Tazz93

Tazz93

Lives in United States Pasadena, CA, United States
Joined on Feb 1, 2007

Comments

Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

blurredvision: Nobody has yet taken a stab at figuring up retail value of everything pictured?

I can't count that high...

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2016 at 21:26 UTC
In reply to:

Alphoid: Honestly, the prices here don't seem at all reasonable. 24-70mm f/2.8 is $2000 in Sony A-mount, $1800 in Canon, $1600 in Nikon, $1300 in Pentax, $780/$1300 in Tamron, $750 in Sigma. The $2500 price in Sony is more than a little high.

The wireless flash systems is also quite overpriced.

Sony products, in general, are always overpriced. You are paying for a brand and the cost of their marketing. Also note, there would be a premium for using C. Zeiss on the lenses.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 15:34 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1190 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mustafa: Cue the 'no 4K, no sale' brigade.

Mustafa, I would generally agree with you, but they have to be marketing to those people... Seems a little odd to entice a demographic only to take them half way. Great concept, just under executed. Same with the SD cards...

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 19:28 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1190 comments in total)

Great concept, but I think the implementation might be miss-spec'ed. We'll see... but I think another MF manufacturer might capitalize on this more than Hassy once a more desirable concept is drawn up and released.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 15:09 UTC as 204th comment
In reply to:

PeteGrady: I'll admit to not being the best photographer on earth. But, I have to say that you folks at dpreview need to get better with these "real world" galleries. For all the extensive and reasonably high quality reviewing you do, along with the championship job of bringing us the latest from the world of cameras and photography, these galleries are generally very poor. As one example, you have a shot of a bride on some sort of concrete structure framed against a natural wood paneled wall and doors. It's an attractive setting. But then you shoot it at f/1.4 at 1/8000. What do settings like that show us about the D5? IMHO...zero. The shortcomings of the lens and the photog's ability to find the proper plane of focus for this kind of shot overwhelms whatever it might be that we could tell about this cameras sensor performance in soft light. Sorry to rag on you guys, but you're a popular site that does a lot of things just fine...taking useful evaluation pictures should be one of them.

Again, I do understand your complaint... but for me... the content isn't a concern. I'll wait for the controlled studio test to judge absolute quality (relative to other bodies). But it was interesting to see the weaknesses and strengths Nikon decided to compromise on.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 21:37 UTC
In reply to:

PeteGrady: I'll admit to not being the best photographer on earth. But, I have to say that you folks at dpreview need to get better with these "real world" galleries. For all the extensive and reasonably high quality reviewing you do, along with the championship job of bringing us the latest from the world of cameras and photography, these galleries are generally very poor. As one example, you have a shot of a bride on some sort of concrete structure framed against a natural wood paneled wall and doors. It's an attractive setting. But then you shoot it at f/1.4 at 1/8000. What do settings like that show us about the D5? IMHO...zero. The shortcomings of the lens and the photog's ability to find the proper plane of focus for this kind of shot overwhelms whatever it might be that we could tell about this cameras sensor performance in soft light. Sorry to rag on you guys, but you're a popular site that does a lot of things just fine...taking useful evaluation pictures should be one of them.

Odd comment... with regards to the bride photo, wide open with fast glass is a wedding photog's bread and butter. Remember we are talking about photographing people, 90% of the time you don't want to see 100% of the detail a 20, 36 or 50 megapixel camera can show in a person's face.

I get what your saying, but why are you looking for award winning photos for free use? I think this is exactly as advertised, real world photos... not high cost and high effort contest winning photography. Sorry if this comes off harsh as well (it was not meant to), but I wouldn't expect anymore of the editors/photogs in this context.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 16:20 UTC

Hmm... I would have preferred a slightly softer than hard or a reverse grad filter... Either way... I guess this means they are looking to improve the current system, and that is good.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2016 at 20:18 UTC as 29th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Karroly: Are these filters for photographers who prefer to carry loads of expensive accessories rather than spending (losing ?) their time in post-processing ?
Or do I miss something ?

Some of us prefer the look that filters give, and the extra added benefit of not having to blend images is a bonus.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2016 at 20:14 UTC
In reply to:

Tazz93: If the FF cam took that big of a step back, the crop cam, D500, has to be worrying to those who have preordered.

Lol, I'm just saying it would really tick me off if I pre-ordered one.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 04:21 UTC

If the FF cam took that big of a step back, the crop cam, D500, has to be worrying to those who have preordered.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2016 at 22:57 UTC as 171st comment | 2 replies
On photo DSC_6924_01 in ShelNf's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Nice!

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2016 at 23:59 UTC as 1st comment

There's definitely a use for this tech/product, but I don't see it as a must have, or even something that would be used very often.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2016 at 17:27 UTC as 13th comment
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (783 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tazz93: I'm mostly curious how this feature will work? I often wish the AF points were a fair bit wider in coverage.

" In fact, it's the same AF system that you'll find on the D5. Since the AF system was developed for a full frame camera it provides coverage that extends almost to the edges of the frame."

I shoot Canon so I wouldn't be able to get that period, just curious if the idea works as well in practice as it does in theory.

Note: The comment was specific to the D500.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2016 at 19:17 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (783 comments in total)

I'm mostly curious how this feature will work? I often wish the AF points were a fair bit wider in coverage.

" In fact, it's the same AF system that you'll find on the D5. Since the AF system was developed for a full frame camera it provides coverage that extends almost to the edges of the frame."

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2016 at 17:57 UTC as 34th comment | 3 replies
On article Nikon fills in the blanks on professional grade D5 DSLR (550 comments in total)
In reply to:

wetsleet: ISO (ASA) 3000000?
Is it time for a return of the DIN logarithmic scale instead?

(obviously, I understand the marketing dept prefer impressively big numbers)

AKA, Nikon Night Vision... but all jokes aside, that type of jump suggests to me they may have got most of the native range into the "usable" range. If so, that's pretty impressive.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 20:29 UTC
On article CES 2016: Live from the Nikon press conference (76 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lars V: ISO 3.2M... Nighttime pinhole, anyone? :D

A usable 100K or 200k would be pretty insane.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 19:33 UTC
On article Nikon fills in the blanks on professional grade D5 DSLR (550 comments in total)

3 million ISO...

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 19:28 UTC as 115th comment | 7 replies
On article In Fine Detail: Canon EOS 5DS / 5DS R In-Depth Review (734 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: D750 scored 90 and this scored 83?

Eyes checked by a back or foot doctor... Ok... It appears you missed the reference on the "soft challenge". The difference you mentioned in some of the other MF cameras likely have more to do with the lenses than the sensors. I'd assume the test lenses from Canon are not quite level with some of the $5,000 standard focal length lenses of the MF world. Once again, Canon only makes one lens (at least that has been tested) that comes even close to resolving the sensor's level of detail and it would never be used in a comparison with a MF camera.

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2015 at 15:49 UTC
On article In Fine Detail: Canon EOS 5DS / 5DS R In-Depth Review (734 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: D750 scored 90 and this scored 83?

Its a niche camera... kind of a one trick pony. That's the reason it is scored in that range. I still love mine, honestly, I could care less if it isn't optimized for video, or "only" has 12,800 ISO abilities. I bought it for the resolution and it delivers there in spades. Its a DSLR camera that challenges Medium format's digital detail supremacy (a soft challenge, but still a challenge). Not to mention, Canon only has one lens that can reproduce 90% of its senor's rated resolution, the rest are a fair bit lower ranging from 25-70% of the theoretical resolution. IMO, that suggests there's still quite a bit of performance on the table.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 03:08 UTC
Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »