TheDigitalCruiser

Joined on May 1, 2012

Comments

Total: 9, showing: 1 – 9
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (507 comments in total)

I respectfully disagree with you. In looking at all the cameras you include in the comparison, the FZ1000 is probably the best one I've ever used. However, even better is the OM-D-M5 II (now only $799) with the Zuiko 14-150mm f4-5.6 lens with the Micro Four-Thirds sensor. Same range (28-300 mm), which when automatically cropped yields a 600mm range, larger sensor and much better handling as a still camera. Right now you can get Olympus' Travel lens Kit consisting of the 14-150 mm lens and the 17mm f1.8 lens for $699. See my reviews at the Cruises & Cameras website where I called this combo the Best Overall Cruise Camera (www.cruisesandcameras.com).

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2017 at 01:40 UTC as 25th comment | 4 replies
On article Feisty upstart: Hands-on with the Fujifilm X-T20 (357 comments in total)
In reply to:

MorriRas: I am planning on purchasing the X-T20 but am first wondering if anyone has tried shooting with a Zeiss X-mount lens attached, and if so, what results have come of that pairing.

Also wondering about the quality of the kit lenses and if it would make more sense to purchase just the body or to get the fuji lens/lenses at the same time and forget about the Zeiss option since it will cost a considerable amount more.

I have been warned that kit lenses are almost never the best option, but as far as I have read there have been no obvious complaints.

I am just a beginner in the world of digital photography (I have shot film my whole life) and would appreciate any help or suggestions about which option, or any others, that you think would render the best results when paired with this body.

The XF 18-55 f2.8-4.0 "stock" zoom lens is one of the best zooms you can own for fujinon cameras. This is the more expensive of the two "stock" lenses; it's standard issue with the X T-2, but not with the X T-20, which uses an inferior XC lens. I've owned two of the XF lens, one came with my X T1 and the other with m X T2, and both were fantastic. I deliberately have bypassed the f2.8 16-55mm Pro lens because its speed isn't markedly different, it's much heavier, and it isn't stabilized; and I use my XF as my zoom lens of choice, along with the 18-135 which is weatherproof and goes out to the 35mm equivalent of 200mm, but is heavier and a bit slower. These are the only Fujifilm zooms I own; although if I did more landscape photos I'd probably go for the 12-24mm zoom also. However, for optical quality and weight, the 18-55 XF is the "go to" zoom for most everyone who knows the Fujifilm system.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2017 at 07:26 UTC

I used to own the x100T and I loved it and was able to use it for 20"x24" prints that are displayed on my wall. I sold it about a year ago to finance an X-T1, that's now an X-T2. You can't imagine the difference the 24.3MP sensor makes when the same lenses are used (the 18-55, 18-135, 23mm f2). If for no other reason, by all means upgrade from the X100T to the X100F!!! The upgrade from the X-T1 to the X-T2 cost me $1000 -- although that bought me the new body and the vertical grip, and it was the best money I've ever spent on photography in recent years. In fact, when the Xt20 comes out, I'm going to sell my Leica D-Lux Type 109, which is my backup camera, so that both of my bodies will have the same sensor.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 01:42 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
On article 2017 Roundup: Consumer Long Zoom Compacts (178 comments in total)

I've literally written the book on the Stylus 1s (Steve Frankel - "The Compleat Stylus 1s and Stylus 1" - Amazon) and I've taken mine all over the world and it's never disappointed As long as you don't use it it in darkness for very dim available-light, you can get fantastic photos with it, even if you use digital cropping and shoot at 600mm. Just see the color plates that illustrate the book -- you can see them for free using the Preview function on Amazon. A constant 2.8 aperture and the same EVF that is used on the Olympus OM-D M10 are features you don't have any right to expect in a $550 camera!

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2016 at 07:42 UTC as 53rd comment | 7 replies
On article Power Zoom: Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS100/TZ100 Review (362 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dave Hurwitz: I have the camera and am generally quite pleased. I shoot raw+jpeg and have used the jpeg images only to transfer to my iPhone for emailing or posting on Facebook. The lens is a little softer than I like but I'm also carrying a Nikon D750 on trips, so the comparison is not fair. Color is decent and I have found it easy to adjust raw images to my preference. I have found some tendency to overexpose and wonder if this is typical of the camera. I often shoot at -0.7 EV to avoid this problem. I don't have to underexpose nearly as often with my Nikon DSLR. Realizing that there will always be compromises with this type of camera, I am reasonably happy with it.

I bought the ZS100 about 3 weeks ago when my Sony RX100-III was stolen in St. Petersburg. However it took only about 50 shots to see that the lens was much softer than the RX100-III, both in the center and on the edges at all focal lengths. I took it back and exchanged it for the Leica D-Lux Type 109. What a difference! Luckily, I still have (and love) my Olympus Stylus 1S which is slightly larger than the ZX100, but still much sharper (despite the smaller sensor) and with a better viewfinder. It's a shame you didn't include it in this group of cameras. It's still available (about $700) and its a terrific buy!

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2016 at 07:24 UTC
On article 2017 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (507 comments in total)
In reply to:

pete guaron: When I finally made up my mind, I preferred the build quality of the Canon PowerShot to the Sony RX100. Other people might prefer later models of the PowerShot, but I chose the G 1X mark II - not exactly a "pocket cam", but it has all the features I was looking for. At the end, the RX100 IV was "interesting", but the build quality didn't appeal. The Leica D-Lux was also a contender, but lacked both a tilt screen and touch screen.

I've had the Leica D-Lux for about two weeks and not only has it been outperforming my Sony RX100-III, but from the natural color palette and three-dimensionality of the images, it has been every bit the equal of my Fujifilm X-T1, and Olympus OMD-Mark V sensors -- both with a wide variety of the top lenses. I know it's supposed to be an expensive clone of the Lumix LX-100, but I suspect that probably due to the assembly process and/or cherrypicking-components, the Type 109 Leica is a lot more. At this point I'd say it represents the best trade-off of camera size vs. image quality I've ever shot with since my film Nikon FTN, Rolleicord and YachicaMat.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2016 at 07:03 UTC
On article Studio comparison widget (13 comments in total)

In the case of interchangeable lens cameras, where does it explicitly say what lens was used to shoot the studio image shot? For instances, we the Olympus OM-D shot with the 12-50mm zoom, the older 14-42mm zoom, or some other legacy lens that few people use anymore. If you're not doing it already, I'd suggest shooting with the most popular package lens and then listing the identity of that lens prominently on the same page as the comparison engine.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2013 at 15:05 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
On article Minox announces tiny, retro-styled DCC 14.0 camera (146 comments in total)

I would have liked it better if had used the original Minox form factor that was about the same size and shape as a BIC lighter (with square corners) or a 5-pack of chewing gum. Naturally the body would telescope out to include an EVF viewfinder. An LCD screen wouldn't be needed. Given a sharp lens and sensor, I would grab this Minox and pay around $500 for it!

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2013 at 17:51 UTC as 18th comment
On article Dpreview Users' Poll: Best Camera of 2012? (1507 comments in total)

I'd add the Panasonic Lumix FZ200 to the list. I've gotten superb results from it that rivals my OM-D and RX100 in quality when results are blown up to 13x19" or shown on a 28" Apple Monitor; and it proved more versatile than the OM-D which I have equipped with 2 zooms and the 14mm, 25mm and 75mm Lumix lenses. Couple it with the RX100 for a 2 camera, 2 pound (total) combo. Despite theoretical problems with the small sensor, it functions extremely well in practice and the 2.8 aperture from 25mm-600mm is unexcelled by any 2012 camera regardless of price. Add weather-proofing and it would be virtually perfect.
My votes would go for the FZ200, the RX100 and the OM-D in their respective classes.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2012 at 20:17 UTC as 28th comment | 4 replies
Total: 9, showing: 1 – 9