Edgar Matias

Lives in Canada Toronto, Canada
Works as a Keyboard Designer
Has a website at http://edgarmatias.com
Joined on Mar 5, 2012

Comments

Total: 187, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Edgar Matias: Both look pretty bad.

Actually, I disagree.

They both look fake, just in different ways...

The Nikon looks filmic fake (24 fps, like a movie) while the iPhone image looks interpolated fake (60 fps).

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2018 at 04:40 UTC

Both look pretty bad.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2018 at 14:48 UTC as 30th comment | 2 replies
On article Canon RF 35mm F1.8 Macro IS STM sample gallery (314 comments in total)
In reply to:

DamianFI: 56 image samples of a macro lens and not one macro sample?

I use the 30mm/2.8 Panasonic (60mm-e). Great lens but still wish it was smaller/lighter.

Prior to that I used the Olympus 45mm/1.8, which is an awesome lens, but sadly not macro.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2018 at 15:09 UTC
On article Canon RF 35mm F1.8 Macro IS STM sample gallery (314 comments in total)
In reply to:

DamianFI: 56 image samples of a macro lens and not one macro sample?

@SafariBob yes, but most people think of macro lenses in terms of photographing bugs.

I do a lot of product photography of larger objects. You wouldn't think they'd need a marcro lens, but they do.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2018 at 16:37 UTC

Deep felt *thank-you* for stating the equivalent focal lengths!

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2018 at 01:29 UTC as 28th comment
On article Canon RF 35mm F1.8 Macro IS STM sample gallery (314 comments in total)
In reply to:

DamianFI: 56 image samples of a macro lens and not one macro sample?

IMO, the main benefit of it being a macro lens is not having to worry about running up against the minimum focus distance.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2018 at 08:25 UTC
On article The Samsung Galaxy A9 is the first quad-cam smartphone (114 comments in total)
In reply to:

kobakokh: very strange description... which focal length have this 4 cameras? Whats mean 2x camera? And which focal length has main camera?

@Lars Rehm just curious... When you get these press announcements, do they not include a press contact, in case journalists have questions?

Could you not ask them what the focal lengths are?

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2018 at 21:33 UTC
On article Lenovo teases Z5 Pro smartphone with quad-camera module (100 comments in total)

Why post news about multi-lens phones, without stating the (equivalent) focal lengths?

Am I supposed to guess?

Have you forgotten you're a photography website?

Sheesh.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2018 at 00:06 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX100 VI: What you need to know (445 comments in total)

Guaranteed that lens will be soft.

The MUCH bigger RX10(ii) lens has the same 24-200mm range and it's soft compared to (for example) the LX10 lens that's only 24-72, or (presumably) the original RX100.

WIll be interesting to see how this RX100vi compares to the RX10ii image quality.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2018 at 22:10 UTC as 120th comment | 5 replies
On article Sony announces Cyber-shot RX100 VI with 24-200mm zoom (742 comments in total)

Guaranteed that lens will be soft.

The MUCH bigger RX10 lens has that 24-200mm range and it's soft compared to (for example) the LX10 lens that's only 24-72.

There's no free lunch.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2018 at 22:04 UTC as 75th comment

Great to see this lens review -- especially given that it's m4/3.

Keep 'em coming...

Link | Posted on May 1, 2018 at 21:56 UTC as 21st comment
In reply to:

Gatoraied: Barney, you're a better editor/writer than a wildlife photographer. If I paid you to showcase a lens I made, I'd want my money back. The elk photos were not good. I'm guessing the focus point was not on the head in #1 as the middle of the body has some sharpness, however the head bordered on being blurred. The other elk shots were also not good. I understand some of the photos were taken during it snowing, but to post images such as these to showcase a new lens (which is probably a good lens) was poor judgement imo. Lastly, I've been to Yellowstone a few times and never even thought to take a photo of a sign not matter the intent when this place is a wildlife & geo-feature extravaganza. Id be happy to test your lenses next time.

Haaa, well played...

Link | Posted on May 1, 2018 at 21:48 UTC
On article DPReview TV Episode 1: Sony a7 III review (348 comments in total)
In reply to:

Phil Askey: Good job

Hear, hear.

Took me forever to get out of the habit of typing photo.askey.net.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2018 at 23:07 UTC
In reply to:

marcio_napoli: Headline: "smartphone filmmakers"... filmmakers eh?... hmmmmmm...

Please, don't insult filmmakers. Please. These words are never meant to be put together.

A filmmaker is moved by passion, by perfectionism, by an eternal chase for the best he/she can do. A filmmaker has standards, and will pursue it at all costs.

Smartphone use is at the opposite end.

You don't make movies with smartphones, you make very forgettable mundane captures of passing by life. That's not filmmaking.

Things that require ultimate quality and craftsmanship (like filmmaking) are outside the realm of smartphones.

Lars Rehm, thanks for the insult.
And yeah, smartphone lovers, your move.

I’m saying that the widely held view among (still shooters) here, is that you want to have the best equipment, ideally FF, and shoot raw. The goal is to get the best possible shot.

People with that mindset are now telling a film maker that if he were any good, a smartphone should be sufficient to shoot his movie. You don’t see the hypocrisy there?

I’m a big believer in smartphones for shooting photos and video, but with the amount of effort / planning / money required to shoot a movie, what logic is there in using a smartphone to film it? It’s proposterous.

It’s like after climbing Mount Everest, casually whipping out your iPhone to take a few shots, and then climbing back down. Everybody here would be shaking their heads, saying “why didn’t you take a real camera?!?”

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2018 at 08:09 UTC
In reply to:

marcio_napoli: Headline: "smartphone filmmakers"... filmmakers eh?... hmmmmmm...

Please, don't insult filmmakers. Please. These words are never meant to be put together.

A filmmaker is moved by passion, by perfectionism, by an eternal chase for the best he/she can do. A filmmaker has standards, and will pursue it at all costs.

Smartphone use is at the opposite end.

You don't make movies with smartphones, you make very forgettable mundane captures of passing by life. That's not filmmaking.

Things that require ultimate quality and craftsmanship (like filmmaking) are outside the realm of smartphones.

Lars Rehm, thanks for the insult.
And yeah, smartphone lovers, your move.

Question for all the armchair film makers here lecturing marcio_napoli...

How many of you shoot stills in raw format?

JPEG is just as good, so why bother shooting raw?

I think you know what I mean.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2018 at 07:01 UTC

Could we get mm-equivalent focal lengths please?

2x zoom is pretty meaningless if you don't know what the 1x equivalent focal length is -- certainly a lot more relevant than reporting the 1.4 µm pixel size.

This is a photo site -- please remember your audience.

Thanks. :-)

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2018 at 23:58 UTC as 17th comment | 1 reply
On article Have your say: Best compact camera of 2017 (142 comments in total)
In reply to:

AKH: How did the Sony RX IV end up in the high-end compact category? - it is heavier than the Nikon D850 body and the most high-end part of the camera is its crazy high price.

How about this... "Best fixed-lens / zoom camera"

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 21:25 UTC
In reply to:

kobakokh: bad news is dpreview doesn't update own reviews when something corrected by manufacturers. For example, they many times gave low scores to Nikon camras just for this bad application, but now? whats now? is they will update their review of Nikon, they must give them 2 scores more...

I don't understand the concern about this. Makes me wonder if you are a PR person or Nikon employee.

Anybody buying a camera of that caliber will research it thoroughly.

Given how opinionated everyone is here, I doubt they will just blindly follow an old-ish review. Reviews are a source of critical information, not a school test that you try to haggle with the teacher for a higher score.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2017 at 04:27 UTC
In reply to:

kobakokh: bad news is dpreview doesn't update own reviews when something corrected by manufacturers. For example, they many times gave low scores to Nikon camras just for this bad application, but now? whats now? is they will update their review of Nikon, they must give them 2 scores more...

If Nikon had shipped a good app right from the beginning, there'd be no issue.

They only have themselves to blame for the earlier bad reviews.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2017 at 12:09 UTC
In reply to:

Raist3d: This looks great but I think pursuing a bigger body is a mistake. If a lot of this tech was packed in a GX80/GX85 sized model that would have been amazing.

Going bigger size is what killed original 4/3rds in the first place. I hope Panasonic trickles down these advancements to the GX80/GX85 line into a GX90 asap.

The better sensors will work their way into the smaller models. It's just a matter of time.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 01:13 UTC
Total: 187, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »