Tazz93

Tazz93

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

Comments

Total: 62, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On article Nikon announces midrange D7500 DSLR (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

pixtorial: Confused why Nikon chose to remove the second SD slot, and disappointed that the AF module gets no update. It isn't that the AF on the 7200 is bad, just that the D500 shows how much better it can be. I didn't expect D500 AF but still expected some level of improvement. Trading pixel density for an incremental improvement in high ISO ability is an ok trade for me, but for some they will be disappointed. I've been shooting NIkon DSLRs since I came to digital, but increasingly worried about their product roadmap. I see little to justify the D7500 over the D7200 unless you really need that higher FPS and maybe 1/2 stop of high ISO. Otherwise, spend the extra $500 and get the D500.

Unfortunately, all of your complaints can be answered with your last sentence, "Otherwise, spend the extra $500 and get the D500". It's clear they're trying to differentiate the two models and they had to strip features from this one to make it work.

The question I have is... do manufacturers have too many offerings? When you have to continually under-engineer a product to save another something might be wrong with the business model. They should be over-engineering at a set price target, not under-engineering to protect other models. One method stagnates, the other innovates.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 14:31 UTC

The files do seems to have a "crispness", however, they tend to be fairly noisy even at low ISO. I'm imagining this gets out of hand fairly quick. Would I call it "Game Changing"... nah, but interesting nonetheless.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2017 at 15:37 UTC as 14th comment | 1 reply
On article Leica offers free fix for faulty AF in some S lenses (91 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tazz93: So people have been dealing with broken lenses for years and years and are now just getting an actual fix?

Ouch!

MWBG, please enlighten us with your ever-so-brilliant account of the fix/problem.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2017 at 23:42 UTC
On article Leica offers free fix for faulty AF in some S lenses (91 comments in total)

So people have been dealing with broken lenses for years and years and are now just getting an actual fix?

Ouch!

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2017 at 19:31 UTC as 37th comment | 2 replies

Seems a little gimmicky... but I'm sure there's a use of two for it, and it has a reasonable price. Just prep the forums for a little more flora photography.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 16:09 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

citrate: So, people who want to buy a Fuji GFX or Hasselblad X1D should really save their money now and wait the the new sensors?

Depends how quickly they perform on the road map...

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2017 at 17:50 UTC

Funny thing is nearly every lens they mentioned I also have a strong affinity towards. The 11-24L will be my next purchase, the 24-70L II is now one of my fav's, the 100-300 was my first tele and I loved it until I got a 70-200L.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 15:56 UTC as 91st comment
On article Fujifilm GFX 50S Review: Modern MF (899 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Dopaminer: There`s always something absurd in these tests. 5DSR with the 85 1.8?
Put some recent L glass on there, obviously.

And the Fuji`s 50mp raw is 112mb? Double the Canon`s ?

Mikael, there's a problem with using moire as a measuring stick. It does prove the lens is sharp enough to out resolve the sensor in that particular instance/area, but if the lens were fully out-resolving sensor you could also say no lens is sharper on a 5DSR and I don't I believe that. That said, I don't necessarily believe the 85's sharpness is a problem in these tests, but the lack of CA reducing coatings/techniques are.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 23:46 UTC
On article Fujifilm GFX 50S Review: Modern MF (899 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Dopaminer: There`s always something absurd in these tests. 5DSR with the 85 1.8?
Put some recent L glass on there, obviously.

And the Fuji`s 50mp raw is 112mb? Double the Canon`s ?

I think the 1.8 is better at the given shot settings. Personally, I'd prefer the 50 STM as the Canon measuring stick, but I'd settle for the 5DSr getting its crops updated with the newer ACR v2 profile.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 22:02 UTC
In reply to:

sleibson: Sentence the van driver to community service... on the salt-flat repair team.

Obviously they don't care about rules... community service would likely be tricked-off and then were back to square one... jail time.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 15:04 UTC
On article Fujifilm GFX 50S Review: Modern MF (899 comments in total)
In reply to:

villagranvicent: Glad to see how a "lesser" Canon lens still delivers the goods even against Sony + Zeiss lens or even medium format cameras. It would be interesting (and fair) the comparison with L glass.

The ART looks like it might have better contrast and less fringing, but looks very similar in sharpness (Note, that may be an illusion because the crops I'm viewing are very simple and may not reflect an ability to get really fine detail). The 70-200 II looks close in the center, but gives up a little in the corners and edges at 70'ish mm. What I really thought was odd is the 100L Macro doesn't seem to best the "lowly" 85 1.8. The really funny thing is the $100 miracle lens, 50mm STM, seems to be the best Canon in the 50-100mm at f5.6. Judge it for yourself...I used TDP crops for the comparisons.

Canon seems a little behind the curve in the heart and soul range of portraiture photography 50-100 mm, but I don't feel they give up much in real world use, just when comparing apples to apples.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2017 at 16:31 UTC
On article Nikon D5600 review: making connectivity a snap? (346 comments in total)
In reply to:

Leo "Zoom": Pros:
"No USB charging" - whaaat? Whay would we need that? I had Sony NEX with USB charging. The very first accesory I bought was a dedicated battery charger.
"Control of Auto ISO potentially confusing." It may be a bit confusing, but it actually works. And works perfectly. All these "simple" solutions from other manufacturers are close to useless.

I have to admit that a USB charger would be convenient, but USB charge ports are simply too delicate. Personally, I would prefer to leave them off. Wireless charging might be worth looking into, but the logistics and compatibility with grips could stifle that idea.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 19:13 UTC
In reply to:

Josh Leavitt: Here's where I'd start:

Kill Coolpix - Never going to compete with smartphones even though IQ is way superior with point-and-shoots, so just end it now and save some money.

Kill APS-C D3xxx - This model line can't hold a candle to mirrorless offerings from Olypus, Panasonic, Sony, or Fuji in or around the same price range.

Kill APS-C D5xxx - Just like the D3xxx, the D5xxx isn't really accomplishing anything compared to other mirrorless offerings in terms of price/size/weight/IQ/features

Kill FF D6xx - If you're going to make a full frame, make it right. The D600/610 are pretty minimalist designs when it comes to features that are available for just a few hundred dollars more with the D750

Things to keep:

APS-C: D7xxx for enthusiasts
APS-C: D5xx for pros
FF: D7xx for enthusiasts
FF: D8xx for pros
FF: D5 for pros/action

If Nikon consolidates their offerings to those 5 model lines, then they can increase output and shave off a couple hundred bucks from each of them.

The bottom end cameras are all about costs and margins. Even though the first question a new person will generally ask is "which one is best", the cost or brand will generally sell that class of camera.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2017 at 17:13 UTC
In reply to:

Hachu21: I guess it's a way for natural selection to still make its job.
You cannot protect people from themselves, especially when they think they are smarter.

I've seen people do that on 2-3 feet of snow in the same area... Totally insane. Sure, using a tripod to feel out the ground in front of you helps, but why risk life and limb for a shot that effectively more than a million other people have?

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2017 at 17:28 UTC

Focal plane shutter at 1/125th... well, they will definitely have something to work on for the Mark II version if this makes it past this stage.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 16:17 UTC as 18th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Bobobears: No picture? Journalism at its worst

I don't think anyone wants to touch this pic with a ten foot stick. Sue-happy lawyer and a woman arguing she was taken advantage of, equals a healthy amount of precaution.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 16:45 UTC
In reply to:

DenWil: The plaintiff was a customer not a model and she refused to sign a release at the time the images were taken.

This is not a case of oversight but incompetence or fraud. The photographer should have deleted the images the minute the customer refused to sign a release. He had no right to commercial use of the images and he knew it right then.

All so incredibly absurd considering you can hire a commercial print model fitting exactly the type you are looking for, no issues for usage, own the shots and write it all off.

Quite honestly I am surprised at how low end Chipotle advertising is. Buying from a guy who shot a pic of a customer. A lot of thought went into that.

You're assuming this was a photo shot for the purpose of advertising. What if this was simply an editorial stock shot, then someone in Chipotle decided would go in their program/ad?

BTW for those asking what the image looked like, before this gained steam there was a pic of the 2.2 Billion dollar look... and honestly it didn't look to be worth even using in an ad... let alone $2 Billion in reimbursement. If the article I saw a couple of weeks ago was accurate, it showed a black and white scene of a Chipotle "assembly line" with two people behind the counter and I think one customer ordering. Honestly, I thought it could be argued that the model/woman wasn't even recognizable. At best it looked like an editorial stock shot, that honestly could have been taken with an iPhone and not lost anything. But again, that's assuming the article had the accurate picture in question.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 16:41 UTC
In reply to:

juvx: The amount is just a negotiation tactic, they will settle out of court for 200-300k One mil, tops.

Acidic, there is a difference... using someone's face on the actual product dispersed to millions of buyers versus a barely recognizable P.R. stock pic. I think it would be tough to prove (or argue) she made them 2 billion. Juvx is right, this will likely get settled, but I wouldn't suspect it will do any better than $1,000,000 (likely in the hundreds of thousands).

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 00:22 UTC
In reply to:

evogt500: So she knew about it 2014, but she waited till 2017 to make her claim...You know she just waited to rack up the doe.

She waited to make sure there was something to sue... they are finally recovering from the food poisoning claims. Had she filed for it then, it's possible the company could have gone up in flames before she got paid.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 00:14 UTC

Fine + two weeks in county should be suffice... and obviously, proportionately more aggressive for repeat offenders.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2016 at 17:46 UTC as 48th comment | 1 reply
Total: 62, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »