Mastering Light

Joined on Jan 18, 2018

Comments

Total: 217, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Kharan: I'm not impressed. An RX10M4 would produce better results than this, and you get a free camera along with the superior lens for the same money. Panasonic missed the mark badly with the 50-200mm, which could've been an excellent and very useful lens for MFT :(

@kharan
You continue to spread misinformation and lie about others posted.

I never said the RX100/4 only went to 400mm. You know that I picked that focal length because it is the topic of this article.

It is also very true that the RX100/4 zoom is painfully slow. If the lens is at 30mm it takes a while to get to 400mm. If time is short, you will miss that shot.

Also, the difference between m43 and Canon APSC is 2x vs. 1.6x. The RX100 is 2.7x Your claim the RX100/m43 difference is big and the apsc/m43 difference is small, is misleading (as usual).

Link | Posted on May 2, 2018 at 17:31 UTC
In reply to:

Kharan: I'm not impressed. An RX10M4 would produce better results than this, and you get a free camera along with the superior lens for the same money. Panasonic missed the mark badly with the 50-200mm, which could've been an excellent and very useful lens for MFT :(

Kharan is of course wrong.

I have experience with the RX10/4 and the zooming is painfully slow. At 400mm it is basically F4 on a 1 inch sensor which means it has a 1 stop disadvantage. And while the lens is good for a super zoom, it can't compete with a sharp telephoto zoom. Then there is the problem that the lens is fixed, so there is no option for wider aperture primes.

Honestly if all one wants is 400mm and a 1 inch sensor, but an old Fz1000 for 1/4th the price of the RX10/4.

If you want a weathersealed ILC for wildlife and hiking get this lens or the 100-400 with a G9.

Link | Posted on May 2, 2018 at 14:52 UTC
In reply to:

keepreal: No disputing this is a high quality lens, but the size and weight for MFT is as much as I would tolerate on full frame and then only grudgingly. As for the price, gear now often is aimed at those who are prepared to pay way over the top. Even with the quality, this is not value for money.

Ephotozine of this lens says " It is easy to see the attraction of lighter, smaller cameras and lenses, especially when the quality is still extremely high." LOL.

Lol!!!

Dr Jon is busted for LYING again.
The Canon camera he cherry picked coats $3700 on Amazon.
The Olymous camera sells for $1800 new on Amazon

That is almost a $2000 difference!!!

Plus the crappy Canon can barely shoot at 5 FPS.

Of course Jon is being dishonest which is why he picked a lens different than the one in the article and being discussed in these comments.

Link | Posted on May 2, 2018 at 13:05 UTC
In reply to:

keepreal: No disputing this is a high quality lens, but the size and weight for MFT is as much as I would tolerate on full frame and then only grudgingly. As for the price, gear now often is aimed at those who are prepared to pay way over the top. Even with the quality, this is not value for money.

Ephotozine of this lens says " It is easy to see the attraction of lighter, smaller cameras and lenses, especially when the quality is still extremely high." LOL.

Wow Dr Jon is spreading the BS like a true fanboy.

First, notice how he failed to mention the Canon costs a whopping $2000 more! Hilariously, his camera can only shoot at 5 FPS!!! The Oly can shoot at 60 FPS.

Then he cherry picked a lens different than the article. And of course failed to mention the M43 was almost 2 inches shorter than the giant Canon lens he picked!!! LOL!!!!!

And since the Oly he cherry picked is a bit sharper wide open it will still yield greater resolution despite being 100mm shorter!!!
And again, fanboy Jon is stuck at shooting at a lousy 5 FPF while the Oly is shooting at anywhere from 12 FPS to 18 FPS to 60 FPS!

Link | Posted on May 2, 2018 at 11:26 UTC
In reply to:

Mastering Light: I do not understand the small apertures used. F8 and F7.1?

Anyway, with 5 axis IS and the smaller lenses, these cameras are by far the best for many hikers and wildlife shooters.

And if you are only going to shoot between F4 and F8 then the 100-400 would be a better choice.

And for those who don't get it, you will get far more detail on a distant object with a G9 and a Canon 400mm lens than with any FF camera and the same 400mm lens.

@FR3SH

Great point. For half the price of a Canon camera, one get more detail (resolution) when shooting distant subjects. So while the G9 is a "crop" camera, it is a crop of an 80MP image (vs. Full 50MP, 36MP, or 24MP).

Link | Posted on May 1, 2018 at 18:18 UTC
In reply to:

J A C S: One of the problems with slow telephoto lenses (yes, f/5.6-8 eq. is slow) is weak background separation. This is not such a problem with, say, 50mm eq. FF lenses of this type like 100-400/4-5.6 are on the slow side, as well and faster lenses are very expensive.

J A C S, you appear to be confused and misinformed.

Many of these pics were taken at F8 and F7.1 (on a sharp F4 zoom). The lack of separation was intentional.

But to help you search for NZMacro's gallery. He primarily uses Sony APSC and Olympus M43 cameras and you will see he gets plenty of "separation. And for those who do not know he shoots with manual autofocus- a great skill.

If one owns an FD 600mm canon lens, he will get far greater detail on distant subjects with an M43 camera like the G9 versus any Canon FF camera. It is that simple.

Link | Posted on May 1, 2018 at 18:12 UTC

I do not understand the small apertures used. F8 and F7.1?

Anyway, with 5 axis IS and the smaller lenses, these cameras are by far the best for many hikers and wildlife shooters.

And if you are only going to shoot between F4 and F8 then the 100-400 would be a better choice.

And for those who don't get it, you will get far more detail on a distant object with a G9 and a Canon 400mm lens than with any FF camera and the same 400mm lens.

Link | Posted on May 1, 2018 at 13:50 UTC as 38th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

ttran88: By the time this gets released Sony will be dumping A7III on the gray market for $1600 a pop. As we speak A7RII are going for $1800 new gray market. OG A7 are selling for new $799. What will Nikon release and for how much?

Same for Sony. Mostly due to Exchange rates. The Sony I couldn't find for 30% off in less than a year was A99II. Maybe due to such low volume.

Sony uses it to inflate "value" too (because their "units sold" keeps dropping). They sell cameras with bundled lenses ar discounts in various markets then claim MSRP for "value". Exchange rates inflate numbers even more.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2018 at 22:08 UTC
In reply to:

ttran88: By the time this gets released Sony will be dumping A7III on the gray market for $1600 a pop. As we speak A7RII are going for $1800 new gray market. OG A7 are selling for new $799. What will Nikon release and for how much?

Won't matter.

The reason over priced under performing Canon mirrorless has been beating Sony in regions like Japan is because people prefer Canon and Nikon to Sony. Tech matters little.

The Sony user base is tiny, and there are many more diehard Nikon fans (Sonys ILC market share actually dropped or at best was flat over the past 10 years-at only 12-14%).

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2018 at 20:36 UTC
In reply to:

Kiril Karaatanasov: So they cannot make it for 2018 as initially speculated/leaked. It basically means they are kicking the can down the road with little to show.....

Nikon's frequent superior DR has nothing to do with jpegs.

Nikon has a large user base that dwarfs Sonys (Sony has been below 14% of ILC sales for more than 10 years straight now). On day one a lot of diehards will buy in.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2018 at 20:32 UTC
In reply to:

Nukunukoo: For that to even succeed, Nikon must deliver a system that is at least better than the A7iii at a better price. Sony now knows that they should deliver an A7iv by then to steal Nikon’s thunder, at the very least. Next year’s going to be interesting indeed!

They don't need anything special yet (though Nikon usually gets better results than Sony with Sony sensors D600>A7, D800>A7R, etc.)

Canon with a couple lousy mirrorless bodies has been killing sony in regions like Japan and increasing their lead over Sony mirrorless (FF and APSC combined!) for more than two years in a row.

The Nikon user base dwarfs Sonys, and just like Canon is already starting to beat Sony, so too should Nikon. History has proven over and over, the best tech has little to with sales.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2018 at 20:28 UTC
In reply to:

Kiril Karaatanasov: So they cannot make it for 2018 as initially speculated/leaked. It basically means they are kicking the can down the road with little to show.....

????

You clearly don't know what "kicking the can down road" means.
They will have FF mirrorless in less than a year. Canon will too (probably sooner)

Nikon usually gets more out of Sony sensors so many will be ready to give Nikon a go again. Nikon's user base huge compared to Sonys and I expect over time the Nikon will do very well.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2018 at 19:47 UTC

Both Nikon and Canon will have FF mirrorless in less than a year.

Their new cameras will cannibalize both DSRLs as well as Sony FF mirrorless. (Many Sony users own Canon lenses).

Nikon for whatever reason is able to get more out of Sony sensors (D600>A7. D800>A7R, etc.) so I'll be curious to see if they can do it with mirrorless too.

By next year DSLRs will still be the largest segment with only 2 major players (and pentax with about 5%)
In a couple years FF mirrorless will have 3 major players (it won't take Canon long to grab 20% and maybe Nikon too)

And mirrorless overall will have 6 major players. Anyone not making DSLRs will remain a bit player or "niche'" until DSLR sales drop below 40% (and that won't happen for several years).

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2018 at 19:42 UTC as 110th comment | 6 replies

This idea is mostly BS.

Try this. Take one image, increase size by 4x. (I.E. 24mp to 96mp). Then sharpen and process. Now reduce crack to original size. "Sometimes" the image will look more detailed, almost like it was taken at a higher resolution! Usually both sides end up looking no better and occasionally worse.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2018 at 13:59 UTC as 25th comment
On article Why smartphone cameras are blowing our minds (414 comments in total)

People here just don't get it.

They remind me of a person standing in the middle of the interstate highway saying "that truck coming at me looks far away".

They think mirrorless cameras will so replace DSLRs, but within a few years high end smartphones will be the defacto tool for most top amateurs and semi-pros while only pros will still use ILCs. We are already mostly there.

Also, virtually everyone already processes there pics with software. Smartphones and simply taking it to a new and better level. Soften, dodge, burn, sharpen, lighten, etc... we've been doing it for decades. Now smartphones DP it faster and sometimes better.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2018 at 13:42 UTC as 150th comment | 5 replies
On article Why smartphone cameras are blowing our minds (414 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lee Jay: Still next to useless without focal length control, at least for me.

Guess what. No ILC has "focal length" control. You have to buy lenses for that.

Smartphones have lenses built in and YES you can buy other lenses separately. Did you miss the article comparing a $30 smartphone lens to a $6000 ILC/lens combo?

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2018 at 13:33 UTC
On article Sony a7 III Review (2195 comments in total)
In reply to:

Luddhi: I like the new format for the reviews and appreciate the "What we think" section. I think DPR deserves some recognition for their work on refining the review process and reporting.
I also congratulate Sony for what appears to be a very good update for the A7 series. It gives me some confidence that they will bring a similar attitude to bear on updating the a6x00 series, which, as someone who prefers the APS-C format is encouraging.

@T3
You are extremely gullible if you believe "value" numbers over units.

In Japan where Canon is crushing Sony, we have actual Unit Sales. Not shipments or shipped "value".

"Value" is extremely misleading because manufacturers often use MSRP even though items were sold at discounts and bundled with "free" items. Also, Sony "estimates " value of other manufacturers items. It is a complete joke.

No matter, Sony still only has 12-13% of the global ILC market. The same number as back in 2008. The completely failed at SLTs, and have 0% of the DSLR market which is 80% of ILCs in north America.

Sony relies heavily on FF mirrorless and 2 larger competitors are entering that segment. Expect their market share to get cut in half.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2018 at 17:27 UTC
On article Sony a7 III Review (2195 comments in total)
In reply to:

vscd: Now we can have long time exposure @10fps! ;) For real, it's a considerable cam for new beginners with no lens-circus or already choosen brand. After all I'm not impressed by what I see. It's a good cam...no doubt, with all advantages and disadvantages of a small mirrorless. Sony-fanboys will hype it, the rest will be unimpressed. Next.

@Bluebomber

You seem pretty clueless about Sony.

The reason why the LA-EA2 and 4 are so bad is because they are based on a terrible AF module from 2011 with only a few AF points. Blocking 1/3rd of the light makes matters worse. They can't use CDAF or OSPDAF at all.

Sadly, the new A7III and A7RIII can't shoot faster than 2.5 FPS with A mount lenses because of Sony crippling them. The A9 is the only one that can, but it costs well over $4000 and its mechanical shutter can still only shoot at 5 FPS. Sony has virtually killed off A mount.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2018 at 17:20 UTC
On article Sony a7 III Review (2195 comments in total)
In reply to:

vscd: Now we can have long time exposure @10fps! ;) For real, it's a considerable cam for new beginners with no lens-circus or already choosen brand. After all I'm not impressed by what I see. It's a good cam...no doubt, with all advantages and disadvantages of a small mirrorless. Sony-fanboys will hype it, the rest will be unimpressed. Next.

It is amazing how many Sony users deliberately use Canon EF mount lenses.

Sony crippled the A mount adapters. Most lenses need a crappy AF module from 2011 or get stuck at 2.5 FPS and other restrictions. My A mount lenses do NOT work well on my FE cameras.

I've talked to numerous Sony owners who can't wait to switch back once Nikon and Canon make FF mirrorless and since they all still have mostly non-Sony lenses it will be very easy.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2018 at 16:28 UTC
On article Sony a7 III Review (2195 comments in total)
In reply to:

Luddhi: I like the new format for the reviews and appreciate the "What we think" section. I think DPR deserves some recognition for their work on refining the review process and reporting.
I also congratulate Sony for what appears to be a very good update for the A7 series. It gives me some confidence that they will bring a similar attitude to bear on updating the a6x00 series, which, as someone who prefers the APS-C format is encouraging.

@T3 pretty much just humiliated himself. LOL!

In the US DSLRs still command near 80% of the ILC market. Amazon mirrorless sales account for a tiny fraction of the ILC market, and Amazon numbers are notoriously unreliable, (that is why Sony fans cling to the usually misleading numbers). Often you will see miscategorized items skewing numbers.

In markets like Japan where mirrorless is about 50%, Sony has been getting beat by Canon for years. And that is going by actual sales numbers from most retailers.

But the real concern is according to Sonys own records, they lost money every year on APSC, and only FF changed that...of course expect their FF sales to plummet after the 2 larger competitors enter the market.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2018 at 16:21 UTC
Total: 217, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »