Najinsky

Joined on Feb 21, 2006

Comments

Total: 733, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Adobe classic or classic Adobe?

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 18:20 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

Najinsky: I feel sorry for the ex Aperture users who moved to LR when Apple stopped developing Aperture.

Rug, pull, repeat.

Glad I stayed with Aperture, for the time being it still works great for me, but not sure it will continue to as I get new cameras that needs the latest OS for raw support.

@mrkalntms,

All my raws work fine for now. I've seen discussions about some new cameras where Aperture doesn't read the native raw even though the OS does, however converting the files to DNG restores Aperture's ability to process them, at least in the cases reported.

I'm also expecting some of the tinkerers to offer some tweaks that may help Aperture use the original. Aperture still has a lot of resourceful users who love it.

As it happens, the DNG solution wouldn't be any hassle for me because I'm contemplating switching to DNG for other reasons, and I have three cameras that use DNG for their native raw.

So the sky's not falling just yet.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 18:08 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: I feel sorry for the ex Aperture users who moved to LR when Apple stopped developing Aperture.

Rug, pull, repeat.

Glad I stayed with Aperture, for the time being it still works great for me, but not sure it will continue to as I get new cameras that needs the latest OS for raw support.

@marcus, I don't doubt LR's editing capabilities, I tinker with it occasionally when I get offered a new trial from time to time, but LR cannot do many things on the DAM side of things that are invaluable to me. I'm also comfortable scripting workflows with AppleScript hooking into the Aperture API. These are the main reasons I have little interest in LR, although I think it's great (if somewhat clunky) for what it does do.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 17:53 UTC
On article Have it your way: which 24MP Canon should I buy? (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: I'll wait for the test of the G1X.3 lens. If it's a good performer,I'll probably swallow the thorny pricetag and go with that.

It will be my carry everywhere camera, and as a supplement to my mirrorless body which will have a longer lens attached and avoid lens switching ( which I avoid whenever possible).

But I wouldn't even be considering it if Olympus/Panasonic adopted the same policy of using their better sensor across the range of body choices. Canon do it, Fujifim do it and Sony do it, just not the system I invested in lenses for!

Indeed. Based on some early rumors, and a Canon lens patent, and the price, I was half expecting (well, dreaming) that the G1X.3 would become the second one to get the L designation, but obviously it didn't happen.

Of course, it's not the red ring that's important, but simply the quality of the lens.

But it does leave me wondering what that patent will become, maybe EF-M is going to get it's first premium standard zoom. That's the also most obvious gap compared to the EF-S series.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 17:23 UTC

I feel sorry for the ex Aperture users who moved to LR when Apple stopped developing Aperture.

Rug, pull, repeat.

Glad I stayed with Aperture, for the time being it still works great for me, but not sure it will continue to as I get new cameras that needs the latest OS for raw support.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 15:44 UTC as 73rd comment | 5 replies
On article Have it your way: which 24MP Canon should I buy? (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

Potemkin_Photo: Have it my way. Indeed. Bought an a6000 for 300 2 years ago. Been enjoying my hamburger without waiting 3 years at 4 times the price. Your lunch has already been eaten canon.

I envy you. My tastebuds won't let me enjoy a Sony.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 15:28 UTC
On article Have it your way: which 24MP Canon should I buy? (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

steelhead3: Great, more sponsored content

If content is sponsored, it is identified as such.

As this isn't, it isn't. Time to smooth the crinkles in your tin foil headpiece.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 15:23 UTC
On article Have it your way: which 24MP Canon should I buy? (95 comments in total)

I'll wait for the test of the G1X.3 lens. If it's a good performer,I'll probably swallow the thorny pricetag and go with that.

It will be my carry everywhere camera, and as a supplement to my mirrorless body which will have a longer lens attached and avoid lens switching ( which I avoid whenever possible).

But I wouldn't even be considering it if Olympus/Panasonic adopted the same policy of using their better sensor across the range of body choices. Canon do it, Fujifim do it and Sony do it, just not the system I invested in lenses for!

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 15:15 UTC as 14th comment | 2 replies
On article Take a look inside Leica's factory in Wetzlar, Germany (116 comments in total)
In reply to:

mahonj: I thought the link up with Panasonic was very clever. Panasonic has plenty of electronics technology, but little "optical heritage", Leica has the opposite. It is very hard to get an optical heritage quickly, so merge into one.

A great piece of marketing (+ engineering), IMO.

I agree, it turned into a great partnership with real benefits on both sides. I hear rumors of some rocky patches, but they both stuck with it, and brought many elements of Leica quality into the realm of more photographers, can only be good.

But I do worry that with advances in technology and rising costs associated with keeping things small scale, will they be able to keep finding innovative solutions such as washing vs clean room, or will they become more and more reliant on some variant of a patronage system.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 17:08 UTC
On article Take a look inside Leica's factory in Wetzlar, Germany (116 comments in total)

Dam, I got half way through thinking, I really hope Barney took a Nikon, or Sony with him to document this visit. But curiousity got the better of me and I had to check and see it was a Leica M10.

Ah well...

Still, you did well seeing that thing can't even autofocus!

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 16:53 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

Jefftan: many like me have more camera than we need

if a company want me to buy a new camera, it must make me excited

but this thing is so boring, Just a M5 with kit lens glue on it
no 4k, no Olympus level IS, sensor not comparable to Sony, lens only F2.8 at wide

even if u give one to me for free, I don't know if I will use it
it will just collect dust like some of my other camera

Don't knock the gear collectors, if they want to contribute to camera development costs, I say bless 'em.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 15:14 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Today's lesson for the armed chair critics: Joined up thinking.

So Sony RX100v has a fast F/1.8-2.8 lens, but this lens is slow? Equivalent apertures:

RX100V: f/4.9-7.6
G1X.3: f/4.5-9

Well holy poop, it's the slow Canon that actually has the faster comparable aperture, 1/3 faster at wide, but 1/3 slower at tele. Tie?

Do you really shoot at max aperture most of the time? Most of the time you'll be shooting with the appropriate aperture for the scene.

My APS-C compact has f/2.5, but on this day: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60236163 I never had cause to use it once, yet the AP-C sensor was used for every shot.

Max aperture would account for less than 2% of my shooting, for example, shooting a group of friends around a beach fire. For this I would use the wider faster end of the lens. And be thankful for the dust protection too.

New cameras = more choice.

Pretty dumb to hate a camera just because it doesn't fit your choice, no? You wanted an RX100 clone?

Saul Goodman....

@ottonis

It's not insulting, don't worry about that.

I certainly think the choice of lens and the price warrants some discussion, but it would be more constructive, for me, if the discussions related directly to these subjects.

Starting at 2.8, I see this lens as perhaps promising a bit more than kit lenses, which tend to start around f/3.5. Combined with the modest range, I'm hoping Canon have prioritized both size and optical performance.

If they have, and if it delivers, I will applaud their decision because I would reap its benefits on vastly more images than I will suffer its limits on. They will have gotten the balance right.

But if they haven't, my laughter may well join those who have already judged it unseen.

Regarding the price, that tells me they understand this probably won't have mass appeal, and seem to have priced it accordingly based on lower sales.

Again, if it delivers, and I want it, I would have to swallow the price. But if it doesn't, more laughter.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 14:55 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Today's lesson for the armed chair critics: Joined up thinking.

So Sony RX100v has a fast F/1.8-2.8 lens, but this lens is slow? Equivalent apertures:

RX100V: f/4.9-7.6
G1X.3: f/4.5-9

Well holy poop, it's the slow Canon that actually has the faster comparable aperture, 1/3 faster at wide, but 1/3 slower at tele. Tie?

Do you really shoot at max aperture most of the time? Most of the time you'll be shooting with the appropriate aperture for the scene.

My APS-C compact has f/2.5, but on this day: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60236163 I never had cause to use it once, yet the AP-C sensor was used for every shot.

Max aperture would account for less than 2% of my shooting, for example, shooting a group of friends around a beach fire. For this I would use the wider faster end of the lens. And be thankful for the dust protection too.

New cameras = more choice.

Pretty dumb to hate a camera just because it doesn't fit your choice, no? You wanted an RX100 clone?

Saul Goodman....

@Tom
Yes, I do understand equivalence and exposure, that's why I choose not to discuss it here ;-)

Take a room filled completely with darkness. Drill a hole through to a 2nd room filled completely with light. Some light spills through the hole and your room gets less dark. Drill the hole a little bigger, you get more light.

Bigger hole, more light. This bit is simples. Anyone can try this at home, but get permission from the wall owner first, or use a cardboard box.

To make any other point, a scenario with artificial constraints has to be introduced. And that's the point at which the real points get lost.

1. Choose the camera that is the best fit for your own use, not because of subjective popularity contests.
2. Learn to use and enjoy it.
3. If you run into occasional constraints, get creative. Get the best shot you can.

Ask your vase to hold still a while longer, open a curtain, switch on a light, pan or exploit motion, use some flash, or, or, or, or, or...

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 12:07 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Today's lesson for the armed chair critics: Joined up thinking.

So Sony RX100v has a fast F/1.8-2.8 lens, but this lens is slow? Equivalent apertures:

RX100V: f/4.9-7.6
G1X.3: f/4.5-9

Well holy poop, it's the slow Canon that actually has the faster comparable aperture, 1/3 faster at wide, but 1/3 slower at tele. Tie?

Do you really shoot at max aperture most of the time? Most of the time you'll be shooting with the appropriate aperture for the scene.

My APS-C compact has f/2.5, but on this day: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60236163 I never had cause to use it once, yet the AP-C sensor was used for every shot.

Max aperture would account for less than 2% of my shooting, for example, shooting a group of friends around a beach fire. For this I would use the wider faster end of the lens. And be thankful for the dust protection too.

New cameras = more choice.

Pretty dumb to hate a camera just because it doesn't fit your choice, no? You wanted an RX100 clone?

Saul Goodman....

See above reply to your post, but on a more general note, I wanted thank you for informing me that you can put a lens on an ILC body and use it as a camera.

Can't believe I've been here so many years before someone made that revelation. It sounds like it could have profound implications for the whole industry.

The only question now is what lens to put on. The 10-18mm F/4 maybe. But wait, F4 that is so so slow it must be completely useless, but wait, no the reviews say it's a very good lens. dam, all these numbers seem so confusing, will they ever make sense.

Should I get a weather sealed lens for it, that will make this whole new ILC body + Lens contraption thing weather sealed right?

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 08:56 UTC
In reply to:

ottonis: This is a bad joke, isn't it? A Sony A6000 + kit lens costs around 600 US-Dollars and is just as small or even smaller / more compact than this G1Xmiii camera, while performig as well or better (IQ, AF. fps, video etc)
So, Canon charges more than twice the money for the same (or lesser) value? How is this not a joke?

It's not a joke, but it's not true either. You are just being a touch hysterical, isolating random features for comparison to support an emotionally derived conclusion.

For a start, when I first started traveling, my NEX 5 jammed up due to dust and grit working its way into the controls (a similar fate befell my GH2).

A travel camera gets a very different kind of usage, and as a consequence, environmental sealing is a valuable feature.

That's factual and the benefit should be self evident. But some things can be more subjective.

The A6000 lacks a touch screen and is cumbersome to select the required focus point, with the Canon , just touch where you want the focus; quick, easy.

The irony is that A6000 was introduced as the fast AF on the market, but what use fast AF if it's slow to set the AF point? These ergonomic oversights litter the three Sony's I've use and make them feel like consumer electronic devices more than cameras.

There's more too, but 999 characters and all that...

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 08:32 UTC

Today's lesson for the armed chair critics: Joined up thinking.

So Sony RX100v has a fast F/1.8-2.8 lens, but this lens is slow? Equivalent apertures:

RX100V: f/4.9-7.6
G1X.3: f/4.5-9

Well holy poop, it's the slow Canon that actually has the faster comparable aperture, 1/3 faster at wide, but 1/3 slower at tele. Tie?

Do you really shoot at max aperture most of the time? Most of the time you'll be shooting with the appropriate aperture for the scene.

My APS-C compact has f/2.5, but on this day: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60236163 I never had cause to use it once, yet the AP-C sensor was used for every shot.

Max aperture would account for less than 2% of my shooting, for example, shooting a group of friends around a beach fire. For this I would use the wider faster end of the lens. And be thankful for the dust protection too.

New cameras = more choice.

Pretty dumb to hate a camera just because it doesn't fit your choice, no? You wanted an RX100 clone?

Saul Goodman....

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 07:39 UTC as 19th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

phazelag: Seeing this on camera size dot com, its a lot smaller than the Mark II and just a tad bigger than the G5X. I think this will catch on as something special.

Yes: I see many people are overestimating both how close 1" type is to APS-C and how big the difference between the equivalent apertures are, and in doing so making emotional (subjective) rather than factual statements.

Equivalent apertures:

Rx100iv = f/4.9 - f/7.6
G1X.3 = f4.5 - f/9

About 1/3 of a stop to the Canon at the wide end and 1/3 of a stop to the Sony at the tele end.

Best sensor measurements I've seen suggest +2/3EV to the Canon.

I guess numbers the numbers confuse people.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 17:48 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Mmmm, Lemonade!

A wise man once said, when life deals you Lemons, make lemonade!

Like many here, and also in the forum discussions of late stages of the rumors, I was looking at that F/5.6 and that $1300 pricetag and thinking, that's just not right.

But the reality is, if I can get passed that F/5.6 and the pricetag, I see this as a very nice camera indeed.

24mm, 28mm, 35mm & 50mm with APS-C light coverage and 24MP of detail to play with. If the optical performance is good, that's a very appealing package. The leaf shutter and built in ND filter can be invaluable on the rare occasions I need them.

If it's up to Canons usual standards, the ergonomics and shooting experience should be great (words can not express how much I disliked shooting the Sony RX100, and I sold it)

4K video holds almos no appeal for me, 1080/60p gets the job done for my simple needs.

USB charging negates the shortish battery life and removes the need for a dedicated charger, travelers applaud that.

Cheers!

The best site I know for sensor performance measurements is Bill Claff's: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20M5,Sony%20DSC-RX100M3

He doesn't yet show data for the latest RX100, but the MK3 is 1 full stop behind at all full ISO settings. For example, at ISO200, PDR 9 vs 8. If you take the DXO derived versions, which does have the MK5 we can see it is just a little better. So when the measurements are in, let's be generous and call it 2/3rds of a stop.

The 1" type sensors are certainly punching a bit above their weight, but not matching that Canon APS-C yet.

By itself, that wouldn't bother me, but making the lenses so small introduces compromises, which can clearly be seen in this comparison:

http://bit.ly/2gfqcp2

The RX100v lens is visibly lacking micro contrast and not fully exploiting its sensors capabilities.

Obviously this new G1X is yet to undergo this testing, hence my comment about it coming down to the lens performance.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 15:43 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Mmmm, Lemonade!

A wise man once said, when life deals you Lemons, make lemonade!

Like many here, and also in the forum discussions of late stages of the rumors, I was looking at that F/5.6 and that $1300 pricetag and thinking, that's just not right.

But the reality is, if I can get passed that F/5.6 and the pricetag, I see this as a very nice camera indeed.

24mm, 28mm, 35mm & 50mm with APS-C light coverage and 24MP of detail to play with. If the optical performance is good, that's a very appealing package. The leaf shutter and built in ND filter can be invaluable on the rare occasions I need them.

If it's up to Canons usual standards, the ergonomics and shooting experience should be great (words can not express how much I disliked shooting the Sony RX100, and I sold it)

4K video holds almos no appeal for me, 1080/60p gets the job done for my simple needs.

USB charging negates the shortish battery life and removes the need for a dedicated charger, travelers applaud that.

Cheers!

Indeed it's a choice, but the range of choice is limited.

You can only choose from what's offered, and in terms of APS-C compacts, the choice is a 35mm Fujifilm (24MP), a 28mm Ricoh (16MP) and a couple of Leicas.

The only one with a zoom is the $3000 Leica X vario with 16MP and a 28-70 range with slower F/3.5-6.4 apertures.

There is also a 16MP APS-C Ricoh GXR module giving a more useful 24-85 range with f/3.5-5.5 but the larger lens protrusion perhaps fights a bit with some definitions of 'compact'.

So this camera now brings 4 very popular focal lengths 24, 28, 35 & 50 in a single APS-C compact for the first time, and it is very compact indeed.

It would have been great to see 85mm covered too, but considering how compact they made it, and given they started at 24mm I can forgive only getting to 72mm.

For me, it now all comes down to how nice the optical performance is, and given they make some very good performing compact EF-M lenses, I'm cautiously optimistic in this respect.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 13:00 UTC

Mmmm, Lemonade!

A wise man once said, when life deals you Lemons, make lemonade!

Like many here, and also in the forum discussions of late stages of the rumors, I was looking at that F/5.6 and that $1300 pricetag and thinking, that's just not right.

But the reality is, if I can get passed that F/5.6 and the pricetag, I see this as a very nice camera indeed.

24mm, 28mm, 35mm & 50mm with APS-C light coverage and 24MP of detail to play with. If the optical performance is good, that's a very appealing package. The leaf shutter and built in ND filter can be invaluable on the rare occasions I need them.

If it's up to Canons usual standards, the ergonomics and shooting experience should be great (words can not express how much I disliked shooting the Sony RX100, and I sold it)

4K video holds almos no appeal for me, 1080/60p gets the job done for my simple needs.

USB charging negates the shortish battery life and removes the need for a dedicated charger, travelers applaud that.

Cheers!

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 11:08 UTC as 143rd comment | 7 replies
Total: 733, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »