robmanueb

Lives in New Zealand (Aotearoa) bay of islands, New Zealand (Aotearoa)
Works as a mini lab manager
Joined on Feb 26, 2009

Comments

Total: 157, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Biowizard: This obsession with so-called "full-frame" would be laughable, if not so sad. Throughout the history of photography, there have been MANY different frame sizes, from 10x8" (and larger) down to tiny Minox spy cameras. Why does a legacy format, the one the Leitz had the brainwave of introducing, to allow the use of early cinema film in a camera, retain some "magical" sense of the only "real" size?!

Why not settle on a new format altogether - say 50mm circular (or at least octagonal), from which you could "pluck" either a landscape or portrait "full frame" image, without having to hold your camera on its side? Or a square one bigger than "full frame" allows?

Don't tell me its so photographers can use their 20-year-old film lenses! Who the heck does that?!

FORGET "full frame", make cameras the size you need for any given job. And for mine, 4/3rds does fine. When I want bigger, I'll get a Hassy.

Brian

They should go with a square format. 24mm by 24mm. Make a decent adapter so you can mount DX and FX lenses. This is pretty much the dilemma for Nikon, go with a new mount so they can make a smaller camera (part of the sales pitch for mirrorless) and lose the ability to mount legacy lenses or keep the f-mount and lose the size and weight advantage.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2017 at 21:51 UTC
On article Nikon D850 Review (2114 comments in total)
In reply to:

Henry McA: So in the end it´s just more of the same and that might be very good if you wanted a better D810 but it´s a bit disappointing when you expected some real innovation. No electronic first curtain and so-so video features are big ones in my book.

The innovation is in the price

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2017 at 06:01 UTC

Price, focal lengths covered, sensor size and resolution. Can any useful info be added to this article?

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 20:56 UTC as 39th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

tszabon: is it any better than my D70s? worth to upgrade?

Every three generations is worth an upgrade in the Nikon world, IMHO. 70S to 7500 is six, so I think I can safely say that yes it would be worth upgrading for you. Though that is totally subjective and the 70S takes fine photos.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 05:11 UTC
On article Video: Nikon D7500 first look (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

glennwithtwo: Nice camera - only three things wrong: there's no grip, it doesn't have a grip, and the grip is missing.

Grip gripe

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2017 at 21:23 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (767 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dr_Jon: The other issue is how much are current photographers missing shots that the Sony will help with. If the number is small then people will be less interested.

One thing that didn't get mentioned is it is a real shame that the A9 is really an attempt to polish up the features on Sony cameras to around those of other current cameras (some a bit more, some a bit less). It seems a huge shame that they didn't pick a few things that would be entirely new and do those. As an example (and to help me and my camera get out the door at the time we need to) consider Thom's list here:
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/nikon-2017-news/march-2017-nikon-news/what-weve-never-gottten.html
(I'd have a couple more, but that's a good starting point and most I'd go with.)

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1714585446/chronos-14-high-speed-camera Clips made using these are starting to appear on Youtube. Cheaper than if Canikon made it..

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 09:58 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

webservants: Why is this a better option for landscape photographers if the megapixels when down from 24 on the D7200 to 21 on the D7500?

The megapixels count for nothing, base ISO is improved over the D7200. Wait for DXO to do the comparison and we'll see how it performs.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2017 at 00:04 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shotmaker2: They gave it the wrong number but I understand why. The D7500 is the successor to the D5600, NOT the D7200. They had to go with a D7XXX number due to the unexpected increase in cost and therefore, price.

The D7200 is not going anywhere. The other reason for the D7500 is that too many D500 sensors were made relative to the demand. No reason for most photographers to purchase the D7500 since better options are available.

We are still waiting for Nikon's anniversary camera most likely coming out in June, or thereabouts.

Base ISO performance is worse than the D7200? You do realise that the D7500 goes to ISO 50 compared to the D7200's ISO 100?

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2017 at 00:02 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

leonardotonin: Not metering for ai lenses.
No grip.
No dual slot.
Downgrade.

CosminMunteanu Curious as to where you get the D7500 ISO and DR comparison as DXO don't have a listing for the camera yet...

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2017 at 23:58 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

knows_nothing: Why remove the second card slot on the 7500?? Ever had a card stop! Second slot is a life saver.

Never had a card stop.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2017 at 23:53 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (533 comments in total)
In reply to:

dpthoughts: I don't get over the downgrade in the sensor quality.

The D7200 has not only the higher resolution (24 Megapixels) than the D500/D7500 (20,6 Megapixels), but despite having more pixels and a higher pixel density, the D7200 still achieves the higher image quality! It wins over the D500/D7500 in all of the three DxO image quality criteria:

- dynamic range (landscape score)
- color resolution (portrait score)
- high ISO performance (sports score).

I place my bet, that the D7200 will rank in Amazon's DSLR sales ranking higher than the D7500, until the D7200 will be sold out eventually.

Because the market is more sensitive to image quality (sensor) and 'professional reliability' (2 SD slots), rather than to comfort (such as slightly modified body shape, or the tilt screen).

I can't see a DXO listing for the D7500 so curious as to where you are getting your info?

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 00:01 UTC
In reply to:

wetsleet: "OPPO announces dual-cam 5x optical zoom technology for smartphones"
Really? I thought the optical zoom was 3x.
Who is responsible for the marketing inflation here, Oppo or DPR?

They use a combination of optics to achieve the zoom. It definitely isn't digital zoom or cropping.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 21:27 UTC
On article 19 tips for better live music photography (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Underexpose.

Groan

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2016 at 23:30 UTC
On article Making a splash: Nikon D500 real-world sample gallery (225 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thematic: Uh oh. Very disappointing image quality.

I was praising this camera because 2 friends own it and said the picture quality was as good as the FF Nikon D750. These pictures, and the RAWs they sent me are underwhelming.

At the end of the say its a tool for speed and the 1.5x crop people need but I can't image anyone shooting portraits, fine art, macro, landscape, architecture etc using this over a cheaper Pentax K-1 or the Nikon D750.

As for the price people are complaining about - No issue with me there, Pentax is the value champ but the Nikon mount is great for their lineup and Zeiss Milvus options.

Next up is Sonys a9 and the Canon 5DMK4.

Fun times!

Just don't compare it to a full frame camera and it will look fine :)

Link | Posted on May 8, 2016 at 04:26 UTC
On article Huawei launches P9 and P9 Plus with Leica dual-camera (72 comments in total)

Interesting tech. My mind boggles at the thought that more light sensitivity in a black and white image can help when combined with a color image. I guess at low light levels things look monochrome already so there is not as much color "lost" by combining. Boost saturation on the color image and average out the two? Cool.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2016 at 05:40 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply

Well I didn't need a camera bag, but seeing as they come in different colors I've ordered a couple. :p

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2016 at 00:03 UTC as 5th comment
On article What a view: Aukey Super Wide Angle lens quick review (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

robmanueb: This is fish eye lens not a wide-angle lens.
Subtle yet important difference if your into photography...

I like to think a fish eye is a type of wide-angle lens, but being a subset thereof. When I see a photography article with "wide-angle lens" in the title I don't expect to find a story about a fisheye lens. It wasn't the biggest shock in the world, as I know there is overlap between the two designs. Would just have saved me the bother of trying to read it if they had included the term fisheye in the title. Me being fussy.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2016 at 07:35 UTC
On article What a view: Aukey Super Wide Angle lens quick review (61 comments in total)

This is fish eye lens not a wide-angle lens.
Subtle yet important difference if your into photography...

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2016 at 02:02 UTC as 7th comment | 2 replies
Total: 157, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »