marike6

Joined on Jul 29, 2011

Comments

Total: 2719, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

gravelhopper: "The autofocus tends to hesitate, even in AF-S mode with the center point - it’s nowhere near as fast as most Canon and Nikon DSLRs."

What is not to understand about this statement? It is very clear and I think it is formulated as intended. Now the relevant question to help us understand may be: what does DPR mean with "hesitant"? Hesitant like "I cannot catch the moment, I miss it" or hesitant like "I catch the moment, but it takes 0.2 sec versus 0.1 sec like Nikon"?
(don't shoot me for the figues I put here).

@SungiBr
For the bike test yes. For other images on the AF page, discuss the Sigma 35 1.4 and the Pentax FA 77 1.8, a motor-less "screw driver" lens.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 13:28 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

Xentinus: With single point AF,they DO NOT mean AF-S...They mean AF-C with single point (which is in the centre).

Yes I read the review, DPR said they used a single center AF point in AF Continuous because they couldn't get good results with it in Array mode (i.e. all AF points active). A camera with 25 cross type AF sensors not being able to track accurately with all the AF points selected sounds like user error, a defective camera, or some other issue. The confusion comes with their inconsistent terminology, little mention of lenses use, and the fact that virtually none of the other reviews on line mentioned the AF in such negative terms. But whatever, I don't shoot Pentax and I don't put all of my faith in DPR reviews. I live close enough to B&H where I can test cameras myself. Cheers.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 12:11 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: From Imaging Resource K-1 review: "Autofocus performance was swift, comparing well with the Pentax K-3 II in my informal, real-world testing. (And our lab testing likewise found autofocus performance to be a strength of the Pentax K-1.)" That's odd. Why would another respected review website have the exact opposite results as DPR? Did DPR have a defective K-1?

What "overly praised"? Imaging Resource has exact measurements for AF speed and the times are in line with the rest of the market. Everyone knows that Nikon's predictive AF is the best on the market. That doesn't mean that all other brands that don't match Nikon's AF performance as "broken". I've never read DPR draw the conclusion that Fuji, Olympus, Sony AF tracking was subpar or even broken because it didn't match the performance of the class leader Nikon. Why judge Pentax so harshly? None of the other review sites are doing so. CameraStoreTV said the K-1 AF was "extremely accurate". Tony Northup view that while the entry level K-1 is clearly not a sports camera, his only criticism of the K-1's actual AF performance was related to focus breathing.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 12:06 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

Xentinus: With single point AF,they DO NOT mean AF-S...They mean AF-C with single point (which is in the centre).

Testing AF-C with only the center AF point selected is poor testing methodology. The K-1 has 25 cross type AF points, there is no reason why it shouldn't do accurate AF tracking with the full array of AF points selected. If DPR didn't test more than one body for this review to account for the possibility of a defective test body, IMHO, they've done a disservice to their readers and to Pentax.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 11:30 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)

From Imaging Resource K-1 review: "Autofocus performance was swift, comparing well with the Pentax K-3 II in my informal, real-world testing. (And our lab testing likewise found autofocus performance to be a strength of the Pentax K-1.)" That's odd. Why would another respected review website have the exact opposite results as DPR? Did DPR have a defective K-1?

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 11:21 UTC as 297th comment | 10 replies
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

gravelhopper: "The autofocus tends to hesitate, even in AF-S mode with the center point - it’s nowhere near as fast as most Canon and Nikon DSLRs."

What is not to understand about this statement? It is very clear and I think it is formulated as intended. Now the relevant question to help us understand may be: what does DPR mean with "hesitant"? Hesitant like "I cannot catch the moment, I miss it" or hesitant like "I catch the moment, but it takes 0.2 sec versus 0.1 sec like Nikon"?
(don't shoot me for the figues I put here).

That paragraph sounds like they were using one of the FA screw driver lenses which don't have AF motors. Let's hope DPR tested more than one body because publishing this review because all of the other reviews (Imaging Resource, The CameraStore TV, et al) praised the K-1's AF performance.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 11:16 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

jacek2008: "Single point AF, which we expect DSLRs to excel at, proved to be highly inconsistent and failed about half of the time".

Clearly this camera just can't focus and has very serious AF issues. Is it possible to release such a camera to the market? Which manufacturer would be that mad?

A fully weather sealed FF camera with 5-axis In-Body Image Stabilization with class leading DR and overall IQ for an unheard of $1800? Any award other than Silver or Gold would have been an absolute joke!!

Re: AF, none of the other reviewers (The Camera Store TV, Tony Northrup, DigitalRev, et al) had any major AF issues. Camera Store TV said the AF was "highly accurate". Is the K-1 a sports camera? No. But neither is the D810 and A7. Because Pentax still uses screw driver lenses, AF speed is often lens dependent. In the AF test, other than the 70-200 f2.8, little mention was made of which lenses they used. The reviewer shouldn't have expected the 77 f/1.8 lens (a screw driver lens without an AF motor) to be able to compete with modern Nikkors or L lenses and to make cheeky comments about bringing a Kindle along to read while the K-1 acquires focus was just obnoxious. Since none of the other reviewers mentioned any K-1 accuracy issues, I hope DPR tested more than one body.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 10:41 UTC
On article All about that lens: Sony Cyber-shot RX10 III review (450 comments in total)
In reply to:

TyphoonTW: It clearly DESTROYS all the bridge cameras in the 600/700$ price range.

The Panasonic FZ1000 is $600 and DPR gave it a Gold Award so clearly there is no destroying in this case.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 11:25 UTC
In reply to:

M1963: The concept of "advanced entry level" baffles me, but kudos to Pentax for making a budget DSLR with two rotary dials. Canikon, take notice.

@Nobby2016
Pentax offering feature rich cameras is NOT a bad thing, nor is it something new. Nothing sucks more than an entry level camera with great IQ but tiny viewfinders and one command dial like every budget Nikon and Canon ever made. Pentax has offered more for less since before mirrorless cameras even existed. They have always been run by people passionate about photography and they've been innovative for decades. SR or in body image stabilization, 100% viewfinders in all their bodies, weather sealing, a system of compact, all metal FA and DA primes in a world of plastic lenses -- these are features that Pentax has always offered pretty much across their camera lineup. I've shot Pentax, Nikon and Canon (and most of the mirrorless brands) and for general photography, the Pentax system is a joy to shoot with. And the features and overall cost of ownership, now with the K-1, the upgrade path to FF and beyond, is as good or better any system on the market.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 12:04 UTC
In reply to:

thx1138: The gushing enthusiasm about the high ISO performance is ridiculous. The D500 is barely better than the a6300 or D7200 at 25600 and if those sensors were down-sampled to 21MP the results would be even closer. Nikon has not altered quantum physics and have only barely raised the bar. You certainly would not use ISO 51K or higher which are marketing cr@p. The really good news is that they have not made the mistake they did with the D5 and the sensor has impressive DR and is ISOless, the exact opposite of the D5, which has gone markedly backward. However yet again the D500 is only performing a wee bit better than the D7200 in the DR and ISO'lessness testing.

Leaving aside the sensor the real drawcard of this camera is the AF. And could they have just used the D7200 sensor in the D500 body and would anybody really see the difference in IQ.

In RAW, the D500 has less (finer grain) chroma noise and better sharpness / detail at every ISO than the three other default cameras. At pixel level it competes well with some of best Full Frame cameras. But nobody is gushing, you might be imagining that. DPR is releasing the results of their testing, and D300s shooters and Nikon users in general clearly have a lot to be pleased about. But if Canon releases an APS-C camera with class leading high ISO performance, we'll see if you continue to be a doubting Thomas chiding others for their enthusiasm about a new class leading body from Nikon. I'm guessing you won't be so dismissive if it's a Canon camera outperforming the others. And yes, AF but also fast burst rate with a 200 shot buffer, 4K video, tilting touch LCD are all draw cards of the D500.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 10:54 UTC
In reply to:

lensberg: You're sure this is "class leading" ...?!

Can't really says its any better than the A6300 ... Reminds me of their image processing from their J5 ... except on an APS-C scale...

@FantasticMrFox In RAW at ISO 6400 the D500 has better contrast and sharpness with considerably less and finer grained chroma noise. D500 > D7200 > 7D Mk II > A6300.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 10:17 UTC
In reply to:

Iloveaircraftnoise: Does anybody on here actually take photos?

This website has dynamic range paranoia.

Let me guess, you shoot Canon.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 10:08 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (370 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: Some shops still have the Coolpix A for $369, a pretty fantastic deal. And since it uses the proven D7000 sensor, IQ is banging. Not a pretty as the X70, but half the price and no IQ / RAW converter issues and they make a dedicated VF for it, unlike the X70. My Ricoh GR III is easily my favorite compact of all time for shooting (on the Greek Islands it performed like a champ). A good 28mm lens that focuses close is a revelation that will improve your photography immeasurably. The Ricoh GR I sells for $550 new on Ebay. It could be that other RAW converters like Dcraw will produce better RAW conversion for the X70, but as a Lightroom users I don't want to change. So I might have to grab one of the last few Coolpix A's or the Ricoh GR I. Thanks guys.

@John Gellings What now? RAW files from the X70 are so soft it's laughable that you'd even compare it to the D7000. The D7000 sensor was the first and only APS-C camera to get 14.9 EV dynamic range on DxOMark, it's the same sensor that's found in tons of cameras including the K-5. It's just that Nikon engineers don't mess it up like Fuji's do.

The Coolpix A won a Silver Award, reviewers felt the X70 wasn't even worthy of an award. Enough said.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 23:18 UTC
In reply to:

Prairie Pal: Any old excuse will do for Nikon these days whether or not it's accurate.

As if a catastrophic earthquake is just any old excuse, like "the dog ate my homework". Canikon jealousy can be irrational but this comment is extreme.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 23:11 UTC
In reply to:

Phoetus: Canon and Nikon: The slowly dying ancient giants.

Hello Sony and Panasonic!

What is the number of pro photographers using Sony and Panasonic gear, 3 or 4 people? But seriously, do you even bother reading these articles or I don't know, reading the newspaper? There was a huge earthquake in Japan. Sony and Fujifilm have also been affected.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 23:08 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (370 comments in total)
In reply to:

rodderslw: Lovely little camera but I just sold my Ricoh GR because I realised I really like to frame my shots with a OVF or EVF. Because its a fixed lens a basic OVF would not be too hard to incorporate? I shall wait.

The Ricoh GV-1 is the OVF for the Ricoh GR, which is the exact same VF with the same 21/28mm crop lines that Fujifilm has rebranded and offered for the X70.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/761037-REG/Ricoh_172780_GV_1_External_Viewfinder.html

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 21:58 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (370 comments in total)

Some shops still have the Coolpix A for $369, a pretty fantastic deal. And since it uses the proven D7000 sensor, IQ is banging. Not a pretty as the X70, but half the price and no IQ / RAW converter issues and they make a dedicated VF for it, unlike the X70. My Ricoh GR III is easily my favorite compact of all time for shooting (on the Greek Islands it performed like a champ). A good 28mm lens that focuses close is a revelation that will improve your photography immeasurably. The Ricoh GR I sells for $550 new on Ebay. It could be that other RAW converters like Dcraw will produce better RAW conversion for the X70, but as a Lightroom users I don't want to change. So I might have to grab one of the last few Coolpix A's or the Ricoh GR I. Thanks guys.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 21:49 UTC as 41st comment | 12 replies
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (370 comments in total)
In reply to:

Digimat: Hm...i would never have thought that one day i would say this...but why should i use the x70 over my smartphone? i mean dont get me wrong, its a beautiful small camera, fine for traveling. but i also always have my smartphone with me when i travel. will the x70 have better image quality? yes. but will anyone see the difference on social networks or small prints? most probably not. and there is no viewfinder, no fast aperture, no image stabilisation and you dont get much DOF control.

so if i want to get "serious" i use the real stuff, and if i just want to take a quick picture i use my smartphone. but maybe its just me.

If you have to ask why you need a proper camera over your smartphone, you're probably not a photography enthusiast and you probably don't need a proper camera. But f2.8 on a large APS-C sensor gives you WAY more DOF control than a teeny tiny smartphone sensor and because of that your images will look MUCH more professional. Not to mention the proper exposure controls and lack of horrible shutter lag you get with a X70 or Ricoh GR type camera.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 21:36 UTC
On article Crossing the Bridge: Canon XC10 Review (258 comments in total)

The XC10 is a bit of a joke on both camera review and filmmaker websites. Filmmakers on NoFilmSchool and EOSHD claim it's mainly useful as a pricey drone camera. The Camera Store TV rated it as one of the worst cameras of 2015. The truth is a fixed lens camera with a slow zoom won't appeal to a huge number of people, but who knows? But clearly without RAW capture in still mode this is not a "bridge" to anything but an empty wallet.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2016 at 21:06 UTC as 29th comment | 5 replies
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2154 comments in total)

Nice camera. Those lenses though. I just can't.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2016 at 12:10 UTC as 161st comment | 1 reply
Total: 2719, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »