Mike Oo

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Dec 19, 2007


Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

As someone who has owned two Fujis...an S3Pro and an X100T, I will never, and I mean , never, buy another weirdo Fuji design. There are always way too many downsides to a couple of cool features.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 23:38 UTC as 69th comment | 4 replies
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1919 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ouchy: Around six years ago I found myself with enough spare cash to buy a EOS 5 mkII and 24-105L lens kit for £1900.

6 years later, with a better job, but more responsibilities, I have a similar amount of cash to spend on a camera - I find that two iterations later the camera now costs two and a half times the price. Does it run on a fusion core or something?!..

Well if everyone bought a new camera when it came out instead of waiting 6 years between iterations it would be cheaper. People are not buying digital cameras as much anymore. The Flickr boom is over. Be prepared for even more price hiking as digital photography with large cameras becomes an obscure hobby....

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2016 at 19:37 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1919 comments in total)
In reply to:

Studio1138: I got my 5D Mark IV Thursday, photographed a session on Friday, and I am sending it back on Monday! Not impressed with the overall image quality, especially compared to my 5Dsr and Mark III. Skin tones did not look good, just did not have that Canon look at all. I had high hopes for this camera after waiting 4 long years for it. Makes me appreciate my 5Dsr & Mrk III even more.

You use it for one day and can't make it work so you're sending it back. Okay then.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2016 at 19:35 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1919 comments in total)

A "30.4MP CMOS full-frame sensor with Dual Pixel autofocus" is listed as a PRO. Why? What aspect of it makes it a "PRO?"

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2016 at 19:34 UTC as 146th comment | 3 replies
On article Updated: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV real-world sample gallery (485 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wild Light: "raw processing to taste" ...

Well the jpgs look impressive anyway.

Ed....are you new to photography? Be honest.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 16:43 UTC
On article Updated: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV real-world sample gallery (485 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wild Light: So many of these are soft because of Canons average lenses. For example - 35mm 1.4L II is beyond awesome. 35mm f2 is really terrible. Canon are catching up on their sensors but behind on their lenses which are typically mushy and the reason I left Canon. Would be good to see pictures taken with the Zeiss family of lenses.

Who cares if it's just on a monitor? How does it print? I doubt it would be noticeable. Photography is not the act of capturing an image and then analyzing it at 100% to see if it's "sharp."

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 16:42 UTC
On article Updated: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV real-world sample gallery (485 comments in total)
In reply to:

bildsee: The straight-out-of-the-camera JPGs are quite impressive while I don't like most of the ACR processed ones. Some wrongly exposed images have been rescued using ACR and some scenes with extreme contrast have been "adjusted" by ACR, which both are ok. But in general most ACR processed ones look flat to me. But maybe this is the current "highlight the shadows" fad, which I personally don't like in many cases.

Nevertheless, taking into account that these are "real world examples" rather than "real world test scenes" I think the images are still very helpful.
Thank's for the good piece of work.

Why anyone would spend $4000+ on a camera and then cripple it with ACR or Lightroom is beyond me. The idea that RAW photos are "flat" is a myth perpetuated by, well, amateurs, EDWARD ARTISTE (caps his). Open up the file in DPP (or NX-D for Nikon) and see how much better it looks compared to ACR.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 16:41 UTC
On article Hasselblad True Zoom Moto Mod hands-on preview (151 comments in total)

Is it not possible to have two sites? DP Review and DP Review Mobile or something like that? I come here for cameras, not phones and their accessories.

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2016 at 18:25 UTC as 12th comment | 4 replies
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1919 comments in total)

Here I was expecting a "grown up" camera and they stick a touch screen on it. DSLRs being influenced by mobile phones and tablets is a clear indication of the state of the market. Digital photography as we know it is doomed.....

Link | Posted on Sep 1, 2016 at 19:28 UTC as 174th comment | 5 replies
On article Rebel in your pocket: Canon EOS M3 Review (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

cosinaphile: with evfs in mirrorless by sony panny fuji , oly. so very popular ,.i cant fathom the inability of canikon to grasp whats important &produce what folks want in the mirrorless realm:
a camera w\ a proper evf[if you like framing at arms length get iphone]
a camera w\ proper metal build,a real camera, not amorphous polycarbonate lumps like canon and nikon slrs of the last 20 yrs..while canikon mirrorless designs are attractive ..canon m3 &some nikon 1s are smart looking too,
canon and nikon are clueless generally with mirrorless as they have been with highend point and shoots
if nikon and canon produced mirrorless analogues of their late model rangefinders
with a trio of primes for each , can you imagine the success they would have ??
they would fly off the shelves and be the most exciting cameras from canikon in many decades... so i can guarantee they will never have the wisdom or fortitude to do such a thing ......just sayin

"i cant fathom the inability of canikon to grasp whats important &produce what folks want in the mirrorless realm"

Why do they have to produce what folks "want" in the mirrorless realm? Perhaps they want no part of that "realm." I have owned an X100T and it SUCKS. I will not buy another mirrorless camera until it has a REAL 100% optical viewfinder that shows focus the way an SLR camera (so never, in other words).

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2016 at 23:16 UTC
In reply to:

ttran88: This stuff can happen anywhere in the world. No country or city is immune to it.

Camera theft with a getaway vehicle? Name another country where this happened?

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2016 at 22:32 UTC
On article All about control: Huawei P9 camera review (90 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: When would smartphone manufactors build-in at least an 1/1.7" sensor...size does matter...you can't overcome laws of physics with newer processing algorithms and faster cpus...Sony for instance decided it right back into 2012 with their very first RX100 iteration - the 1" sensor is so much better than a usual 1/1.7" which all other prosumers and highend compacts have had back at this day...and now smartphones...12.16..20 or more MP...it doesn't matter...the sensor size is still a mess, JPEGs in 1:1 100% mode look really mushy & like watercolors....they'd never compete with digicams if they wouldn't get a better, bigger sensor for better light gathering ability, low light performance and image quality after all....i am tired of all these smartphone cameras...it's been 2016 - and still no RX100 IQ into a smartphone besides the CM1 Lumix from Panasonic.

Manufactors should do it right that way - bring it on, or just fade away. The typical smartphone cam can never compete with an 1" sensor

Putting RAW and/or DNG into cel phones will defeat the whole purpose and ignores the main reason a lot of photographers use their cel phones now. One of the main reasons people like phones is because they are cameras for dummies. Hold it up, press a button. Press another button and it's on Instagram. Sure there's always been weirdos who spend time retouching their phone pictures with apps but for the most part, veteran photographers are using their phones because they are EASY TO USE. Adding RAW is a step in the wrong direction...

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2016 at 01:08 UTC
On article All about control: Huawei P9 camera review (90 comments in total)

There's some shots by David Guttenfelder in the latest National Geographic mag on a P9 and they flat out suck. They look like they were shot on a 2mp point & shoot. I don't understand the point of cel phone cameras if they are taking us back to the dark ages of digital.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2016 at 01:05 UTC as 26th comment | 2 replies
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1297 comments in total)

In December I bought an X100T after all the hype. I have been using it for awhile and convincing myself that I will never need another DSLR. Wrong. I find myself still grabbing my old D90 and actually preferring it. Way quicker to use and change functions even with manual controls all over the X100T. It also has comparable image quality and was made in, what, 2008? Fuji is about HYPE. Until they have image quality and more importantly, the ERGONOMICS, to match Nikon and Canon, forget it.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 04:02 UTC as 36th comment | 8 replies
On article 5 Reasons why I haven't used my DSLR for months (598 comments in total)

I have always used film and digital SLRs and decided to try a more lightweight, smaller camera so I bought an X100T. After using it for about six months, I have decided that it's not my thing. Yes, I like the light weight but I hate the ergonomics and small buttons. I also got tired of the retro styling and manual buttons. It's 2016 and the idea that we have a camera that resembles a 1960s Leica is just plain weird. I guess I fell for the hype. Image quality is great (with the exception of the weird fuji smearing of detail) but it's just not fun to use. To each their own.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2016 at 21:36 UTC as 17th comment
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2501 comments in total)
In reply to:

Atazoth: I’m going to by an X Pro 1 and this is why;
Comparing studio scenes between the XPro 1 and D750 $1700 vs $2000, The Iso noise levels are very close. The D750 is only slightly better. At 12800 you can really notice the D750 has less noise but it looses a lot of detail (notice the lines on the cap of the tube of paint they are invisible on the D750 The XPro 1 is still pretty clear). The Fuji’s color also is better over all and much better in some situations. The type is also easier to read on the XPro 1. That is compared to a full frame body with an equivalent lens. The X pro 1 is also all metal body, the d750 is not and the Xpro 1 has better weather sealing. Fuji’s equivalent zoom lenses are also a *lot* cheaper and a little smaller.

Who cares about ISO 12800? If that's what determines what camera you buy you are not a photographer but rather a tech collector.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2016 at 22:51 UTC
In reply to:

yashicamat124: Call me crazy, but I still prefer the output of my old X100. Jpegs, RAWs and all. But I come from the film days.
By the way, that grain simulator on the Across is awful.

If you came from the "film days" you wouldn't be judging a camera's output from sample images on the web. I own both an X100 and an X100T and the X100T looks far better when printed. Fuji is from the "film days" also and realizes that the crap you see on a screen is simply not visible in print.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2016 at 22:56 UTC
On article Nikon's New D5 and D500 Push the Boundaries of DSLR (737 comments in total)

I have owned the D50, D200, D90 and D7100. I sold my D7100 recently and decided that I am done with Nikon and DSLRs in general. Utterly pointless except for a very small group of professionals who shoot the Olympics, etc.

These "swan song" products for me are more like tombstones. They bring back memories of when I first switched from film to digital and everyone clamored to buy a DSLR.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2016 at 02:38 UTC as 39th comment | 3 replies
On article Leica Q In-depth Review (1140 comments in total)

The JPEG of the girl in the lounge is far better than the author's RAW conversion. People always chant RAW, RAW, RAW but in the end most people have no clue how to colour correct an image.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 22:44 UTC as 197th comment | 2 replies
Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »