deep7

Lives in New Zealand (Aotearoa) New Zealand (Aotearoa)
Works as a writer/photographer/ecologist
Has a website at deeppics.com
Joined on May 10, 2008
About me:

God makes it, I see it and photograph it. Sometimes that works well!

Comments

Total: 1415, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Hasselblad XCD 21mm sample gallery (129 comments in total)
In reply to:

panther fan: The samples look great no doubt. But isn't that the same with other modern lenses? Mix in a shot of the Fuji 23mm F4 or the Batis 18mm and nobody would have noticed.

For such high end lenses I think a full review would be more helpfull than a sample gallery

Until you zoom into 100% and maybe add in some tricky lighting...

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2018 at 05:04 UTC
In reply to:

deep7: I hardly think it's a downfall tethering via a cable. So much easier than faffing about with WiFi and likely to be more reliable. Besides, the two are physically connected anyway! This is a positive feature.

A very short one between your iPhone and the controller!! Much less than twelve miles. Or even twelve inches...

It is still a radio controlled quadcopter.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2018 at 21:23 UTC
In reply to:

Dheorl: I wonder if that camera can shoot straight up. If it can I'd buy it over the DJI for that alone.

Bridges, roofs, under trees, gorges, caves....

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2018 at 01:05 UTC
In reply to:

deep7: I hardly think it's a downfall tethering via a cable. So much easier than faffing about with WiFi and likely to be more reliable. Besides, the two are physically connected anyway! This is a positive feature.

Bound to be. How is that relevant to this discussion?

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 23:31 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: djis software policies and known bricking should be avoided

i hope this helps that goal

Exactly. DJI are not on my shopping list at all. This one very much could be!

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 21:11 UTC
In reply to:

Dheorl: I wonder if that camera can shoot straight up. If it can I'd buy it over the DJI for that alone.

They claim +/- 90 degrees, so yes.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 21:09 UTC
In reply to:

santamonica812: Does it shoot RAW? The reviewer forgot to mention this. (For a lot of photographers, it's one of the 2 or 3 most important factors, I think.)

The website says it does.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 21:08 UTC

I hardly think it's a downfall tethering via a cable. So much easier than faffing about with WiFi and likely to be more reliable. Besides, the two are physically connected anyway! This is a positive feature.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 21:02 UTC as 17th comment | 7 replies
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX100 VI: What you need to know (433 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: You don't really need an "equivalent" aperture chart. The cameras all use the same sensor size so real aperture would be more appropriate!

Of course not. Absolutely no need for an academic, unrelated benchmark when comparing across one format. The chart would be better without that silliness because it would actually tell you how the real apertures changed as you zoom, rather than having to do some maths. We are NOT comparing a range of formats here, are we??

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2018 at 19:55 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX100 VI sample gallery (239 comments in total)
In reply to:

bluevellet: I was going to say the images looked a bit soft, thinking it was this new super zoom lens coming with this camera.

But I double-checked with the galleries of the mark V with the equivalent 24-70mm lens and the Nikon 1 galleries with the excellent 32mm f1.2 lens and they're mostly the same. I guess Sony did a good job with this new lens and I just overestimated the IQ one can squeeze out of an 1-inch sensor.

There are plenty of very sharp images taken using a one inch sensor (I have a few of a my own!). However, dpreview processing tends to be conservative on sharpening. Maybe that is what you are seeing? I did note at least one focus miss here (long shot of building tops) so there could be other things at play. You really shouldn't expect such an ambitious lens to be razor sharp across its range either.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2018 at 19:50 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX100 VI: What you need to know (433 comments in total)

You don't really need an "equivalent" aperture chart. The cameras all use the same sensor size so real aperture would be more appropriate!

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2018 at 22:42 UTC as 116th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

The Fat Fish: It's weird to think 5 years ago I would happily identify as an Apple fanboy and wouldn't have a bad word said about them. Now I am down to one Apple product and soon to be none.

The experience was certainly a lot better five or more years ago. The trouble is that any alternatives are just as bad or even worse. Luckily, for a lot of the new software, you can keep turning off the endless gimmicks. Sadly, the hardware requires more and more adaptors! Yet they make money...

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2018 at 22:22 UTC
In reply to:

tedolf: Do these flashes use the Olympus/Panasonic TTL flash protocol?

tEdolph

Sorry, msadat, that's not quite clear. I use my Metz flash on two Olympus bodies, a Panasonic DSLR and FZ1000 and a Leica T and it works perfectly on all of them, including TTL. I thought I had read that the SL moved to Nikon protocol.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2018 at 22:16 UTC
On article SeaLife DC2000 sample gallery (155 comments in total)

Wow - comparing these images to the usual "tough" camera samples just shows how bad most of those other cameras are! This thing seems genuinely usable. Just a shame the lens is so wide but you need that underwater (where a lens effectively becomes narrower) so it's not unexpected.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2018 at 20:10 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

tedolf: Do these flashes use the Olympus/Panasonic TTL flash protocol?

tEdolph

That's a good question. Early digital Leicas did but I thought the SL used a Nikon one. Hopefully someone can confirm either way?

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2018 at 19:38 UTC
In reply to:

Ab Latchin: Love all these "serious" photopraphers commenting on a fun body for the casual user. Cracks me up. Look every camera can't be an OMD em1.2 or a Sony A9 etc. Some people just want a bit of fun with their purchase.

I don't want a camera to match my outfit but I do like blue. I'm definitely a man!

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2018 at 20:42 UTC

I have to say it looks way better than the bland black or painted silver look that the vast majority of cameras sport these days. If only it was a blue Pen F...

I know it shouldn't really matter what a camera looks like but, it seems, if you like a camera you are more likely to have it with you. The world needs more blue cameras!

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2018 at 20:40 UTC as 33rd comment | 2 replies
On article Does sensor size still make a difference? (1050 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: For decades, one of the biggest problems with photography was trying to get enough in focus (better depth of field) without sacrificing shutter speed or using higher sensitivity film. Small digital sensors have massively improved this issue. You forgot to mention that...

I'm pretty sure that, had it not been for a legacy of 35mm film cameras and the millions of lenses lying around, most enthusiasts would have settled for something around the 4/3 sensor size as the best balance. The great hordes of snappers have proven to be perfectly happy with something much smaller. I guess this proves that, all things considered, larger sensors are actually not better at all!

Sure it was.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2018 at 21:28 UTC
On article Does sensor size still make a difference? (1050 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: For decades, one of the biggest problems with photography was trying to get enough in focus (better depth of field) without sacrificing shutter speed or using higher sensitivity film. Small digital sensors have massively improved this issue. You forgot to mention that...

I'm pretty sure that, had it not been for a legacy of 35mm film cameras and the millions of lenses lying around, most enthusiasts would have settled for something around the 4/3 sensor size as the best balance. The great hordes of snappers have proven to be perfectly happy with something much smaller. I guess this proves that, all things considered, larger sensors are actually not better at all!

Your first response moved the goalposts. Sounds like you would rather argue than even try to understand a completely valid point. Please don't make that my problem.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2018 at 20:50 UTC
On article Does sensor size still make a difference? (1050 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: For decades, one of the biggest problems with photography was trying to get enough in focus (better depth of field) without sacrificing shutter speed or using higher sensitivity film. Small digital sensors have massively improved this issue. You forgot to mention that...

I'm pretty sure that, had it not been for a legacy of 35mm film cameras and the millions of lenses lying around, most enthusiasts would have settled for something around the 4/3 sensor size as the best balance. The great hordes of snappers have proven to be perfectly happy with something much smaller. I guess this proves that, all things considered, larger sensors are actually not better at all!

No no no!! While that is one key advantage, it is far from the only one. The advantages of either carrying far less or being able to take more options with you, especially if you want some reach; being able to focus closer with "equivalent" lenses; saving money; being less disappointed when you pixel peep (because of less apparent motion blur) are just the first things that come to mind. Please, understand the fact that larger sensors come with disadvantages as well as advantages! Otherwise we would all be using much larger sensors than just those based on the 35mm film size!

Link | Posted on May 31, 2018 at 02:45 UTC
Total: 1415, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »