Mark B.

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Nov 5, 1999

Comments

Total: 141, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Jay Ellbee: So...still no word from Mr. Tokura on a successor for the now very long in the tooth EOS 6D? Or hints of a full frame version of the M5 or M6? Moving more affordable full frame bodies into the enthusiast market dominated by APS-C cameras (which have improved tremendously in even the past seven years but still can't quite match image quality from a top notch FF model) would do a lot to boost not only Canon's sale of cameras but also the lenses required by a FF system. I've used Rebels in my personal travels for the past five years but after having photographed with a 5D MII and 5D MIII along with a 6D at work, I'm ready to move up to a FF system for myself - but I'm not eager nor able to splurge $2-4k in order to do it. There's a market here for lower cost FF ILCs which Canon isn't tapping, but which could pay off extremely well for them (especially considering Nikon's recent woes).

There wasn't a question specifically about the 6D successor, and they're certainly not going to volunteer any information on an as-yet-unannounced camera.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2017 at 17:25 UTC
In reply to:

bokane: "Right now the M5 is a more expensive 80D that's worse in most ways, bar size, weight,"
Size and weight were crucial in my recent purchase of it.

"But please, give us 4K at the consumer level."
I don't use video at all - surely there are many like me who would resent the extra cost (and size and weight?) of accommodating 4K?

How much size & wt do you think 4k is adding, considering it's mostly software?

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2017 at 17:24 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Canon EOS 77D (448 comments in total)
In reply to:

pacnwhobbyist: I am a huge fan of Canon's cameras but I don't get why this camera exists. Too close in price to the 80d and not that much smaller. They coud've just released thr T7i and called it a day. It just causes confusion, IMO.

80D <$1000 is possible if you get a refurb from Canon, and it still carries a 1 yr warranty.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 11:05 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Canon EOS 77D (448 comments in total)
In reply to:

NicoPPC: Looks interesting. Now it fails some weathersealing and better lens!

Get the 80D for weather-sealing. Better lens? Buy the body only and get whatever lens you want.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 11:03 UTC
In reply to:

Mariano Pacifico: When G9X was released it was $429.00. With additional incremental IS and Digic VII which were available at the time G9X was released now cost $100.00 more just like the RX100 series ...
Instead of waiting for a year for micro-incremental addition, why not give us consumers build-your-camera option like cars and Nike running shoes? Give us option for:
1. Lens
2. OS
3. Metal or Plastic
4. Waterproof or shockproof
5. FPS burst
6. 1080k or 4K

Common guys, these are available. You have it in your closet. We also know for very small increment you add $100.00. So, why not give it to us as an option so we do not have to wait for years and years.

A modular cam that you're asking for will cost significantly more than $529.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 17:48 UTC
On article Canon is selling a gray version of the Rebel T6 (147 comments in total)

Sorry, but that is one ugly camera. It looks like they got halfway through the design and just...stopped.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2016 at 23:29 UTC as 30th comment | 2 replies

What a relief, it's so embarrassing to have people see my plain black external drives.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2016 at 16:44 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

Janbro: Why no filter threads???

Agree, that's a bummer. Nice that the ND filter is built-in, but one other filter I use frequently is a CPL. Can't add that in PP.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2016 at 12:51 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (654 comments in total)
In reply to:

nekrosoft13: Come on Olympus make a full frame camera!!

@FLruckas: It just happens to be a coincidence that the name of the camera series coincides with the AR. It is, in fact, a 4/3" sensor. If you look at the chart in the article I posted, the physical sensor dimensions are very close.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 13:33 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (654 comments in total)
In reply to:

nekrosoft13: Come on Olympus make a full frame camera!!

@FLruckas: it's not an aspect ratio. If so, that would mean a 1" sensor is square, which of course it's not.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 13:29 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (654 comments in total)
In reply to:

nekrosoft13: Come on Olympus make a full frame camera!!

@HowaboutRAW: Yes, it's 1.33333" but that has no real relation to the physical size, other than it gives you a general relative relationship to other compact sensor sizes. For example, 1/1.8" will be slightly larger than 1/2.3" and 4/3" will be larger than a 1" sensor, but it gives no real idea as to the physical dimensions of the sensor unless you look at the specs. Did you read the link about the sensor sizes? It seems you don't understand what the size really refers to.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 13:25 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (654 comments in total)
In reply to:

nekrosoft13: Come on Olympus make a full frame camera!!

@HowaboutRAW
What is the point? Not sure what you mean by "4/3 of something". The ratio isn't in relation to anything, it's an obscure picture tube standard that nobody but the digital camera industry uses anymore. From the article I linked to, "There appears to be no specific mathematical relationship between the diameter of the imaging circle and the sensor size, although it is always roughly two thirds."

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 10:03 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (654 comments in total)
In reply to:

nekrosoft13: Come on Olympus make a full frame camera!!

According to the actual specs, the sensor is 17.4 x 13mm.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 16:31 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (654 comments in total)
In reply to:

nekrosoft13: Come on Olympus make a full frame camera!!

Take a look at this link for explanation on sensor sizes:
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/8095816568/sensorsizes

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 16:27 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2128 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mbaris: Great outdoors, eh? Who will exactly thug that 900gr beast (before the lenses and tripod) to a hiking trip? The pros carrying around tens of kilos, and other support equipment, would they care about the "new" features? Aren't they redundant to a pro? The serious-amateur, wouldn't they prefer something much lighter for their personal trips? For someone doing studio, there are much better used Canons than this one. I think this camera is targeted for wedding photographers, which can burn cameras fast, and buy new to replace. This makes most of the new features just a marketing trick

This is beyond my budget at the moment, but I wouldn't hesitate to carry this camera and all the necessary accessories.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 10:16 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (501 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Why am I surprised that people continue to misunderstand the beauty of a fixed-lens solution?

These cameras are the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras.

They don't replace larger, heavier, bulky, multiple lenses in a backpack just yet; but as this technology matures, more and more people will come to appreciate these wonderful bridge cameras. I've waited for a decade for these cameras to arrive. It's still not quite there yet, but they are getting closer and closer to "bridging" the gap between good image quality and utter silliness of the DSLR's need for a backpack full of lenses just to take a picture.

A Nikon 80-400mm on an APS-C DSLR is 120-600mm. That one lens costs $2300. It's also large and heavy.

Some are suggesting 3rd party junk lenses like the 16-300mm. I would not ever use a super-wide to super-telephoto on a DSLR. The whole reason for a DSLR is changing lenses and image quality. Why put 3rd party anything on it???? Even a filter, even a battery. I *ONLY* use genuine!

I'd sooner have *real* bokeh and not have to spend more time in PP.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 09:52 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (501 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Why am I surprised that people continue to misunderstand the beauty of a fixed-lens solution?

These cameras are the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras.

They don't replace larger, heavier, bulky, multiple lenses in a backpack just yet; but as this technology matures, more and more people will come to appreciate these wonderful bridge cameras. I've waited for a decade for these cameras to arrive. It's still not quite there yet, but they are getting closer and closer to "bridging" the gap between good image quality and utter silliness of the DSLR's need for a backpack full of lenses just to take a picture.

A Nikon 80-400mm on an APS-C DSLR is 120-600mm. That one lens costs $2300. It's also large and heavy.

Some are suggesting 3rd party junk lenses like the 16-300mm. I would not ever use a super-wide to super-telephoto on a DSLR. The whole reason for a DSLR is changing lenses and image quality. Why put 3rd party anything on it???? Even a filter, even a battery. I *ONLY* use genuine!

This is very true, and it's only one reason APS-C and FF sensors will continue to be around in one form or another.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 21:48 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (501 comments in total)
In reply to:

Androole: The RX10 III definitely has the best wide-angle performance across the frame, no denying that. At 400mm and f/4 the difference between the FZ1000 and the RX10 III is exceptionally small, though. It's hard to call the RX10 III the winner at that FL. However, obviously the RX10 III goes to 600mm, which is a big advantage over the FZ1000.

Still, for double the price tag and 30% more weight, you really do need to weigh your options. It's an uncompromised approach to a compromise camera, but in the end the form factor is like a DSLR with a big superzoom that you're carrying around.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#611.432,672,ha,t

The weather-sealing shouldn't be overlooked either. I love carrying the FZ1000 when I don't need the IQ of my Canon DSLRs, but with the first raindrops it goes right back in the bag.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 21:40 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (501 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Why am I surprised that people continue to misunderstand the beauty of a fixed-lens solution?

These cameras are the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras.

They don't replace larger, heavier, bulky, multiple lenses in a backpack just yet; but as this technology matures, more and more people will come to appreciate these wonderful bridge cameras. I've waited for a decade for these cameras to arrive. It's still not quite there yet, but they are getting closer and closer to "bridging" the gap between good image quality and utter silliness of the DSLR's need for a backpack full of lenses just to take a picture.

A Nikon 80-400mm on an APS-C DSLR is 120-600mm. That one lens costs $2300. It's also large and heavy.

Some are suggesting 3rd party junk lenses like the 16-300mm. I would not ever use a super-wide to super-telephoto on a DSLR. The whole reason for a DSLR is changing lenses and image quality. Why put 3rd party anything on it???? Even a filter, even a battery. I *ONLY* use genuine!

Don't forget that just as smaller sensors improve, so too will large sensors.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 21:36 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (501 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marximus: I've had the RX10 III for a couple weeks, coming from the FZ1000. I really wanted the range, so pretty much as soon as I got the Sony, the Panasonic was on eBay. That was a mistake, IMO. The Sony is quite a bit slower in multiple areas: startup, autofocus, low light performance. I shot quite a bit with it and it seemed okay, but just to make sure, I purchased the FZ1000 again (crazy, I know) to do some final testing. I took it to the zoo today, and within a couple shots, the Sony was back in the bag and I used the FZ1000 for the rest of the day. The difference in my experience is nearly night and day. For all my critical areas, the Panasonic wins, hands down. Faster startup, blazing fast autofocus, better low light performance, lighter in weight, a fully articulating screen, and about half the price. After doing the comparison, one of the few areas in which the Sony is superior is with that extra reach. I looked at the comparison shots and it does appear that the Sony lens is a bit sharper. And the weather sealing/build quality is nice. But these are all compromises I'm very willing to make. I absolutely love the FZ1000 and I'll be returning the RX10 III. And I'll keep my eye out for the FZ2000:).

Very interesting comparison Marximus, thanks for that.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 21:33 UTC
Total: 141, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »