Dr_Jon

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

Comments

Total: 2601, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Best cameras under $2000 (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

NoTx: So why on the G9 do you list 6.5 stops of image stabilization and on the E-M1 Mark II at 5.5 but both hit 6.5 with dual in body and lens image stabilization. Just seems an odd separation. Wondering the cause?

Panasonic say the IBIS (alone) for the GH5 is 5.5 stops and for the G9 is 6.5 stops as it has an improved version. How much of an improvement Dual-IS or Dual-IS2 makes seems to be a little variable.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2018 at 23:15 UTC
On article On Assignment with Kylie Mazon and the Canon EOS M6 (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dr_Jon: "Second Breakfast" - sounds fun but filling, also nice to see food photography that doesn't use all sorts of tricks to make the food look good but just shoots it! Lok chooses the complicated route:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E_1mzBGNkQ
Oh and the green hexagonal floor is cool.
BTW anyone know a paid gig shooting cocktail photos, as I have this new idea no-one's done before, honest...
(P.S. having spent today dodging showers shooting in London I'm really feeling envious...)

I think you mean the later photos would have an improved artistic content... much more creative... clever use of Dutch angles, blur ... :-)

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2018 at 00:27 UTC
On article On Assignment with Kylie Mazon and the Canon EOS M6 (115 comments in total)

"Second Breakfast" - sounds fun but filling, also nice to see food photography that doesn't use all sorts of tricks to make the food look good but just shoots it! Lok chooses the complicated route:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E_1mzBGNkQ
Oh and the green hexagonal floor is cool.
BTW anyone know a paid gig shooting cocktail photos, as I have this new idea no-one's done before, honest...
(P.S. having spent today dodging showers shooting in London I'm really feeling envious...)

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2018 at 17:14 UTC as 21st comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

tedolf: Whatever happened to the concept of a Trademark being a guarantor of quality and not just source?

Is Kodak the licensor exercising quality control over its Kodak licensees?

Tedolph, Esq.

In the 19th Century Trademarks were intended as a sign of quality, as people sold some appallingly doctored products (flour with much chalk added, etc.) when the local shop just handed you a bag of stuff they weighed out for you.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2018 at 19:22 UTC
In reply to:

Kharan: How many years of rumors does this make? Five, six? By this point, it's obvious that both Canon and Nikon flubbed their timing and manner of entrance to the mirrorless market. Now, their challenge is to offer a real alternative to their DSLRs, which means offering credible alternatives to their lens lineups, which means they need to ramp production up before release, which slows them down in turn...
Anyway, don't count on adapters saving the day. They won't work any better than they did for Sony or MFT - when there was no alternative, they offered a way to access some capabilities, and people used them despite the drawbacks. But now that there's a good number of strong players in the field, with very good offerings, Nikon and Canon will have to do much better than that.

samtheman2014 - Olympus is doing well in Japan, which is the numbers you are thinking of, World-Wide it's #3 by a margin. IIRC they said they sold 495k cameras in the last reported year (Canon 5.7M) out of a >3M mirrorless market. But hey I'm buying another Panasonic camera today so what does market share matter if you like the product..

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2018 at 08:46 UTC
In reply to:

Kharan: How many years of rumors does this make? Five, six? By this point, it's obvious that both Canon and Nikon flubbed their timing and manner of entrance to the mirrorless market. Now, their challenge is to offer a real alternative to their DSLRs, which means offering credible alternatives to their lens lineups, which means they need to ramp production up before release, which slows them down in turn...
Anyway, don't count on adapters saving the day. They won't work any better than they did for Sony or MFT - when there was no alternative, they offered a way to access some capabilities, and people used them despite the drawbacks. But now that there's a good number of strong players in the field, with very good offerings, Nikon and Canon will have to do much better than that.

Canon appears to be #2 in Mirrorless, after Sony, plus sells about 55% more cameras than the entire mirrorless market, so they may struggle by for a little while. Nikon have had a big dip in Market share so may be very keen to come up with something good. It will be very interesting to see what C/N come up with though... plus the A7sIII as well of course...

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 23:57 UTC
In reply to:

String: One of the things they will certainly need to release is some form of lens roadmap or I suspect only the dedicated few will partake.

Nikon... Lens Roadmap... good one! Alas...
Still maybe the DX one got lost in translation...

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 23:52 UTC
In reply to:

tedolf: Whatever happened to the concept of a Trademark being a guarantor of quality and not just source?

Is Kodak the licensor exercising quality control over its Kodak licensees?

Tedolph, Esq.

Kodak Alaris is basically the U.K. Pension fund of Kodak, who were owed so much money when they had their accident that they get to sell the film in order to make some of it back.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 23:46 UTC
In reply to:

Shlomo Goldwasser: Did DPReview get a call from higher up to spin the earlier story about the mining scam?

Yes, but...
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/301037556312981878/

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 23:43 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: Honestly, the worst part about this story as it relates to Canon is that they can't find the $$ to actually pay a photographer for an image. It's a company selling a variety of photographic equipment to a variety of people, including those who make a living from using the equipment they sold, and they can't be bothered to support them in return.
That's just sh***y.

Strictly speaking Royalty Free means you don't pay when you use it, it doesn't actually mean it is free, you may need a licence to use it but then not have to pay for whatever you do subsequently. I have a bunch of Royalty free music to use in videos, but it wasn't free, just doesn't cost any more when I use it.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2018 at 21:35 UTC
In reply to:

Dr_Jon: So presumably the question is whether it consumes more or less than $1080 in electricity in two years ($3400-$2320)? I guess less.

BTW I doo wonder if people buying the machines and running them in their own houses are at risk of getting raided by the Drug Enforcement people, as usually the house in the street with the big heat signature if the one growing drugs...

JensR - Thanks!

I assume they have a deal for much cheaper electricity than the consumer rate so will make more than $400, but it certainly looks less of a bad deal for the "renter" that way.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2018 at 21:20 UTC

So presumably the question is whether it consumes more or less than $1080 in electricity in two years ($3400-$2320)? I guess less.

BTW I doo wonder if people buying the machines and running them in their own houses are at risk of getting raided by the Drug Enforcement people, as usually the house in the street with the big heat signature if the one growing drugs...

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2018 at 18:39 UTC as 49th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

walker2000: $1299 is not expensive. Wait, $12999???

They'll probably take 20 to the Olympics to loan out, sell another 40 to rental houses and another 30 to big press combines before they sell 10 to end users.

That said I know a non-pro who bought the Canon version for Wildlife shooting - rather amusingly he said his wife wouldn't notice as long as he had the same number of big white lenses, and I literally didn't hear anything from him for the next three years... (he recently re-appeared, somewhat denting the story as I can't still say "ever again").

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 11:42 UTC
In reply to:

Adam2: Eh, Canon produced the 200-400mm with the built in TC. It wasn’t as useful or as sharp as the primes and way over priced. It looks like Nikon is making the same mistake.

The Canon is really amazingly good for what it is, although there did seem to be an iffy one in circulation for reviews for a while... compared to 400 II at f4:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=764&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=741&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 11:38 UTC
In reply to:

justmeMN: No Nikon, by pricing it at $12,399.95 rather than $12,400.00 , you are not going to make it sound inexpensive. :-)

They'd probably go looking for the change to keep you busy until the DEA turn up to ask about where you got the cash...

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 11:36 UTC
In reply to:

nzmacro: Hmm, I wonder if they bought most of the lens elements off Canon.

It would actually be interesting to know where their fluorite blanks came from... not a skill they had(/had access to) until quite recently...

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 11:33 UTC
In reply to:

thx1138: LOL, even more ridiculous price than Canon’s, that’ll get sales moving said no one ever. Hopefully too, unlike the past two 200-400 f/4 models it can focus at infinity.

What they need is a great 80-400 f/4-5.6, the current one is average and overpriced, smashed by the Canon and Sony offerings.

You just need a bunch of Pros not to jump ship to Canon and they'll be happy...

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 11:31 UTC
In reply to:

weixing: Another lens from Nikon with fluorite element, but this lens can't be good because Nikon said that "fluorite easily cracks and is sensitive to temperature changes that can adversely affect focusing by altering the lens' refractive index." Ha ha ha :-P :-P

They do seem to be adding Fluorite to a few recent lenses, I don't know if some Canon patent expired or they finally worked out how to make some of the big crystals (IIRC the fluorite "blanks" for the Canon 1200mm lens took nearly a year to grow, so you need to know what to do to get good ones as test/improve/repeat could take a while).

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 11:30 UTC
In reply to:

Slapstick Noir: So, with the TC it becomes 200-500 f/5.6, and you're paying 12k for the coatings and the golden ring? Or they're trying to convince you, it's going to be 10x better than the existing 200-500? Really?!
Can't wait to see the proof!

Slapstick Noir - The Canon version is really pretty close to the awesome 400/2.8 II stopped down, so I'd assume it's also pretty close...
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=764&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=741&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2
(Mouse-over for the Prime.)

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 11:25 UTC
In reply to:

Focus Shift Shooting: Is this a joke? A $12,999 lens? What's the point? Seems like a waste of time.

People wanted those 3 cameras. Nobody really wants this. It's $12,999.
But the idea of 3 cameras based on 3 focal lengths had traction.
Well, it's too late now.

Go work on Mirrorless. It's what the people are asking for. So give them the best mirrorless there is. That will be something.

I expect they paid attention to how many copies of the Canon lens were out there, plus how many of their Pro users (and rental outlets) were asking for one.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 11:20 UTC
Total: 2601, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »