AndrewG NY

Lives in United States Chappaqua, NY, United States
Joined on Aug 29, 2006

Comments

Total: 106, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

Brechtlam: It's a shame Pentax or Ricoh doesn't focus a tiny bit more onto video features. My first DSLR, a Pentax K-5, was able to produce some of the smoothest video footage handheld I've ever seen, using it's fantastic SR-System. No matter what lens I used, everything was stable, even when glancing through the viewfinder. Out of the sudden they skipped that feature on newer models due to amatuer customers complaining about the noise destroying their family clips or maybe overheating issues. Now step by step other manufacturers implement IBIS and it's celebrated as a fantastic new feature, offering stable video handheld, which I had 6 years ago... I still believe that Pentax has the most straight forward control- and menu system of all ILC manufacturers and a very versatile lens mount that let's you choose from over 40 years of lenses without adapters. Unfortunately I need video for my job, so I had to switch, at least i tried to convince Pentax a few times to implement better video features...

The SR never would have made the viewfinder view stable.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 01:16 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

spontaneousservices: "The K-70 is a very compelling option, especially for cash-strapped enthusiasts that are looking for a camera that they want to take complete control of and customize to their personal taste. For them, the Pentax is the obvious choice, as there's no penalty for buying a body on a budget in terms of features and controls, which isn't the case with other manufacturers."

- aren't you forgetting the point about buying into one brand's lens line-up? Possibly that IS quite some penalty!

And the 20-40/2.8-4 is also pretty good and prime-like at 24mm.

Just who *does* offer a fast 24mm **for APS-C**? I see relatively large (pricey and heavy) full-frame glass. Unfortunately Sigma hasn't made their new 24/1.4 available for Pentax yet. (Pentax had offered and discontinued a full-frame FA* 24/2, but I don't know if I'd seek that one out today for digital). If by 'fast' you mean f/2.8, I think the very nice DA 21/3.2 is close enough. (though the Canon EF-S 24/2.8 is a screaming bargain, price-wise).

Anyway, if your priority really is the fastest primes for the most focal lengths, then Pentax probably isn't for you. There are plenty of choices suitable for most photography however. Pentax has strengths in terms of weather sealing and relatively compact designs.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 01:14 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

odpisan: Just asking if anybody knows the explanation ...
__________________
In review is AF of K 70 - it seems - is one of big problems.

I wonder how is that possible?

A month ago I made 400 pictures with twin brother of Pentax K20 - my 8 years old (!!) Samsung GX20. Also action. Only 12 photos were out of focus.

12 of 400 ???

BTW: 8 years old battery was not even beginig to loose some power .. indicated as full at the end of photo-day. So it had moore than enough power to save everything on pc & after that savig, indicator still showed that batery is full.

Question:
What is happening with new cameras?

Samples:
https://goo.gl/photos/32KZFQNfeTmpbc449

Would be nice if Pentax updated some of their earlier in-body-AF-motor lenses (DA*, DA 17-70/4) with their newer-tech PLM (or even DC) motors. I'd also go so far as to say they might want an optical upgrade on the DA* 16-50/2.8 as well as it doesn't fare as well as it might vs. the newer Sigma or Tamron 17-50/2.8.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 00:51 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

joelfoto: My very first camera was a solid Pentax KX with a razor sharp 50 f1.8 and i took great photos with it. Traded it for a Nikkormat (a lovely hunk!) then a Canon dslr and still took great photos but missing that Pentax "feel". I am going to czech this K-70 out!

At first I thought you were confusing the great Pentax KX with the DSLR K-x from a few years ago.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 00:38 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

GarysInSoCal: SAD... four of the things I find MAJORLY important in my next DSLR camera purchase are 4 of the things this camera FAILED so miserably at... ELEVEN focus points (ridiculous when the competition has anywhere from 39 to 153)... battery life (400 shots/more ridiculous)... NO touchscreen (a option that I would have found majorly convenient to have)... and weight (substancially heavier than the competition... LOVE the price thou. SO PENTAX... back to the drawing board... come out with a K-80 that fixes all the problems listed above... at ALMOST the same cost... and bring your lens prices down somewhere close to Earth PLEASE!

I've always assumed that the probable biggest contributor to extra Pentax body weight is the in-body SR mechanism which rather than a fixed sensor position has a bunch of electromagnets and moving parts.

I assume that in addition to the viewfinder pentaprism the in-body AF motor and weather sealing also increase weight vs. competitors that also lack all of these things.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 00:35 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

WJMWJM: Perhaps I overlooked this in the previous 330 reactions, so forgive me, but:

Did anyone notice the also very impressive (combination of) AEB-range & max exposure-compensation?
5 shots, +/-5 stops.
Or +/- 10 stops, cq 20 stops total.
Which is *better* than the best performer until now, the 1Dx, 7 shots at +/-3 stops (+/- 9 stops, or 18 stops total.
If true, this is the HDR-shooter's wet dream.
(but only perfect if the longest exposure times also run into minutes, not seconds (which is hardly ever the case))
(but, given the likewise steller ISO-values (plus native/single-shot DR), becoming less and less relevant, of course)

Any thoughts, confirmations or rebuttals?
(including alternative stellar performers in other brands & models that I might have missed)

I don't have this model but 30s is probably the slowest *manually* settable shutter speed. If you're using aperture priority then it may be able to do slower shutter than that?

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 00:28 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

John Photo: Informative review. I am looking at upgrading from K110D to add capabilities primarily for landscape and nature (audience is self, family and friends), which would include: decent video, good continuous focus for wildlife, easy sharing capability, and a pivoting touchscreen would be nice. So, I'm disappointed that the K-70 does a relatively poor job in these areas (my hopes were much higher). So my choices are: 1) wait until Pentax brings out something that meets my needs, 2)change systems to ..? (I do like flexibility) trying to stay under $1000 with body and 2 zooms (kit). The Nikon d5500 appears to fit a system change, but it sounds like the burst buffer is too small/slow to practically shoot more than app 5 frames before it really slows. The Canon 80D would be about perfect but at best it is $300 over budget. Thinking Canon t6i is a decent compromise, albeit not perfect, within budget. Any bets how soon Pentax will come up with a body with decent continuous autofocus??

While continuous AF may still not be a Pentax strong point, I feel it's safe to say the K70 (or any relatively modern Pentax body, I'd aim for K-5 ii or newer) will stomp your old K110D in almost every regard. Pentax's recent PLM tech seems promising, even if they only have the one lens so far. I would be surprised if we don't see a few more of these in the next 1-2 years. It also seems plausible that we may see some of the benefits of the PLM lens be extended to other lens motor technologies like DC and SDM via body firmware updates.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 00:26 UTC
In reply to:

appelton: It all sounds good..but 27 AF points in 2017 ?? ..hey come on ..deal breaker for a lot of people.

Express it in terms of f-stops and that difference seems even less important -- what is that, only 1/2 stop?

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2017 at 06:27 UTC
In reply to:

Kevin Coppalotti: OMG that camera takes ugly to a whole new level.
Frankenckamera via east germany.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...I think it looks great, sharp & purposeful. More interesting than the conservative K70, and much better (to me) than the rather strange-looking K-S1.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2017 at 06:17 UTC
In reply to:

Wye Photography: The Pentax KP, it doesn't cost peanuts.

When I read KP I think Kitchen Patrol. (for the scouts or army types out there)

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2017 at 06:13 UTC
In reply to:

Anastigmat: Knobs and dials are back in fashion. Pentax introduced push buttons with the Super A/Super Program. Now they are gong back to knobs.

Actually the buttons appeared on the predecessor model, the ME Super a few years earlier, and also on the contemporary 645 medium format camera. By the late 80's when introducing autofocus models they switched to spring-loaded toggle or slider switches. Some of their later film cameras featured classic dials with shutter-speed markings (MZ-5/5n/3/M, and the 645n and 645nii) that seem to be winning praise now for fujifilm. But some high-end film cameras (e.g. PZ-1p) and all the digital bodies have used modern e-dials. That the dials are now fully exposed rather than mostly hidden inside the body is more of a cosmetic difference than a real difference in the way the camera handles.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2017 at 06:08 UTC
In reply to:

perry rhodan: Nissin i40 anyone? It's a superb flash. Small and powerfull. 4xAA wireless and all work perfectly, on ALL platforms inclusing Fuji. For 179 a piece it is a no brainer. They even work great on multiplatform by using slave settings and if needed FEC.
It's good the Metz is here also as it is always nice to have choices.

Nissin does not support ALL platforms, they excluded Pentax...while the new Metz M400 does.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2016 at 01:08 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon EOS D30 (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

rfsIII: For heaven's sake, put a contemporary lens on it in the lab and add the new results to the database! It will be fascinating to compare it to current cameras for color accuracy and beauteousness.

Would be nice to compare with newer but you can see some samples here: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canond30/

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 01:00 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon EOS D30 (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

Toselli: Are you sure the d30 could go up to iso 1600 and get good results? I remember that on my first dslr, a pentax k-7 in 2010, to have good results I had to limit to iso 1600 too, and it was more or less the same for my friends with nikon d300 and canon 50d and 7d. Maybe coming from the taste of color film there was less sensibility to grainy pictures?

Toselli, having owned and used Pentax *ist DS2, followed by K10D, K20D, K-7, and K-5ii, I can say that the older models were still pretty usable at ISO 1600 provided you have a bit more tolerance for 'grain' or luminance noise. Where they especially suffered though was if the file was underexposed. I still look back and am surprised at how good some of my Pentax K10D ISO 1600 images were -- but generally these were well exposed and didn't have too much dark shadow areas because these would likely have suffered a lot of color noise.

The 6mp *ist DS2 had a pretty much unusable ISO 3200, the K10D had a CCD that stopped at 1600 (but it was a bit better than *ist DS2's 1600), the Samsung 14mp-sensored K20D and K-7 offered actually usable 3200 (+ in-a-pinch 6400, probably better than the 3200 on the 6mp bodies), and I'd say all the later models (K-5, etc.) with the 16+ mp Sony sensors have actually usable 6400.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 00:53 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon EOS D30 (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

bobbarber: OFF TOPIC--

Can somebody clear up a point of confusion for me?

I shot film for years (my first camera was a Polaroid I got in the mid-1970s), and then switched to digital like the article describes.

Here's my question: In the years when digital cameras "didn't exist," how was live T.V. produced? Obviously it wasn't film. What was the technology?

...I imagine as computers became more powerful we started encoding the initial analog capture (both for audio and video, and maybe not even in real-time) into a digital ones & zeros format where it could be modified and then probably 'played back' for broadcast or re-recorded to tape.

Something else to consider is that resolution required for standard-definition TV is quite low so the sensors and processing power required were probably available much sooner. In addition, a TV station would be a friendlier environment for an emerging technology such as this because it would be more tolerant than Joe Consumer of higher prices & power consumption, bulkier sizes, complicated workflows, etc.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 00:38 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon EOS D30 (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

bobbarber: OFF TOPIC--

Can somebody clear up a point of confusion for me?

I shot film for years (my first camera was a Polaroid I got in the mid-1970s), and then switched to digital like the article describes.

Here's my question: In the years when digital cameras "didn't exist," how was live T.V. produced? Obviously it wasn't film. What was the technology?

I don't actually *know* the answer to this but I suspect that may have been more analog in nature -- for many of the earlier years it would probably not have ever been encoded and stored as ones & zeros anywhere, there was probably an analog storage scheme on tape. I am assuming this is similar to audio tape, whether reel-to-reel, eight-track, or cassette. Also similar is videotape such as VHS. I believe even laserdisc may have been closer to this tech than one might suppose considering the more modern-looking media. Playback would essentially be translating the precorded analog data back to a display, loudspeakers, etc...but this would not be done by translating the data into a binary encoded format....

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 00:38 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (654 comments in total)
In reply to:

sneakyracer: 4/3 sensor is dated imho. They date back to when larger sensors were really expensive. Enthusiasts demand better performance nowadays at the $1000+ pricepoint. All TV/Monitors today are 16:9 as well so the 4/3 format is a bit awkward except for more traditional applications like print (magazines). In very small form factors the 4/3" format is nice but on larger cameras it makes little sense except maybe for the smaller lenses and increased affordability (if any). That does not mean that the OM-D cameras are bad cameras. On the contrary they are excellent just that there are better options for most folks available today.

4:3 aspect ratio historically popular for medium format as well: 645 is also 4:3. The even squarer 6x7 as well as truly square 6x6 were also popular. I think there is some residual snobbery for wider aspect ratios from early digital days when compacts generally had 4:3 but non 4/3 DSLR had 3:2.

Link | Posted on Sep 24, 2016 at 19:02 UTC
In reply to:

eric greaux: Big surprise how sharp this GX85 is in comparison with larger sensor cameras. And this is coming from an owner of a Fuji XE2 and Nikon D7200. I think the only advantage APS-C and larger sensor cameras have is high iso/low performance in low light. I try to never go over 1600 but this camera seems pretty solid through 6400. With the advent of all of these f.95/f1.2 lenses and Speedboosters, the approach for low-light shooting with M43 is to have a fast lens instead of using high ISOs. I like that method much better. I use the remote app for selfie video which is not as convenient as a flippy screen but it works. The camera provides excellent video (I've rigged my own flat profile), and I plan to use with my old film lenses and Speedbooster to provide some nice bokeh in my photos & videos. Quick note: The camera is very responsive with no lag when using the menus or even during 4K photo selection. The screen is nicely visible in sunlight. Metering/WB=excellent. Focusing is superb!

Agree that the MFT solution viability is impressive. Most lenses are very good wide open, and the extra DoF is often valuable. To me one drawback is that nearly all the lenses that are fast enough to offset the sensor differences are primes. It's not like you have a lot of f/2 short zooms, f/2.8 medium telephoto zooms or f/4 longer zooms. So coming from a APS-C or FF perspective, not only do you lose 1 or 2 stops of sensor performance, the lens availability trends toward slower zooms (f/5.6 at the long end) for the most part. The speed booster solution seems a bit niche -- rather pricey, and seems more practical for someone who already owns the (Canon EF, etc.) glass.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2016 at 01:59 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review (1003 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeDPR: That 16MP sensor spec should not be used for this camera. Tallest photo is 3088 pixels tall (from 4:3) and widest photo is 4480 pixels wide (from 16:9). That makes it only 4480*3088=13.8M pixels for the largest rectangle area that encompasses all aspect ratios options. I think it's fine to say it has 13.8M sensor even though not all of them is used for a given aspect ratio. But to say it has a 16MP sensor is quite misleading.

The area of the sensor used is still larger than competing 1" and might actually be cheaper for Panasonic rather than purchasing someone else's 1" sensor. It's probably also cheaper to use an off-the-shelf sensor rather than making a new sensor slightly smaller than 4/3. Covering more pixels would require a larger lens with a smaller effective aperture.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2015 at 20:00 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review (1003 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joe Spade: I own this little camera, and it is amazing. Two things that Panasonic must improve: Better EVF (the one it has is useful at best in sunlight, but not good at all). Second, better resolution. How about GX8 20MP sensor?

The LX100 is *much* smaller (http://camerasize.com/compare/#629,569), and has a much faster zoom at a considerably cheaper price (if you factor in a fast m4/3 zoom). I think these cameras are different enough.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2015 at 19:53 UTC
Total: 106, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »