Helen

Helen

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Joined on Aug 13, 2001

Comments

Total: 51, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Marty4650: Why?

Why on earth would anyone buy a $1700 two and a half pound beast with a one 1" sensor just to avoid ever having to change lenses?

This behemoth makes a six year old Nikon D5100 with a couple of kit lenses look like a size, weight, image quality and value champion.

Actually, isn't there quite a lot of magnesium alloy involved in the exterior of the RX10 Mark II? I don't know offhand if the Mark III and presumably therefore the Mark IV have more polycarbonate though.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 18:35 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: Why?

Why on earth would anyone buy a $1700 two and a half pound beast with a one 1" sensor just to avoid ever having to change lenses?

This behemoth makes a six year old Nikon D5100 with a couple of kit lenses look like a size, weight, image quality and value champion.

@matthew saville - a word of caution: fixed-lens extendible-zoom cameras unfortunately aren't always immune to dust on their sensors, as the extending lens barrel acts like a pump and cannot be airtight. It's relatively uncommon to get dust on the sensor but it can happen - and if it does, it's very difficult for the owner to deal with.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 16:26 UTC
In reply to:

Ross the Fidller: I think it's interesting the hot shoe now has the 4 TTL connection points that the upper (Mk II) models have for the purpose of using the FL-LM3 flash even though this has a pop-up flash in-built. It's a bit like the earlier OM-D's having the accessory port that could take the add-on EVF even though there was one built in.

The E-M10 Mark II has the extra contact to power the little FL-LM3 tilt/swivel flash as well - I've used it with mine.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2017 at 17:46 UTC
In reply to:

zeratulmrye: wow...a mirrorless camera without PDAF/DFD/DPAF in 2017

@Karroly,
Thanks - yes, I am aware of that, but it's not a good situation to be in when you come across this issue, particularly as different adjustments may be needed for different lenses - obviously the ability to do the adjustment oneself is much better, but limited to higher-range models (as is also the case with Nikon, of course). I sent back the 50mm as I wasn't that desperate to have one just yet and didn't want to go through the hassle of sending off a month-old camera at the time. I've since part-exchanged the 750D in any case, though I still have the 100D. Might eventually try another 50mm as you never know, another example might interact better with that body's particular focusing offset. Or not...

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2017 at 14:06 UTC
In reply to:

zeratulmrye: wow...a mirrorless camera without PDAF/DFD/DPAF in 2017

To Bambi24: AF microadjust is actually a very valuable feature for DSLRs - I had an unusable brand new EF-S 50mm f1.8 STM (never impacted or mishandled) which could not focus accurately - in different ways - on equally never mishandled EOS 750D (T6i) and EOS 100D (SL1) bodies, though both were fine with it using their CDAF live view, which is logical. I certainly wished those bodies had a microadjust feature.

I happen to have an EOS M5, one of Canon's current mirrorless models with dual pixel AF. In stills use, I'm afraid I find the AF less effective than Olympus, Panasonic, Sony or Fuji.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2017 at 12:19 UTC
In reply to:

OhWeh: Funny comments here, from the mFT bashers ;-)

This small and cheap camera has the same fps as the D850, but without BG.

It has an electronic shutter which works as first curtain whenever you want(!) and you can use the so called silent mode at any time. And the sensor will not need 1/6s for readout. But you get 1/16.000s

It has 4K 30fps video and the AF in video mode is usable

It has nice modes for the beginners only one click away, but you can use it also as serious photographer.

Guess what: it has a display you can tilt up and down! like the model before and the model before the model before!

It has a 5axis stabilization in the body.

True, it has only 16MP, but you know, that 16 MP means 15 inch x 11 inch at 300dpi.

......

This camera is another proof, which shows, how outdated the mirror technique is.

I don't like the feature downgrades (see Robin Wong's review at Ming Thein's site, and the review at Imaging Resource, both of which have pointed some of them out) but I always look to Canon for the worst illustration of mirrorless advantages (no silent shutter on any of them, for example).

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2017 at 12:00 UTC
In reply to:

strawbale: According to Robin Wong more a beginner's mFT than an upgrade for existing E-M10i/ii users, with some drawbacks (compared to mk1/2) like no external grip or wireless flash RC mode:
https://blog.mingthein.com/2017/08/31/review-2017-olympus-e-m10-mark-iii/

Not really - this is the first time Olympus have noticeably "dumbed down" the feature set of an affordable model AND taken away some valuable configuration settings, whereas Canon and some others have done so for quite a while. I don't mind Olympus adding a beginner-friendly interface for those users/occasions that would benefit, but I wish it hadn't been at the expense of long-established, generous specs. I suspect this is a response to the apparently unstoppable success of makers like Canon who trim features off without much complaint from their customers, and the constant complaining from a surprising number of more advanced users and reviewers who repeatedly point out that the Olympus menus (and hence feature set) are "too complicated". Not something I've ever felt, myself, but I appreciate that some do. I personally have always preferred to ignore an unwanted feature than risk its removal, as the former is far easier to do than it is to use an absent feature or control!

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2017 at 11:54 UTC
On article Hands-on with Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / EOS 200D (235 comments in total)

I see that the auto eye sensor by the OVF that turned off the LCD is gone - not too surprising I suppose, as the EOS 100D offered it when the next model up the range (from the 750D generation onwards) didn't. I note the lens mount is still the hybrid version (with black polycarbonate claws) which is slightly surprising, given that even the cheaper 1300D/T6 uses an all-metal mount, when the 1200D didn't).

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 08:37 UTC as 48th comment
On article CP+ 2017: Olympus interview: 'We chose to be bold' (352 comments in total)
In reply to:

LDunn1: decades ago I bought into the OM film system, an OM2n initially, then added an OM4. I have very fond memories of those camera. When they were stolen, around 1987, I switch to Canon Eos due to the intro of AF.

5 years or so ago, I bought an OM2n from ebay for nostalgia reasons. Then an OM4. The collection grew, & I now have a display cabinet full of old OM gear. I have a soft spot for them

Around the same time, I went to a camera show & had a 'play' with the then current Olympus DSLR, I can't recall what the model was (it was that memorable for me), I was very disappointed, it felt 'cheap' & the view finder (optical I think) seemed very small & cramped, like looking down a rectangular toilet roll tube. I put it down, made my excuses & moved on to the next stand.

I therefore found the comment in the interview 'interesting' that they said putting the cameras into the hands of Pros resulted in purchases.

It's more probably that I'll end up with a Sony full frame Mirrorless I think

LDunn1 - if you looked at an Olympus DSLR with a small optical viewfinder, this was probably a little more than 5 years ago (assuming it wasn't secondhand) - but it was probably one of their more affordable DSLRs and all OVFs at that end of the market were small, with the narrower format of Four Thirds making this a little more noticeable than for APS-C in some cases. You would probably be impressed today at the much larger and in some cases huge, high quality electronic viewfinders in the OM-D mirrorless cameras (and other makes too, of course), despite the cameras being smaller than the DSLRs were. It's a mistake to equate what you saw back then with the current models - they are very different, and much closer to the large viewfinder, small body and optics ethos of the OM system (which I also started with and have a small collection of) - hence the OM-D name.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 22:24 UTC
On article Nikon announces midrange D7500 DSLR (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

straylightrun: Good to see Nikon FINALLY catching up to Sony, with the tilt screen.

Actually, it WAS Sony - their A300 and A330 were launched in January 2008, with the D5000 in April 2009. Though Olympus did it in January 2006, for the record, with the E330.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 06:44 UTC
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Is this identical (optically) to the EF-M version?

As an eos-m owner my biggest question will be to use native or adapted.

Adapted gives me greater flexibility but a little bigger size. If optically they are identical I'd go with the adapted version.

I doubt it, since they are both for the APS-C format, but the EF-M is a 28mm f3.5 versus the EF-S 35mm f2.8 - guaranteed to make us look twelve with those "mirror image" specs though.

I just double-checked and they are more different than I expected - size, weight, number of elements, groups and even minimum focus all differ.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 08:46 UTC
In reply to:

HeyItsJoel: Instead of innovation, Apple is reduced to using gimmicks to drum up sales. I really miss Steve Jobs.

To Rob Sims: the price drop, possibly-improved performance and larger battery capacity are all good, but I somewhat regret the weight increase and thicker build (and probably, though not sure, new case/cover required, since they usually move the magnets when the opportunity arises). But what most bothers me is the loss of the fully-laminated, air-gapless and anti-reflective screen, which I found really useful in the Air 2.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 11:20 UTC
In reply to:

david25uk: Any idea what shutter mechanism is being used? i.e. something from the GM1 because it had no IBIS?

Yes, that's the same battery.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 20:49 UTC
In reply to:

david25uk: Any idea what shutter mechanism is being used? i.e. something from the GM1 because it had no IBIS?

Thanks for confirming it - that's the one I was thinking of (I should have mentioned the electronic shutter feature that it has always been paired with). Presumably the same 1/50 maximum flash sync?

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 20:40 UTC
In reply to:

david25uk: Any idea what shutter mechanism is being used? i.e. something from the GM1 because it had no IBIS?

Looks like the GM/GF7-8 shutter from the shutter speed specs - the tiny, quiet EFCS stepper motor one.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 19:08 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1648 comments in total)

I have one of these and I am quite surprised that it is praised for solid build in the conclusion and described in the specs as having a metal body - it is very obviously a rather flexible plastic/polycarbonate, which is disappointing considering its rather high price in the UK. It's definitely a nicer camera to use (for me) than the previous EOS M models, but I recognise the performance shortcomings mentioned such as the long blackouts and periodic slow responses. This might partially be linked with the total inability to set release priority in single shot AF mode - the camera has to achieve AF lock or it simply won't fire. Hopefully Canon might address some of the holes in spec and configurability with future firmware updates.

The conclusions and final rating seem a little forgiving considering the shortcomings raised, all of which I have experienced myself. I find it clearly the best EOS M so far, and quite a nice camera actually, but whether it is competitive with models from other manufacturers is debatable - more so at the elevated UK price.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2016 at 18:32 UTC as 168th comment
On article Nikon D5600 DSLR announced, though not in the US (297 comments in total)
In reply to:

Helen: I have a D5500 and it's a nice, compact DSLR with generally impressive image quality. I notice this in the announcement: "In addition, the touch Fn function so popular with the D5500 has been expanded to support the enabling and disabling of auto ISO sensitivity control, and operation with viewfinder shooting has also been improved."

Certainly the inaccessibility of the Auto ISO sensitivity control is currently odd on the D5500, as it's not very intuitive to get at. Would surely have been possible to fix it on the D5500 with a firmware update, though.

I wonder what the "operation with viewfinder shooting has been improved" refers to? It would be nice if it was a fix for the strangely under-illuminated data display in the viewfinder, though again, less useful if it is only for the new D5600, and perhaps another thing which could easily be fixed on the D5500 via an adjustment of the firmware.

True, Fuji are very generous with their firmware updates - something I very much appreciate. There is another company which has been behaving similarly, and that is Olympus. Rather like Fuji with the X-T1, the Olympus E-M1 is like a new camera compared with its original release specification, and as with Fuji, the models lower down the range may not have had quite as many updates lavished on them, but still some really rather valuable features have been added. Panasonic will occasionally add a worthwhile new feature, though not to the extent that Fuji and Olympus do.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2016 at 23:44 UTC
On article Nikon D5600 DSLR announced, though not in the US (297 comments in total)
In reply to:

Helen: I have a D5500 and it's a nice, compact DSLR with generally impressive image quality. I notice this in the announcement: "In addition, the touch Fn function so popular with the D5500 has been expanded to support the enabling and disabling of auto ISO sensitivity control, and operation with viewfinder shooting has also been improved."

Certainly the inaccessibility of the Auto ISO sensitivity control is currently odd on the D5500, as it's not very intuitive to get at. Would surely have been possible to fix it on the D5500 with a firmware update, though.

I wonder what the "operation with viewfinder shooting has been improved" refers to? It would be nice if it was a fix for the strangely under-illuminated data display in the viewfinder, though again, less useful if it is only for the new D5600, and perhaps another thing which could easily be fixed on the D5500 via an adjustment of the firmware.

It does, actually - it automatically alters in response to the ambient light of the scene above it (I am referring to the shooting data in green below the optical reflex finder's image). Unfortunately, in the D5500 (or is it only some of them, including mine?), the default settings for what it considers to be the appropriate display brightness seem to be unusually low - unless the display array isn't capable of running brighter than the brightest it can muster at present (that would be surprising, though, as practically any other similar model seems to).

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2016 at 16:24 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus C-3040 Zoom (121 comments in total)

I had this one's 2MP sibling, the C-2040z, as my first proper digital camera (it was my second digital after the nice but fixed-lens/no manual control Fuj MX1500). Later on I had the slightly later C-4000z, which was the only way to afford 4MP for me at the time, at the cost of some downgrades (no top LCD, back to an f2.8 lens like the original C-2000z). I really enjoyed using those cameras but don't have them any more as I passed them on to friends.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2016 at 13:46 UTC as 68th comment
On article Nikon D5600 DSLR announced, though not in the US (297 comments in total)

I have a D5500 and it's a nice, compact DSLR with generally impressive image quality. I notice this in the announcement: "In addition, the touch Fn function so popular with the D5500 has been expanded to support the enabling and disabling of auto ISO sensitivity control, and operation with viewfinder shooting has also been improved."

Certainly the inaccessibility of the Auto ISO sensitivity control is currently odd on the D5500, as it's not very intuitive to get at. Would surely have been possible to fix it on the D5500 with a firmware update, though.

I wonder what the "operation with viewfinder shooting has been improved" refers to? It would be nice if it was a fix for the strangely under-illuminated data display in the viewfinder, though again, less useful if it is only for the new D5600, and perhaps another thing which could easily be fixed on the D5500 via an adjustment of the firmware.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2016 at 13:18 UTC as 46th comment | 5 replies
Total: 51, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »