James Bligh

Lives in Korea (South) Korea (South)
Joined on Dec 5, 2008
About me:

I admire the paintings of Goya, El Greco, Rembrandt, Gauguin, Courbet, Picasso, Salvador Dali… If only we photographers could create images as compelling as the masterpieces of them…

My present light-painting tools are: Nikon D700, AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D, Nikon D610, AF-S Nikkor 24-85mm F3.5-4.5G ED VR, Nikon D800, AF Nikkor 24mm f/2.8D, AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G ED, AF-S Nikkor 85mm F1.8G, Panasonic GF-1, Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH, Nikon Coolpix A, Ricoh GR2, Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3, Canon PowerShot S110, Ricoh GRD2, Fujifilm F30 and my SLR heritages.

Comments

Total: 151, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

bergat: It will possible change diaphragms,iso, speed, only using the body and lens, whithout enter in menu? If yes it wil be a good thing, otherwise I remain with fuji.

James Bligh

'Of course for some of the menus which appear in back LCD I mean.' This should be read as follows.
'Of course for some menus which appear in back LCD I mean.'

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2018 at 08:26 UTC
In reply to:

bergat: It will possible change diaphragms,iso, speed, only using the body and lens, whithout enter in menu? If yes it wil be a good thing, otherwise I remain with fuji.

T3
Looking at a screen does not mean you are entering into a "menu."

-- In Nkon D700 what you are saying is right. In D800 you are wrong, you can change the settings in back LCD screen. Of course for some of the menus which appear in back LCD I mean.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2018 at 07:58 UTC
In reply to:

James Bligh: Exhibit number one/ I may say one of the purposes of MILC is smaller size if you don't mind. As it happens we are told that the lens mount of Nikon FF MILC grows larger, and lenses become bigger too, because of the necessity of such as IBIS etc. So when you consider total size I mean that of body and lens together the size advantage of Nikon FF MILC may not be as great as we have hoped. You may say still the size of MILC plus lens combo is smaller than that of DSLR with its counterpart lens. But how much?

Exhibit number two/ Among many differences between MILC and DSLR, let's put aside the EVF and electrical power consumption issue, one thing we can/should not ignore is AF. The AF may be more accurate in MILC but the AF speed of MILC will not match that of DSLR.

Considering these things we may wonder what the merit of MILC is.

RandyPD
on-sensor AF systems don't need to be calibrated for back/front focus for each lens.

-- I know that. Again I think I have read that on sensor phase detect system has side effects.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2018 at 07:49 UTC
In reply to:

James Bligh: Exhibit number one/ I may say one of the purposes of MILC is smaller size if you don't mind. As it happens we are told that the lens mount of Nikon FF MILC grows larger, and lenses become bigger too, because of the necessity of such as IBIS etc. So when you consider total size I mean that of body and lens together the size advantage of Nikon FF MILC may not be as great as we have hoped. You may say still the size of MILC plus lens combo is smaller than that of DSLR with its counterpart lens. But how much?

Exhibit number two/ Among many differences between MILC and DSLR, let's put aside the EVF and electrical power consumption issue, one thing we can/should not ignore is AF. The AF may be more accurate in MILC but the AF speed of MILC will not match that of DSLR.

Considering these things we may wonder what the merit of MILC is.

T3
@James Bligh - I think you should go back to

-- Why not? We should surrender our swords when fate dictates us. Like Charles Strickland did.

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2018 at 06:52 UTC
In reply to:

James Bligh: Exhibit number one/ I may say one of the purposes of MILC is smaller size if you don't mind. As it happens we are told that the lens mount of Nikon FF MILC grows larger, and lenses become bigger too, because of the necessity of such as IBIS etc. So when you consider total size I mean that of body and lens together the size advantage of Nikon FF MILC may not be as great as we have hoped. You may say still the size of MILC plus lens combo is smaller than that of DSLR with its counterpart lens. But how much?

Exhibit number two/ Among many differences between MILC and DSLR, let's put aside the EVF and electrical power consumption issue, one thing we can/should not ignore is AF. The AF may be more accurate in MILC but the AF speed of MILC will not match that of DSLR.

Considering these things we may wonder what the merit of MILC is.

T3
when AF does "fail", that's where the focus peaking and focus magnification of mirrorless systems are such a huge benefit.

-- It's useless when LCD fails. Modern lenses get rid of aperture rings but they retain manual focus rings. So what can you do?

Hint: Have you ever used Rollei 35SE?

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2018 at 19:40 UTC
In reply to:

James Bligh: Exhibit number one/ I may say one of the purposes of MILC is smaller size if you don't mind. As it happens we are told that the lens mount of Nikon FF MILC grows larger, and lenses become bigger too, because of the necessity of such as IBIS etc. So when you consider total size I mean that of body and lens together the size advantage of Nikon FF MILC may not be as great as we have hoped. You may say still the size of MILC plus lens combo is smaller than that of DSLR with its counterpart lens. But how much?

Exhibit number two/ Among many differences between MILC and DSLR, let's put aside the EVF and electrical power consumption issue, one thing we can/should not ignore is AF. The AF may be more accurate in MILC but the AF speed of MILC will not match that of DSLR.

Considering these things we may wonder what the merit of MILC is.

T3
rangefinder cameras are not true mirrorless cameras.

-- Then I will say it's SMB ILC.

P.S.) In case you are clueless I inform you SMB stands for 'sans mirror box'.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2018 at 19:15 UTC
In reply to:

James Bligh: Exhibit number one/ I may say one of the purposes of MILC is smaller size if you don't mind. As it happens we are told that the lens mount of Nikon FF MILC grows larger, and lenses become bigger too, because of the necessity of such as IBIS etc. So when you consider total size I mean that of body and lens together the size advantage of Nikon FF MILC may not be as great as we have hoped. You may say still the size of MILC plus lens combo is smaller than that of DSLR with its counterpart lens. But how much?

Exhibit number two/ Among many differences between MILC and DSLR, let's put aside the EVF and electrical power consumption issue, one thing we can/should not ignore is AF. The AF may be more accurate in MILC but the AF speed of MILC will not match that of DSLR.

Considering these things we may wonder what the merit of MILC is.

T3
choose a manual focus rangefinder camera?

-- Why not? All AF sometimes fails eventually. When AF seems unreliable MF is your last resort. Even more MF does not consume electricity. I will choose Leica M series rangefinder any day if only the price is not prohibitive.

Who the heck wants to shoot at mirror up position?

-- When your camera is on the tripod I guess.

Bells and whistles? I call them helpful tools.

-- Sometimes I want to drive a car equipped with manual transmission. What's wrong with that?

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2018 at 19:05 UTC
In reply to:

James Bligh: Exhibit number one/ I may say one of the purposes of MILC is smaller size if you don't mind. As it happens we are told that the lens mount of Nikon FF MILC grows larger, and lenses become bigger too, because of the necessity of such as IBIS etc. So when you consider total size I mean that of body and lens together the size advantage of Nikon FF MILC may not be as great as we have hoped. You may say still the size of MILC plus lens combo is smaller than that of DSLR with its counterpart lens. But how much?

Exhibit number two/ Among many differences between MILC and DSLR, let's put aside the EVF and electrical power consumption issue, one thing we can/should not ignore is AF. The AF may be more accurate in MILC but the AF speed of MILC will not match that of DSLR.

Considering these things we may wonder what the merit of MILC is.

T3
Firstly, the latest sensors have phase detection sensors *on* the image sensor:

-- I knew that. Canon employs on sensor phase detect system and I think I have read it has side effects.

demonstrated that focus systems such as the A9's and A7III's are as fast as DSLRs.

-- as fast as, maybe but not faster, if DSLR shoots at mirror up position... BTW I do not shoot sports so frame rate does not mean much to me but I need fast AF speed to catch fleeting moments.

As for other benefits of mirrorless, there are many others. Face/eye AF, real-time exposure preview in the viewfinder, focus peaking/focus magnification, live histogram in the viewfinder, silent shooting with electronic shutter, no mirror slap sound or vibration, full frame focus coverage, etc.

-- Some people are not possessed by all the bells and whistles you may need. At the end of the day we may wonder what counts. Personally I may choose Leica M series rangefinder for real FF MILC.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2018 at 17:47 UTC
In reply to:

James Bligh: Exhibit number one/ I may say one of the purposes of MILC is smaller size if you don't mind. As it happens we are told that the lens mount of Nikon FF MILC grows larger, and lenses become bigger too, because of the necessity of such as IBIS etc. So when you consider total size I mean that of body and lens together the size advantage of Nikon FF MILC may not be as great as we have hoped. You may say still the size of MILC plus lens combo is smaller than that of DSLR with its counterpart lens. But how much?

Exhibit number two/ Among many differences between MILC and DSLR, let's put aside the EVF and electrical power consumption issue, one thing we can/should not ignore is AF. The AF may be more accurate in MILC but the AF speed of MILC will not match that of DSLR.

Considering these things we may wonder what the merit of MILC is.

T3

Frame rate and focusing speed are not the same thing. Usually in continuous shooting AF occurs at the first shot and subsequent shots are shot at the AF position of first shot regardless of DSLR or mirrorless. In this situation mirrorless camera, because of absence of mirror, may have a higher frame rate compared with DSLR.

To measure frame rate which includes auto focusing at each shot focus priority continuous shooting should be employed.

As to focusing speed it is proven that phase detect AF of DSLR is faster than contrast detect AF of mirrorless if all other things except AF mechanism are same. And to measure AF speed we have to use sophisticated equipments including very accurate timing machine.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2018 at 17:00 UTC

Exhibit number one/ I may say one of the purposes of MILC is smaller size if you don't mind. As it happens we are told that the lens mount of Nikon FF MILC grows larger, and lenses become bigger too, because of the necessity of such as IBIS etc. So when you consider total size I mean that of body and lens together the size advantage of Nikon FF MILC may not be as great as we have hoped. You may say still the size of MILC plus lens combo is smaller than that of DSLR with its counterpart lens. But how much?

Exhibit number two/ Among many differences between MILC and DSLR, let's put aside the EVF and electrical power consumption issue, one thing we can/should not ignore is AF. The AF may be more accurate in MILC but the AF speed of MILC will not match that of DSLR.

Considering these things we may wonder what the merit of MILC is.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2018 at 12:38 UTC as 44th comment | 19 replies
In reply to:

Carel: Well, at least Nikon will now have a ridiculously wide mount to go with their ridiculously large and heavy lenses. Canon should really do the same. These narrow mounts only needlessly remind us that once there were full frame lenses that were small and unobtrusive! Can't have that, now can we ;-)

Those narrow mounts necessarily remind us that once there were full frame lenses that were small and unobtrusive! Those were the days my friend.

'one sweet chance to prove the cynics wrong'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9T0AWUMMNYA

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2018 at 18:41 UTC
In reply to:

HenryDJP: Not too crazy about the design of the prism-style EVF. Looks very much like the older Sony SLT cameras, which I hate. I was expecting Nikon to create a really innovative looking full frame mirrorless in order to grab Sony's market.

I think it would have been much better both aesthetically and functionally if Nikon had employed EVF in the left upper corner of the camera, like Panasonic GX series. I feel Leica M style camera serves the spirit of MILC better. EVF hump looks ugly.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2018 at 02:32 UTC

EVF housing looks strangely unbalanced, inadequate and ugly. Am I the only one who feels that way?

Somehow a comment is catching my eyes.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/8765930378/nikon-counts-down-to-new-mirrorless?comment=8820153631

(quote)
Robert1975
Well see for yourself in 2032...

MILCs are like compacts or phones, they're good for static subjects in good light. Do you even understand how much CPU & battery power is required to create clean EVF image at high ISOs, with zero lag!? Dx series is for sports, continuous shooting in horrible light.

At the World Cup in Russia, there was not a single photographer with MILC. That's zero, none! Where's your Sony A9? They will probably add Nikon FF MILC for situations in which silent shooting is absolutely necessary, and that's it.

It will take another 30 years for MILCs to replace DSLRs in professional photography. Even that is questionable. Some things cannot be done completely electronically.
(unquote)

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2018 at 03:26 UTC as 86th comment | 8 replies
On article Nikon D850 Review (2100 comments in total)
In reply to:

James Bligh: (Quote) The other consequence of the smaller photo-sites might be a slightly stronger effect from diffraction. While the optimal aperture on the D810 (and D800) was f/7.1 it could now be f6.3. Stopping down beyond this could make images softer due to diffraction. (Unquote)

https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon-d850-review/

Even if we get mirrorless FF and are free from focusing error of DSLR, high pixel density sensors are far into the realm of diffraction softening. So I think it is appropriate to think about what the ideal pixel count in a given sized sensor is, in other word what pixel count is the sweet spot in FF or APS-C sized sensor.

https://www.naturescapes.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=272733

https://visualsciencelab.blogspot.kr/2017/08/i-read-with-great-interest-12th-thought.html

BTW there is a report which says resolution seems to be almost same between D850 and D800/D810 despite an increase of 10 megapixels.

http://www.sassmannshausen.eu/cameras/d850-first-impressions/

(Quote) Compared to the D810 there may not be as big a difference as you’d think – The increase in linear resolution is only 13% (Unquote)

https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon-d850-review/

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 23:56 UTC
On article Nikon D850 Review (2100 comments in total)

(Quote) The other consequence of the smaller photo-sites might be a slightly stronger effect from diffraction. While the optimal aperture on the D810 (and D800) was f/7.1 it could now be f6.3. Stopping down beyond this could make images softer due to diffraction. (Unquote)

https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon-d850-review/

Even if we get mirrorless FF and are free from focusing error of DSLR, high pixel density sensors are far into the realm of diffraction softening. So I think it is appropriate to think about what the ideal pixel count in a given sized sensor is, in other word what pixel count is the sweet spot in FF or APS-C sized sensor.

https://www.naturescapes.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=272733

https://visualsciencelab.blogspot.kr/2017/08/i-read-with-great-interest-12th-thought.html

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 23:48 UTC as 120th comment | 4 replies
On article The Nikon D850 could be the only DSLR you’ll ever need (1055 comments in total)
In reply to:

James Bligh: What was an issue 5 years ago may be a reminiscence but I am afraid people are too forgetful. Or may I say blindfolded?

If my memory serves me correct, no one in dpreview staffs or not a one article among more than dozen ones dpreview has published so far has mentioned about diffraction in D850.

Well, you may read the following dpreview article.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d800-d800e/25

Has diffraction suddenly not become an issue in 45 MP FF sensor when it was an issue in a 36 MP FF sensor? Human memories may be strange things but physics stays, doesn't it?

@J A C S You may use F16 F22 in D850 but I will never use them in D850. I may use F8 but I am not sure I will dare to use F11 in D850.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2017 at 15:17 UTC
On article The Nikon D850 could be the only DSLR you’ll ever need (1055 comments in total)
In reply to:

James Bligh: What was an issue 5 years ago may be a reminiscence but I am afraid people are too forgetful. Or may I say blindfolded?

If my memory serves me correct, no one in dpreview staffs or not a one article among more than dozen ones dpreview has published so far has mentioned about diffraction in D850.

Well, you may read the following dpreview article.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d800-d800e/25

Has diffraction suddenly not become an issue in 45 MP FF sensor when it was an issue in a 36 MP FF sensor? Human memories may be strange things but physics stays, doesn't it?

@J A C S You may agree that the consequence of high pixel density is very narrow range of usable ISOs in compact digicam and I am afraid it will be very narrow range of usable F stops in DSLR.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2017 at 14:56 UTC
On article The Nikon D850 could be the only DSLR you’ll ever need (1055 comments in total)
In reply to:

James Bligh: What was an issue 5 years ago may be a reminiscence but I am afraid people are too forgetful. Or may I say blindfolded?

If my memory serves me correct, no one in dpreview staffs or not a one article among more than dozen ones dpreview has published so far has mentioned about diffraction in D850.

Well, you may read the following dpreview article.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d800-d800e/25

Has diffraction suddenly not become an issue in 45 MP FF sensor when it was an issue in a 36 MP FF sensor? Human memories may be strange things but physics stays, doesn't it?

@J A C S What you are saying can be summarized to two words, that is diminishing return. If you recall the evolution of compact digicams everlasting increase in MP was stopped or reversed albeit temporarily by 6 MP Fujifilm F30 and I think/hope the same phenomenon will emerge in DSLR in near future. Fact is the public in general may be ignorant but not everyone is.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2017 at 14:24 UTC
On article The Nikon D850 could be the only DSLR you’ll ever need (1055 comments in total)
In reply to:

James Bligh: What was an issue 5 years ago may be a reminiscence but I am afraid people are too forgetful. Or may I say blindfolded?

If my memory serves me correct, no one in dpreview staffs or not a one article among more than dozen ones dpreview has published so far has mentioned about diffraction in D850.

Well, you may read the following dpreview article.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d800-d800e/25

Has diffraction suddenly not become an issue in 45 MP FF sensor when it was an issue in a 36 MP FF sensor? Human memories may be strange things but physics stays, doesn't it?

@J A C S So be it but I wonder no I am afraid DSLR has become/is becoming more or less like compact digicams in regard to usable F stops, it is a pity.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2017 at 13:54 UTC
On article The Nikon D850 could be the only DSLR you’ll ever need (1055 comments in total)
In reply to:

James Bligh: What was an issue 5 years ago may be a reminiscence but I am afraid people are too forgetful. Or may I say blindfolded?

If my memory serves me correct, no one in dpreview staffs or not a one article among more than dozen ones dpreview has published so far has mentioned about diffraction in D850.

Well, you may read the following dpreview article.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d800-d800e/25

Has diffraction suddenly not become an issue in 45 MP FF sensor when it was an issue in a 36 MP FF sensor? Human memories may be strange things but physics stays, doesn't it?

@J A C S Because Amadou Diallo, Barney Britton and Richard Butler say so.

(Quote) Look carefully enough and you can probably see a subtle difference in sharpness between the images shot at f/4 and f/5.6 compared to the one at f/8. By f/11, the effects of lens diffraction start to become more pronounced and at f/16 and f/22, a noticeable amount of sharpness is lost (Unquote)

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2017 at 13:37 UTC
Total: 151, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »