keeponkeepingon

Lives in United States United States
Joined on May 28, 2005

Comments

Total: 629, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Howard: A giant leap forward for Canon, a small step for APS-C mirrorless users.

Seriously, I applaud Canon for coming up with an APS-C mirrorless camera with built-in EVF, etc., unlike its soapbox-like predecessors.

But the lack of native mount lens support in both the Canon EF-M line and the Sony APS-C E-mount line is their Achilles's Heels. Each needs a stellar fast standard zooms (16-50 f/2.8 or thereabout), and a couple more. Fuji has better lenses, but their sensor is not the best, and they seem to price themselves too high above the competition.

It is a shame, really: I think APS-C is the sweet spot for IQ and portability, too bad the few manufacturers that make them do not take them seriously enough.

The adapter is $40 (from third parties). It's a simple passthrough and works fine.

For me it's the best of all worlds. When just walking out and about I slip on the lovely 22mmF2 but if I have a special need I just put on the adapter and use my EF-S or EF lenses.

Compare this to my A6000 and sony's silly adapter with mirrors and an entire focusing system shoved into the huge power sucking adapter.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 17:16 UTC
In reply to:

Mel P: I hate touchscreens. Also there is no 4k video. I prefer the Sony a6300.

I thought I hated touchy screens until I used one for a bit. Curiously it grew on me. Have you given one a chance?

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 17:12 UTC
In reply to:

Correction man: I have an EOS M it fits in my pocket (With 22mm lens)
this new version is massive by comparison my pockets are not big enough (Or Deep enough for the price)

Price kills me too. Too much for a second camera and too many compromises for a primary.....

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 17:10 UTC
In reply to:

HenryDJP: For the base price point being the same as the Sony A6300 there's really no benefit to buying the Canon M5 since the Sony A6300 has 4K and the Canon M5 does not. Plus the M5 has no weather sealing and the Sony does. Although this camera should've been built with 4K recording in mind, had Canon built the M5 to use all of Canon's existing full frame lenses so existing Canon users (such as owners of a 5D Mark III) could simply switch lenses then the absence of 4K might not be such a thorn to deal with. At this point Canon is just saying, "We "have" a mirrorless camera, but if you want a BETTER mirrorless camera buy the Sony, since their cameras can adapt to our lenses".

" same as the Sony A6300 there's really no benefit to buying the Canon M5"

> Fully compatible with a mature flash system instead of whatever sony has.
> Lacks Sony A6XXX miserably small screen (for stills, it gives you like 2.5")
> Lacks Sony A6XXX ugly lock you out of a bunch of functions after a burst.
> Can take a picture while you take a movie.
> Much more affordable native lens lineup (example: UWA zoom is 1/2 the price of sony's and just as good IQ)
> Much better kit lenses, a lot of people just use the kit lens so overall better IQ for that group (15-45, 18-55, 22mmF2 versus sony's silly 16-50)
> Cheap small adapter as low as $40 from third party and it's just a passthrough connection so third party is fine.
> With the $40 adapter you get Canon's entire lens eco-system. I "no brainer" if you are already invested and kicks sony's but if you are deciding between the two.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 17:08 UTC
In reply to:

steelhead3: The R&D that Canon must have spent bringing out this Sony competitor is probably beyond measurement. It really looks like a good shot (but why cripple it with no video aids such as focus peaking?) Focus aids are what the still photographer wants if he is to adapt other mount lenses.

"The R&D that Canon must have spent bringing out this Sony competitor is probably beyond measurement. "

Really? They just shoved the 80D into a mirrorless body, does not sound like rocket science.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 16:57 UTC
In reply to:

E_Rybin: I wonder why I bought the a6300... sony is not willing to produce new lenses for APC-S and I see no sense to buy lenses which cost and weight the double necessary

"Thermidor
I have the exact opposite experience"

What you are saying is your style of shooting matches well with the limitations of the lens. The limitations are still there.

Most folks paying for a camera with 192 PDAF points and fantastic tracking don't want to gimp the camera and use it as you would an EOS Rebel from 10 years ago.

"which is more than good enough for my needs,"

I keep hearing this "good enough" from sony apologists. The fact is the 19mm is not much better than the kit lens at 19mm. The only advantage it has for me is that it's not a frustrating, gosh awful power zoom and when I turn the camera on I know it will be at 19mm.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 11:15 UTC

"12MP is good enough"

It is if it's matched with a lens that can resolve 12mp.

My A6000, has a 24mp sensor but is sold with a kit lens that DXO marks rates as resolving 6mp. This is verified in various publiciations imatest results which show that the it resolution is similar to an iphone on the wide ("similar" because it's a bit sharper in the center but fuzzier on the edges). Amazing they still sell the $1000 A6300 with the same lens.

So yeah, 12mp paired with a decent lens is more than "good enough"

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 10:39 UTC as 268th comment
In reply to:

E_Rybin: I wonder why I bought the a6300... sony is not willing to produce new lenses for APC-S and I see no sense to buy lenses which cost and weight the double necessary

> there is a lot of apsc good glass for a6300

Lol. Name one? The only one that comes to mind is the $800 24mm F1.8. Everything else has issues, is overpriced, uses a powerzoom that's an ergonomic disaster, subpar quality (esp for the price) or enough sample variation to be troublesome.

Sigma? I got the 19mm and it's totally "meh" plus it gimps the AF on my A6000. Why would I get a camera with super tracking AF then gimp it with centerpoint AF just because sony can't make a decent 20mmish lens?

(ref: Me, A6000 user 4evah and very frustrated with the lack of decent Sony APS-C glass)

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 06:57 UTC
On article Canon EOS M10 real-world samples (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

whakapu: Is there any need for samples or reviews of this camera? We know the image quality from the 550D, 600D, 650D, 700D, 1200D, 1300D, 60D, SL1, M and M2. This is an M2 with a selfie screen and a slightly better jpeg engine but minus a couple of other things.

For myself I'm interested in the new 15-45 kit lens not available with the 550D, 600D, 650D, 700D, 1200D, 1300D, 60D, SL1, M or M2. So thanks dpreview!

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2016 at 23:34 UTC
On article Canon EOS M10 real-world samples (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: Is it just me? No offence, but I feel Canon cameras get more reviews than other brands every year? I have the M3, love it and loved the reviews, but seriously the M10? Can we give this chance to some other more worthy camera models?

I think dpreview is just doing penance because they blew off reviewing the EOS-M.

Sort of crazy isn't it? The #1 camera makers first push into mirrorless and dpreview does not review it?

But don't worry, they did sample images of the EOS-M and never gave it a proper review, I suspect they will do the same for the EOS-M10. Just enough coverage to get click throughs without wasting time on it.....

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2016 at 23:30 UTC
On article Canon EOS M10 real-world samples (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: As this M10's sensor is subpar comparing to all MFT sensor, if you only use kit zoom, you better save some money for getting $399 Olympus EM-10 instead for:
- Better sensor
- EVF
-...

Or $399 Panasonic GM1 which is the smallest MFT money can buy:

http://www.adorama.com/ipcdmcgm1ks.html#source=productOptions

Other than better sensor, both have better performance than this Canon M10 too.

Wake me up when they make a MFT that works seemlessly with my canon glass and my canon flash. Your examples are lower resoltion sensors, but also APS-C is bigger than MFT so regardless of whatever high ISO, you suck at controlling lighting, chart you are looking at in some ways bigger will always be better (easier to get wide, better control of DOF etc).

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2016 at 23:24 UTC
On article Canon EOS M10 real-world samples (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

Catalin Stavaru: I currently own the M1, M2 and M10. I shortly owned the M3 but sold it due to green cast and extreme vignetting issues (basically the output of the M3 is subpar for a Canon camera, take a look at the DPR gallery).

From all the EOS M cameras I can tell you that the M10 is clearly the best regarding image quality. Auto-focus speed is also very comparable to the M3. The "old" 18MP sensor has an important advantage: the color rendition is the classic Canon color that cannot be obtained in post-processing (unlike what many people think) and that many people fell in love with (including me). Combined with the relatively new Digic 6 it is the best combination possible at this size if you are looking for beautiful pictures and not for paper specs. 90% of the pictures taken with the M10 do not need any LightRoom processing, at least in my case.

I highly recommend the EOS M10 if you need a very compact APS-C camera which takes great looking pictures, and don't care about the paper spec wars.

The one "paper spec" I care about is the lack of a hot shoe.

My classic EOS-M with Canon's 580EX is an awesome combo. A built in flash a selfie flip screen and the new kit 15-45 are tempting, but I'm not sure I want to give up that hot shoe.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2016 at 23:19 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2138 comments in total)

"We'll be diving deep into the features and performance of the 5D Mark IV once one arrives at our offices. "

Thanks for wasting my time. Gosh y'all are making a lot of conclusion here on a camera you don't even have and probably haven't used in any reasonable way.

Question: Did you actually use, as in take pictures, put them on a computer, process them and generate some output from the 5D MKIV or is this all based on stuff you read on the internet?

Love how all of the white background 5DMKIV pictures were taken with a 40D. Blast from the past covering the latest and greatest.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 07:54 UTC as 461st comment | 7 replies
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2138 comments in total)
In reply to:

MrTaikitso: No USB-C in a camera designed to remain with you for 4-5 years? Why are camera makers (except Sony) so behind the times with connectivity?

Name one USB-C camera from Sony? They just moved to USB3.0 this year with the A6300.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 05:52 UTC
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Talk about out of touch with reality.

LR is not recommended for Pros but is an also ran for consumers? Umm OK. Yeah pro's better stay away from that LR cr@p, and good luck consumers climbing LRs steep learning curve.

"Advanced photo manipulators" should use cyberlink? Does anyone in the real world actually use cyberlink?

Pro's should use aftershot pro instead of photoshop but there is no mention of Painbrush pro, Corels actual Photoshop competitor? At least put in a comment on why Paintbrush pro isn't in this lineup and isn't recommended to replace photoshop.

And then as others have said, were's ACDSEE, DarkTable, Capture One etc (If you are saying LR can replace PS, then Capture One needs to be included).

Aside: It would have been much cleaner if you seperate this article into two, one for PS replacements and one for LR replacements. LR and the LR like stuff here are not really suited for PS style graphic editing.

Also, given Aftershot is part of the high end version of Paintbrush.... it's totally confusing that you would not mention it as a comprehensive photoshop replacement.

http://www.paintshoppro.com/en/products/paintshop-pro/ultimate/

PaintShop Pro X9 Ultimate:
NEW Corel AfterShot 3 RAW photo editor
Perfectly Clear 2 SE automatic photo correction
NEW Corel Live Screen Capture screen recording

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2016 at 14:26 UTC

Talk about out of touch with reality.

LR is not recommended for Pros but is an also ran for consumers? Umm OK. Yeah pro's better stay away from that LR cr@p, and good luck consumers climbing LRs steep learning curve.

"Advanced photo manipulators" should use cyberlink? Does anyone in the real world actually use cyberlink?

Pro's should use aftershot pro instead of photoshop but there is no mention of Painbrush pro, Corels actual Photoshop competitor? At least put in a comment on why Paintbrush pro isn't in this lineup and isn't recommended to replace photoshop.

And then as others have said, were's ACDSEE, DarkTable, Capture One etc (If you are saying LR can replace PS, then Capture One needs to be included).

Aside: It would have been much cleaner if you seperate this article into two, one for PS replacements and one for LR replacements. LR and the LR like stuff here are not really suited for PS style graphic editing.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2016 at 14:20 UTC as 115th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

ShutterNot: Is this a serious article ? What exactly is the purpose of this article ? Then to mention these as an alternative to Photoshop ? The article should not even mention Photoshop, but rather is an article about some lesser known photo editors that are worth looking at perhaps.
What about ACDsee ?
What about PaintShop ?
What about PhotoNinja ?
How about Raw Therapee ?
Just at the top of my head ...

"less enthusiast focused and move towards being a resource for amazon consumers "

FTFY FuhTeng. Your welcome!

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2016 at 14:08 UTC
In reply to:

bmwzimmer: Was it shot with a Sony?

lol. It must be, it's on dpreview! Just look at that wall of sony cameras:

https://www.instagram.com/p/BJG_KZtA5t_/
https://www.instagram.com/p/BJG4YCHgXz4/

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2016 at 18:23 UTC
In reply to:

Sir Nick of High Point: Wow, they are clearly different, but it is so difficult to pick a winner. There are unique attributes I enjoy about both photos. Personally, I absolutely prefer composition over sharpness, thus I'm not bothered by the lack of sharpness in the Spencer photo. I prefer the blurred lower legs of Spencer's shot, which I think compensated for the relative sharpness of the face, and adds to the feeling of speed. I also like the arm position in Spencer's shot as well, but I like the position of the other runners in the Pfaffenbach shot. The three clear, closely spaced faces of the trailing runners add to the sensation of being chased. Also, De-Grass' head position is odd in the Spencer shot.

So this is circled and starred because the editors like it? I could care less what the editors think. If all I cared about was the editors views, I would stop reading after the article is over. I like a conversation, I read comments for the conversation, I don't need the editors pointing and saying loudly "HEY WE LIKE THIS GUY, LISTEN TO WHAT HE SAYS WE AGREE WITH HIM".

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2016 at 18:17 UTC

Reminds me of my first nice digital camera, canon's S50. Nice slider design, built like a tank. Unlike todays canon's it even had a built in intervalometer.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 18:37 UTC as 90th comment
Total: 629, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »