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: 880, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1289 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: "Compared to its larger sensor competitors, the E-M1 II shows a noise penalty of about 1EV, which is higher than the 2/3EV you'd expect from sensor size alone." - DPReview

After 3 years, the new E-M1 II has gained only a tiny improvement in IQ, while competitors pull ahead and leave it further behind. Not using the latest sensor technology provides, this E-M1 is disappointing in the one fundamental area that is important to numerous photographers, the quality of the image.

You worry far too much about incremental differences in image quality. The image quality is excellent in a huge range of uses and situations and far better than any camera which will miss the shot because you didn't bring a tripod; didn't want to get it too wet; couldn't be bothered carrying all the right lenses because they were too heavy etc. etc. Image quality is fine and not a weakness unless you are shooting in specialised conditions, other things are strengths.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 21:46 UTC

Quote "if you're mostly a slow-speed stills photographer, the original E-M1 won't disappoint. " Actually, even if you want a quick camera, the original EM1 is unlikely to disappoint for anything but the most specialised uses. The newer one is outrageously fast but the old one still packs a fast frame rate and instant autofocus into its little body. You really couldn't call either one "slow"!

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 17:29 UTC as 52nd comment
In reply to:

kobakokh: this is very good camera and also good system... New E-m1 is great camera, with great 12-100 lens... But PRICE! This is one and only very wring thing there. Sorry, but we can buy 1 Nikon D610 with Nikon 24-120 lenses in this one set price. Its not equal purchase.. But I hope price will be down soon, also I think soon we will see E-M5 Mark 3 and E-M10 Mark 3... With baby prices!

" ...photos from small sensor are not so good"??? That depends on what you mean by "small sensor". Micro four thirds sensors are much larger than a lot of sensors out there and are capable of producing very, very good photos! I have large, beautiful and detailed prints on my walls which have come from sensors nowhere near as good as the ones being discussed here.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2016 at 11:28 UTC
In reply to:

photog4u: There is something wrong with the E-M1 SSCT. Sorry but you give me your studio test scene, and E-M1 (firmware v4) and a 45mm f.18 and I will give you back a file one hell of a lot sharper (at default settings) than the one you are providing here. It looks like the photographer missed the focus. This comparison is junk IMO.

Ta!

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2016 at 11:25 UTC
In reply to:

photog4u: There is something wrong with the E-M1 SSCT. Sorry but you give me your studio test scene, and E-M1 (firmware v4) and a 45mm f.18 and I will give you back a file one hell of a lot sharper (at default settings) than the one you are providing here. It looks like the photographer missed the focus. This comparison is junk IMO.

You really should make the time, Carey. People take these comparisons seriously and it reflects very badly (and unfairly) on what is still a current camera!

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 20:57 UTC
In reply to:

brycesteiner: I always thought the original E-M1 test shots here looked like there was always a slight amount of blur--either motion or out of OOF. Clear back in 2013 it would be that way and so I would compare to the E-M5 even though that wasn't the camera I was looking at.
Compared to the E-M1mk2 it's pretty clear the E-M1 is a little out of focus.
It might explain what might be the problem with people's view on the new camera, thinking it doesn't resolve well at 200

I did see that the 800 photo was crisper than the 100 but it doesn't look like shutter shock (though it is in the right speed range). Shutter shock is seen as either a slight double image or blur in one direction, this just looks soft. You could be right though. My first EM1 was really prone to shutter shock. Luckily, the shop allowed me to test a few bodies and exchange it - the third was much better. Not a problem now, of course!

Now the issue has been raised, it would be very helpful if dpreview would re-shoot the original EM1. A bit of work, I realise, but it is a current model and that comparison does it a real disservice.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 20:52 UTC
In reply to:

brycesteiner: I always thought the original E-M1 test shots here looked like there was always a slight amount of blur--either motion or out of OOF. Clear back in 2013 it would be that way and so I would compare to the E-M5 even though that wasn't the camera I was looking at.
Compared to the E-M1mk2 it's pretty clear the E-M1 is a little out of focus.
It might explain what might be the problem with people's view on the new camera, thinking it doesn't resolve well at 200

I noticed that with this comparison, but not at every sensitivity. Did someone bump a lens on the original? I know my own EM1 is much crisper than you'd expect from that test. Mind you, the newer version does seem to produce a bit more detail, if you really need it.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 06:07 UTC
In reply to:

deep7: You absolutely don't have to use it as a selfie! This could be an interesting tool to have hanging around (pun intended) but it all depends on how good that camera is. Or, perhaps, how compromised it had to be to make it light enough?

I wonder if the camera tilts?

For sure! You'd need a plan...

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 01:15 UTC

You absolutely don't have to use it as a selfie! This could be an interesting tool to have hanging around (pun intended) but it all depends on how good that camera is. Or, perhaps, how compromised it had to be to make it light enough?

I wonder if the camera tilts?

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2016 at 19:38 UTC as 60th comment | 2 replies
On article 2016 Roundup: Enthusiast Long Zoom Cameras (185 comments in total)
In reply to:

Entish 1: Florida Keys field (often wet) naturalist shooting twitchy birds in sun-flecked forest understory, frenetic little butterflies and, like Cheney, occasionally my friends. Superzoom practicality & affordability (expendability) won out over SLR IQ years ago, "best camera is the one you have with you (said climbing from canoe into tree). SX40HS has succumbed to coastal salt/humidity (squeaks pitifully prior to "lens error" message). Wavering 'tween weather-sealed FZ300 vs IQ & low-light capable FZ1000. Question: won't any fixed-lens zoom act like bellows, drawing moist salt-air into camera? If so, weather-sealing is just a defense against rain & sea spray encountered while not zooming. Better than nothing, but moist salt-air gets in. Transitions 'tween A/C and the rest of Earth (it's a wet world) creates condensation wherever moist air goes. Larger lens volume (FZ1000) may exacerbate the issue, but can FZ300 really escape it? And, if does, how will I justify "needing" a FZ500 in 4 years?

The FZ2000 also doesn't move the lens when zooming, only when you turn it on or off, but is not claimed to be weather sealed like the Canon and Sonys.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 19:16 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Enthusiast Long Zoom Cameras (185 comments in total)
In reply to:

MySchizoBuddy: Which of these can shoot more than 29min continuous video?

The Panasonic FZ2000.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 19:11 UTC
In reply to:

deep7: I'm a little confused. On the intro page, the Sony A99/2 is one of the models covered. Yet I don't see a page for it. I would have expected it to win easily in this arbitrary class, on a website devoted to Sony sensors and lots of numbers (tongue in cheek but you all know what I mean!), especially at the price.

That was quick! Thank you.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 19:04 UTC

I'm a little confused. On the intro page, the Sony A99/2 is one of the models covered. Yet I don't see a page for it. I would have expected it to win easily in this arbitrary class, on a website devoted to Sony sensors and lots of numbers (tongue in cheek but you all know what I mean!), especially at the price.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 18:55 UTC as 69th comment | 2 replies
On article OWC's Thunderbolt 3 Dock adds 13 ports to your MacBook (150 comments in total)

If Apple threw something like this in with their more expensive models it would be a good pacifier. Leave it on your desk with everything plugged in and just take the lighter computer with you.

Alternatively, replace two of the up-to-date but mostly useless new ports with two so-old-fashioned but massively useful old USB ports and add an SD card reader. Might be cheaper, lighter and more useful for many...

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2016 at 20:56 UTC as 43rd comment | 1 reply
On article OWC's Thunderbolt 3 Dock adds 13 ports to your MacBook (150 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fujica: You could as well bring your iMac under your arms... ;)

I know someone who does that! Chucks it in a box, plugs it in when he gets there.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2016 at 20:54 UTC
In reply to:

Aroart: I wonder how many people were upset when Apple removed the DVD drive and if hurt Apples sales. xqd is the future of dp and video... Change is inevitable, so deal with it....

Before SD, CompactFlash was actually quite widely used. I even had a HP Jornada once (mini laptop) which had a CompactFlash slot in it! I spent $100 on a 32MB card and doubled the storage. Times have changed but the convenience of having a built in card slot remains.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 03:03 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 1 - Crop-Sensor (387 comments in total)
In reply to:

Keith57: Strange language. What's a crop sensor? Is it a sensor that stated out a certain size and then gets chopped down? What's on earth is 'full frame'? Is it a mythical standard size? What about all those cameras with a really big sensor (Medium format) are they 'expanded sensors'?

Just curious, what's wrong with just 35mm, m4/3, etc? aren't all of these 'Full Frame' ;-)

SirSeth, that's fine. The trouble is that that (very recent) "historic usage" (common here but not everywhere) has led to a ridiculous attitude that anything not "full frame" is no good, which is patently untrue and illogical, as well as being misleading. It's just not a good term to use and there is no need for the writers on this site to promote that. In fact they could improve the site greatly by moving away from that.

Endless forum topics get ruined here because idiots butt in, essentially claiming anything that is not 35mm format is rubbish. As someone who consciously chose to embrace the advantages of a smaller format, I see this annoyance frequently.

photomedium: Your unpleasant aggression contributes nothing. What do you hope to achieve by such silliness?

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2016 at 19:00 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 1 - Crop-Sensor (387 comments in total)
In reply to:

Keith57: Strange language. What's a crop sensor? Is it a sensor that stated out a certain size and then gets chopped down? What's on earth is 'full frame'? Is it a mythical standard size? What about all those cameras with a really big sensor (Medium format) are they 'expanded sensors'?

Just curious, what's wrong with just 35mm, m4/3, etc? aren't all of these 'Full Frame' ;-)

Your call. My species is Homo sapiens. What's yours?

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2016 at 06:00 UTC
On article Nikon reportedly eliminating 1000 jobs in Japan (518 comments in total)

Nikon have rarely made a camera that appealed to me. I only bought one and sold it again within weeks. Yet I find this sad news. When it comes to a lot of electronics, we've been sucked into a world in which we somehow believe getting the "latest/greatest" will make life better. The constant need to produce that, instead of producing solid products that can be sold over a several year lifespan, puts crazy pressure on manufacturers. Now we have had this massive shift in how photography works (thanks Apple!), a whole lot of that innovation died before it could produce a sufficient profit, especially for those who were/are in the cutthroat high turnover/low profit per item market.

I feel sorry for any old, established business caught up in that. Just look at what happened to Kodak. I hope Nikon do okay, just to keep some variety out there!

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2016 at 05:58 UTC as 117th comment
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 1 - Crop-Sensor (387 comments in total)
In reply to:

Keith57: Strange language. What's a crop sensor? Is it a sensor that stated out a certain size and then gets chopped down? What's on earth is 'full frame'? Is it a mythical standard size? What about all those cameras with a really big sensor (Medium format) are they 'expanded sensors'?

Just curious, what's wrong with just 35mm, m4/3, etc? aren't all of these 'Full Frame' ;-)

photomedium: Keith made an excellent point. That's far from trolling. You may not agree with the point, which is fine. However, the term "full frame" has become senselessly (and illogically) snobbish on this site and it is time the writers got more objective. You should at least be able to understand that, surely?

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2016 at 01:32 UTC
Total: 880, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »