xPhoenix

xPhoenix

Joined on Nov 10, 2017

Comments

Total: 795, showing: 781 – 795
« First‹ Previous37383940Next ›Last »
In reply to:

riknash: BRAVO! Just in time for Black Friday.. or is that Going in the Red Friday?

Makes sense, since DPR is actually owned by Amazon.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 17:48 UTC

How about a wildlife category? Guess that's closest to sports and action. D5 would be nice, but it's freaking huge, and lacks the crop factor of the D500. Plus, it's a fortune. I can't seen some parent buying this to shoot their kids' soccer game.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 17:44 UTC as 8th comment
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

lzeppelin: no, King of Song, the Nikon D850 is quite overall even better than the superb A7r3 :D

and the all around best sensor remanis the one installed in the d750 if you consider, in addition to pure resolution, all other electrical features (mix of dynamic range, latitude of exposure, iso invariance ecc)

I probably won't replace my D750 until someone releases a sensor that's significantly better. Yes, the D850 has more resolution, but I don't need that. Is there another 24MP, FF sensor out there that performs better in low light, except maybe the one in the D5? The D750's sensor is phenomenal.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 17:38 UTC
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

fishy wishy: I bet you didn't have enough time with it to examine how quickly the battery drains while left in the camera when turned off. In experience of a lot of mirrorless I see draining in 2-3 weeks. Very common in mirrorless and maddening in practice. I took three batteries to a shoot recently. Two had been in cameras and hardly used but turned out almost flat. Only the one that I had charged that day got me through. Why is "Off" not really Off to so many cameras?

I have an a3000, and I noticed this happening. Kind of crazy.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 22:04 UTC
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

xPhoenix: Can anyone explain why the D850 appears sharper in the studio scene? These cameras seem to perform about the same as far as high ISO noise goes.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a7riii&attr13_1=nikon_d850&attr13_2=canon_eos5d&attr13_3=canon_eos5d&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=3200&attr16_3=3200&attr126_0=1&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.24840474020054693&y=1.0887988662547037

Thanks.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 20:59 UTC
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1253 comments in total)

Can anyone explain why the D850 appears sharper in the studio scene? These cameras seem to perform about the same as far as high ISO noise goes.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a7riii&attr13_1=nikon_d850&attr13_2=canon_eos5d&attr13_3=canon_eos5d&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=3200&attr16_3=3200&attr126_0=1&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.24840474020054693&y=1.0887988662547037

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 20:09 UTC as 179th comment | 4 replies
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

xPhoenix: Both this and the D850 appear to be great cameras, but for my style of shooting (wildlife), I just don't need them. The performance at higher ISOs is really only impressive if you downsize the image. When viewed at 100%, the D500 is actually cleaner. Surprising, but true. I can see these being awesome cameras IF you don't need to crop.

I'm rarely able to fill the frame with wildlife, unless it's a large animal, so I just use APS-C. When I can fill the frame, or most of it, I do use a FF camera. One area where the Sony may be better is stabilization. It sounds like the D850 requires higher shutter speeds to get the sharpest images. It'd be nice to have in-body stabilization on my Nikons.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 16:13 UTC
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

xPhoenix: Both this and the D850 appear to be great cameras, but for my style of shooting (wildlife), I just don't need them. The performance at higher ISOs is really only impressive if you downsize the image. When viewed at 100%, the D500 is actually cleaner. Surprising, but true. I can see these being awesome cameras IF you don't need to crop.

Sure, but if I need to crop that 42 MP image to 20 MP anyway, then the D500 is going to look cleaner. For my shooting needs, 42 MP is pointless, but I can see why some would like it.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 15:47 UTC
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1253 comments in total)

Both this and the D850 appear to be great cameras, but for my style of shooting (wildlife), I just don't need them. The performance at higher ISOs is really only impressive if you downsize the image. When viewed at 100%, the D500 is actually cleaner. Surprising, but true. I can see these being awesome cameras IF you don't need to crop.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 15:36 UTC as 247th comment | 7 replies
On article Top 10 sample galleries of the year #8: Nikon D7500 (22 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tord S Eriksson: I bought this camera a while ago, and I must say it is a pure delight! Great at high ISO, but a wonderful camera overall!

Not anything special, but one of those cameras you can't help liking a lot.

Touch-screen, flip-out display, why haven't the older cameras I own that?! Not a high-resolution display, but very useful, even in sunlight.

Overall, a very user-friendly camera, that gives the owner excellent images in return!

The IQ is pretty much the same as the D500, which is great. There were a few ergonomic things I didn't like about it, but it is a nice camera. Enjoy!

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 00:55 UTC
On article Sony a7R III added to studio scene comparison (446 comments in total)
In reply to:

xPhoenix: Interesting. I would take the sharpness differences with a grain of salt. I sincerely doubt the D850 is sharper. As for noise, when viewed at full size, the Sony seems close to the D850. Difference is probably negligible. What I still find interesting is that the D500 looks cleaner at high ISO (when viewing 1:1). Also, if you're interested in the cleanest shots at high ISO, the D750 is still king, unless you want to drop $6500 on a D5.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a7riii&attr13_1=nikon_d850&attr13_2=nikon_d750&attr13_3=nikon_d500&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=6400&attr16_3=6400&attr126_0=1&attr171_3=1&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0&y=0.07071072883657764

In the link I posted above, I compared the a7riii to the D850 and D500. The D500 is actually cleaner. It's clearly visible. I'm talking about 1:1 viewing. If you downsize the image from the a7riii or D850, then it's a different story, but pixel for pixel, the D500 is cleaner.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 00:26 UTC
On article Sony a7R III added to studio scene comparison (446 comments in total)
In reply to:

havoc315: I ran the comparison to the D850, which I had been considering. Compared to my current D750. And for giggles, compared it to my old A99. Also compared it to the A7rii. it's basically still the same at the A7rii, not surprising. I ran the "comparables" to equalize the size on all 4.
First off, makes me very glad I'm not using the A99 anymore. Even at ISO 100 and comparable size, it looks terrible in comparison. Look at the rest... at high ISO... 12800-25600 ---
Raw looks virtually identical between the A7riii and the D850. For comparable size, the D750 is noisier but it's close.
For jpegs -- Not sure if the settings were similar on all the cameras, but the D750 drops out at this point -- details very smeared and lost.
Compared to the A7rii -- The A7riii seems to preserve more detail with less aggressive noise reduction. Very clear at ISO 25600.
Compared to the D850 -- the A7riii keeps a tiny bit more detail in the high ISO jpegs.. at the expensive of slight more noise

Even when the larger images are downsized, D750 still appears to have the cleanest, high-ISO image, although it's not as clear due to the lower resolution and AA filter.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 21:54 UTC
On article Sony a7R III added to studio scene comparison (446 comments in total)

Interesting. I would take the sharpness differences with a grain of salt. I sincerely doubt the D850 is sharper. As for noise, when viewed at full size, the Sony seems close to the D850. Difference is probably negligible. What I still find interesting is that the D500 looks cleaner at high ISO (when viewing 1:1). Also, if you're interested in the cleanest shots at high ISO, the D750 is still king, unless you want to drop $6500 on a D5.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a7riii&attr13_1=nikon_d850&attr13_2=nikon_d750&attr13_3=nikon_d500&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=6400&attr16_3=6400&attr126_0=1&attr171_3=1&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0&y=0.07071072883657764

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 21:47 UTC as 19th comment | 2 replies
On article Instagram is 'liking' natural wonders to death (44 comments in total)
In reply to:

NG Resonance: To those of us who value the silence and wonder of our planet's wild places, "social media" is poison, because people act like mindless sheep.

A large percentage of people ARE mindless sheep.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2017 at 02:00 UTC

Wow. Actually very impressive.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2017 at 19:24 UTC as 184th comment
Total: 795, showing: 781 – 795
« First‹ Previous37383940Next ›Last »