wolfie

wolfie

Lives in New Zealand (Aotearoa) New Zealand (Aotearoa)
Works as a MS Excel VBA Programmer
Joined on Dec 1, 2003

Comments

Total: 151, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

I reckon the brutal truth for C and N is that once the mirrorless system gets its foot in the door it will be the tipping point for the downhill slide for the new DSLR sales.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2018 at 07:03 UTC as 176th comment | 2 replies
On article DPReview TV: Waterproof camera shootout 2018 (177 comments in total)

Time for manufacturers to try something new: the "Serious Rugged Camera" with at least a 1" sensor - not everyone wants a tiny cam with with a tiny sensor.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2018 at 04:46 UTC as 14th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

stratman1976: f/3.3? No RAW?? ☹️

I have an AW-1 and reckon Nikon should have done it as a fixed lens design and saved themselves a lot of grief over the lens mount sealing. Frankly think they should make a fast wide prime (like Seaside 2000) and offer some front-mounted adapters for wider or even telephoto options. Get rid of silly USB ports and just have one access point for card and battery.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2018 at 04:23 UTC
In reply to:

bloodycape: I agree with others asking for a 1in sensor, but that might bring the price up too much. I'd be happy with a ruggedized version of the LX7 or even a 1/2" sensor camera with 26-70mm f1.4 -f2.2 lens with 5-axis ois would be a setup up from this.

reckon there is a market for the 1" sensor that is for serious photographers who want better image quality and good control access without a clumsy housing, certainly wouldn't appeal to the current mass market demographic.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2018 at 04:11 UTC
In reply to:

AaronsLyfe: I would have been all over this if it would shoot RAW and have something about 10sec or longer on the exposure side.

Olympus TG5 does RAW.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2018 at 03:50 UTC

Really don't care but internal EVF , especially on another sad little 1/2.3 sensor camera - how long until somebody makes a "serious tough cam" with a 1" sensor?

Link | Posted on May 12, 2018 at 03:49 UTC as 26th comment | 4 replies

When a monkey pay taxes like humans then they should be allowed "human rights" - sort of like that 1776 ballyhoo ...

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2018 at 04:42 UTC as 16th comment | 1 reply
On article Buying Guide: The best cameras for landscapes (186 comments in total)

Totally ignores the high resolution mode available on mirrorless which can match or better a lot of DSLRs

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2017 at 22:49 UTC as 27th comment | 4 replies

Just keep that RF mechanism calibrated or you may not be be too happy where the hair thin focus actually occurs in your image ...

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2017 at 03:16 UTC as 6th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: It would be great if Sony puts this in their RX10 V or another 1 inch camera. Hopefully, the smaller sensor and a more conservative approach (4 shots only and less MPs) can actually produce more usable images with higher DR, colour depth, and not just very high resolution and huge files.

Better DR and colour accuracy and moire reduction are part of the benefits of pixel shift, as well as resolution and MP increase - at least with the Olympus function.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2017 at 00:13 UTC

The longer exposure works OK with water flow shots reduces or eliminates the cross-hatching artefacts that occur at faster shutter speeds.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2017 at 00:10 UTC as 49th comment
On article Leica Thambar-M 90mm F2.2 sample gallery (214 comments in total)

These all look as if OOF - so really to achieve this look use a regular "sharp" lens and unsharpen your image in post.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2017 at 17:48 UTC as 62nd comment | 1 reply

Just shoot the things on sight if they are in a forbidden zone ... see if the operator ever comes forward, I think not.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 11:29 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Mark Turney: Seems quite dysfunctional and extremely expensive for what you get. If you’re a pro underwater photographer, get a dedicated hard case to protect your very expensive gear. And if this is for beach trips and family outings, just use your water resistant phone or a P&S with $35 plastic waterproof cover.

You need to read intended usage - its about just as much about camera protection above water rather than underwater. And how many rigid housings give you ability to use virtually any lens to access the focus ring or zoom lens collar without charging hundreds extra?

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 02:33 UTC
In reply to:

JokingJ: It still seems like a bad deal for mirrorless users - screw in a baseplate to the tripod mount (instead of the normal eyepiece-mounted rear window) and use a cover that's build for a camera about an inch larger in a all directions? I'd hardly call that "optimized."

My OM-D swims inside the "mirrorless" version - tried it once and never again since.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 02:29 UTC
In reply to:

Okapi001: LOL Ewa-marine, DiCaPac and AquaPac have been making these for decades.

Not really the same as dicapc etc, if you actually have ever used one - many of those other designs do not let you freely use the focus or zoom collar on a lens -that alone is a HUGE issue that the outex does address by being a simple "bag".

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 02:27 UTC
In reply to:

FlipUpFlipDown: Flexible housing??
What about the water-pressure then exercised on the gear at more important water-depth??

This isnot for deep deeping - its about total camera protection above water or to shallow depths. Divers will have to pay for a rigid housing, simple!

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 02:24 UTC
In reply to:

Leo Pan: it is a condom for a camera

And condoms work ... so your point is?

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 02:22 UTC

Backers may receive a clear cover but then pay for the lens and rear fittings which would probably add another $100-150. I hope their quality control has improved on the fittings, the ones I got with mine had scratches as if were pre-used. Never got any reply from the company when I wrote to them.
Oh and also buy the harness- strap that goes around the camera as in the picture - that'll be another $50-75 ...

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 02:21 UTC as 4th comment

As a serious compact it is good specs, WR is an advantage, but I think it is 200-300 over priced compared to plenty of mirrorless options offering similar or better performance for similar size for less money. Be interesting to see how long it takes to drop under $1000.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 09:35 UTC as 163rd comment
Total: 151, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »