zorglub76

Joined on Aug 28, 2012

Comments

Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1909 comments in total)
In reply to:

maljo@inreach.com: Good camera, like it, very capable, but... not enough to make me change systems. What I have works great.

I think this camera is not meant to turn people away from using 1D or D5. This camera is meant to start a path on which people will be able to abandon 1D/D5 in 7-10 years time. At that point electronics will probably surpass the performance of DSLR, and Sony's lens lineup will be completed...

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 06:54 UTC
In reply to:

Wye Photography: "We’ve learned that some customers require exceptional lens performance" does that imply that other customers don't want exceptional lens performance? I have not met a photog who does not want anything but exceptional lens performance. "Yeah, I use this SIGnificant MAlfunction lens coz it is as soft as butter". That's why I do not use SIGnificant MAlfuction lenses any more.

@Bhima, I have excellent trio of lenses - Sony 50/1.8 (aps-c), Sigma 30/2.8 and Samyang 12/2.0
The most expensive was 50/1.8 which was $270. I don't need better quality than that. There were compromises that I was willing to take with these lenses - Sony could've been sharper at f/1.8, Sigma could've had better bokeh, and Samyang could've had AF.
But it works for me. I don't need fast glass that is sharp wide open if that would cost me three times more (the sole reason why I didn't buy Zeiss Tuit 24/1.8).
Again - I'm an amateur - my pics suck because of poor background or lighting, not because of unsharp corners....

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 15:42 UTC
On article LG G6 comes with dual-cam and 18:9 FullVision display (69 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hellstrom: storage always remains the same. It's been 32GB or 64GB for about 3-4 years now on most Android phones. You'd think this would be the easiest for manufacturers to boost. With 4K video recording, it means you have less room for your files.

If storage increased with each model, we should be up to 512GB or 1TB by 2017, yet we're still stuck in 2013.

Haha.. Yes, it's flattering, really, considering that I live in Serbia.
But whatever perspective you take on this internal flash size, apps are getting bigger and bigger. OS takes about 10GB, Facebook app is 318MB + 125MB of cache. I have an app that is 645MB and I'm not able to move it to SD card...

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 15:32 UTC
In reply to:

tinternaut: 4GB of memory simply shouldn't be an option for a premium level product.

I had 4GB of memory in a desktop PC, and got so annoyed with it that in 2013 I bought new motherboard, CPU and 32GB of ram. Then I noticed that I never use more than 12GB.
Anyway, 4GB is still a joke.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 14:17 UTC
On article LG G6 comes with dual-cam and 18:9 FullVision display (69 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hellstrom: storage always remains the same. It's been 32GB or 64GB for about 3-4 years now on most Android phones. You'd think this would be the easiest for manufacturers to boost. With 4K video recording, it means you have less room for your files.

If storage increased with each model, we should be up to 512GB or 1TB by 2017, yet we're still stuck in 2013.

mSD card is much slower than internal flash.
Also, after installing/uninstalling applications some garbage is left on flash, and you run out of space fairly quickly. I have 32GB internal and 64GB sd card, and, after 6 months of use, I have only 7GB free internally.
Before, you were able to move all your apps to sd card, but now you need to do it manually (afaik). This is quite annoying, and even when you do it, some parts of the application still stay on internal flash...

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 14:05 UTC
In reply to:

Wye Photography: "We’ve learned that some customers require exceptional lens performance" does that imply that other customers don't want exceptional lens performance? I have not met a photog who does not want anything but exceptional lens performance. "Yeah, I use this SIGnificant MAlfunction lens coz it is as soft as butter". That's why I do not use SIGnificant MAlfuction lenses any more.

I don't need exceptional lens performance.
I'm an amateur and I want lenses below $500. I want them to have good IQ, but I know they won't have exceptional IQ and I'm OK with that...

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 13:42 UTC
In reply to:

zorglub76: So, a6000 was $600 2.5 years ago. Now we have touchscreen, which is about $25 upgrade (iPhone 6s replacement screen is $85 if you buy a single item, so Sony's is probably $50, and no-touch screen is probably already $25), and IBIS, which, with all the other improvements, made a7II cost $300 more than a7.

This means that a6500 should cost about $325 more than a6000. Everything above $1000 is a rip-off.... If I want to upgrade my a6000 in two years, does it mean that my option would be a6900 with the price of $2700?

Yes, I'd be fine with having $500 line (a5xxx), $1000 line (a6xxx) and $1500 line (a7xxx). I could live with slower af and no ibis, and I wouldn't like giving more than $1000 for a camera (I'm not a pro)

Most importantly - I'd know that there will be upgraded camera in the future that I can buy.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2016 at 18:56 UTC
In reply to:

zorglub76: So, a6000 was $600 2.5 years ago. Now we have touchscreen, which is about $25 upgrade (iPhone 6s replacement screen is $85 if you buy a single item, so Sony's is probably $50, and no-touch screen is probably already $25), and IBIS, which, with all the other improvements, made a7II cost $300 more than a7.

This means that a6500 should cost about $325 more than a6000. Everything above $1000 is a rip-off.... If I want to upgrade my a6000 in two years, does it mean that my option would be a6900 with the price of $2700?

I'm not trolling, but I am bitter.

They gave me extraordinary camera for extraordinary price (a6000), and then bumped the price 3x without making a new line of cameras that would replace a6000. They should have created a7xxx line with IBIS and left a6xxx without it in the <$1000 range.

I'm bittering all over.....

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2016 at 13:20 UTC
In reply to:

zorglub76: So, a6000 was $600 2.5 years ago. Now we have touchscreen, which is about $25 upgrade (iPhone 6s replacement screen is $85 if you buy a single item, so Sony's is probably $50, and no-touch screen is probably already $25), and IBIS, which, with all the other improvements, made a7II cost $300 more than a7.

This means that a6500 should cost about $325 more than a6000. Everything above $1000 is a rip-off.... If I want to upgrade my a6000 in two years, does it mean that my option would be a6900 with the price of $2700?

IBIS is a two years old technology that made a7II $300 more expensive than a7 (with all the other changes that a7II brought in comparison to a7). My old NEX 5n had touchscreen 5 years ago.

4k, more focus points and a slightly faster AF are all evolutionary technology, that were expected in 2.5 years newer camera.

So, what's groundbreakingly new in a6500 compared to a6000 that made groundbreaking bump in price from $600 to $1400?
And yes, a6000 was a high-end camera priced low - that's what made it so popular.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2016 at 13:50 UTC

So, a6000 was $600 2.5 years ago. Now we have touchscreen, which is about $25 upgrade (iPhone 6s replacement screen is $85 if you buy a single item, so Sony's is probably $50, and no-touch screen is probably already $25), and IBIS, which, with all the other improvements, made a7II cost $300 more than a7.

This means that a6500 should cost about $325 more than a6000. Everything above $1000 is a rip-off.... If I want to upgrade my a6000 in two years, does it mean that my option would be a6900 with the price of $2700?

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 09:22 UTC as 46th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

Bernie Ess: Well, I am not too impressed. The price is beyond reasonable, the pixel count is a bit more than twice of what my a7rII gives me. When I look at the files at 100%, nothing of what I see is so exceptional after all. It just looks like any high end DSLR theses days at 100%, just more of it. a7rII with a premium lens can shoot detail that is "pixel sharp" at 100%, and I can deeply dig into the shadows without noise penalty. This here is similar, just larger (sensor surface), Colour doesn't impress me.

I may be wrong but the older CCD files were nicer...

a7rII sucks at drilling.....

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2016 at 10:45 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85 / G80 Review (691 comments in total)

Ha! A comparison of five cameras where Sony e-mount wins in battery life category!
I thought I'd never see this!

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 13:10 UTC as 151st comment | 3 replies
On article 2017 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $900-1200 (478 comments in total)
In reply to:

AJDVD: I always like the way DP review tests but in the interpretation somethings goes wrong.
Just give a professional photographer a Sony 6000 or so for a day and e.g. a Canon-Nikon DSLR the next.
It depends how you use it, true but for me a camera should take good pictures in all situations and in a way that the camera not distract from the picture taking. I used an Olympus camera for a while, great quality, great lens, but terrible menu, slow access and horrible battery life. I dont want that camera in my bag. I think this is still a point why many prefer a Canon-Nikon old fashion DSLR, big grip, big battery, reliable. Rather have that than pixel peeping. If I want the last bit of quality I rent myself 4X5 or something. But I do wish a real medium format 6X6 sensor sensor(56x56mm).........dream on. Still take an old folder with me, no worries it ever breaks...it works for 60 years....no batteries, no menu, just slide in my pocket.

I've had Sony NEX 5n as my first 'serious' camera, and then bought a6000. I'm not a pro, so I'm not sure how much my experience is relevant, but I've never had some major problems with Sony. I bought another battery and had it with me until I realized that I didn't need it. I shot 5 hours long corporate events (colleagues didn't like the pics of the pro that covered these) and I would end up with battery at arounf 20%.
As for the UI, I really like quick menu of the a6000. I miss a front wheel (don't like the wheel on the back for controlling aperture, but it's not a huge deal - I got used to it). And I'd love to have a quicker way of sellecting a focus point (touchscreen, probably, since I can't see how joystick would be fast enough for the huge amount of focus points).
The main thing that keeps me to the Sony ILCE camp is that I have my camera with me all the time. This was the main reason why I chose it over D7000 - I knew that a big camera would be collecting dust at home...

Link | Posted on May 23, 2016 at 13:36 UTC
In reply to:

ekaton: Size and weight advantage of mirrorless, where did you go?

It's there all the time.
My laptop is portable, but I can still attach four 27" monitors to it. I can do that in the office, I can do that at home, but I can still travel light if I wanted to.
It's the same with mirrorless cameras: you need them to be light - they can be. You need them to use great bulky lenses - they can do that too.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 21:47 UTC
On article Rough and ready: Olympus Tough TG-4 review (291 comments in total)
In reply to:

lem12: This cam. loaded with features useful for any outdoor adventurer not just under water photography. But unfortunately its 1/2.3 limits its use for any other outdoor photography.. Some of these new cams. come loaded with features but with tiny sensors - small enough to limit all its photo features. I would buy this cam. but with 1/1.7 sized sensors at least.

1" or bust!
With such cam you don't need huge zoom, but you need a good DR

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2015 at 08:03 UTC
On article Capture One Pro 8 software review (318 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shangri La: How do you apply same adjustments (WB/Lens correction/etc) to several images, like you can 'Sync' in LR?

I know you can save the adjustment as a preset and then apply to the images, but that way you have to go through each and every image manually. Unlike 'Sync' in LR, where you can one-click apply. Thanks.

Also: ctrl-shift-C (to copy adjustments from one picture) and ctrl-shift-V (to apply adjustments to all the other selected images). Note that it will apply all the adjustments (crop, healing brush, local adjustments), as opposed to LR's selection of the adjustments you want to sync.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2015 at 09:49 UTC
On article Capture One Pro 8 software review (318 comments in total)
In reply to:

Akpinxit: I could never manage to sharpen my photos in C1 without producing additional (unwonted ) artifacts . LR has a really high edge in it .

My experience is totally opposite. Maybe it's the way these two applications deal with Raw files of different camera producers. I hate the way LR is sharpening (adding grain to borders). I did it manually in PS before. C1 does it great and "structure" tool deals fabulously with textures. I have Sony a6000, and I think Sony and PhaseOne work close together (C1 is the first, and currently the only software that can read a7rII raw files), which might be the reason why this works so good on C1.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2015 at 07:21 UTC

These go to eleven, man!

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2015 at 12:18 UTC as 33rd comment
On article Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rashkae: Where's the A6000? It's a fantastic little beast.

... AND it is smaller than all the cameras above (including V3, which is smaller 2mm in height, but bigger 11mm in width!). NX1, on the other hand, is not even small - it is comparable to D7100 (4mm lower and 3mm wider)
Talking 'bout "small and powerfull"....

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 10:51 UTC
On article Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rashkae: Where's the A6000? It's a fantastic little beast.

Really don't understand the lack of a6000. It's, arguably, better or at least on par with all these cameras, and price-wise it looks like this (todays bh prices):
- NX1 (body) $1,499.99
- X-T1 (body) $1,199.95
- GH4 (body) $1,497.99
- E-M1 (body) $1,299.00
- V3 (with kit lens) $1,196.95
- A6000 (body) $448.00
More than $1000 difference between GH4 and A6000????

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 10:17 UTC
Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »