Picturenaut

Picturenaut

Lives in Frankfurt am Main
Works as a science journalist
Has a website at www.roland-wengenmayr.de
Joined on Jun 1, 2010
About me:

Love to shoot wildlife, birds, animals, macros of insects and spiders, plus street and portrait of people (I like to draw portraits too).

Comments

Total: 141, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Yake: With a Sony sensor he could be doing those most excellent shadow pushes that are so critical to saving highlights and producing usable pictures, as every informed amateur knows. He must really struggle with that old inferior sensor, poor guy.

Shame on Canon for crippling these cameras and not giving them the dynamic range of next year's 5DIV or the 2020 1DX Mark III. But then Canon is strictly run by some dude in the Marketing Dept. who doesn't crave on-chip ADC new fab nanometer blah-blah like all real photographers do.

Before you start thinking that this Canon is a good camera, remember that pros often don't have a choice about which camera they use because their employers choose for them. They just run with whatever the boss hands them and can't say a bleep about. Oh yeah, and the cost of switching to a better brand like Sony would be too prohibitive for a pro with a vast inventory of lenses like this guy has. ;-)

P.S. But seriously, he's a great photographer!

Sure you don't know who Sebastião Salgado is, Yake, just google him and his famous images. Or watch the movie "salt of the earth". There you (1) can learn what really great photography is (well, we all can learn a lot) and that (2) he uses Canon SLRs and DSLRs to shoot his stunning images. Does he stick with this uncool brand only because he can't afford a system change? I don't think so.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2016 at 15:01 UTC
In reply to:

Brobes: Easy job, easy pictures! It all happens in front of him... Strange there is no blimp or silent shutter camera to be less intrusive?

5D3 has a very effective silent shutter mode

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2016 at 14:23 UTC
On article DxOMark confirms Canon EOS 1D X II sensor advances (216 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nobby2016: DXO is not making it public how exactly they reach the score.

the 1DX MK2 is nearly everywhere better than the D5 and only gets the same score.

what is the reason that DXO does not make it public how exactly they weight the scores?

also DR only seems to be really important at low ISO, why?

sony for example has worse DR at high ISO than canon cameras.... yet sony scores always better at DR.

Revenant, you hit it. If you shoot action like sports or wildife, for which such a camera is made, you nearly never have enough light for base ISO. It is much more likely that you have to go for ISO 1600 or 3200, even higher. So higher ISOs matter, and that's the reason why DxO's final scores are more or less useless for this class of cameras. At least you have to check their data more thoroughly - or get your information from other sources with more transparent methods.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 08:39 UTC
On article Leica Q In-depth Review (1126 comments in total)
In reply to:

IvanPavlov: Are there among commentators professional photographers? Or are only wealthy amateurs having Leica Q?

Which are professionals shooting with Leica? And how many professionals are shooting on Leica M/S/SL?

About this camera: May consider this is as professional tool or auxiliary (second) tool in terms of real work taking into consideration its abilities and price and value of brand?

Actually I know one pro who loves his Q and shoots it in sessions even side by side with his extended mid format gear (Phase One). He definitely knows a lot about photography, he is quite successful even in these hard times for pros. There is definitely much more about photography and cameras than sensor scores etc., in particular because nearly all digital cameras are good nowadays. Most important is the way a camera helps you getting good images, and obviously the Leica Q is just right for his personal way of doing things.

Btw he allowed me to briefly test his Q. It is a beautiful camera with great AF and IQ but not my cup of tea, because I am more a normal-tele lens guy. But that's my way of seeing things.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 08:07 UTC
On article DxOMark confirms Canon EOS 1D X II sensor advances (216 comments in total)
In reply to:

Balooziggy: DXO is clearly biased as are many others including DPReview. Canon will never better Nikon or Sony in some peoples eyes, but who gives a sheit? I am using the 1dxII and love it, it's a superb camera albeit not perfect!

Well, those many pros still shooting with Canon are obviously disbeliever in the holy books of DxO & DPR ;-) I am no fanboy but Canon has one outstanding quality that really can matter but doesn't help this brand in lab review scores: quality. We shoot both a Canon and a Nikon gear side by side, mostly wildlife in really rugged environments, and our Nikon gear needed much more repair service in the past years (opposite to our vintage analogue Nikons that still are doing well). The most reliable parts of our current Nikon gear are Sigma lenses... I think many pros appreciate reliable workhorses, because only a camera that works does the job.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2016 at 21:05 UTC
In reply to:

marc petzold: For ~1900 EUR, i expected to see the Lens made completely out of metal,beside the glass elements... not with plastic front rings or somehow interna, my bad. The Primes from the 60s to 80s Era are mostly made out of metal, minus the rubber focus rings.

For comparsion, Zeiss Loxia Lenses...or just the good old C/Y Zeiss lenses.

Besides that, it looks like a really nice build quality. :-)

@marc petzold: sure, there are better and less good lenses around in terms of durability, that applies to all manufacturers. Roger Cicala's great blog delivers good statistics based on lens rental's real life experience, at least for pro like gear.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2015 at 20:27 UTC

Interesting to read the debates here about modern lenses with their ultrasonic drives and other features won't last as long as vintage lenses. But is that true? Simplicity seems not always guarantee durability, according to my experience.

My wife e.g. lost a mechanical only Sigma 24-70/2.8 zoom in Siberia, at -40 °C it broke and literally fell into pieces - she selected this vintage lens from early 1990s because she expected it to be very robust. Then, a Nikkor 300/4 (no VR) of our gears needed recently an AF drive replacement, whereas our technically more advanced and complex EF 300/4 L IS USM (with IS) still works flawlessly - same age, same use.

Such a personal experience of course does not support any statistics, but I do believe that modern complex lenses can be quite long-lived if well made. I think, electronic compatibility could be more a problem in the long run.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2015 at 08:47 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

marc petzold: For ~1900 EUR, i expected to see the Lens made completely out of metal,beside the glass elements... not with plastic front rings or somehow interna, my bad. The Primes from the 60s to 80s Era are mostly made out of metal, minus the rubber focus rings.

For comparsion, Zeiss Loxia Lenses...or just the good old C/Y Zeiss lenses.

Besides that, it looks like a really nice build quality. :-)

@marc petzold: I frequently use a vintage EF 500mm F/4.5 L USM built in 1995, and it still works flawlessly (besides a little tolerance in the AF/MF switch). Served me just well again recently on in a storm with sand and salty spray on a shore, shooting seafowl in action. I am pretty sure that it will work the next several years without failure.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2015 at 08:28 UTC

Kudos to Roger Cicala and lensrentals. In fact I check their great blog first before I invest since many years.

Like other posters here I am a huge fan of Canon's high quality lenses (not every lens in their line is stellar, of course). I really don't pamper my gear, but my expensive Canon glass survived many accidents in rugged environment without decentering or failing. We do a lot of wildlife, and we have an extended Canon and Nikon gear, so I can compare both systems well. Our Nikon lenses and cameras needed much more service so far, and our most reliable, best performing Nikon lenses are made by Sigma btw.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2015 at 10:22 UTC as 46th comment

The M3 isn't the sexiest act in the mirrorless circus of course, but not a bad camera. I played a bit with one in my local shop and like its quality and handling. AF is okay now, and its IQ is good enough for very good results. Seems to make a nice addition to Canon gear. I personally prefer the native system over a Sony-Canon EF-adapter thing, and I seriously consider getting one...

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2015 at 08:50 UTC as 35th comment
In reply to:

lbjack: Stodgy. C'mon Canon, get with it! We need Sony innovation with your quality.

Besides the sensor tech I do hope that Canon does not regress to Sony quality. My Canon gear survived sand and salt storms, tumbling from tripods, heat and frost, and really never failed. Our Nikon gear proved to be much less reliable than in the old days of Nikon, unfortunately.

Roger Cicala from lens rentals recently teared down a 7D II and was impressed by its quality:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/11/cracking-open-the-7d-ii

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2015 at 08:42 UTC
In reply to:

MustyMarie: An actual DPR review of M3 some day ??

you can predict the result: silver award (only just). DxO already scored its sensor only 72 pts - worse than the old Nikon D90, and DxO is the master here now. But I guess a lot people won't care and get them an M3.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2015 at 08:32 UTC

I think most of those lenses will end up in collector's show cases, in which the will look nicely with their brass casings (don't forget to polish them frequently). In real life, fumbling with an 18th century design lens will be mostly a too frustrating experience: "wait, just keep still in this position another 10 minutes until..."

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2015 at 08:11 UTC as 6th comment
On article Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review (1318 comments in total)
In reply to:

audiobomber: What is the basis for saying the 7D II outperforms the a6000 and K-3 for noise? DXOMark shows the 7D II with the lowest score of the three for SNR.
a6000: ISO 1347
K-3: ISO 1216
7D II: ISO 1082

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-7D-Mark-II-versus-Sony-A6000-versus-Pentax-K-3___977_942_914

Tony Northrop (surely no Canon fanboy) explains here in detail why DxO's scoring system does not give any useful idea about the real world performance of a camera such as the 7D2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTuBr0W0Zhw

The 7D2 is made for sports and wildlife photographers using supertele lenses and often shooting action, and high ISO performance is what really matters then - plus a very good AF system, because if you miss a great moment that never comes back no extraordinary DR performance will compensate you.

So, overall, the 7D2 mostly meets what one can expect from such a camera. There are a few downsides, of course, touchscreen is lacking and video is a bit disappointing looking at the competition.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2014 at 15:53 UTC

As a user of two Mecablitz flashes I do hope that their flash business will survive. Bankruptcy in Germany doesn't mean necessarily the end of a company.

Hey, this is one of our old camera gear makers in Germany, they MUST survive, in particular because their flashes are really good. The new mecablitz 64 AF-1 is one of the hottest guns on the market btw: maximum guide number 64 for ISO 100 @ 200 mm!

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2014 at 08:11 UTC as 39th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Picturenaut: Great! Some wildlife shooters have been waiting for this MK II version for at least 5-6 ys now. I guess only hobby trombone players will really miss the old push-pull design.

@wburychka: you made a point, it surely depends on the personal shooting style. I prefer shooting wildlife with primes and work with details when an animal gets close (in fact I do love detailed close-ups), so zooming is not so important for me.

Btw the new Sigma 150-600 S might be interesting for you. There is a good review on Nikon rumors, and the guy says there:
"When shooting you can zoom the lens by pulling and pushing the barrel instead of twisting."

http://nikonrumors.com/2014/11/09/sigma-150-600mm-f5-6-3-dg-os-hsm-sports-lens-review.aspx/#ixzz3JPAS0Ilp

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 08:02 UTC
On article Video: Capturing nature with the Canon EOS 7D Mark II (210 comments in total)

Great footage for enjoying in the evening with a glass of wine, watching how a pro wildlife shooter works, and how the reviewed gear performs in real life. Since all digital cameras today deliver quite good quality compared to some years ago, I think those real life reviews are getting more and more important (e.g. AF performance in challenging moments) - and scientific lab tests less and less important at least for real photographers (excluding geeks).

Please DPR, I want to see more of this very good stuff! (And, please, not always with Country muzak.)

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 07:49 UTC as 37th comment

Great! Some wildlife shooters have been waiting for this MK II version for at least 5-6 ys now. I guess only hobby trombone players will really miss the old push-pull design.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2014 at 15:08 UTC as 8th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Antony John: Any camera manufacturer that releases new lenses and puts pressure on other companies to do the same is to be applauded.
Now if only Nikon would update their 400mm F4 ...

The current Nikkor superteles are more affordable than Canon's latest Mk II lenses and their new 200-400, but Nikon's current supertele line is getting a bit long in the tooth now. With the new Nikkor 800/5.6 they have shown that the next generation Nikkors will be coming with a breathtaking premium price again.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2014 at 15:04 UTC
In reply to:

ms18: I wonder how it will comparable to EF 400mm f/5.6 L prime... at 400mm ignoring the IS.

Not sure, the 400/5.6 is a prime and it's simple optical construction is tack sharp (I love it). IS is not so important if you shoot action, e.g. BIF. And the 100-400mm MkI's weak point was its long end at 400 mm. But I am pretty sure that the Mk II will provide a huge leap in optical quality anyway. Will be interesting to see first lab tests.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2014 at 14:47 UTC
Total: 141, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »