Lives in United States North State, CA, United States
Works as a Retired engineer
Joined on Nov 19, 2010
About me:

Nikon D7000
Nikon V1
Nikon Nikon V2
Nikkor 10-100mm lens
Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM
Tokina AF 16-50mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX
Tamron SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di-II LD
Nikon 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-S DX VR ED
Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VR
Nikon SB-600 Speed light


Total: 72, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On article Olympus PEN E-P5 Review (500 comments in total)
In reply to:

SHood: "shutter shock" is a problem with all mirrorless cameras. Smaller body is part of the problem but also due to the shutter requiring a close/open to start the exposure and then another close/open to end it. This quick double shutter action is different than DSLRs which just need to open to start the exposure and then close to end it.

I have found with my GH3 that shooting at hi-speed continuous shooting does help as liveview is disabled so you don't have the double shutter action except to start the first image and end the last image in the sequence. The electronic shutter on Panasonic bodies also helps but is limited.

The new 1/8000s shutter speed on the E-P5 and E-M1 has probably made it even worse as the shutter is now designed to move even faster. Only the global shutter will totally eradicate this.

I have never experienced shutter shock with my Nikon V1, so no, it is not a problem with all mirrorless cameras. Maybe Olympus just can't get good engineers since they are having financial problems?

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2013 at 02:41 UTC
On article Olympus PEN E-P5 Review (500 comments in total)

A thousand dollar camera body and it doesn't come with a viewfinder? Really? So you have to buy the big ugly VF4 EVF separately for another $300 which makes the camera body $1300 and to top it off, it takes blurry pictures! Who in there right mind would buy the E-P5 when the OM-D E-M5 with an EVF and no blurry pictures can be had for around $900? With designs and marketing like this it is little wonder Olympus is in financial difficulties.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2013 at 23:51 UTC as 178th comment | 8 replies
On article Nikon Coolpix P7800 real-world samples (82 comments in total)

The images show an amazing amount of detail for such a small sensor camera. No doubt in large part due to the excellent Nikkor lens in the P7800 and excellent noise handling that retains detail as well. This is about as good as it gets for a camera with a tiny sensor!

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2013 at 03:37 UTC as 32nd comment | 5 replies
On article Nikon AW1 First Impressions Review (591 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: For those of you offended by the comparison of this rugged camera to the classic Nikonos, please remember that Dpreiew never made that assertion. They merely posed the question in the headline for this new item. ("Nikonos reborn?")

Most likely the question was asked to draw attention and elicit response, and not to claim that the Ruggedized Nikon 1 is in the same league with the classic underwater SLR.

Like a dog with a bone, they just won't let it go until they are done chewing on it!

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2013 at 17:29 UTC

I like Fujifilm's innovation approach with their sensors, but unfortunately Fujifilm missed the mark with the uninteresting XA-1. There is nothing new or special about this XA-1. No EVF and no on-sensor PDAF. There are so many other cameras that use this 16 MP sensor right now that I don't see a compelling reason to chose this one.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2013 at 03:45 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
On photo IMGP0163 in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (3 comments in total)

I am not impressed with these images at all. IMGP0213 looks like a poorly exposed flat P&S shot, and the guys white shirt in IMGP0163 is blow and shows no detail. I could go on, but let's just hope the problem is the operator and not the Pentax camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2013 at 02:49 UTC as 1st comment | 2 replies
On a photo in the Pentax K-50 Preview Samples sample gallery (3 comments in total)

I am not impressed with these images at all. IMGP0213 looks like a poorly exposed flat P&S shot, and the guys white shirt in IMGP0163 is blow and shows no detail. I could go on, but let's just hope the problem is the operator and not the Pentax camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2013 at 02:49 UTC as 1st comment | 2 replies
On article Just Posted: Our Nikon Coolpix A review (351 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cailean Gallimore: I'll buy the Ricoh, but the Nikon doesn't seem to have any special appeal... It's a decent camera, but nothing special. The Ricoh is driven by incredibly photographer friendly software, and in that lies it's special appeal.

The Coolpix A does have special appeal for Nikon DSLR owners because their Nikon flash units will work with it, but not so with the Ricoh. That's reason enough for Nikon owners to skip the off-brand cameras like Ricoh. It's just the way it is.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2013 at 02:18 UTC
In reply to:

fmian: The question is, will this lens perform well wide open, or will it have to be stopped down?
Most good fast prime lenses benefit greatly from being stopped down.
For example, a 1.4 prime will perform much better stopped down to 2.8, and will still give you a decent shallow dof when required. A 2 stop sacrifice for sharpness.
Will this lens need to be stopped down as well? Cause if it needs to be by say, 2 stops, then you are left with a dof equivalent of >5.6, which is not very shallow.

All Nikon CX prime lenses are sharp wide open. This is what SLRgear said about the $200 18.5mm f1.8:
"The 18.5mm ƒ/1.8 lens produces tack-sharp images, even straight out of the gate at ƒ/1.8."~
At $900, I would expect the 32mm f1.2 to do at least as well.
And keep in mind the more closely spaced photosites of the 1" sensor puts more demands on the resolving power of any lens. None of the FX Nikon lenses can resolve as well on the 1" sensor as the little an inexpensive 18.5 f1.8!

Link | Posted on May 15, 2013 at 16:13 UTC

Although this 32mm f/1.2 lens is no doubt a stellar lens, it is also an outlier in terms of price compared to other Nikon CX mount lenses for the Nikon 1 cameras. On the plus side, at least all the other Nikon 1 lenses are reasonably priced, and most Nikon 1 owners can easily live without this lens, and purchase the superb 18.5 f1.8 for a mere $200 instead. I doubt Nikon will sell many of the 32mm f/1.2 at this lofty price, but it is nice to know that Nikon is committed to making excellent lenses for the Nikon 1 cameras. The future of the Nikon 1 system is looking brighter all the time!

Link | Posted on May 15, 2013 at 04:58 UTC as 43rd comment | 7 replies

Why isn't there a tripod mounting foot and collar for this rather large and heavy lens? Even my much smaller and lighter Tokina 50-135 f2.8 has one Hopefully the final version of this lens will have one as well, otherwise this lens becomes a real mount puller!
- Jon

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2013 at 17:00 UTC as 14th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

AllOtherNamesTaken: Too bad about the 1/1.7" sensor. Looks like an OK camera other than the sensor. With how small M43, Nikon V1, and Sony RX100 type cameras are, there is no excuse to be using such a small sensor IMO. Just not for me, but I'm sure some will like it.

What about the Fujifilm X10 with a f2.0-f2.8lens? It at least has a somewhat larger 2/3-inch sensor with better high ISO image quality and probably a stop more dynamic tonal range at base ISO than this Pentax "enthusiast" camera.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2013 at 20:24 UTC
On article Just Posted: Pentax MX-1 hands-on preview (173 comments in total)
In reply to:

acuberosm: The camera the same lens, the same sensor and the same screen as the Olympus ZX-2. Probably these cameras were made by the same manufacturer.

I just compared those two cameras and the similarities are so similar that I think you are correct, they are made by the same camera manufacturer. Good catch!

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2013 at 16:36 UTC
On article Just Posted: Pentax MX-1 hands-on preview (173 comments in total)

I don't understand why Pentax is so intent on designing and marketing higher end cameras around a tiny 1/1.7" sensor at a time when most photo enthusiasts are moving to larger sensor cameras in this market segment. The Sony RX-100 with a much larger 1" sensor appears to be smaller and lighter than this clunky Pentax MX-1 retro design.
Unfortunately, It appears that the Pentax acquisition by Ricoh has not improved the marketing savvy of the old Pentax, and the MX-1 (like the Pentax Q), will be yet another poor selling over-priced camera with a tiny 1/1.7" sensor for a very small niche market. Too bad the more savvy and technology innovative Fujifilm did not acquire the Pentax camera division. Oh well....

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2013 at 16:26 UTC as 49th comment | 6 replies
On article Dpreview Users' Poll: Best Camera of 2012? (1507 comments in total)

Kind of silly that the Olympus OM-D EM-5 is in second place when it has the old CDAF focusing issues of not being able to track a moving subject with PDAF when other cameras costing hundreds less have this feature.
The only thing "best" about the OM-D EM-5 is the best sensor of any m4/3 camera to date,( and they have Sony to thank for that one). Unfortunately the IQ still does not match the best of the APS-C sensors though.

The marketing hype for this camera not withstanding, there is just not anything new or special about the Olympus OM-D EM-5 that we have not seen before.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2012 at 08:05 UTC as 530th comment | 3 replies
On article Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

viking79: I would have liked to see a bit about how the ND filter works in the Samsung EX2f. It would be nice to know how well it works, if it is an optical type, etc. I think the feature is unique to all the tested cameras.


Internal ND filters are a kludge compared to having a super fast electronic shutter with speeds of 1/16000 sec, like the Nikon 1 cameras have.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2012 at 01:09 UTC

No. DxOmark's lens test results are already bewildering, and not very helpful in choosing a lens for me at least. DxOmark' rates most lenses closer to poor than any test site I have ever seen and gives the impression that one would have to pay at least $2000 to get a decent lens for their Nikon D3200!

I much prefer's interactive blur index graphics for an indication of what one can expect from a lens in the real world. DxOmark is for those few who like to t contemplate the String Theory of the universe, but not for those interested in doing photography in the real world.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2012 at 20:17 UTC as 21st comment
On article Just Posted: Sony Alpha SLT-A99 review (499 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: Strange, DPR gives the A99 a better low iso rating than the full frame cameras w/o light absorbing SLT mirror and same sensor tech. Must clearly be a mistake. Moreover, DPR finds no nice words for the A99 AF system. Still gets the top score. Strange I find.

More than just strange, and more like an early Christmas present to Sony and their fans! Maybe the DPR staff does not care, but at some level they must know these kind of overreaching scores, awards and and recommendations for a camera with some major shortcomings (such as entry level APS-C- like AF performance in a $2800 FF camera body), only hurts their credibility as camera reviewers. I know it has with me.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2012 at 00:48 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sony Alpha SLT-A99 review (499 comments in total)

With the recent price drop announcements* for the Nikon D800 body to $2799.95, and the Nikon D600 24-85 VR kit now reduced by $700, to only $1999.95, it is obvious to any reasonable person that the Sony a99 is WAY overpriced at $2800 for the body only. A thousand dollars to high!

How DPR ignored these huge price discrepancies in their value rating for the a99 is anyone's guess, but unless Sony substantially reduces the exorbitant price on the a99, they will not be able to sell very many of them, DPR gold award notwithstanding.



Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2012 at 21:23 UTC as 35th comment | 6 replies
On article Just Posted: Sony Alpha SLT-A99 review (499 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: Sony made a big gamble by dropping the OVF on all their cameras. A top level pentaprism OVF will always be the state-of-the-art, while in one or two years time, the A99 EVF will be old technology, superseded by new models. Just ask Fuji X-Pro1 users how they felt when the X-E1 came out with a higher specified EVF.
So perhaps one of the negatives of adopting an evolving technology like EVF is an increased need to upgrade. Whereas a 100% OVF of a 5D3, D800 or A900 will always be about as good as it gets.

This is an excellent point that I had not really considered until your post! Sony is enjoying extremely high profit margins with their SLT cameras, but their cameras low resale values makes upgrading to a new camera with an improved EVF even more costly for Sony SLT owners. I think I'll stick with my Nikon DSLRs with their optical viewfinders that are not obsolete and worthless in a few years.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2012 at 16:31 UTC
Total: 72, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »