Joined on Apr 20, 2013


Total: 785, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: Although this function is totally useless for general use, I have asked my colleague to order this new a7R3 and the Canon lens adapter for shooting the products for printing the new product catalogues. I trust this pixel shift function can perfectly handling the task.

yes, horses for courses . the a7rIII should be the perfect camera for this.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 09:08 UTC
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: This is the problem with the website that dabbles in so many different areas of digital imaging, that its articles and comparisons become forced, and conclusions nonsensical. Drones should be compared not to DSLRs and hand-held cameras, but to satellites, surveillance drones and aircrafts in different orbits and their equipment. How this drone compares to a surveillance satellite's sensor and its camera(s)? Or to the weather satellite?

DSLR s "are NOT designed nor made for dedicated imaging from above. "
So you are only allowed to point your DSLR upwards?

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 07:28 UTC
In reply to:

endofoto: APS-C sensor for $2700, I think it is too expensive. You can put top notch FF sensor instead for this price.

Omg in case you missed it. For almost all video applications, FF has some serious disadvantages.
Plus the video rigs are already huge through the attached accessories like monitors, grips, follow focus units etc so there is no need to compensate a small reproductive organ with sensor and lens size...

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 07:24 UTC
In reply to:

random78: Not sure what the point of this article is. It is an APS-C sensor so it will perform as an APS-C sensor. Also DxoMark only tests the sensor so what type of camera the sensor is housed in has zero bearing on the results.

That is exactly why some live the dxo scores and some don't give a damn

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 07:20 UTC

Yeah, sure sure

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 07:19 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

shademaster: With a 20 frame RAW buffer and uhs2 I wonder if you can shoot jpeg at 20fps "forever"

almost certainly

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 09:19 UTC
In reply to:

eddie_cam: Woohoo! My G81 (aka G80, G85) cost 600 bucks. Would I drop 1000 bucks more? Not in this life ... ;-)
Maybe Panasonic got video AF right this time.

well, wait 2 years and pick up a G9 for 600 bucks. That is my road :)

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 09:16 UTC

uh I am excited for the AF.
And I always figured, I will have a Olympus body when going m43s (Fuji user right now).
Panasonic does it right, this camera looks lovely! (when you want to handle a DSLR-like camera)

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 09:15 UTC as 213th comment
In reply to:

Azathothh: D850 owners now bought a dead system. Congrats.

do you even do logic?

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2017 at 10:44 UTC
On article Nikon D850 Review (2115 comments in total)
In reply to:

GabrielZ: I know the scoring here is relative to a camera's category type (APS-C, FF, enthusiast, semi-pro, pro etc...) and price range, but I was expecting the D850s score to surpass that of the D500 (91%) and certainly the D810 which it replaces and which was also 89%, as its certainly a major improvement over the latter.

just because it is an improvement in many areas, doesn't mean to receive a higher score.
from that logic, we would soon be at ratings of 140%

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 07:06 UTC
On article Shooting with a used DSLR kit that cost me just $80 (282 comments in total)
In reply to:

tbcass: The problem is for a gearhead like myself looking at a fantastic 42mp image at 100% from my A99ii gives me a thrill a 10 year old camera can't deliver. ;-) A 10 year old Caravan could get me around but my new Explorer gives much more satisfaction.

plus your neighbor really knows how much you know about caravans!

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 09:59 UTC
In reply to:

Pavel Muller: This confirms my own experiences. Invest in quality lenses (not necessarily the fast ones) and get the good quality software and learn to use it to its full potential. The size of your sensor will not really kick in until you print really big.

that actually is balm for the mind. I have read over and over that aperture and sensor size is more important than everything else for some users here.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 17:01 UTC
In reply to:

ekaton: Anybody, beer and chips please.......this will be a fun read.

excuse me? 12oz beers are from a tasting perspective not usable at all.
there is no way, one wouldn't pick the 20oz beer!

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 17:00 UTC
In reply to:

T3: How about just using a $900 full frame camera, like the Sony A7? You really don't need much for a portrait shoot (or most photography, for that matter).

would it change the output?

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 16:58 UTC
In reply to:

MShot: This has me scratching my head. In some cases I like the crop sensor image better. All the crop sensor images are good enough for me.

*psst, don't tell the FF people, they will go crazy over this*

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 16:58 UTC
In reply to:

Peter G: "Manny shot the A9 photos at F2.8, and the A6500 photos were taken wide open at F1.8, "

Well if you are going to handicap the Full Frame by stopping it down to equalize the DOF with the crop sensor, then yes you are going to get essentially the same results.

But one of the big advantages of Full Frame, especially when shooting portraits, is that you will usually have a shallower DOF available to you.

When workhorse lenses like the 24-70 F2.8 and 70-200 F2.8 get crop equivalent lenses, they are usually also F2.8, giving a much shallower DOF option on Full Frame.

IMO Shoot some portraits at F2.8 on both and then you should see some difference.

so you think using smaller apertures "handicaps" a system?
buddy, you have been successfully fooled by the marketing divisions

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 16:56 UTC

I guess, the animalistic instinct for breasts is associated with the need for big cameras.
makes total sense.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 09:44 UTC as 66th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

photomedium: This would have been perfect if the guy had chosen CROP sensor at the end. As it is this sounds like the priest telling you: 'do what I say - don't do what I do'.
On course FF is better, the blur Is there in plain sight. You can get FF for 2k these days anyways, so ultimately the video was nonsense. I did enjoy the cleavage though...

I guess, the animalistic instinct for breasts is associated with the need for big cameras.
makes total sense.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 09:43 UTC
In reply to:

dkeller: I don't see much validity in this as the two samples in many appear to have different processing.

are you such a pro guy?

or do you talk about your buddy the pro guy who compared his new 4k setup (maybe a canon 6D with 24-70 f2.8) with his old nikon D3100 and a f3.5 kit?

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 09:31 UTC
In reply to:

ebarak71: I think that one of the major factors, as mentioned here, is good glass.
But the trouble is that crpped cameras doesn't have a range or even any, dedicated ASP-C quality glass.
It's been proven (at least in DXO mark numbers...) that full frame lenses are not 100% compatible with cropped sensors optically.

ah the never ending sharpness debate.
I'm waiting for the 48 megapixel sensors and the people, who still see more detail on the 135 sensors compared to APS-C

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 09:28 UTC
Total: 785, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »