Gabebalazs

Joined on Oct 19, 2011

Comments

Total: 75, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

djwuk: With a barge pole (would not touch) comes to mind, lenses like this are a false economy on image quality, far better to carry several shorter quality zooms.

I guess you can switch lenses in 23 nanoseconds when something important presents itself :)
Nobody is expecting excellent quality from this lens, that's not it was designed for.
At the moment I do not have a superzoom but owned a few over the years and they do serve their purpose of being able traveling lightly and not having to constantly switch lenses on a windy beach for instance and still being able to shoot a wider shots then a bird right after that. Sometimes other priorities come first when taking a family trip.

I've learned to draw the line how many lenses/bodies I take with me on different occasions. If it were about the quality all the time, then I could take all my 15 lenses and 4 bodies on every trip because let's go for the best quality or nothing at all, right? :)

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 20:01 UTC
In reply to:

davids8560: So would this lens on a DSLR best the results from a RX10 or FZ1000?

Hold your horses. :)

It depends. First of all, the samples I've seen show it being fairly decent, certainly not L quality but decent enough that in many applications it could work better than a Sony RX10.

So it mostly depends what body you put it on. Also, shooting what subject, moving or not, how far, what focal length, etc? Just imagine the Tamron lens on a D500 for instance (hypothetically, not very likely though) and compare a high ISO image of that combo to the RX10 and FZ1000. The D500 is about 2 stops better at high ISOs than the Sony so even though the Sony has a f/2.8 lens, the Nikon/Tamron combo could have less noise.

Also, depends on the reach. The Tamron on a Canon or Nikon body goes to 640mm or 600mm equivalent while the Sony is only up to 200mm. So no contest there if you need long reach.
And there are many more things to consider...

So answering the question with a simple "no" is not going to work.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 19:52 UTC
On article Canon EOS 77D / 9000D sample gallery (147 comments in total)
In reply to:

Karroly: I like the OOC JPEG colors. I find them natural and not too much saturated.
But I find the EOS 77D pictures a bit soft, compared, let's say, to the Fujifilm X100F beta gallery...

Well, "dad", based on your gear list, you do not seem to own a recent Canon body where you can actually change the sharpening radius ("fineness") for jpegs.

I've owned about 15 Canon DSLR bodies since the 40D, I now own a 5DIV, and an 80D both of which are capable of fine tuning the sharpness for jpegs. They're better than the jpeg processing of the 5DIII (I also own one) in terms of sharpness. I also own a Sony A7RII (no AA filter) which again beats the 5DIII in jpeg processing (and the other Canons too).

I have also submitted probably terabytes worth of photos for my clients in real estate photography and dozens of weddings.

Don't get me wrong, the 5DIII is still a great body. The bottom line is, the lack of very fine jpeg detail in the 5DIII and earlier canon bodies is a fact. This does not yield bad photos, your clients are no doubt happy. And there is always RAW. But this is a fact and proven by dpreview, as well as my own tests using multiple bodies compared to the 5DIII.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2017 at 01:20 UTC
In reply to:

RMGoodLight: This whole article smells like MF bashing from a FF fanboy. Why does it need this here on DPR? The GFX is very expensive and I'm sure who want to buy it will think carefully about the purchase.

I'm arguing about this article because why yet? The Hasselblad X 1D was released before without such "FF is better than MF" articles. And where were the "Thinking about buying a Sony A7R2 / Canon 5DS / Olympus OMD E-M1 II? Read this first" articles?!

I could write similar articles for APSC. Who needs FF? Or how about mFT? I whish you would have shown a real comparison between MF and FF with emphasis on the strength and weakness of both?

The last thing I want to add is that the whole equivation of systems is moot. DOF depends not only on sensor size. It depends on resolution too. A FF 50MP sensor has thinner DOF as a FF 12MP sensor. And larger sensor pixels gather more light and information than smaller ones. That results in sharper images with better color precision. Want proof? The DP2M!

I see, I never thought you were thinking in 1:1 view of image terms. That makes sense then.
I thought I was going to hear something revolutionary I never heard before :)

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 01:21 UTC
On article Canon EOS 77D / 9000D sample gallery (147 comments in total)
In reply to:

Karroly: I like the OOC JPEG colors. I find them natural and not too much saturated.
But I find the EOS 77D pictures a bit soft, compared, let's say, to the Fujifilm X100F beta gallery...

SOOC jpegs will almost always look soft on Canon APS-C (and even on some FF) because the jpeg sharpening settings favor large radius sharpening. Even when you read the 5DIII review here in DPreview, one of the cons is lack of fine detail in the jpegs.

Use a sharp lens and process it in RAW and the softness is gone.

OR with many of Canon's recent bodies, you can significantly alter the jpeg output by changing the sharpening "fineness". The first thing I did to my 80D was to change it to my liking (reducing fineness). You can bring back fine detail to jpegs that way.

However, it is true that it's never going to be as sharp as a body with no AA filter.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2017 at 01:17 UTC
In reply to:

RMGoodLight: This whole article smells like MF bashing from a FF fanboy. Why does it need this here on DPR? The GFX is very expensive and I'm sure who want to buy it will think carefully about the purchase.

I'm arguing about this article because why yet? The Hasselblad X 1D was released before without such "FF is better than MF" articles. And where were the "Thinking about buying a Sony A7R2 / Canon 5DS / Olympus OMD E-M1 II? Read this first" articles?!

I could write similar articles for APSC. Who needs FF? Or how about mFT? I whish you would have shown a real comparison between MF and FF with emphasis on the strength and weakness of both?

The last thing I want to add is that the whole equivation of systems is moot. DOF depends not only on sensor size. It depends on resolution too. A FF 50MP sensor has thinner DOF as a FF 12MP sensor. And larger sensor pixels gather more light and information than smaller ones. That results in sharper images with better color precision. Want proof? The DP2M!

A FF 50MP sensor has thinner DOF than a FF 12MP sensor? How so, please explain. I'm just honestly curious. Thank you.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 02:19 UTC
In reply to:

Boeing skipper: That's $400 more than the Canon 135 f2 L.
I'm sure it will have a higher resolution and for some that's the only thing that matters.
But the Canon's bokeh is outstanding already. It's compact, lightweight lens with very fast, accurate AF. Unless you absolutely need that extra resolution, I hardly see the benefits of the Sigma.
That is for the Canon shooters of course.
Bear in mind that 135mm is a long focal length. As much as I love my 135L, it is often not a practical lens.

I agree too. I've had the Canon 135 f/2L in my arsenal for a couple of years yet I've only used it about 4 times, and it's not the lens fault. Great lens but I realized that I just simply rarely use the 135mm FL. I also own a couple different 85mm primes (including the new Sigma 85 ART) plus the Canon 70-200 2.8L II. The 85mm primes are my most used lenses for people, weddings etc.

So I'm sure I won't be in the market for the Sigma 135

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 20:36 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Canon EOS 77D (450 comments in total)
In reply to:

Acrill: Why would any camera released in 2017 still use USB 2.0? Lame.

Yeah, I know... That's the only thing that prevents me from buying the new Sony A99II. Deal breaker ;) (warning: sarcasm)

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 01:22 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1581 comments in total)
In reply to:

barrym1966: actually it aims to be in the same league as the D5 and the 1DX

It murders the D810 and the 5D IV

41mb is the compressed RAW version, at least in my A7RII it is. Uncompressed is way bigger.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2017 at 00:59 UTC
In reply to:

Kiril Karaatanasov: In the bojeh examples the GM lens performs vastly better. Sigma is clearly squashing the bojeh towards the corners in cat's eye shape. The Sony retains circular bojeh all over the field. This allows for stitching bokeh panoramas

So really if you shoot Sony camera this sigma is not usable at all

I think it just comes down to what your goal is and what's the best way and tool to achieve it.
Like I said, at f/2 both the Sony and the Sigma produce perfectly round bokeh highlights. So they both are suitable for panos in my opinion based on that logic. In that case it comes down to which has less distortion since that may also affect panos I presume.
We also know that at wide open both the Sony and the Sigma produce cat's eyes, so neither is optimal for panos wide open.

So in my opinion, if someone is planning on doing bokeh panos with either of these lenses, he/she needs to stop down to f/2 to make it work. So here we go, both lenses do the job equally well in this case.

I also own the older Sigma 85 f/1.4, the Canon 135 f/2L, and the Canon 85 1.8.
I never tried doing panos with any of these lenses, but if you say that the 135 f/2 is the best out of these then I'd use that for stitched panos, simple as that.
(Disclaimer: I never do panos, so this is just my opinion.)

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2017 at 19:11 UTC
In reply to:

Kiril Karaatanasov: In the bojeh examples the GM lens performs vastly better. Sigma is clearly squashing the bojeh towards the corners in cat's eye shape. The Sony retains circular bojeh all over the field. This allows for stitching bokeh panoramas

So really if you shoot Sony camera this sigma is not usable at all

Maybe it's just me but the Sony is also doing cat's eyes when wide open, I think this has been pointed out in the review. Not as much as the Sigma wide open but the difference is small. Certainly, neither does retain the perfect roundness of the background lights at 1.4.
At f/2 and up they both appear to be circular. So I don't see why the Sony would be able to do a nice bokeh pano while the Sigma is "not usable at all".
I have the Sigma (Canon mount) and shot some maternity photos of my wife in front of the Xmas tree. I did it at f/2 and the bokeh lights on the tree in background are perfectly circular all the way to the corners.
(I also use and own Sony equipment, so I'm not biased to any of these brands)

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2017 at 22:32 UTC
In reply to:

Stacey_K: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigma-85mm-f1-4-art-lens/5

Is a perfect example of why sharpness isn't something at the top of my list for a portrait lens. I'm still using a Nikon 85mm f1.4D because of the rendering and how little PP the files need -for portraits-. If I was going to go out and shoot buildings, yeah, I'd use something else.

True, but it's always easier to soften an image than to sharpen. When you have a fast car it doesn't mean you always need to drive as fast as it can.
But I do understand the reasoning, why pay extra for unneeded sharpness (or fastness of a car if it's never called for action.)

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2017 at 22:24 UTC
On photo A different take on Red, White, and Blue in the Aircraft formation challenge (2 comments in total)
In reply to:

MarioSS: Superb composition and brilliant colours.

Thank you.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2017 at 18:05 UTC
On article Got focal range? Canon 24-105mm F4L II sample gallery (101 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: Do I need to see an opthalmologist? Everyone is faulting the lens sharpness while I am seeing tack-sharp images (and this is at 30mp magnification!!!)

I see quite a bit of Chromatic Abberation though.

Perhaps it's what I am watching on? I am watching the Sample Images on a 1280x720p 51’’ (So you could imagine how big the 1:1 representation I am seeing, billboard size) Plasma Samsung TV with all enhancements turned off/down. Opening Dpreview on a Playstation 4 so maybe it's doing a sharpening trick or something. But the images at VERY LARGE magnification I can see every bit of detail in subjects. The corners are almost all out of focus in the photo set but the ones that are not, show decent corner sharpness fall off.

Perhaps my standards were lowered down since we're all shooting on such immensely high quality gear now it's crazy.

I just made a 10 by 15 print, from.a 2011 Canon T3, 12 megapixel DSLR on a 50mm 1.8 @ f/2.8. The poster is absolutely astonishing and I couldn't imagine it getting sharper or better than this. I can count the eyelashes and cannot see pixels, what more do I want? No CA or Distortion or Vigenetting or any optical faults because they've been all momentarily eliminated upon ingestion! (Canon Local Service do my printing as a friendly gesture using their highest end printers and they use DPP software, maybe it's a factir but still)

So really what do we need anymore as photographers since a 100$ lens and a 200/300$ body exceeded "enough" for all purposes including portraiture, landscape, products, studio, just not sports or billboards? Given that only a very very tiny percentage of us prints bigger of has the "needs" for these higher-end applications.

I have a long exposure light-trail landscape in my living room that's about 40x30"! Shot on a Canon T6s, 24mp (which taxes the lens sharpness more than a 5DsR) on a 10-18mm STM IS. Again, eveyone coming in is absolutely amazing by the image sharpness. Printed by Canon and Processed through Canon Photo Professional Raw Converter too.

I love all these cameras and lenses because they give me amazingly HQ prints.

What I hate is the motion-picture quality. All these great sensors and cameras and lenses made by Canon are wasted on a video mode that's heavilly line-skipped, soft, aliased result. And the frustration it that it doesn't improve with each model no, the T3 720p is identical, IDENTICAL to the t6s 1080p, which is identical to 70/80D, which identical to 7DII, and to 6D, to 5DIV to 1DX to 1DXII to 1DC! Very strange. Nikon's smallest D3300 makes a considerablly better 1080p image than any Canon. They should be ashamed by it, not market it as Full HD Video. It's not!

The only high quality motion picture imagea coming out of Canon Hybrid/DSLR is on the 5D at an APS-C crop mode and the 1DxII at an APS-H crop mode. Both VERY expensive, major files, but expensive most of all.

If they're so opposed to increasing beyond HD north of the 5D line then just improve the HD resolution, it still had WAAAAY long to bet full HD like the C100 HD image. I mean just a SMIDGE, a littke tineeey bit of very little improvement with each generation, but 80D and 550D being identical is very sad (see Dpreview Video still Test). Prevents us from buying all these wonderfully sharp، AF wonder Canon S35 lenses because there is simply NO body to mount them on!

The s35 lens portfolio is Canon's pride. The unparalleled 10-18mm STM IS, the best 18-55mm IS among all brands (yes including Fuji's try it), 55-250mm STM IS which side by side is as sharp as a 70-200mm 2.8 @5.6 (!) with better IS for video, the 18-135mm Nano USM IS perfect documentary lens from wides to portraits sharp all through and IS the best I've ever used, 50mm f/1.8 STM, no need to praise optics we all know, all of these with a 270° smooth focus ring,

I mean COME ON. Give me high quality video to put these lenses on! Just enough HD. Let's keep knocking on their door for this. Imagine the motion picture aesthetic you would get from a 35mm F/1.4 L II on a FF 4K Canon body giving all the lens FOV/DOF with Standard/Portrait Picture Style filmic Colour science. Or with an 11-24mm FF FOV, or a 70-200mm f2.8 II,

1DC is closest to getting that (though big and 1.3 crop so not the entire lens magic and most of all EXSPENSIVE for me as a T6s owner who just needs better quality video to playback on my 51" 720p set and 60" 2160p set. I am a normal consumer that Canon must please otherwise, with no huge commitnemt in lenses obviously, I can jump to the Nikons with cheap high IQ 1080p (And just lose the 10-18mm advantage) or a Sony A6000 also with high IQ 1080p. (And keep all my glass but lose on filmic colours) but people appreciate sharpness more. Me included as a simple consumer. I have enough colouring skills on my NLE to drive any colours to filmic, it's not that needed SOOC. So Canon relying on that card is going to bite their sales on cameras north of the 5DIV in 2017 sales report. Unless they do something, I predict a 50% drop at the lower end models from 7D to rebel)

Has DPreview done away with the character number limit? Just wondering how you managed to post such a long comment :)

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 03:30 UTC
On article Lily Robotics sued over claims of false advertising (139 comments in total)
In reply to:

AlanG: 60,000 people thought this was a good idea and would be useful to them? I'd like to know what percentage of them also voted for President Tweet?

By the time I finished reading the last 20 comments, I had to think really hard to recall what the original topic was about. :)

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 03:26 UTC
On article Lily Robotics sued over claims of false advertising (139 comments in total)
In reply to:

TheDarmok74: Remindes me of the Lumia ad shot from a moving van that showed in a reflection that a professional camera was being used.

Yeah, that was my first thought too.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 03:20 UTC
On photo Ballerina in the Large Birds challenge (16 comments in total)
In reply to:

Buzz Lightyear: Perhaps one of those once-in-a-lifetime shots where everything comes together for a remarkable image. Well done!

Absolutely true. I haven't shot a better egret photo since (and I've tried, with much better equipment...)

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2016 at 15:19 UTC
On photo Ballerina in the Large Birds challenge (16 comments in total)
In reply to:

Samaistuin: Abszolút csodálatos !!

Köszönöm! ;)

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2016 at 15:17 UTC
On photo Siesta in the Large Birds challenge (2 comments in total)
In reply to:

RuthC: Congratulations, Gabebalazs, on achieving a third place in this 'Large Birds' challenge. Your sleepy brown pelican provides us with an excellent example of texture in its plumage, its solitude on the basalt rock, and calm reflection in the quiet water.
RuthC :-)

Thank you!

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2016 at 01:45 UTC
On photo Ballerina in the Large Birds challenge (16 comments in total)
In reply to:

RuthC: Congratulations, Gabebalazs, on your very well-deserved and popular win in this 'Large Birds' challenge. This is such an elegant capture of a beautiful bird; the curves of its body are artistically perfect, and the pristine whites of the egret's plumage shows these curves to their best advantage. Quite stunning!
RuthC :-)

Thank you very much, I appreciate it.

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2016 at 01:44 UTC
Total: 75, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »