tbcass

tbcass

Lives in United States Central, NY, United States
Works as a Retired and Loving It
Joined on Nov 21, 2005

Comments

Total: 1554, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On a photo in the Tamron 70-210mm F4 Di VC USD sample gallery sample gallery (1 comment in total)

The Minolta Beercan reincarnated.👴🏼

Link | Posted on May 23, 2018 at 18:13 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

MrBrightSide: You were probably still in diapers at the time so you’re forgiven for not knowing, but the camera you’re describing was released in 2004, the Epson R-D1 was a 6mp ccd-based rangefinder that used Leica lenses.

Unfortunately it was too far ahead of its time, it is only now that we’re realizing it was the camera we needed all along.

Nah. Rangefinders don't cut it for those of use who demand through the lens viewing whether OVF or EVF.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2018 at 13:30 UTC
In reply to:

DiffractionLtd: Why us a low-light Sony as a demo? Use an APS or m4/3rds where people always complain about noise.

I fail to see any improvement. You can remove all the noise while destroying detail with any camera or editor today.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2018 at 16:39 UTC
In reply to:

anticipation_of: Not perfect obviously, but clearly a massive improvement over traditional techniques. This is one area where I'd be happy to see an AI take the wheel.

You could achieve the same result with a good editor. The advantage is in the speed of the process, not the results.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2018 at 16:36 UTC

The processed image was better but it still sucks. There's no detail left in that image.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2018 at 16:35 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1453 comments in total)
In reply to:

robbo d: Comparing the k1 to an a7iii is also garbage.

2 quite different cameras.

Sure a7iii is new with all singing dancing AF. But k1 is 36mp, has puxel shift, astro and handheld stacking.....

In Australia prices show the sony a little dearer by 3/400 dollars.

K1 is its own camera and therefore should be reviewed as such. The editorial doesnt seem to really compensate for this rather just promotes modern video and AF.

If you shoot video your hardly going to buy pentax.

Funnily enough these are stills based cameras and Pentax is very very good at stills shooting.....

robbo d

Any good review has to compare a camera to all other cameras available. If you want to start a site that reviews and compares only Pentax cameras go for it. I think the review gives enough information for dedicated Pentax owners, especially in the way they compare it to the K1.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2018 at 13:26 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (558 comments in total)
In reply to:

tbcass: Why is the inability to zoom while shooting bursts considered such a disadvantage for sports? When I see sporting events the professional sports photographers use primes which don't have any zoom capability.

Sammy Yousef

Tell that to the pros who shoot sports with high priced primes. I also acknowledged that being able to zoom while shooting bursts is desirable. My problem is with the wording and using the term ESSENTIAL!!!! I believe I made that very clear.

Definition of essential; absolutely necessary; extremely important.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2018 at 14:12 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (558 comments in total)
In reply to:

tbcass: Why is the inability to zoom while shooting bursts considered such a disadvantage for sports? When I see sporting events the professional sports photographers use primes which don't have any zoom capability.

Sammy Yousef

But I still disagree with DPRs statement that the ability to shot bursts while zooming is ESSENTIAL for sports shooting, the key word being essential. Obviously the pros who shoot with primes are very serious sports shooters and can't zoom while shooting bursts.

essential; absolutely necessary; extremely important.

I bring this up not to defend the fact the RX10iv can't shoot bursts while zooming which I wish it could do. I bring it up because what DPR said is blatantly wrong. They should be more careful with the way they word things because people reading the review will take it to mean the RX10iv can't shoot sports. That very question has already been asked on the Sony forum.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2018 at 12:49 UTC
In reply to:

tbcass: People get all excited about these new lens releases when in reality they are hardly better than the old version. Lens design has reached a point where they're about as good as they can get.

I guess we have a different meaning about the term "substantially". If the old one was a fine lens I can't see how much better the new one could be. I guess some people consider any improvement no matter how slight to be substantial.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 17:55 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony RX10 IV Review (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: If I'm going to spend this kind of money for an all-in-one setup, I'd rather get an Olympus M43 body and a 12-100mm zoom instead. Probably better image quality and flexibility.

aliasfox

IMO the best option is to have an all in one like the RX10iv AND an ICL camera with lenses. I often carry my RX10iv and a FF ICL with a 24-105 lens at the same time since they both fit in a small sling bag I own. You may say that is a costly option but it's not an issue for me.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 16:58 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoFactor: Now if you just use Canon's great new glass on Sony's great new cameras, you have a great system!

Yake
Better to you but not to me ;-) I find Canon colors too orange but that could be because I'm used to Sony colors. Get my point?

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 16:38 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoFactor: Now if you just use Canon's great new glass on Sony's great new cameras, you have a great system!

Yake
The switchers have gotten used to the Canon colors and any change bothers them. That in itself does not make Canon colors better. Nobody needs to settle on the default colors of any camera because JPEG shooters can change them in the camera while RAW shooters can do it during the editing process.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 16:14 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoFactor: Now if you just use Canon's great new glass on Sony's great new cameras, you have a great system!

But I don't like Canon colors! About the only thing Canon users have to brag about is the false idea their colors are better and the fact they have more lenses than anybody else.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 15:55 UTC

People get all excited about these new lens releases when in reality they are hardly better than the old version. Lens design has reached a point where they're about as good as they can get.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 15:55 UTC as 68th comment | 3 replies
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (558 comments in total)
In reply to:

tbcass: Why is the inability to zoom while shooting bursts considered such a disadvantage for sports? When I see sporting events the professional sports photographers use primes which don't have any zoom capability.

Here's what DPR said;

"Any serious sports photographer knows that the ability to zoom out on a subject as they approach, while also maintaining focus is essential to the way most people shoot action. We've reached out to Sony to see if this is something that could perhaps be enabled via firmware update."

All the pros I see shooting professional sports with primes are certainly serious sports shooters and obviously they don't zoom while shooting bursts.

An air show is not sport shooting and that is not what DPR was talking about, but it still can be done successfully by shooting a short burst, zoom out and shoot again. Maybe not ideal but still possible.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 13:49 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony RX10 IV Review (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

UllerellU: I am waiting for my RX10 1 to replace my deceased FZ1000. I have learned to love and hate these 1 ", I love its versatility, but I detest its image quality in some occasions and the difficulty of playing with the DOF I hope not to notice much the downgrade from FZ1000 to RX10, but it was the most economical. I like to always carry a camera to frame and compose, in addition to my a6000 with a couple of good prime ... On the RX10 IV you can have 1000 focus points, a zoom that extends up to 1200mm or whatever you want, but it will always be a 1 ", with all its limitations, I would never pay what they ask for it, it's an exaggeration.

MatVicensPhoto

I did buy the best. The RX10iv is the best bridge camera. Be aware it's not my only camera because I also own a FF camera.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2018 at 17:51 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony RX10 IV Review (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

SaltLakeGuy: I'm super happy to have Chris on board doing the review movies now. I'm not at all surprised he had to take some pot shots at it's performance or usage. This is to be expected. All I can say is after having sold off a ton of top Nikon and Sony cameras over the last few years, the RX10MkIV is meeting all my professional real estate needs coupled with the occasional portrait and landscape commissions that come alone. The issues he described are not things I run into with MY use so perhaps I'm dodging all those bullets he mentioned. For some indeed this is a ideal camera and depending on the final usage of the files, is more than up to the task for nice larger prints as well. Sure beats shelling out the $7,000-$10,000 I shelled out before.

Every real estate agent I've ever seen uses cameras with 24mm or longer. Maybe wider would be better in some cases but it certainly isn't a necessity.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2018 at 16:33 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony RX10 IV Review (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: If I'm going to spend this kind of money for an all-in-one setup, I'd rather get an Olympus M43 body and a 12-100mm zoom instead. Probably better image quality and flexibility.

Steven Ar

More ignorance on your part.
The FZ1000 doesn't have a touch screen.
The Sony A6300 shoots 4K and sells for $898 with 16-50 lens.
You also admit the RX10iv has better IQ with the phrase "in most cases".
You ignore the superior AF tracking with the RX10iv.
You ignore the full width frame 4k recording and video superiority of the RX10iv over the FZ1000.
You ignore the greater zoom range and sharper lens of the RX10iv compared to the FZ1000.
You ignore the far faster frame rate capability of the RX10iv.
You ignore the slo mo video of the RX10iv.
Since you are so obsessed with the cost why don't you recommend the Nikon P900 with it's 83x zoom for less money that the FZ1000?

I could go on and on but debating with you is way too easy because you don't have any idea what you are talking about. I'll let you have the last word because with every post you dig yourself a deeper and deeper hole.

Any more stupidity on your part isn't worth replying too.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2018 at 15:24 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony RX10 IV Review (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: If I'm going to spend this kind of money for an all-in-one setup, I'd rather get an Olympus M43 body and a 12-100mm zoom instead. Probably better image quality and flexibility.

Steven Ar

You better go back and reread what I said and not take things out of context. I said; "Sensor is too small to give the best IQ and you still have to change lenses. What about that statement is untrue? The RX10iv is a better option IMO because it gives you an all in one solution not available in M43. If anybody is trolling you are and you sound like a Panasonic fanboy in recommending an outdated inferior camera Like the FZ1000 or you are just one of the army of anti Sony fanboys out there. The RX10iv zoom is not painfully slow and the FZ1000/2000 zooms no faster. All in all you sound like you know virtually nothing about cameras and photography in general and instead just like to Troll and stir up trouble. Lastly, the NX1 is an ICL camera and no all in one superzoom was ever offered for it so your adding it to this conversation only confirms your total lack of knowledge.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2018 at 14:53 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony RX10 IV Review (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: If I'm going to spend this kind of money for an all-in-one setup, I'd rather get an Olympus M43 body and a 12-100mm zoom instead. Probably better image quality and flexibility.

Steven Ar

I disagree with everything you are saying. Buying M43 is not for me. Sensor is too small to give the best IQ and you still have to change lenses. I could care less about the future of A Mount. I have every lens I will ever need and the IQ of the A99ii easily exceeds any M43 camera. With the success of 1" superzooms and prices of FF cameras coming down I can see M43 dying in the future. The FZ1000 is inferior to the RX10iv in every way possible so why should I buy an inferior product to save a couple bucks?.

The cost is no issue to me because I am in a financial situation to easily afford these cameras and buy a new one every year or two.

I don't think you've ever used an RX10iv because the zoom isn't that slow. It's never held me back.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2018 at 13:36 UTC
Total: 1554, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »