Dr_Jon

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

Comments

Total: 1905, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

beavertown: This article reminds me putting EF PRO lenses via EF-EOS M adapter that slows down the native EOS M AF system.

EOS-M but only with DPAF cameras IMHO...

BTW it will be interesting to see what comes first, an EOS-M1 (or whatever) with 4k or a 20MP Sony A7sIII with PDAF. Personally I'd like to have a choice.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2017 at 15:40 UTC

I don't think 20fps is all that meaningful and people should mostly be looking at other things, like AF quality, when assessing the camera (hence this sort of stuff is good). I have a RX100V which can shoot 24fps (Raw+JPEG with continuous AF and AE) and I used that speed at a sporting event recently (really just to see how useful it was), but you just end up with a nearly infinite pile of images to sort through. I can see 15fps might help getting the exact moment you want, but more than that I think is very limited in its usefulness, I can only think of a couple of event types where it might help. (I came back with 19GB of images BTW. My conclusion was to use 10fps in future unless there was a very specific reason to go faster.)

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2017 at 07:48 UTC as 69th comment | 1 reply
On article Now we know: Sony a9 is sharper than we thought (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

wwc: I have a couple questions that I mentioned in a post in the Sony Full-Frame forum. First: the 85/1.8 lens seems to have quite noticeable of chromatic aberration, which is quite noticeable in the corners. In comparison, the a7 test shot, which used the 55/1.8, had no visible CA. Would a "good" (non-decentered) copy of 85/1.8 have less CA?

Second, the dates in the EXIF data for the a9 test shots say they were taken on June 2, which was well before the original review was published. Is that right?

Hey, could be worse - the Canon 85mm lens they use pre-dates digital sensors, so wasn't even designed with the sensor cover glass in mind. (It's the cheap one, not the L.)
It is a problem if they use 85mm equiv lenses rather the the best lens they can find in, say, 50-100mm. I'd have been tempted to use macro lenses as they are usually really good for distortion.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 08:43 UTC
In reply to:

brownie314: If I were going to drop big cash and didn't already have lenses - I would go with mirrorless. I just can't stand the live view performance on dlsrs. It is horrific. It is like two different devices - a good experience when you have the device covering one eye - and a miserable experience when you move it away from your eye and try to use it.

Try one of the Canon DPAF ones, like the 6D mk II...

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 08:31 UTC
In reply to:

memee_meen: You can actually put the sensor inside as well and call it bodyless camera lol!!!

Plus the Olympus Air looks like a lens, but is actually in two parts....

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 08:28 UTC
In reply to:

Iloveaircraftnoise: Twin long haul still doesn't make sense. Most capital city airports are at or near full capacity as it is. Lower pax aircraft like 787 will not free up slots at the gate. Take London - Sydney as an example. BA has become an also-ran on the kangaroo root with 777 equipment. All passenger traffic to Uk is via middle east with A380 Qatar emirates Etihad. Even QF discontinued the kangaroo root.

The A380 has 317 orders, of which 104 are undelivered, that should keep them going for a while as they deliver one about every 12 days. The development cost was given as €15B (but others have estimated up to €25B) and sales to date are about €140B, which is a fair few bob...
BTW the 787 program, cost had hit $32B by 2011, they've built more but it's a cheaper aircraft. I suspect the return vs development cost is very similar.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2017 at 09:03 UTC
In reply to:

mandophoto: I know how an airplane can fly but still, having been a passenger in a plane with a full complement of passengers with what seems like increasingly heavy luggage, lift offs never (thankfully) cease to amaze me. And traveling at 500mph, sheesh!

Cool looking jets.

I've been on some Jumbos where after (what seemed like) 5 mins rolling down the runway I assume they were going to turn onto the motorway to continue the trip, as getting airborne really seemed very unlikely. (Although see my 757 post above.)

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 09:23 UTC
In reply to:

jhinkey: Oh the things you can do with an empty plane and a lot of excess thrust at takeoff . . .

I used to take the BA London to Edinburgh or Glasgow shuttle. They were usually 757s with big Rolls Royce Turbofans under each wing (2 x 44k lbs thrust, 230k lbs take-off weight). The cool thing was they promised to fly regardless of how many people turned up. I've literally been one of 5 passengers on one (presumably not much weight of fuel for c. 60 min trip vs 4550 mile range). The Pilots used to have some fun with only businessmen on board (so no-one to scare/upset). I've sat at the start of the runway as they spooled the engines right up with the brakes on and literally been in the air in about 300m, with acceleration like a high-end sports car pushing you back in the seat.
Oh and a few cockpit visits too. One slightly less impressive one where the pilot failed to demo something on the navigation computer (but presumably he could just follow the M1 motorway ;-) and sitting in the jump seat for a night landing with a 45kt crosswind, which of course isn't going to be repeated, alas.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 09:06 UTC
In reply to:

supersonic: Here is a pukka aircraft video of something not mundane.

If the Frogs had not tossed their toys out of the pram it would still be flying commercially.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSnh-4EiBYM

Thanks for that, cool...

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 08:58 UTC
In reply to:

Great Bustard: But what they didn't show in the video is how United Airlines was able to make space for the camera crews that showed up at the last minute. : )

Ouch...

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 08:53 UTC
In reply to:

Iloveaircraftnoise: Twin long haul still doesn't make sense. Most capital city airports are at or near full capacity as it is. Lower pax aircraft like 787 will not free up slots at the gate. Take London - Sydney as an example. BA has become an also-ran on the kangaroo root with 777 equipment. All passenger traffic to Uk is via middle east with A380 Qatar emirates Etihad. Even QF discontinued the kangaroo root.

Living in London I see an endless stream of A380s heading towards Heathrow, so they seem to be doing pretty well to me...

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 08:52 UTC
In reply to:

Dr_Jon: One thing to note with Silkypix is there are (IIRC) three places to buy it from (Silkypix Japan, Europe and USA) and you get updates and support from where you got it, plus the Japanese version seems to get updated a little earlier, although I found the EU people would answer questions on my Japanese version. It's worth converting the prices into your local currency (I subsequently found I could have saved some money if I'd have bought the EU version).

Update - looks like they are much more in sync these days:

(EU) http://www.silkypix.eu/upgrade-from-previous-versions
€89
= 77.80 British Pound

(US) http://www.miryestore.com/home.php?cat=692
$99.00
= 77.28 British Pound

(JP) https://shop.isl.co.jp/products/detail.php?product_id=352&lang=en
11232 JPY
= 79.06 British Pound

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 07:39 UTC
In reply to:

TonyPM: What cameras come with this software bundled in the box?

There's a discount. See the right-most tabs (EU):
http://www.silkypix.eu/upgrade-from-previous-versions
Or scroll to the bottom (JP, Pro is first, Std second):
https://shop.isl.co.jp/products/detail.php?product_id=352&lang=en
https://shop.isl.co.jp/products/detail.php?product_id=383&lang=en
Or just look for bundled here (US):
http://www.miryestore.com/home.php?cat=692
Note EU/JP/US are the store locations, not where you have to buy.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 07:32 UTC
In reply to:

Dr_Jon: One thing to note with Silkypix is there are (IIRC) three places to buy it from (Silkypix Japan, Europe and USA) and you get updates and support from where you got it, plus the Japanese version seems to get updated a little earlier, although I found the EU people would answer questions on my Japanese version. It's worth converting the prices into your local currency (I subsequently found I could have saved some money if I'd have bought the EU version).

Thanks, I'll have to see if they have a better update price and if I can update my Japanese 7Pro in the EU.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 12:29 UTC
On article First pictures from the new Nikon 8-15mm fisheye (139 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: The old Canon counterpart seems to be better in image quality.

How can anyone tell from the small size and sharpened images that were posted? I have the Canon one and it's amazing on a 20MP camera, it's pretty amazing on a 50MP camera but needs a bit more work. I'd assume as the Canon one already existed the Nikon one is in the ballpark.
A few examples at 50MP (combined): http://www.viewat.org/?i=en&id_aut=7366&id_pn=26879&pag=1&sec=pn

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2017 at 16:22 UTC

One thing to note with Silkypix is there are (IIRC) three places to buy it from (Silkypix Japan, Europe and USA) and you get updates and support from where you got it, plus the Japanese version seems to get updated a little earlier, although I found the EU people would answer questions on my Japanese version. It's worth converting the prices into your local currency (I subsequently found I could have saved some money if I'd have bought the EU version).

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2017 at 07:22 UTC as 5th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

TonyPM: What cameras come with this software bundled in the box?

I believe Nikon's current Raw software is also based on SP.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2017 at 07:17 UTC
In reply to:

Osa25: How's the software itself. It's bundled with Panasonic cameras but I don't know anyone that uses it..

It has a bit of a learning curve and like all raw tools takes a while to get to grips with. I found it excellent for moire handling for example. I haven't used 8, only 7 Pro, so can't comment on the user-interface changes. I will say that the more expensive Pro version is probably the one people would want though.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2017 at 07:17 UTC
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: Unfortunately, it is still a very small business. Absolutely no effect to the whole camera market.

Fuji do so well as Instax is a licence to print money (amazingly). It would be interesting to see the results with compacts, X and Instax split out. Anyone seen a source?

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 07:36 UTC
In reply to:

gphome: The future is mirrorless, everyone sees it, as shown in the sales

I wonder what the key mirrorless innovations are, since it's basically a compact camera with an interchangeable lens, technology-wise? Canon have the best AF system for mirrorless, especially for video. The Nikon 1 also had amazing AF, although the technology doesn't seem to have made it into their DSLRs for LIve-View for some reason (lenses maybe).
There is some nice technology in the sensors, but most isn't mirrorless-specific.
I'm really asking BTW.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2017 at 07:39 UTC
Total: 1905, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »