SkiHound

Lives in United States RI, United States
Joined on Jun 7, 2007

Comments

Total: 69, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On article Sony a7 III Review (1468 comments in total)
In reply to:

bjphotolabs: The Nikon 85mm f1.8G lens lens used in the dpreview studio scene is rated for 27 P-Mpix, whereas the Sony 85mm FE 1.8 lens is rated for 40 P-Mpix by DXO.

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-FE-85mm-F18-versus-Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-85mm-F18G__1818_0_823_0

I am not sure if this equalizes somewhat by f5.6 or not, but why not just use the same lens with an extremely high quality adapter? Or have a company manufacturer the exact same lens (at least 50 Megapixel by f5.6, and better by f8) with different lens mounts for this purpose.

Lenses also impact colour rendering and dynamic range of the image, and this impacts the perception of looking at these comparison widgets.

Besides this point, the Nikon D750 file appears slightly mis-focused here.

And finally, the cameras should use the "Neutral" instead of "Standard" picture profile because the in camera processing sometimes reduces the effective micro-detail.

Isn't this an issue for all of these comparisons? Cameras are using different lenses which are probably at least as important for differences as sensors. Not to mention differences in default out of camera jpeg processing and any given raw development tool may do a better job with files from certain cameras, especially if simply used at default settings. And then if we let people process to taste we've introduced another variable. Seems to me there are too many variables to make any firm conclusions regarding the intrinsic body performance from any of these kinds of comparisons.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 23:17 UTC
In reply to:

Wye Photography: At least Leica is a successful German company unlike Heinkel which Bombed.

Good one! Made me laugh.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2018 at 12:01 UTC
In reply to:

Arca45Swiss: As far as I'm concerned Olympic may as well not exist. Have never considered buying one

I've never considered buying an Olympic either.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2018 at 21:33 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix GX9 sample gallery updated (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

MrALLCAPS: Nice assortment, but everything seems so flat, no depth. I have the GX7 MKII, so it seems I made the right choice and saving $400 too. I think Panasonic NA is shooting themselves in the foot, by not pairing this with prime instead of a Zoom. This "is" a camera for primes.

I can't see why they don't also offer a body only option. The 12-60 offered with this in NA is probably an OK lens, but I really have no need of another lens like that. And offered with a smaller prime such as the 15 f/1.7 as an alternative to body only, would seem very attractive.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2018 at 16:57 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix GX9 sample gallery updated (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ben Herrmann: Like anything else, these images show the Panasonic way of rendering colors. And as it's often be stated, just about every camera made now-a-days can render colors superbly.

It is only when you shoot the same scenes (same time of day and conditions) with different brand cameras, and then compare, do you realize that colors are rendered differently by the different brands. Some camera brands tend to have a "cooler" look to their overall rendering (i.e. Panasonic), while others have a warmer tone (i.e. Fuji, Olympus, and the list goes on).

Eventually, it all becomes personal as which overall rendering you prefer. Panasonic has been very, very gradually shifting (changing) how they render their colors through the years, although they are still lacking behind some of the others with regards to capturing skin tones.

But this GX9 will sell well. It is priced quite nicely and that kit 12-60 is an optic that punches far above its weight. I may look at this one in the near future.

The Camera Store has an interesting video comparing out of camera jpeg colors using a range of different types of subject matter. I don't recall all of the details but basically taking the same photo with different cameras and then showing them to persons blind to the brand of camera. Results might surprise. No one brand stood out as best in all categories. Indeed, there was considerable variation in rankings across subjects. Maybe those magical Brand X colors aren't really so magical.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2018 at 21:30 UTC
On article Sony a7 III Review (1468 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: Here's what I do not understand about the DPR studio comparison methodology and the consumers of said comparison. Unless this is a system to system comparison, using different lenses does not really provide accurate insight. Especially with Canon, Nikon and Sony, there are plenty of 3rd party lens makers producing the same lens on different mounts.

Can't Mr. Bezos peel off a few bills from his coffee money to bolster the DPR budget?

I've long since stopped looking at the studio comparisons. Lenses have as much to do with resolution as sensors. Add in differences in micro contrast, color response, etc., and all of a sudden the comparison involves a lot of variables. Plus, different developers seem to work better/worse with different cameras, and in the real world, some of this will be contingent on the PP skills of the user. Bottom line is we have a ton of great cameras these days.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2018 at 12:25 UTC
In reply to:

MrBrightSide: Because the human eye is notoriously inaccurate as a judge of almost everything —including magnitude of relative noise—could you please bring back some hard numbers, perhaps even start posting the noise vs. luminance and the RGB noise graphs again?

I sort of mean this to be a crass comment, but not specifically to any individual but to the community. If our eyes are so notoriously inaccurate as a judge of almost everything (and I think they are), then why do we eve care about "hard numbers?" We see and interpret what we "think we see" and thus the "hard numbers" are, in practical terms, completely superfluous. I'm a statistician, BTW, and have authored well over 100 refereed publications. People, and I'm talking about scientists here, constantly assign way to much value to trivially small, often within the bounds of measurement error, numerical differences.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2018 at 23:27 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9: What you need to know (211 comments in total)
In reply to:

toporossa: How often one can omit a low pass-filter? I'm reading that again and again about mirrorless cameras since the E-PL1 came out. But probably that wasn't the case with the GX series until now and every new camera series starts with a model with filter and gets replaced by a successor without filter later ...

I'm not sure moire is a major problem. I think jpeg engines and raw development programs do a better job handling it these days. And it was a greater problem when sensor resolutions were lower. It becomes less and less of a problem as sensor resolutions increase.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2018 at 23:04 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9: What you need to know (211 comments in total)
In reply to:

JokingJ: I understand where Panasonic is coming from as far as filling out their range, but from a value standpoint this is a very disappointing package. Considering that the GX8 had weather sealing, the highest resolution sensor available at the time, the only IBIS system in the Panasonic range, the same focusing system as the GH4 (the current Panasonic flagship in 2015), and the best video spec aside from the GH4 when the GX8 was released, $1199 body-only was kind of a steal. This camera is cheaper, but it's not nearly as competent, which makes the lower price less appealing at the more enthusiast-oriented level. But then if one could have the same sensor, AF, and 90% of the video and IBIS performance of the GH5 in a smaller, lighter, weather-sealed body for $1199, it probably would cannibalize sales of that camera, especially among vloggers.

I suppose it opens up the opportunity for Olympus to wow would-be buyers in the $1000 segment with whatever they're planning for the E-M5 Mark II...

I believe the E-M5ii was US $1099 when it first appeared. I suspect the iii is going to be $1199+. Can't see them going much past $1299 given prices of the G9 and what the E-M1ii is going for. GX9 is not ridiculously priced considering it comes with the 12-60 kit lens. Though the GX85 is certainly a better value. I do wish they would offer a body only option.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2018 at 22:53 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9: What you need to know (211 comments in total)
In reply to:

stevo23: Very compelling camera for me. Not being in the Panasonic ecosystem, I don't have any particular expectations. Seem swell and the pricing seems reasonable.

I think much of the angst is because the GX9 is not what folks expected. The GX80/85 generally got very good reviews. And if you read user reviews on the sites that sell cameras, they too are generally very positive. For some folks, the EFV technology causes significant problems. Sometimes called tearing or the rainbow effect. It doesn't seem to bother most folks much. The GX9 offers several improvements over the GS80/85. I think it will be a fine camera.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 19:51 UTC
In reply to:

kwa_photo: I am willing to bet that Panasonic will do the following with their mid-high end lines:

-GH5/GH5s (video-centric high end)
-G9 (photo-centric high end, DSLR style)
COMING SOON: (no idea of name) G-something, high-end photo-centric rangefinder style following the idea of the GH5s in that is it specialized for this. Maybe a GX9s with sensor tweaked for high ISO stills, super-res EVF, fast shutter sync with strobes, but still capable of quality 4K if needed.
-GX9 mid-level rangefinder style, photo-centric
-GX85 mid-level DSLR style, video-centric
-Lower level bodies as are know today

My thought is the GX8 line (larger, higher end rangefinder) is gone. And my guess is the GX80/85 will go away too. Photo centric bodies will be G9, a smaller SLR styled body that kind of competes with bodies like the EM-5 line, GX9 and a lower end body sans EVF.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 22:35 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix G9 vs Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (256 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike5076: Have been pondering a jump to MF43 from FF. Size, weight, and I am an enthusiast vs. Olympics 5 bodies, tethered instant feed to the news orgs type.

From a handling and IQ perspective when I read the lens reviews there is a jump back and forth as to which has the best lens for a particular focal length, etc.

Picking the body that provided the best overall experience w/ the best IQ lens would be beneficial to me. I know lenses change, etc, but at the current moment, etc.

What say you 4/3 shooters is this a legit question to be answered?

It's a very broad question. You'd likely get more responses on the m43 forum if you asked about specific focal lengths. And so much would depend on how much size you want to tolerate and how much money you're willing to spend. There's a bunch of lenses that have very good reputations for IQ. For example, the PL 42.5 f/1.2 and new Olympus Pro 45mm f/1.2 are probably the best optically in that focal length range. They should be as they are considerably larger, and more expensive that lenses like the little Olympus f/1.8 and Panasonic 42.5 f/1.7 lenses. Both of these smaller and less expensive lenses are very well regarded but probably not the very best in that focal length range. You could make the same kind of statements about the 25mm lenses. Etc.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2018 at 23:06 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix G9 vs Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (256 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: Does anyone in here own both cameras? What’s Your Thoughts?

Melchiorum, great comments. You should be reviewing cameras. Thanks for taking the time to write this.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2018 at 12:17 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix G9 vs Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (256 comments in total)
In reply to:

Linerider: The OLYMPUS OM-D E-M1 Mark II has Live Composite feature which the Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 does not.
The Live Composite is an awesome feature in my opinion, and enough to choose the olympus over the panasonic

I'd expect it's a feature many folks would never use. But I agree that it's a great feature for many situations.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2018 at 12:00 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (1024 comments in total)

The whole Silver vs Gold and 88% vs 87% is completely inane. DPReview would likely do well to abandon them. What anyone reading reviews is how well a camera meets THEIR individual needs. The gold vs silver stuff is basically about who can pee the furthest into the wind.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 23:46 UTC as 89th comment | 1 reply
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (409 comments in total)

Interesting how a few sample images degenerates into a full on format brawl.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 19:11 UTC as 17th comment | 1 reply
On article Panasonic G9 added to studio scene comparison (166 comments in total)
In reply to:

agnost: The G9 results look great and it will be undoubtably be excellent competition for the E-M1 II (which I own) and other similar cameras. However, I find it amusing that so many are trying to assign superiority to whatever camera they own based on viewing these test images on computer monitors. A real-world test would be how well the files print, and I doubt that most people would be able to detect any appreciable difference on carefully made 13 x 19-in. prints from most M43 or APS-C cameras. And please let's not start nitpicking about who wins at ISO 25,000...

This is so antithetical to most DPReview readers.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2017 at 00:05 UTC
In reply to:

dmanthree: I know that phone cams can't compete with real cams, but it is nice to see they're making improvements. Beats the alternative. Someday, I may actually use the cam in my phone.

But not today.

Well, in terms of pure technical IQ they don't. But you can take some pretty dang good pictures with a phone. Most real people don't scrutinize noise and detail at 200%. They look at photos. And it's only when those things become really objectionable that they even notice. I've been using smaller m43 bodies mostly because of the size/weight advantages. Some of them are growing and getting heavier, so I'm not too happy about that. Bob Krist, a NATGEO photographer is using Sony 1" cameras for a lot of stuff these days.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 00:11 UTC
In reply to:

SkiHound: It'll be very interesting to see what DxO brings to the table with their next major Optics Pro release. I like it as a development tool. I really like the lens correction tools and noise handling. I think it's a little slow, it lacks good localized adjustment tools, it doesn't really play nice with most plugins. The Nik plugins were pretty darn good. If they can integrate the Nik tools into Optics Pro, this could be a real winner.

I did.. Haven't done much with it yet.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 20:02 UTC

It'll be very interesting to see what DxO brings to the table with their next major Optics Pro release. I like it as a development tool. I really like the lens correction tools and noise handling. I think it's a little slow, it lacks good localized adjustment tools, it doesn't really play nice with most plugins. The Nik plugins were pretty darn good. If they can integrate the Nik tools into Optics Pro, this could be a real winner.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 15:46 UTC as 84th comment | 2 replies
Total: 69, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »