LJ - Eljot

LJ - Eljot

Lives in Berlin
Joined on Oct 17, 2010

Comments

Total: 447, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Prognathous: Swivel is nice, AAA isn't. Overall the Meike MK-310/320 is a more attractive compact flash, even more so when it costs only a fraction of this Metz.

Compared to the FL-36 and older Metz units the tiny display on the M400 does not look very usefull. Using it in manual mode can be cumbersome. And yes, the M400 takes four AAs.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 08:45 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Casio QV-4000 (58 comments in total)
In reply to:

NikonD2X: As usual ;-)
Please enjoy my "fresh" Casio QV-4000 report from October 2016 and use Google Translate:
https://www.digicammuseum.de/geschichten/erfahrungsberichte/casio-qv-4000/
I think, the Casio QV-3500 was the much better Casio:
https://www.digicammuseum.de/geschichten/erfahrungsberichte/casio-qv-3500/
Ralf

Zum Glück brauche ich keinen Übersetzer.
Furtunatly I don't need a translator.

Very nice.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 12:57 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1238 comments in total)

Have you tried shooting it tetherd with the Olympus sofware? What is the maxmimum resolution for the LiveView image? With USB 3.0 it should be much higher than the 1280x1024 that was possible with mark I.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 15:58 UTC as 245th comment
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1238 comments in total)

"Auto ISO control maxes out at 6400" Strange! That was adjustable on all previous models.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 15:49 UTC as 251st comment
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nikonandmore: MOST lens reviews are largely inaccurate & a waste. Here is why:

One of the biggest flaws of ALL lenses is NOT its native sharpness, fall-off, CR, etc, BUT INSTEAD the variations between samples! Point:

Earlier this year I went to look for a second hand ultra-wide zoom for my a7RII, the only 2 options being Sigma's own 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 DG HSM II & the much hyped Canon EF 11-24mm F4L (both Canon mount to use with a Metabones adapter). Noting that SURELY this adapter is not originally meant to be used with these lenses & can largely affect its native performance, I tried 2 samples of the Canon that were great, 1 sample of the Canon that was HORRID, 5 samples of the Sigma that were "OK", and 1 sample of the Sigma that was STELLAR! Critically sharp all across the frame & going against just about ALL reviews out there that say the lens is "average".

Never buy a new lens! Never! Find second-hand ones that you can ACTUALLY TEST & you may find the stellar one for a killer price!

Good advice. But if we all buy only used lenses and nobody buys new one, were do the used ones will come from?

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 09:48 UTC
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

WastingTime: Why would the aperture change from f4 to f6.4 on an APS-C sensor? Do you meant equivalent minimum Depth Of Field?

The Aperture of a lens remains the same across all formats.

Edit: I just notices that the author also has done this calculation on other lenses reviews, but I really don't understand the logic behind it.

That is just sayed in other words, that the lens on the crop sensor would look like you have used the longer and slower lens on the not cropped sensor.
12-24mm F4 will be the same on the smaller sensor of course. But it will look like you have used 19-38mm F6.4 on full frame. The 10-20mm F3.5 for APS-C will look on APS-C as if you would have used a (hypothetical) 16-32mm F5.6 lens on full frame (small picture).

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 09:15 UTC
In reply to:

LJ - Eljot: And can lenses with aperture ring be used with the ring locked at smallest aperture in P and A mode. Or can the the aperture be controlled by the camera with these lenses?

Ah! Good to know.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2016 at 08:31 UTC
In reply to:

LJ - Eljot: And can lenses with aperture ring be used with the ring locked at smallest aperture in P and A mode. Or can the the aperture be controlled by the camera with these lenses?

It would be strange if not. But who knows.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 20:34 UTC
In reply to:

LJ - Eljot: And can lenses with aperture ring be used with the ring locked at smallest aperture in P and A mode. Or can the the aperture be controlled by the camera with these lenses?

With Nikon cameras it works this way. All AF-Nikkors with aperture ring have no AF-motor (right?). So of course no AF.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 19:50 UTC

And can lenses with aperture ring be used with the ring locked at smallest aperture in P and A mode. Or can the the aperture be controlled by the camera with these lenses?

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 19:40 UTC as 28th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

photophile: Bit disappointed. I compared it with the Sony Alpha II, Fuji X-T2 and Nikon D500 - and pixel peeped. At the two hightest ISO settings, Sony & Fuji walk away with it. Nkon is not bad. But Olympus falls a long way behind. Just above the centre of the image are three items of text set against black, white and grey backgrounds. You can actually read the text with the Sony & Nikon at ISO25600! Impressive.

My original intention was only to point out, that in my opinion it would be smarter to compare camras with different sensor sizes not at the same ISO value but rather at the same DoF. For instance, The E-M1 II 45mm at ISO 3200 with f/5.6 an 1/1250 s and the Canon 5D IV 85mm at ISO 12800 with f/5.6 and 1/5000 s is roughly the same amount of light. And the noise is roughly the same. No suprise. Also the the Nikon D800. 85mm, ISO 12800, 1/5000 s and roughly the same noise (at same viewing size, actuelly a bit worse). Pay attantion to those details when using the comparison tool:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=olympus_em1_ii&attr13_1=oly_em1&attr13_2=canon_eos5dmkiv&attr13_3=nikon_d810&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=3200&attr16_1=3200&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&attr126_0=normal&attr171_2=off&attr299_0=1&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=0.14470235646706234&y=0.544871682578611

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2016 at 13:14 UTC
In reply to:

photophile: Bit disappointed. I compared it with the Sony Alpha II, Fuji X-T2 and Nikon D500 - and pixel peeped. At the two hightest ISO settings, Sony & Fuji walk away with it. Nkon is not bad. But Olympus falls a long way behind. Just above the centre of the image are three items of text set against black, white and grey backgrounds. You can actually read the text with the Sony & Nikon at ISO25600! Impressive.

Well right. This is more a problem of terminology. If I want to photograph a scene from a certain point of view with the same framing with the same ilumination and brightness and with the same shutterspeed with two different sensor sized cameras than I have to do it with the same aperture and different focal lenses. because we usually give apertures in f-numbers the f-number will differ with the different sensor sizes with the different focal lengths needed to get the same angle of view.
Thats why DoF has very much to do with Sensor size. And thats why you can not alway get the same DoF with different sized sensors because with the shorter focal lenght the same aperture would be an f-number smaller 1.

You are right, IQ is more than just noise. And thats why IQ is often better with greater sensor sizes. This is allready discussed earlier in this thread.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2016 at 13:13 UTC
In reply to:

photophile: Bit disappointed. I compared it with the Sony Alpha II, Fuji X-T2 and Nikon D500 - and pixel peeped. At the two hightest ISO settings, Sony & Fuji walk away with it. Nkon is not bad. But Olympus falls a long way behind. Just above the centre of the image are three items of text set against black, white and grey backgrounds. You can actually read the text with the Sony & Nikon at ISO25600! Impressive.

@entoman "Bigger sensor means more photons" No, not with same DoF as smaller sensor. You can trade of more DoF for more photons with bigger sensor, but with the same DoF the number of photons will be the same. Bigger Sensors have andvantage in low ISO. To get the same IQ as small picture sensor at ISO100 a mft would need about ISO25, but all I know have ISO200 as base ISO. Bigger sensors have advantages, in low light as well as at low ISO, but at the same DoF they have roughly the same IQ.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 23:29 UTC
In reply to:

photophile: Bit disappointed. I compared it with the Sony Alpha II, Fuji X-T2 and Nikon D500 - and pixel peeped. At the two hightest ISO settings, Sony & Fuji walk away with it. Nkon is not bad. But Olympus falls a long way behind. Just above the centre of the image are three items of text set against black, white and grey backgrounds. You can actually read the text with the Sony & Nikon at ISO25600! Impressive.

That is no suprise. The Sony uses roughly 4 times more light. If you want to compare the cameras at an equivalent depth of field you have to compare small picture @ 25600 with mft @ 6400. I don't want to start an equivalence war here. I just want to say that for the test scene diferent apertures do not matter much, but in nomal use there is a difference.

Edit: some comments apeared before I got ready with mine. Bigger sensors are not categoricly better than smaller ones. But you can get more light with the bigger sensor by using smaller DOF. That can be an advantage. But if you use 0.02s and f/2.8 with mft or 0.02s and f/5.6 with small picture gives you basicly the same result. Actually the E-M1 II is better than Sony A7 (II) if you consider this. Pretty much the same as other cameras like Nikon D750. The Sony A7 (II) hat not very good IQ for its sensor size.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2016 at 17:29 UTC
In reply to:

gordzam: Has the second prize winner ever heard of "composition" in a photo?

Put the the most interesting part (the face) in the middle! What is wrong with that approach?

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 20:36 UTC
On article Nikon D5600 DSLR announced, though not in the US (299 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: At least improve the focus performance in Live View, do we need to wait for ten years to have it?

Nikon can't live view. I think they hate live view.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2016 at 12:02 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (333 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alphoid: I saw "Pentax," the class of the camera, and said "silver." I clicked to the end, and there it was!

The awards have almost nothing to do with the cameras; Top-of-the-line $5000 Canon/Nikon will always be gold.

Pentax K-3: Gold
Pentax K-5 II: Gold
Pentax K-5 IIs: Gold
Olympus OM-D E-M1: Gold
Olympus OM-D E-M5: Gold
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85: Gold
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4: Gold
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3: Gold
Fujifilm X-T2: Gold
Fujifilm X-T1: Gold

This list may not be complete.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 18:39 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (333 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adam Sharp: Pentax great value for money

And dials. One Dial can cost a few hundred dollar.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 18:18 UTC
In reply to:

LJ - Eljot: Wich Cameras are capable of tethered shooting with live view? I know some Olympus are. At least the E-M1 (II) and the E-M5 II. I know because I have a E-M1. Now Fujifilm is. Sony is not. At least my alpha 7 II is not. Phase One backs are.

Ok, the Sony Alpha 7 don't deliver a live view image to Capture One but the 7 II does. It is sill very basic compared to Olympus Capture.

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2016 at 20:14 UTC
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (762 comments in total)
In reply to:

Manfred Bachmann: kodak pocket instamatic, and i was very proud:)

Also my first camera. I have some flash cubes left. Wonder if they would fire.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 17:15 UTC
Total: 447, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »