oscarvdvelde

Lives in Spain Prov. of Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
Works as a thunderstorm & lightning researcher
Joined on Apr 29, 2006

Comments

Total: 152, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon EOS 5D (171 comments in total)

This DPReview article seems to be laughing at 5D image quality. But the 5D could already produce excellent A2 format prints. The noise performance up to ISO 1600 isn't even so much worse compared to the later 5D models. The typical quote was 2/3 to 1 stop difference. In fact, only in recent years APS-C has made it to this very same level.

I once met someone with 5D mk III and did an ad hoc ISO 3200 test: my 5D produced a way brighter image at the same exposure settings.

Those newer 5D models only produced a slightly bigger image/overall somewhat reduced noise and better features, kept the same DR. Banding was removed only in 2012 with the 5D III. The 5Dsr finally is a big step, but even my Fuji X-T1 has more DR...

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 15:48 UTC as 20th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon EOS 5D (171 comments in total)
In reply to:

TORN: When the old 5D is at its best I get a good laugh comparing it to my Fuji T1. My Canon can still focus in low contrast situations where the AF of my Fuji goes Nirwana and the clarity of pictures up to 800 and maybe 1600 is hard to achieve for the Fuji in Lightroom. I know the show ends if I push the shadows by 3 or more stops but it is funny how the old lady still puts up a fight against the "Uber-Fuji".

The X-T1 is what I replaced my 5D with in 2014. I agree with your remarks. I find the image quality very comparable and Fuji certainly wins in DR.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 15:29 UTC
In reply to:

armandino: So, this is it what Canon users will be stuck with for the next 4 years? Good luck...

Sony A7R II is also $800 more expensive (23%) than 5D mk IV...

However the 5D mk III was introduced March 2012. Since that time there have been 6 Sony A7 models released, which probably all get updated to version III next year.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 13:37 UTC
In reply to:

mgblack74: How spoiled you've all become. 30mp, 4K video in one body was the subject of nerd wet dreams 5-6 years ago. It wasn't long ago that the 24mp Nikon D3x sans video was $9000. 30mp is in the Goldilocks zone of balance between resolution and file size. As a Nikon user, bravo Canon.

The problem is Canon responding to what users wanted 5-6 years ago (at least 3 years ago). This camera will be their semi-pro top model for the following 4 years.

They will follow up with a 6D mk II which will be a firmware-crippled 5D mk IV (can't save RAW in this or that mode etc). If Canon has remained stupid, this model still would not come with a rotational screen most landscape/macro photographers will appreciate. Look at the Pentax what innovation can be made for the price point, even if just simple led lights to change a lens at night.

It remains to be seen if the video and derived stills actually have the resolution claimed.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 11:53 UTC
On a photo in the Fujifilm X-E2S real world samples gallery sample gallery (3 comments in total)
In reply to:

Contra Mundum: Green leaves look mushy and uniform color. Where are all the natural color variations? The image looks digital, dead ...

Nonsense. Details look great and free of artifacts as long as you avoid Adobe's raw developers and camera JPEGs. This image looks like the latter and parts of the tree look out of focus.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2016 at 11:38 UTC
On article Still solid: Fujifilm X-E2S Review (229 comments in total)
In reply to:

oscarvdvelde: I don't know why DPR keeps ascribing an obvious Adobe development issue to the 16 MP Fuji X-Trans sensor. It's been long known that processors like Iridient (on Apple) and RawTherapee (free!) do not have any problems with the detail in greens.
Then there are some who complain about "wormy artifacts", but those are enlarging beyond 100% pixels.

The first thing I did to inform myself whether the detail was up to snuff using a Fuji for landscapes is opening a publicly available RAF file (XF 27mm) in RawTherapee, and I was blown away. It looked better than my old EOS 5D output!

No, the 5D has always been praised for it detailed files and for having a quite weak anti-aliasing filter. Whether you get better detail on smaller formats depends mainly on the lens, not the sensor. But with a smaller sensor there is more noise adding some texture to make up for a lack of detail.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2016 at 14:34 UTC
On article Still solid: Fujifilm X-E2S Review (229 comments in total)

I don't know why DPR keeps ascribing an obvious Adobe development issue to the 16 MP Fuji X-Trans sensor. It's been long known that processors like Iridient (on Apple) and RawTherapee (free!) do not have any problems with the detail in greens.
Then there are some who complain about "wormy artifacts", but those are enlarging beyond 100% pixels.

The first thing I did to inform myself whether the detail was up to snuff using a Fuji for landscapes is opening a publicly available RAF file (XF 27mm) in RawTherapee, and I was blown away. It looked better than my old EOS 5D output!

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2016 at 13:20 UTC as 41st comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

Emadn13: one of the worst focals,come on samyang give us your magic the 85mm

I would prefer 70mm F1.4.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 22:42 UTC
In reply to:

PanchoVilla: The Fuji 90mm f/2 looks better than this. It amazes people still shoot with those ancient DSLRs! Fuji X lenses are cheaper too!

rjx you have to ask the ones who returned to Fuji after using Sony a7 models...

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 22:41 UTC
In reply to:

PanchoVilla: The Fuji 90mm f/2 looks better than this. It amazes people still shoot with those ancient DSLRs! Fuji X lenses are cheaper too!

Except when you need the look of 105mm F1.4 on a full frame Nikon instead of the look of 137mm F2.8 (what the 90mm F2 image on Fuji would equate to in comparison)

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 12:21 UTC
In reply to:

Ran Plett: I can barely nail focus at f2. That being said, I really want to see some good samples from this beast. I wonder if this is Nikon's answer to Canon's 85L. Should render similar results wide open.

A 105mm F1.4 renders shallower depth of field and more background blur than 85mm F1.2, see a depth of field simulator.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 12:50 UTC

Yahoo had put Flickr on a sell out already. You could basically get a free account with all the benefits of a Pro account if you have an ad blocker.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2016 at 22:34 UTC as 4th comment

Thinking about using this (Canon mount) with a shift adapter to Fuji X. But edge quality needs to be excellent. I shall wait for reviews and the Irix 11mm F4.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2016 at 22:09 UTC as 5th comment
On article Samyang teases 'summer blockbuster' lens announcements (124 comments in total)

Probably the same lenses they already have but with an autofocus update. But it isn't much of a blockbuster if you happen to shoot with the wrong mount.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 01:10 UTC as 32nd comment

Well, almost all pages nowadays look alike. The DPR light scheme with dark top is hard to distinguish from Canonrumors, for example. Those who like to get a break from the ubiquitous sea of bright pixels have few options. Thanks for keeping the dark theme!

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2016 at 22:51 UTC as 152nd comment
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1190 comments in total)
In reply to:

rrccad: so how is this a game changer?

it's certainly well priced. it's a mirrorless camera with greater than full frame sensor, less than a 645 sensor size, no articulating screen, with difficult lens adaptability.

because it doesn't have a mirror it's a game changer?

umm why?

It is the lightest "fuller frame" camera which till now only had optical viewfinders.
It may be a game changer, but very few can play the game.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 14:52 UTC
On article Hasselblad to announce 'game changer' next week (460 comments in total)

It's either a mirrorless X-Pan using a double full frame sensor, or just a Sony a7 with wooden grip and golden buttons.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2016 at 23:01 UTC as 170th comment
On article Bolt-on 21: Fujifilm WCL-X70 sample images (54 comments in total)
In reply to:

GabrielZ: Everybody's saying the quality is great. But look at the photo above, the one before you click on the 'View our gallery...' Look at the extreme distortion of the house and telephone pole. They're both literally leaning over!

GabrielZ that is what ultra wide angle is supposed to do in order to remain a rectilinear lens without distortion. It has nothing to do with optical quality.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2016 at 00:40 UTC
In reply to:

ovatab: the ladies will be able to fix their makeup in total darkness

Only if you can actually see any difference between makeup and skin in the near-infrared range.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2016 at 14:54 UTC
In reply to:

fPrime: Very in tune with the trend in lens design these days... big, heavy, sharp, and well corrected but with relatively flat, characterless rendering.

Carl Zeiss lenses are often said to have a 3D effect. They combine great microcontrast with huge light falloff toward the edges, stronger than any other brand, so perhaps this is important to achieve that 3D effect.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2016 at 21:42 UTC
Total: 152, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »