Dr_Jon

Lives in United Kingdom London, United Kingdom
Joined on Jul 2, 2011

Comments

Total: 1486, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Got focal range? Canon 24-105mm F4L II sample gallery (99 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kinematic Digit: I got this lens in December with my new 5Dmk4. Been putting it through the ropes, and using it in work as well as personal.

Been very happy with the performance, and I've owned the previous version as well, and it's a massive improvement. I also have 24-70 F/2.8 II and the F/4 to compare, and this lens out performs them in many ways. The extra reach is very good to have especially when doing product shooting (which I do a lot in my work). Although it's only F/4, the IS makes up for that in low light which pretty much makes me choose it over the F/2.8 when I'm covering events.

This lens is a winner in my books. It's the perfect working pro's lens that covers at least for me 90% of what I do.

My trick with old Raw files is to use DXO on them, as the sophisticated lens profiles help out more with the cheaper lenses I used then than over the nicer ones I have now, plus the noise reduction and other advances makes significant improvement in image quality.
I do understand the newer lens has significantly less vignetting, distortion and flare, plus a better stabiliser, all before allowing for downstream tweaks. Also while software can dial out the extra stop of vignetting it's doing that by eating into the dynamic range, and so making noise more visible.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2017 at 11:27 UTC
In reply to:

Dr_Jon: Having shot a GH5 today I have some questions Panasonic haven't answered yet and perhaps you could help with:

(1) Will 480fps focusing be available on any existing lenses, especially the two f2.8 zooms and the 42.5mm lenses? (I'm assuming not.)

(2) Will Dual-IS2 be available on any existing lenses? (Again I'm assuming not.)

(3) What firmware are you using (I had v0.3 but I know v0.4x is out)?

(4) What do you think of the video AF, IMHO it was rubbish compared to a Canon M5 and not much advanced from my GH4 (and I was using a 480Hz lens, I think, the 12-60 f2.8-4)

(BTW my comment was 5 days ago and stuff is changing all the time.) Have you read http://www.personal-view.com/downloads/GH5_Presentation.pdf as the table for whether existing lenses will support Dual-IS2 is strange. It says "firmware update" but only some of the lenses have a tick as well, I have no idea what that means.
Since the existing lenses, which aren't that young, can do 240fps focus moves I'd guess the new ones would do 480Hz (a Panasonic Engineer I talked to suggested the old ones won't due to the lack of capability of the chip in them), however the launch blurb for the lenses talks about 240fps so I suspect we'll have to wait. I'm seeing them again on Wed so I'll see if anything has become clearer, I won't be surprised if it hasn't.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 16:49 UTC
In reply to:

Mark Turney: Just like firearms, let's not blame the tool. Blame the operator as appropriate. Guns don't shoot people, spoons don't make people fat, and as far as I know drones don't make independent decisions. Even autonomous drones "acting up" can be blamed on GIGO.

Which is good as then I can't shoot a family member when I wake up in the night and half-awake go downstairs to see what some noise is. Or a neighbour by shooting at a bad guy and missing.
BTW I'm always amazed how many civilians are shot by Police in the U.S. when they are aiming at a bad-guy and missing, despite being 20x (-ish) more used to high stress situations (they get them on most days) and forced to practice shooting regularly.
"According to a 2008 RAND Corporation study evaluating the New York Police Department’s firearm training, between 1998 and 2006, the average hit rate during gunfights was just 18 percent. When suspects did not return fire, police officers hit their targets 30 percent of the time."
"All nine people wounded during a dramatic confrontation between police and a gunman outside the Empire State Building were struck by bullets fired by the two officers, police said Saturday, citing ballistics evidence."

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 17:24 UTC
In reply to:

Mark Turney: Just like firearms, let's not blame the tool. Blame the operator as appropriate. Guns don't shoot people, spoons don't make people fat, and as far as I know drones don't make independent decisions. Even autonomous drones "acting up" can be blamed on GIGO.

A lot of good points above, plus a couple I enjoyed:
"Guns don't shoot people, people shoot people... with guns..."
"Guns don't kill people, unless they are big and heavy. Bullets do."
I live in England and if someone comes into your house to burgle it the chance of them having a gun is basically zero...
I live in London and I believe I have never heard the sound of a shot from an illegal cause.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 11:40 UTC
In reply to:

jhinkey: This kind of thing needs to be nipped in the bud as it will get out of control quickly with the meteoric rise in drones. Well legislated rules and strict tough enforcement for violations are a must.

Last year someone (not sure if they eventually caught them) crashed a drone into the wheel on the waterfront in Seattle - lucky no one on the ground got hurt when it fell.

A 2lb drone that crashed and fell onto a crowd watching a parade in Seattle knocked a woman out and left her with concussion, which isn't acceptable...
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/man-convicted-in-drone-crash-that-injured-woman-during-seattles-pride-parade/
I'm pretty sure if I smashed a baseball or golf ball into the same crowd I'd be in trouble too.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 11:29 UTC
In reply to:

jaysonmc: This is why our promised jet packs never arrived

Airbus announced they will have a flying car by late this year though... :-)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/01/17/flying-cars-end-2017-says-airbus/
Although they aren't dumb enough to let people turn the auto-pilot off...

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 11:23 UTC
In reply to:

dash2k8: Every time a rare drone accident happens, drone haters come out in droves. I'm going to guess that drone-related severe injuries are probably not even 0.1% of vehicular-related injuries. Now, some people will say "that's because there are more cars and bikes on the road," which sort of proves the point: proportionally there are so few drones that injuries almost never happen. When was the last time you or someone you know got hurt or killed by one? I don't hear anyone complaining about airshow-related casualties or theme park injuries (both of which do happen, and have injured or killed more people than drones) for the same reason: they're rare. It's OK if people don't like drones, but some people make it sound like a drone is a serious injury waiting to happen. I do agree that pilots of drones need to practice caution in public spaces just as we don't wield knives in parks, but let's keep things objective.

If I was working at the top over a very high building i wouldn't be thrilled if a 2lb+ drone hit me in the back of the head at 30mph, so it's reasonable to make sure drone operators know other people's safety is something they should pay attention to. Plus there's the woman who got knocked out in Seattle...

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 11:21 UTC
On article Got focal range? Canon 24-105mm F4L II sample gallery (99 comments in total)
In reply to:

villagranvicent: The 24-70mm f4 still is the better option. If you need those extra 35mm, then walk.

Even if you can walk whatever was worth photographing might well be long gone bu the time you get there...

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 11:17 UTC
On article Got focal range? Canon 24-105mm F4L II sample gallery (99 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mister Joseph: It's cool to think that those who bought a 5D MkII with the kit 24-105/4, 8 YEARS AGO, still has a really nice camera rig up to this day.

I'm not sure it's worth the upgrade over the mk1 (one of which I own) but it is noticeable better in some areas, e.g. a whole stop less vignetting at the wide end, plus somewhat less distortion and flare, so if you're buying one now I think the mk 1 would need to be quite a bit cheaper to pick it. Although the mk 2 has grown somewhat... still at least the filters are still 77mm

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 11:14 UTC
On article Got focal range? Canon 24-105mm F4L II sample gallery (99 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kinematic Digit: I got this lens in December with my new 5Dmk4. Been putting it through the ropes, and using it in work as well as personal.

Been very happy with the performance, and I've owned the previous version as well, and it's a massive improvement. I also have 24-70 F/2.8 II and the F/4 to compare, and this lens out performs them in many ways. The extra reach is very good to have especially when doing product shooting (which I do a lot in my work). Although it's only F/4, the IS makes up for that in low light which pretty much makes me choose it over the F/2.8 when I'm covering events.

This lens is a winner in my books. It's the perfect working pro's lens that covers at least for me 90% of what I do.

I'd be interested to know how you feel it's improved, all the tests show minimal changes in sharpness to the mk 1 (overall, the lenses are better at different focal lengths) and it would be interesting to know which areas you feel the key improvements are? For example Vignetting appears one area with a noticeable improvement.
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/11/canon-24-105-f4-is-mk-ii-mtf-results/
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-105mm-f-4L-IS-II-USM-Lens.aspx

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 11:09 UTC
On article Got focal range? Canon 24-105mm F4L II sample gallery (99 comments in total)

People always seem to be knocking this lens and its predecessor, I don't know if they own other lenses, just heard random rumours or got a less-good copy.

As to the mk 2 I'm not sure how much of an improvement it is over the mk 1, IMHO not enough to upgrade. (I think a lot of the improvements are in non-headline things, e.g. other than sharpness, it will be interesting to see field curvature and other aberrations measured.) I like my mk 1 and use it on a 5Dsr. I find it really good at f5.6 and okay at f4. This picture is worst-case (i.e. long end and wide-open):
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57968243
Couple more:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58519069

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 11:03 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Aroart: This camera would destroy all compitition if they put an apsc Sony sensor or if Sony made a camera in this format factor with there a6500 sensor...yeah I know, dream on...

SteveV4D - unless the paid update offers a Teleport facility I'm not buying it...
http://dilbert.com/strip/1993-12-13
:-)

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 21:08 UTC
On article Close-up: Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

discopolana: Who personally is responsible for NOT including multi aspect sensor I'm asking.
I wanna fly Japan 'n kick his her ...
We still love you DH2@Moon T7!

In case that wasn't clear - note with the MAV sensor the various aspect ratios can move the same amount until they hit the edge of the image circle. This is the same amount as 4:3 on a non-MAV sensor. However 3:2 and 16:9 on a "standard" sensor have smaller diagonals and so can move further. Flipping it around on a MAV sensor 3:2 and 16:9 have less IBIS movement possible than a non-MAV sensor.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 09:16 UTC
On article Close-up: Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

discopolana: Who personally is responsible for NOT including multi aspect sensor I'm asking.
I wanna fly Japan 'n kick his her ...
We still love you DH2@Moon T7!

You're misunderstanding. A standard m43 sensor is 17.3mm across and the 3:2 goes to the edge of the sensor (17.3x11.6mm). A MAV sensor is 18.8mm across and the 3:2 doesn't quite go to the edge of the sensor (it's 17.8x11.9mm) but gets closer than the 4:3 but not as close as the 16:9. The image circle is maybe 25mm. I'm pretty sure you can see a 17.3 mm wide active part of a sensor has less room to move sideways in 25mm than a 17.8mm one.
Try this image:
http://www.hennek-homepage.de/video/GH1-sensor.jpg
Note the MAV sensor keeps the diagonal at 22mm for the three image aspect ratios by allowing the width to increase, the "standard" sensor just has the diagonal fall as the image height decreases and the width stays the same:
http://i.imgur.com/rchr7.png

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 09:07 UTC
On article Close-up: Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

unorfordox: I would love to hear this camera compares with the Sony Alpha 7R II, both of which have seem to have excellent 4k capabilities as well as decent stills. And, I would much like to know how reviewers and others find manual focussing on either camera. DPreviews have detailed auto focussing but little comment on the precision of the view finder and focusing tools for manual focus, particularly when needing to "pull focus" in video uses.

The new high-res viewfinder should help. AFAIK you still get peaking and a magnified view as your options.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 21:33 UTC
On article Close-up: Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

markdg: Continuous Autofocus in video??? This has always been a Pani Achilles heal... How does the GH5 compare now to the a6500 for example??? Any closer?

The rolling shutter is miles less, so it's usable in 4k which the A6300/A6500 barely are (I think it's maybe more than 3x better). I have used one but Panasonic say the video AF will improve quite a bit over firmware versions from now to release, so it's too early to say.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 21:32 UTC
On article Close-up: Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: I am not interested into a GH5, but would like to know how good the new Leica 12-60/2.8-4 Zoom is...OTOH i do know, i'd get the Olympus Zuiko 12-60/2.8-4...because it's a great lens and used being affordable...perhaps this year...

The all-new EVF on the GH5 looks interesting - i hope the next iteration of Sony A7-Series would feature also a higher resolution EVF....around 4 MP would here also being way nice.

My main observation is the variable aperture is even across the zoom range, so it's f4.0 only at 60mm, zoom a fraction away from that and it's f3.9 and moves smoothly down to f2.8 at 12mm. It's about f3.1 at 18mm. Panasonic were very proud of how smooth/quiet the aperture blades were. I shot a fair bit of video with one and changed aperture while shooting, but haven't had the time to listen to it yet. (Plus I used a GH5, which has a 3rd microphone to do noise cancelling for camera noises, so may not be applicable for other camera bodies.)

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 21:28 UTC
On article Close-up: Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: Why on earth buy a MFT camera this size and weight? Crazy.

I will say that for 4k/10 bit/422 (which it does internally) it's way lighter than my GH4 with my Ninja Assassin on Top, which is what you had to do previously to get that.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 21:25 UTC
On article Close-up: Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

geogan: Is it true that they replaced the high-tech OLED panel on the flip-out screen from GH4 with a much cheaper and older technology LCD panel instead? That's is not good. OLED is way more accurate lighting on a per-pixel level instead of a stupid old LCD panel with a single big backlight behind it...

I've always found (in cameras) that LCDs had more accurate colour but appalling DR while OLEDs had great DR but the colour wasn't a lot like the image you're seeing. The GH5 rear monitor is a TFT LCD and the viewfinder OLED, so I guess we get both options.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 21:24 UTC
On article Close-up: Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

FantasticMrFox: Despite housing only an mFT sensor, the body of this camera is as large, or even larger, than a lot of APS-C DSLRs ...

I'm not sure I'm a fan of the right hand grip on the GH5 as they scalloped the inside edge leaving a raised edge near the front/lens side running top to bottom which my hands found annoying sometimes.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 21:21 UTC
Total: 1486, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »