PerL

Lives in Sweden Sweden
Works as a Design & layout
Joined on Nov 25, 2002

Comments

Total: 288, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Working with keyboard commands is usually faster.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 23:25 UTC as 62nd comment
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2016 (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

User5273771010: SORRY FOLKS,

Do not agree with DPR this time out... I have been shooting Nikon-only for over 50 plus years, from my first SLR in 1962, the Nikon F and everything else to my F6! DSLR's, the D700, D800, D3, D3s, (2) Df's and my D4 (still have everyone of them and all the Pro glass along the way, LOL!). About 3 years back I jumped ship and purchased (2) Oly E-M1's and now have the entire Oly Pro Lens line up including the outstanding Oly 300mm f2.8. I will be investing in the E-M1 Mk II very soon. Yes, I still shoot my D4 and 2 Df's but I do enjoy using my Oly gear more now than ALL my Nikon collection combined. I believe that my opinion is very subjective, as well, I respect others opinions, more so the ones that invest in, own and use the gear they talk about. The armchair guy & gals, well, keep drooling! 😜

V/R The PhotogDog (Kent)

@Michael
I have not used a m43 with the 45 or 75 and I can image that those can give reasonably good level of DOF control. I have used a Panasonic with the 20 1.7, which I found had a somewhat flat and uninspiring look. Personal opinion of course.

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 19:07 UTC
In reply to:

Nate in Maine: I've been shooting sports - mainly high school and college - for newspapers and yearbooks for more than 40 years. The camera doesn't matter. Mirror/ mirror less, Canon/ Nikon/ Sony - I'm the one taking the picture, not the camera. Hats off to this amazing photographer!

@Eric
You dont see many mirrorless Sonys on the sidelines, do you? That was what the poster wrote - cameras doesnt matter. There is almost no difference vs the pro systems from Nikon and Canon, but the others are behind.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2016 at 20:27 UTC
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2016 (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

User5273771010: SORRY FOLKS,

Do not agree with DPR this time out... I have been shooting Nikon-only for over 50 plus years, from my first SLR in 1962, the Nikon F and everything else to my F6! DSLR's, the D700, D800, D3, D3s, (2) Df's and my D4 (still have everyone of them and all the Pro glass along the way, LOL!). About 3 years back I jumped ship and purchased (2) Oly E-M1's and now have the entire Oly Pro Lens line up including the outstanding Oly 300mm f2.8. I will be investing in the E-M1 Mk II very soon. Yes, I still shoot my D4 and 2 Df's but I do enjoy using my Oly gear more now than ALL my Nikon collection combined. I believe that my opinion is very subjective, as well, I respect others opinions, more so the ones that invest in, own and use the gear they talk about. The armchair guy & gals, well, keep drooling! 😜

V/R The PhotogDog (Kent)

Personally I would be bothered by the lesser DOF control on the smaller m43 format and the fact that a very cheap entry level Nikon APS-C like a D3300 has better IQ.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2016 at 20:17 UTC
In reply to:

Nate in Maine: I've been shooting sports - mainly high school and college - for newspapers and yearbooks for more than 40 years. The camera doesn't matter. Mirror/ mirror less, Canon/ Nikon/ Sony - I'm the one taking the picture, not the camera. Hats off to this amazing photographer!

@Eric
It does negate his point IMO. If the competitors has better cameras as in better low light/AF capabilities they have better odds. Why put yourself at a disadvantage?

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2016 at 18:58 UTC
In reply to:

Nate in Maine: I've been shooting sports - mainly high school and college - for newspapers and yearbooks for more than 40 years. The camera doesn't matter. Mirror/ mirror less, Canon/ Nikon/ Sony - I'm the one taking the picture, not the camera. Hats off to this amazing photographer!

@Eric,
And I shot international soccer games in the 70-80s with SLRs and manual focus. But there is no doubt that todays gear gives many more keepers and better chances. If you are on an assignment, those that hire you expect that you have just as capable equipment as the competing photographers.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2016 at 10:15 UTC
In reply to:

Nate in Maine: I've been shooting sports - mainly high school and college - for newspapers and yearbooks for more than 40 years. The camera doesn't matter. Mirror/ mirror less, Canon/ Nikon/ Sony - I'm the one taking the picture, not the camera. Hats off to this amazing photographer!

The camera doesn't matter? If there is any field where the camera and lenses does matter it is in high end sports photography. Sure you can shot with anything, but you will be severely handicapped vs your competitors.

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2016 at 18:27 UTC
On article Gear of the Year 2016 - Barney's choice: Nikon D500 (216 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mister Joseph: So with 0.67x OVF magnification, it is about as big as my D610's viewfinder (0.7x) ? The only reason I'm holding on to my FF is because I love the large OVF.

When I played with a D500 on a photo expo I was surprised to see that viewfinder seemed to be the same size as some Nikon FF cameras.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2016 at 19:37 UTC
On article Gear of the Year 2016 - Barney's choice: Nikon D500 (216 comments in total)
In reply to:

Satyaa: Certainly a good choice. This is a reliable tool for demanding jobs/situations, though a little late to arrive.

Seeing Nikon's DL series (just the announcements for now), Canon's progress with M5, Fuji's improvements in AF, Panasonic's DFD, Sony's introduction of on-sensor PDAF, andmore... we are closer than ever to mirrorless cameras becoming the mainstream. The only thing that could still be considered a 'deal breaker' by many is the battery life. Let's see what 2017 brings.

Nikon and Canon are holding back on mirrorless for now but they know this business and will not hesitate when they think that they can better meet the needs of their pro customers with a mirrorless.

With that prospect looming, the D500 could be the last pro-grade APSC DSLR, just like Nikon F6 in film series (surprisingly, still available new!)

Nikon will then end this series on a high note again.

Androole – in real use (based on experience, shooting with both types) having your subject suddenly go into blackness or get blown out while you follow it is a disadvantage. The sensor has much greater DR than the EVF, so you cant trust the EVF. The full DR of the scene in an OVF is relevant because it means you can easier follow your subject in shifting light.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2016 at 14:36 UTC
On article Gear of the Year 2016 - Barney's choice: Nikon D500 (216 comments in total)
In reply to:

Satyaa: Certainly a good choice. This is a reliable tool for demanding jobs/situations, though a little late to arrive.

Seeing Nikon's DL series (just the announcements for now), Canon's progress with M5, Fuji's improvements in AF, Panasonic's DFD, Sony's introduction of on-sensor PDAF, andmore... we are closer than ever to mirrorless cameras becoming the mainstream. The only thing that could still be considered a 'deal breaker' by many is the battery life. Let's see what 2017 brings.

Nikon and Canon are holding back on mirrorless for now but they know this business and will not hesitate when they think that they can better meet the needs of their pro customers with a mirrorless.

With that prospect looming, the D500 could be the last pro-grade APSC DSLR, just like Nikon F6 in film series (surprisingly, still available new!)

Nikon will then end this series on a high note again.

But why? The Sony SLT-line is very close in concept to a mirrorless D500? But it is not very popular. There is simply no advantage for serious action shooting with an EVF instead of an OVF. Its the other way around - you want a rock steady, zero lag view with the full DR of the scene, instead of an EVF that is influenced by the cameras processing, changes exposure in the viewfinder, limits the DR , etc.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2016 at 14:17 UTC

A fast 85 on a full frame camera is wonderful thing. Seems like a great lens at a reasonable price.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 14:53 UTC as 54th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Nikon D40 (174 comments in total)
In reply to:

entoman: I owned the predecessor model D50 for a few months. It handled very well and gave great results for the first few months, then the AF system began to falter, and eventually packed up completely. After experiencing reliability problems with my earlier FM2 and F3 film cameras, and then the D50, I finally lost all faith in Nikon reliability and switched to Sony a700. I'd probably still be using Sony now if they had upgraded the a700 sooner, but when I borrowed a Canon outfit from a friend, I was immediately convinced that Canon was the way to go. 5 years later I'm still with Canon and see no reason to change brands again.

I am only refering to the FM2 and F3. Many, many pros used the FM and FM2 as a compact alternative to the heavier F2 or F3. They were considered as though and reliable. The F3 is probably the pro model with the longest production run of all models from Canon and Nikon. I have owned the FM and the F3 and I worked as a professional photographer in the 80s. So I have a different opinion.
BTW I think Canon makes excellent cameras as well.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2016 at 23:16 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Nikon D40 (174 comments in total)
In reply to:

entoman: I owned the predecessor model D50 for a few months. It handled very well and gave great results for the first few months, then the AF system began to falter, and eventually packed up completely. After experiencing reliability problems with my earlier FM2 and F3 film cameras, and then the D50, I finally lost all faith in Nikon reliability and switched to Sony a700. I'd probably still be using Sony now if they had upgraded the a700 sooner, but when I borrowed a Canon outfit from a friend, I was immediately convinced that Canon was the way to go. 5 years later I'm still with Canon and see no reason to change brands again.

IF you had reliability problems with a Nikon FM2 and a F3 you really had bad luck. These are quality cameras.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2016 at 18:46 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Nikon D40 (174 comments in total)

It was a camera that sounded boring if you only read the specs. In use it was a delight. The shutter was one of the most smooth and vibration free on the DSLR market. The grip was much better than on the small Canons. The image quality was crisp (weak AA-filter?) and the images were punchy, colors excellent. All in all, a humble camera that was easy to like.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2016 at 12:56 UTC as 82nd comment
On article Field Test: Birds in flight with the Nikon D500 (92 comments in total)

Excellent video - high class production.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 08:10 UTC as 29th comment
On article Modest Updates: Nikon D3400 Review (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

Melchiorum: I feel like this range of DSLR's is really becoming obsolete. It is an awkward area of the market that was once relevant but is now completely dominated by much better mirror-less offers. High-end DSLRs are still relevant because they are robust, predictable and reliable tanks packed with features professionals and enthusiasts often need, but even they are being pressed hard by the recent mirror-less cameras (and recent announcements like E-M1 II really seem to target the high-end pro market). Entry level DSLRs just have nothing to offer: they are not portable enough to be convenient, nor are they feature packed enough to justify the price.

This cam feels like an artifact of the past to me even if it was just released. The market has moved on and there are way better offers out there now in this price range.

@samfan
For the advanced user, a camera like a D3400 is a great travel cam, or an inexpensive second body when you want to go light and dont worry so much about your gear. I have seen some shots with fantastic IQ from the humble D3x00-bodies. The cost/IQ relation is hard to beat.
As for the beginner, I think the simple operation is often better for learning photography than some of feature laden mirrorless offerings.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2016 at 17:33 UTC
On article Modest Updates: Nikon D3400 Review (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

Melchiorum: I feel like this range of DSLR's is really becoming obsolete. It is an awkward area of the market that was once relevant but is now completely dominated by much better mirror-less offers. High-end DSLRs are still relevant because they are robust, predictable and reliable tanks packed with features professionals and enthusiasts often need, but even they are being pressed hard by the recent mirror-less cameras (and recent announcements like E-M1 II really seem to target the high-end pro market). Entry level DSLRs just have nothing to offer: they are not portable enough to be convenient, nor are they feature packed enough to justify the price.

This cam feels like an artifact of the past to me even if it was just released. The market has moved on and there are way better offers out there now in this price range.

I just wonder in what way mirrorless in the same price bracket is "much better?". Hardly in image quality - if that still is important...

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2016 at 18:15 UTC
On article Modest Updates: Nikon D3400 Review (378 comments in total)

Most people doesn't get it. It is the easy sharing with a phone that is the point of the "upgrade". It is probably a "must feature" today and Nikon knows it.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2016 at 15:36 UTC as 96th comment | 2 replies
On article Fast and light: Nikkor 24mm F1.8G ED lens review (158 comments in total)

Personally I would pick the Nikon because of the weight. There is a real difference in comfort when you walk around with the camera.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2016 at 15:03 UTC as 54th comment
On article Canon EOS M5: What you need to know (564 comments in total)
In reply to:

PerL: Very, very expensive.

Well, it seems mirrorless never delivers on the promise of lower prices that we have heard now for 6-7 years - "because they are cheaper to manufacture".

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2016 at 18:17 UTC
Total: 288, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »