to stop us demanding improvements to the various camera systems.

@ Barney

Thanks Barney, I always like to think I'm important. :-)

My point I was trying to make was that sometimes post on the forums, shall we say, fail to see a broader view. There is more to photography than DPReview, diverse though the forum community is.

I know the camera makers do pay attention to what we say but I understand why they may not do what we ask for.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2015 at 19:51 UTC
On article Readers' Choice Awards 2014: The Winners (126 comments in total)

4749 votes cast 17.2% = 817 votes.
0.1% =4.7 votes so it really was very close.

The real take home message is that only 4749 people voted. Of course lots of DPReview forum members didn't vote and some may have voted more than once but in the grand scheme of things this isn't a big number.

It's easy to see why the camera companies ignore our frequent demands in the forums. We represent only a tiny fraction of their customers and are no where near as important to them as we like to think.

Not that's going to stop us demanding improvements to the various camera systems.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2015 at 19:00 UTC as 29th comment | 6 replies

Interesting release location on the press release. It's usually London, Tokyo or New York. "Southend-on-Sea", hardly an international centre of business.

KeyMed, who used to be one of the largest endoscopy companies in Europe until they were taken over by Olympus, were based there. Olympus have concentrated their UK business in the old KeyMed HQ and have made it their UK headquarters.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2015 at 09:06 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

ctransj: stupid question: will the Sony version can wirelessly trigger the Metz flash for Canon?
thx

This flash's wireless functionality is only as a slave, not a master or control unit.
It can't act as a trigger except when you use it to trigger another flash that has been put into dumb slave/servo mode. In this case the flash from the Metz26 triggers the other flash to fire. Not all flashes can be triggered in this way (the Metz 26 can't) and there is no control involved, just triggering.
Apart from the above you can't mix systems. The Sony version of this flash can't be controlled remotely by a Canon master/control flash and vice versa. You have to get the version that is compatible with your system.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2015 at 16:19 UTC
In reply to:

Hubertus Bigend: The text says that the flash can work as a slave in a wireless setup; does that mean it cannot work as a master? I'm not up to date there, but I remember earlier Metz flash units having such a limitation. In that case, it could not replace the small separate flash unit that comes with many mirrorless cameras, I would still need to carry both (plus the big flash I sometimes need, and which I'd like to trigger remotely).

According to the data sheets on the Metz website it can't act as a master in any of its brand specific configurations.

For example:

https://www.metz.de/en/lighting/flash-units/system-flash-units/mecablitz-26-af-1-digital/data-sheet/mecablitz-26-af-1-digital-olympus.html

https://www.metz.de/en/lighting/flash-units/system-flash-units/mecablitz-26-af-1-digital/data-sheet/mecablitz-26-af-1-digital-canon.html

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2015 at 08:55 UTC
On article Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path (1603 comments in total)

I find the word "Upgrade" and the linguistics behind it interesting.

It can be defined as "raise to a higher standard" where higher/bigger is implicitly better. There is a basic assumption in the phrase "upgrade" that going "up" is good but going "down" is bad.

This is reflected in the real world where the default position is that bigger houses, cars, TV etc. are better than small ones. However once you think about individual cases and put them in context the reverse can be true. For example a small car is probably better in a crowded city than a large 4x4.

I have "upgraded" to a smaller sensor (m4/3). For me buying a FF system would have been a "downgrade" as its size and weight would adversely affect my enjoyment of photography.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2015 at 20:12 UTC as 437th comment | 1 reply

From the firmware release notes
http://cactus-image.com/cactus_v6_fwupdate_notes.pdf

"*Note: The following models will NOT be available in the later firmware updates, due to the limitation of the hardware design: Olympus FL-600R, FL-300R; Panasonic FL-580L, FL-360L."

So a useful update for those with old flashes but not for those of us with the newer models.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2014 at 11:49 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

Kuivaamo: Funny! Just yesterday I started looking at getting Office 365 for the 1Tb storage, and actually installed the OneDrive app and started some uploading tests with the free 15Gb you get without any paid subscription.

This announcement is likely to push me over the fence, even though 1Tb would have been enough to back up all of my current image files. Very nice to have room to grow.

I just wish the OneDrive app could just upload the existing folders on my external 3Tb drive without duplicating the files in the OneDrive folder. To make use of e.g. 5Tb of cloud storage with any convenience, one also needs 5Tb of free hard disk space, and this is a bit of a problem for me.

Sorry I don't know about OneDrive on a Mac. I use (and like) Win 8.1 . I just took for granted that this is how it worked on other systems as well. Maybe Apple will respond and increase iCloud free storage.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2014 at 14:13 UTC
In reply to:

Kuivaamo: Funny! Just yesterday I started looking at getting Office 365 for the 1Tb storage, and actually installed the OneDrive app and started some uploading tests with the free 15Gb you get without any paid subscription.

This announcement is likely to push me over the fence, even though 1Tb would have been enough to back up all of my current image files. Very nice to have room to grow.

I just wish the OneDrive app could just upload the existing folders on my external 3Tb drive without duplicating the files in the OneDrive folder. To make use of e.g. 5Tb of cloud storage with any convenience, one also needs 5Tb of free hard disk space, and this is a bit of a problem for me.

You don't have to keep the actual files on you computer. If you are short of hard disk space copy a folder containing some of your images to the One Drive folder and then right click on it and select "Make available online only". This removes the actual files from your computer and leaves a place maker file (a.k.a tombstone). Repeat until all your files have been uploaded. This may take a while depending on your connection speed. The place marker file is tiny (~60KB per file) and displays on file explorer just like the original image file. When connected to the internet you can edit and manipulate the original file as if it was on your computer. Alternatively just right click on the place marker and select "Make available offline" and the original image file will be copied back to your computer.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2014 at 10:13 UTC
On article Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peter 1745: Reliability also needs to be considered

Another reason to prefer the "70-200 equivalent" rather than an actual 70-200 is the unreliability of the latter.

Roger Cicala of Lens Rentals analysed the failure rate of lenses in his blog,
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/08/lensrentals-repair-data-2012-2013
and states.

"70-200 f/2.8 lenses are likely to fail no matter who makes them. We think of them as ‘built like tanks’ because they have that heavy, all-metal case. That case, though, is as packed with mechanics and electronics as anything you’ve ever seen. There’s a LOT of stuff in there that has to work perfectly. Inevitably, some of that stuff breaks."

I'm not saying you shouldn't buy a 70-200 f/2.8. I'm saying that reliability is a factor that needs to be considered alongside size, weight and focal length requirements.

Peter

@ Daniel
What he said was

"Our numbers reflect heavy and hard use. Your personal equipment shouldn’t fail nearly as often; it isn’t subjected to rental conditions. But this does provide some comparison about how fragile various pieces of equipment are."

There is no reason to suppose that the 50-150 lenses are treated any less or more harshly than the 50-200 yet they don't need as many repairs.

I agree that his lenses may be treated more harshly than your own lenses and will suffer accelerated wear but that does not invalidate the data.

I would like to see failure data for non rental lenses but an not aware of any published data on this apart from anecdotal reports that "my lens broke". Do you know of any?

As I said in my final sentence "reliability is a factor that needs to be considered". If you treat your lenses with care & use them lightly then you will put less emphasis on reliability. If you treat your lenses harshly & use them heavily then reliability is more important.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 10:48 UTC
On article Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents (347 comments in total)

Reliability also needs to be considered

Another reason to prefer the "70-200 equivalent" rather than an actual 70-200 is the unreliability of the latter.

Roger Cicala of Lens Rentals analysed the failure rate of lenses in his blog,
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/08/lensrentals-repair-data-2012-2013
and states.

"70-200 f/2.8 lenses are likely to fail no matter who makes them. We think of them as ‘built like tanks’ because they have that heavy, all-metal case. That case, though, is as packed with mechanics and electronics as anything you’ve ever seen. There’s a LOT of stuff in there that has to work perfectly. Inevitably, some of that stuff breaks."

I'm not saying you shouldn't buy a 70-200 f/2.8. I'm saying that reliability is a factor that needs to be considered alongside size, weight and focal length requirements.

Peter

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 08:54 UTC as 59th comment | 4 replies
On article Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vignes: I standardise to EF lens. I can use it for FF and crops sensor bodies. Not sure whether I want to collect EF-S lens if lets say Canon went along this path.
Companys like Samsung, Fuji, Pentax may develop crop sensor lens but this is where they run into a 'brick wall' when they want to develop FF cameras. They have to re-develop or do what Sony and Nikon does - reduce the MP. Can't see Fuji jumping in FF system, Samsung may do it (they have the money), Pentax may do it to please their customers with legacy lens. Pentax has been saying this for some time but haven't materialised yet.

@ Richard Butler
Nicely put. I'm fed up with the assumption FF is the superior format which we all should be using, if only we could afford it. It's just one of a group of formats that we can choose from. None has any intrinsic superiority.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2014 at 17:50 UTC
On article Olympus shows camera module concept (65 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peter 1745: I don't think this OPC initiative is about changing the camera (or cameraphone) in our hands. It's more about taking photos with the camera module (or modules) in a much wider array of mounting options.
On the web I have seen suggestions for liquid cooled modules for astrophotography; multiple linked modules for sequential/3D photography; remotely operated modules for security cameras; etc.
If this is a truly "open" initiative I think it may also take us in unexpected directions.
It's far to soon to say how important this announcement is but it certainly has great potential.

There's nothing to buy at the moment. The OPC isn't a real product like the Sony QX, it's a concept. Olympus are asking for input into what interested parties want from such a concept. What products, if any, that are developed has yet to be determined. I agree that the average consumer may not be interested in it but I think there will be a strong interest from people who wouldn't consider themselves photographers in the traditional sense. As I said before, it's not a replacement for the camera in our hands but allows us to use cameras in multiple new ways.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 18:59 UTC
On article Olympus shows camera module concept (65 comments in total)

I don't think this OPC initiative is about changing the camera (or cameraphone) in our hands. It's more about taking photos with the camera module (or modules) in a much wider array of mounting options.
On the web I have seen suggestions for liquid cooled modules for astrophotography; multiple linked modules for sequential/3D photography; remotely operated modules for security cameras; etc.
If this is a truly "open" initiative I think it may also take us in unexpected directions.
It's far to soon to say how important this announcement is but it certainly has great potential.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 17:03 UTC as 27th comment | 2 replies
Total: 109, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous3456Next ›Last »