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


Total: 55, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Review (928 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 71st comment | 1 reply
On article Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (415 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 16th comment | 1 reply
On article Panasonic G9 added to studio scene comparison (168 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 82nd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

larrytusaz: Dumb question--I have Lightroom 5.7 and Photoshop CS2. My edits are basic (white balance, sharpness etc in RAW, modest airbrushing in Photoshop). I hear good things about "U point" technology but I wouldn't know the first thing about how to use it. (I had Nikon Capture NX2 for awhile and never utilized it then.) What would this do for me? Good "film emulator" presets or such?

Obviously I don't know how DXO may end up implementing this. And I stopped using the Nik plugins a while back simply because I thought they were dead. The U-point technology is basically a smart masking tool based on tones and colors. You can select points and the software looks at the underlying tones and/or colors. You can link multiple points and adjust parameters for all of the points. If you select adjacent points that are different, the software realizes that you want to adjust the tones/colors separately. The more points you select, the smarter the selections. As implemented in the Nik software, it really wasn't for making hard, precisely defined masks. But very useful for things like dodging and burning or making natural looking changes to certain areas of an image. Thought it worked especially well in Silver Effects Pro, the B&W conversion program.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 15:18 UTC
On article Nikon D850 Review (2112 comments in total)
In reply to:

richard cohen: To me the d850 is all about incremental gains relative to other cameras out there. I doubt there are any 'game changing' technological innovations coming at this point. The tech has gotten so good (same with phones) that we should not expect huge improvements as time goes by...those are already baked into the great cameras we've been lucky enough to have the past couple of years.

What is good about the d850 imo is that nikon has combined all of the latest tech (great dr, good high iso, fast fps, high resolution, best af performance) into one package at a fair price. Sure, they got to cherry pick the af system from the d5/d500 so there was no development cost....but who cares, there is no better af system in a dslr these days. I am pleased that dr and high iso performance are at least as good as the d810, if not a tad better. The rest of the specs make the d850 the best 'all arounder' dslr on the market. Hopefully the qc is ok as well.

I agree. There was a period when each new generation of cameras brought significant gains in resolution, noise, DR, etc. But really over the last 5-6 years the improvements in technical IQ have been pretty incremental. Small sensor technology in phones seemed to get a lot of improvement from things like BSI. I just don't think there's a lot more IQ to pull out of the current sensor technology. No doubt we'll see some revolutionary new sensor technology at some point. What I've read about the "organic" sensor (and I'm certainly not well versed in this stuff) is that it offers much higher signal to noise ratios than the current sensor technology. But until something like that becomes realized, I think we're looking at pretty small enhancements.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 12:28 UTC
In reply to:

Arkienkeli: Actually it is somewhat pointless to judge multimegapixel camera image quality from heavily compressed and gamut-limited HD video. Not to mention normal phone, tablet and laptop displays most people are likely to use instead of calibrated monitors.

It is like judging the differences between DSD and PMC audio coding by listening to 128 kB MP3s.

The but is that very few folks have color calibrated monitors wide gamut monitors. Things like color calibration are probably most important for folks who are printing images.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2017 at 12:50 UTC
On article Elliott Erwitt's lost photos of Pittsburgh (17 comments in total)
In reply to:

Arca45Swiss: I could care less who he is

You're repeating yourself. If you don't care, don't look. And if you could care less, why waste the time to come back and repeat yourself.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 18:36 UTC
On article Elliott Erwitt's lost photos of Pittsburgh (17 comments in total)

Love his photography. Some of his stuff makes me laugh out loud. I wonder how many participants of the gear forums on DPReview would throw these out because of noise (er, I mean grain)?

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 12:47 UTC as 6th comment
On article Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 sample gallery (180 comments in total)
In reply to:

Steve NYC: I like the look of images from the 15mm, but the price is a problem (even on sale or used). So, other than maximum aperture, what would one give up by choosing the far less expensive Pana 14mm f/2.5 instead? Just wondering.

My suggestion is to go to the mu-43 forum. There is a forum with lots of user images from native m43 lenses. There's a long thread on the 14 and I'd presume on the 15. Look at the images and judge for yourself. You could also go to sites like Flickr and search for images made with those lenses. I have the 14 which I bought primarily because it is incredibly small and light. I'm very happy with it but I was willing to live with the limitations. I find the center sharpness fine at f/2.5, but if you pixel peep, the edges and corners are softer. Not surprising given the design of the lens and a little corner softness usually doesn't bother me. It improves as you stop down. I have no experience with the PL15 so can't compare. Pretty much any review would give the edge to the 15, but it costs considerably more and though small, is larger and heavier than the 14. I'll also say that I have the PL 25 and I find something very appealing about the IQ.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 20:03 UTC
In reply to:

Androole: Yikes. From the example above, it looks a bit like an "overcook it" filter.

It's funny, sometimes the scene you see is so vibrant that it seems like you can never capture it properly with a camera. But the rest of the time, everyone seems to want to transform every mundane scene they shoot into a dramatic symphony of light and colour...

The key to truly great photos is truly great light, and finding that takes more time, persistence, and luck than many of us can afford. So enter Macphun, I guess.

Seems to me most of these kinds of programs have presets that are overcooked. And it seems most folks prefer images that are vivid and punchy rather than realistic. And of course depending on the developers, the default development of raw files is pretty flat and dull. All of the filters in Luminar have individual opacity sliders as do the layers. And of course, this can be run as a filter via PS. So you can be subtle. I agree completely about quality of the light. The same landscape can be meh, mediocre, or spectacular depending on the quality of the light.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 20:15 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Canon EOS 80D (251 comments in total)
In reply to:

OzarkAggie: I've processed some files from a D7100 and was envious of the DR, but it's hard to discount the value of the EF-S line of lenses. Cameras evolve with technology, and a year can make a difference, however we typically spend more on glass than bodies if we're truly serious about photography.

But the hype in this piece of rubbish is fully evident when the authors salivate over the 8 versus 7 fps. Really?

These guys don't even write good ad copy.

I think for the vast majority of photographers who would be using this class of cameras, the difference between 7 or 8 fps is moot. No doubt, there are some pretty specialized situations in which frame rates really matter. But I suspect folks doing that kind of work are using a different class of camera and/or video capture.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 21:25 UTC
On article Nikon D5600 review: making connectivity a snap? (369 comments in total)
In reply to:

samfan: I still like the DSLR format, even in this class. I prefer a OVF over EVF most of the time.

But I've always felt the 5x00 line is such an odd duck. Still has all of the disadvantages of the 3x00 line (only AF-S lenses support, weak viewfinder, limited controls) while the cost tends to be quite a bit higher.

And furthermore even these smallish DSLRs are still quite gigantic compared to the MILCs such as the Oly M10 or Sony A6x00. I know it's an advantage for some users but also quite a hard sell for most who are looking for a small ILC.

I think the D5x00 series really needs to improve, almost to the level of the D7x00 series - at the very least add a 2nd roller and some extra bits. The times of the D40 are long gone.

And D3x00 on the other hand really needs to get smaller and probably lose the mirror. Yea, I'm not saying anything new, I know.

I am continually using the 2nd dial to control exposure compensation when in either aperture (most of the time) or shutter priority. If using strobes I'm usually in full manual. The ability to do that with a 2nd dial without mucking around with anything that might require me to take my eyes away from the viewfinder is darn important to me. Heck, I'd like a 3rd dial dedicated to iso. We all have our own individual needs and wants, and sometimes it's just that we've not learned another way, but two control dials is an important ergonomic feature for me.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 23:11 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1582 comments in total)
In reply to:

ovlov: I find it interesting that Sony continues to keep the A-mount on life support. What's really needed is a revamped lens lineup. I left the A-mount for the EF-mount years ago partially because scrounging ebay for used Minolta lenses gets old. Some of the issues that required service visits to Laredo got old too.

All these years later Sony still doesn't seem to have a road map for the A-mount.

I wouldn't consider buying into the A-mount system at this point. I was surprised we saw another A mount body. Sony has some great tech and this is likely a terrific camera. But they just seem to veer one way, then another, then another. The APS-C bodies are very attractive and small, and light. But they have seemed to have stopped developing lenses for APS-C sensors that compliment those bodies. Sure, EF lenses work, but they don't compliment the bodies.

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2017 at 16:33 UTC
In reply to:

TheDarmok74: I wish dpr would show more consistency when talking about sensors.
In the review of the Panasonic GM5, a camewra that's over 2 years old, they said "sensor is starting to look dated". 2 years on in the G80 review that doesn't bother them- 2 years on!
As for the 20 MP sensor used here: in this article it's a nice step up, in another review they said the difference is almost indiscernable.
So what is it now? Sesnor resolution coupled with aspect ratio IS an issue in micro 43.
Personally I don't care that much and am happily awaiting my E-M10 Mk II arriving tomorrow, but a review site should make its mind up, I think.

I think the DPR reviews have really slipped. They are not consistent. The raw files they posted for the E-M1ii were processed using a beta version of ACR. I've seen them post in one of their comment sections that the final results would likely be different. Yet, folks are evaluating the camera based on the beta processed files. They also use different lenses and don't really identify the lenses they use. Lenses are at least as important in evaluating IQ as sensors.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 12:01 UTC
On article Bang for the Buck: Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Review (719 comments in total)
In reply to:

1ManMusic: Please help me. I shoot a lot of macro. I was shooting with the Panasonic Lumix ZS40, but it died after a little more than a year. Since I forgot to buy the extended warranty, I now have a worthless piece of Panasonic gear.

By the way, is buying the extended warranty recommended here?

I always assumed that the transition to digital interchangeable would be prohibitive in cost. However, another photographer convinced me to THINK before I bought another point-and-shoot. I was finally convinced when he told me that mirrorless rigs are more readily adaptable to my Minolta MD/MC system lenses than DSLR.

After investigating and reading and comparing, I landed on a great deal for a refurbished E-M10. I do not get anywhere near the sharp images I got from the Lumix P&S. Everything on close magnification is fuzzy no matter what I do. This is with the kit 14-42 and adapted MD/MC lenses. I am returning it for a refund.

Is this species or specimen? Does the Mark II do any better?

I see you've not had any comments. You may get more help if you post on the micro 4/3 forum. I have an E-M10 and it's certainly capable of producing very sharp images. You either have a faulty camera, a faulty lens, or it's user error. Post some pics with settings and such in the micro 43 forum and you might get more help.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2016 at 22:18 UTC
On article Nikon D3400 Review (403 comments in total)

Seems like an excellent sensor wrapped in a very disappointing, and downgraded, body. What are they thinking removing the sensor cleaning mechanism? Perhaps they think anyone buying this will only use the kit lens. A kit lens that doesn't even come close to exploiting the sensor. The 3300 seems like a better overall package.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2016 at 13:27 UTC as 63rd comment | 4 replies

Should make a nice 4 x 6 print if you keep the iso low.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2016 at 23:02 UTC as 50th comment | 1 reply
Total: 55, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »