nextSibling

Lives in United States WA, United States
Joined on Sep 10, 2006

Comments

Total: 73, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »

Nikon seem to have a habit of making excellent cheapest-of-their-class cameras. Like the D3500 - a way better camera than it should be, for its price. If I ever eventually decide to trade in the D750, hard to imagine needing more than this Z5.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2020 at 22:58 UTC as 85th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

whitelens: I hope the 50mm is better than the official sample pictures show!
In both portraits the eyes are NOT in focus!
How can so called professionals miss that??

*headdesk*

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2020 at 08:35 UTC
In reply to:

whitelens: I hope the 50mm is better than the official sample pictures show!
In both portraits the eyes are NOT in focus!
How can so called professionals miss that??

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not deliberately misunderstanding me.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2020 at 22:20 UTC
In reply to:

whitelens: I hope the 50mm is better than the official sample pictures show!
In both portraits the eyes are NOT in focus!
How can so called professionals miss that??

If you look at the 100% versions, they actually are, kind of. It's just that at that aperture and focal length the depth of field is so narrow that only a couple of eyelashes are in focus, so the whole eye appears out of focus. Stop down to around f/2 or so and those would be much better pictures.

Super-fast lenses seem fashionable at the moment, but I'm really wondering what genuine use they have.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2020 at 16:38 UTC
In reply to:

Guy R: Not going to declare a "winner" here as these things can be rather subjective, but I think we can all agree that one is not 13.7 times better than the other...

@aris - "The quality scale is not linear, it's exponential"

More like hyperbolic.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2020 at 19:04 UTC
In reply to:

Ramapo49: It's about time one or more of the major camera manufacturers produce a new film camera, so those of us film users don't have to look for good fully functioning cameras. It appears that there is a growing movement toward film photography. The new cameras need not be professional grade but should please the photo fan wanting to work with film.

Cosina were effectively doing this with their CT-1 until the early 2000s, rebadged as Nikon FM-10/Olympus OM 2000/Canon T60. Then with a similar chassis as the various Voigtlander Bessa models. With all that cross branding and cost sharing even Cosina couldn't make it work and all those are now defunct. The market has decided there's no room for new 35mm SLRs.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2020 at 12:27 UTC
In reply to:

apestorm: Some of those cameras are pretty old. More than likely they are going to need a service and new light seals which will add another $100.

For a beginner a cheap plastic nikon or canon camera from 1990s early 2000s wont need any work doing on it (hopefully) will come with advanced meter modes so beginner is guaranteed to get a shot and they can use the lenses on a digital body too. $50 and yr in the game.

Can almost guarantee an ME Super etc will need stripping and lubing but who wants to pay for that so instead beginner will be fighting against out of wack shutter speeds and blaming themselves and getting confused.

Generally agree. You can find occasional bargains, they're out there, but you have to hunt and be sufficiently familiar to test and evaluate. I recently found a late serial number FM2 in near-new condition for a bargain price, but I'd been looking for quite a while.

Good suggestion about later models. The Pentax MZ-M is a great example. Many will pass over it because of its 'plastic' construction, but it's durable enough and has an elegantly simple and easy to use design, despite offering all the PASM modes.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2020 at 12:12 UTC
In reply to:

tassienick: Well, whatever ‘wins’ certainly isn’t going to stay under ~$200 for long...

True. For example, a working condition FE2 under $200 is probably findable, but you'll need to hunt for it, especially if you want a lens on it. New and near-new condition are going for a lot more than that. Canon AE-1 slightly less, but for how long, given this article?

The real bargains are in manual SLRs. And medium format.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2020 at 12:04 UTC
In reply to:

Lees Channel: Auto Exposure!? Pfft! PENTAX K1000 all the way. It's got a light meter built in, what more do you need?

Not such a great choice now. The K1000 has been by far the most popular recommendation for 'beginner' SLRs for many years because at one time they were a genuine bargain, 'student' camera. But these days their price tends to be inflated for what they are, based on that history, and many on the used market are very used or abused. Given that the price of other, better made cameras on the used market has decreased, it's competing against cameras like many in the poll above that weren't made to as low a price when new. If you like the the K1000, I'd suggest a Pentax MX instead. For not much more it's a much better made body.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2020 at 11:51 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV initial review (761 comments in total)
In reply to:

Parshua: No PDAF?! Who is making these stupid decisions at Olympus? Just fire them already and get profitable overnight.
What mad idiot thinks that taking in-focus photos easily should be a differentiating factor in the line up of CAMERAS?! Olympus was the first to market with mirrorless PDAF ffs.

@Parshua
What's video got to do with it? If it were up to me, video cameras and stills cameras would be completely different machines, reflecting their completely different media, use cases and user-experience requirements. Fortunately, many things are not up to me. Like the business fortunes of Olympus, which I have no control over, have no stake in, no responsibility for, and really don't care all that much about, 'snubery' or not.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 19:07 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV initial review (761 comments in total)
In reply to:

Quiverbow: It must be too early in the morning for the Olympus batterers to be up. As soon as they are, watch the number of comments rise as fast as their ire that Oly is still in business and producing fine cameras that look like cameras and satisfy the needs of a lot of people.

"Still only 20mp. My smartphone is better." Well we don't care what you use to take photos, as we use Olympus for our own reasons and are happy to do so.

These fora have devolved into noisy brand-tribes playing Top Trumps games using camera specifications.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 15:26 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV initial review (761 comments in total)
In reply to:

panther fan: If there is one thing that is more important than anything in an entry level camera it is AF.

DR, noise, color, handling, detail, FPS, buffer, IS, etc... are useless if your shot is not in focus. Especially for beginners it is important to have a competent "do it all" focus mode, that helps them get shots/ memories of stuff they love like children, pets, etc...

And that is the point where this camera fails. Regular CDAF in 2020 is a No-Go

"If there is one thing that is more important than anything in an entry level camera it is AF."

There were no amateur photographers before the 1980s.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 14:50 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV initial review (761 comments in total)
In reply to:

Parshua: No PDAF?! Who is making these stupid decisions at Olympus? Just fire them already and get profitable overnight.
What mad idiot thinks that taking in-focus photos easily should be a differentiating factor in the line up of CAMERAS?! Olympus was the first to market with mirrorless PDAF ffs.

I have an E-M10 II, which also doesn't have phase detect auto focus. Amazingly, my pictures are in focus. Sometimes I even use manual focus. I know that's terribly retrogressive and vulgar of me - but it's a vice I somehow can't shake. People on DPR keep telling me what a bad camera I have, but somehow it keeps working just fine. Occasionally, I even take a picture I like. I expect my pictures are horrible though, but I'm just to ignorant to realize it.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 13:05 UTC

Unlike other brands, it looks like (from these pictures, at least) that someone at Ricoh/Pentax might actually be giving some thought to the haptics (size/shape/prominence/surface texture) of dials and buttons. About time someone did. It's a hugely undervalued, under-considered aspect of product design in the camera industry. I'd like to have a play with this one just for that.

One of the easiest and most pleasant to use cameras I ever used was an old Pentax MZ-M - one of their last film cameras back in the day. The DPR crowd would instantly write it off as cheap and 'plasticy', of course, but whoever designed it had clearly really thought through the user experience - very simple, undemanding and elegant, easy in the hand, all controls just fell into place, just worked, stress free.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2020 at 22:40 UTC as 61st comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Primrose Wood: I am about to buy a new camera for my beloved Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 12-100 mm lens. Should I get an Olympus or a Panasonic body?

Whichever one works best for you and your preferences. Recent business news need not influence your decision.

FWIW, personally, I'd look at an EM-5 III, for the amazing image stabilization in a small body that would be a really useful match with your lens, especially at the longer end - a genuine photographic innovation.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2020 at 18:15 UTC
In reply to:

Bigsensorisbest: If they had done full frame years ago they would have a reasonable share of the market instead of this mess I would always have gone for olympus full frame over sony

gravis92 - going to go delete all my m4/3 images at 800iso and above. What was i thinking?

Bigsensorisbest - Can't fault your apposite username. But if "that's the end of it" why aren't more people shooting 10x8 cameras?

The current pandemic, stay at home situation has prompted me to finally get around to digitising my archive of 35mm transparencies. Lots of fun in a nostalgic way, and it's been great to revisit a lot of pictures I hadn't seen blown up in detail for years. But however you look at it, modern digital cameras (including my phone) blow them away in any objective measure of resolution, acuity, color accuracy, take your pick. But somehow, I still love some of those images, for all their supposed objective technical flaws. It really doesn't matter all that much. The never ending quest for 'image quality' seems futile at this point. Every modern digital camera has far more of it than we were usually quite happy with a generation ago.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2020 at 17:47 UTC

Damn. For a moment there I thought Fuji might have brought back Natura. You tease.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2020 at 16:06 UTC as 193rd comment
In reply to:

Bigsensorisbest: If they had done full frame years ago they would have a reasonable share of the market instead of this mess I would always have gone for olympus full frame over sony

"You people". Camera brands really are tribes for some, I guess.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2020 at 15:29 UTC
In reply to:

fuego6: It's not like my camera and lenses are going to stop working anytime soon... and if folks will be jumping ship - I should be able to get some nice used items for cheap in a few months... like the 300 2.8 pro which will complete the system along with the super wide 7mm Laowa... Come on folks... JUMP SHIP already and give me some cheaper prices on this gear!

Yep. Hoping for opportunities. Really enjoy using this format and no plans to stop. Don't understand the camera gear as 'investment' notion. The money's gone, go and enjoy using it. If the maker goes bust, so what? The gear doesn't evaporate. Modern stuff will last many years in normal use.

Couple of weeks ago I gave in to temptation and bought the new(ish) cute little Olympus 12-45mm. A really neat combo with the small bodies. Wish I'd waited a bit to see if prices dropped. Oh well, maybe I'll be able to pick up another body for cheap in the dip if enough nervous camera 'investors' panic-sell.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2020 at 15:26 UTC
In reply to:

Bigsensorisbest: If they had done full frame years ago they would have a reasonable share of the market instead of this mess I would always have gone for olympus full frame over sony

What is this obsession with 'full frame'? (How did the marketing weasels manage to persuade people it's 'full' anything? In the film world it's considered a small format.) I've got some 'full frame' Nikon gear. It's great for studio, car-based, housebound photography, but I hate it for hiking, biking, general travel. Huge lenses, too heavy, takes up way too much bag space, cumbersome, tiring to work with over hours, difficult to stabilize, needs heavier support. A user-experience downer.

Yes, the 'image quality' is marginally better if you care enough to forensically examine big prints for the purposes of bragging rights, but that's got nothing to do with how good your photos might be in any qualitative or critical sense.

Meanwhile my Olympus gear is an order of magnitude easier and more pleasurable to use and handle, offers maybe 90% of the 'image quality', however you care to define that, and doesn't make photography feel like a chore.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2020 at 14:56 UTC
Total: 73, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »