RexTremendae

Joined on Sep 3, 2020

Comments

Total: 111, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon EOS R5 review (2962 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vignes: continues from previous...
I’m actually exploring Sony not for the argument as others are saying but for the lens options. Sony strategy is very interesting. The 3rd party Lens makers work with Sony to produce native integration i.e. not reverse engineering. I can see some great lens from Tamron and Sigma that I’m really interested with. It’s all about the lens folks. Rather than spending a great cost on lens development, Sony worked with other to close the gap. Sigma is producing many lenses for E mount. As a user, you’re not locked to a brand. The MC-11 adaptor works great with EF lens. The E mount system looks more flexible and future proof.
I feel, Somehow the EF release strategy is not going to work for RF. The competition is simply is much bigger now. Sony strategy is current with the current times… a collaborative approach. I see value in this.

The spirit of collaboration? Canon gets ripped off left and right by scam 3rd party companies. They put the effort in developing the system and maintaining a very high standard for decades. Now the parasites are setting upon them like a wave of unstoppable filth. The more you hurt Canon the more you hurt the camera industry that is a fact. The camera industry will go to **** if Canon falls.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2020 at 00:36 UTC
On article Canon EOS R5 review (2962 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kevin DiOssi: I think it's valuable information for readers to point out that the reduction of bit-depth on R5 RAW files using 12-bit electronic shutter is the same as competitors such as the Sony A9 and A9II, which share a very similar dynamic range. I can't confirm this, but I believe all continuous shooting modes on the A9 and A9II are 12-bit. They're also limited to 5fps and 10fps with their mechanical shutters, respectively. Those two cameras never exceed 11-stops of Photographic Dynamic Range at either 12-bit or 14-bit RAW and the R5 nearly hits 13-stops in 14-bit and performs strongly in 13-bit as well.

The A9 and R5 sit at around 10.4X-stops of PDR, not even a 1/3-stop less total dynamic range than the EOS R had.

This is characterized as a negative, but it's actually pretty incredible when combined with the 45mp sensor's readout speed.

Look at photons to photos, the R5 has 12 stops of PDR, not 10.4. Get your facts straight bro... https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20R5

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2020 at 20:51 UTC
On article Canon EOS R5 review (2962 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mr_Win: Looks like a great camera for photographers

It also has amazing video quality if you know what you are doing. Sadly a lot of people demand that everything be totally fool proof. I do lots of wild life video and rarely shoot longer than 5 minutes. Also ask a director how long their cuts are... They have lots of short cuts, they wouldn’t even notice the R5 overheats.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2020 at 04:12 UTC
On article Canon EOS R5 review (2962 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): A great camera, well done Canon. Although it’s not yet at a9II level the one spec that Canon has progressed significantly one is the e- shutter rolling shutter.

If only one could use Z glass on it...

Some people don’t have much experience or know-how as photographers which is why they have trouble understanding how to use a very fast lens. Kubrick used them in Hollywood movies and they were all manual. Point is, some people figure things out, others complain about eyelashes being in focus.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2020 at 02:32 UTC
On article Canon EOS R5 review (2962 comments in total)
In reply to:

Snapper2013: It's hilarious that the R5 scored the same score as Sony A7R IV.

@DarkShift... 20mm is perfect, the others are too close... LOL. When IBIS reaches a new level you’ll see what I mean. But then again Sony IBIS is not great so maybe they don’t care. They like software stabilization apparently. I guess everyone who uses gimbals like Hollywood have been wrong all this time.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2020 at 21:21 UTC
On article Canon EOS R5 review (2962 comments in total)

Been waiting 3 months for my camera. Wedding season is almost over so I missed the chance to use the new camera for most of that and I'm going on a big vacation to the Smoky Mountains in a week and I can only assume I won't have the camera for that either. Doesn't really matter how good it is if they don't make enough of them to get out to consumers.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2020 at 19:48 UTC as 174th comment | 4 replies
On article Canon EOS R5 review (2962 comments in total)
In reply to:

Funny Valentine: Also it should be noted some independent reviewers claim they're getting a higher keeper rate at 20 fps with the R6. It seems the R5 AF is a little less performant than the R6 because processor is under heavier load because of the 45 megapixels and heavier files.

That's not an advantage. Simply resize the R5 files to R6 size, done.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2020 at 19:29 UTC

What's really odd, is that when the iPhone 12 was announced, my iPhone 11 battery started losing charge faster... hmmm. I'm guessing I will have to pay the piper to keep my phone working properly. They probably don't even change the battery when you take it in, they just reset the planned obsolescence timer and the battery works normally for another 6 months.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2020 at 18:28 UTC as 17th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS R5 review (2962 comments in total)
In reply to:

TomCodyPleasedToMeetYa: To me, the studio shots from the R5, Z7, A7Riv, and S1R look pretty much identical - any one of those cameras will produce superb output and it's down to the user. Even high ISOs look pretty much identical. The only difference I perceive is to some of the skin tones, especially the black gentleman whose skin looks most realistic with the Nikon and Canons.

Studio shots like that are not a good basis for how a camera will perform in the wild. Everyone should know that by now. Also, they're using Lightroom for all these shots which puts Canon at a disadvantage.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2020 at 18:11 UTC

Wow! Is it possible they made this phone better than the last one?? That’s 12 model numbers in a row!! Wow! Each one is better than the last! Sooooo excited right now.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2020 at 03:09 UTC as 51st comment
On article Nikon Z 24-50mm F4-6.3 sample gallery (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

RexTremendae: Lot’s of apologists for this lens! $400 for a 24-50 that goes to f/6.3 seems like a lot. Canon is selling a 24-105 for the same money that goes to f/7.1 at 105mm, at 50mm it is a stop faster than this Nikon. Stopped down to the same aperture they’re probably the same image quality and the 24-105 gives you double the reach...

Compactness is not a feature. Physics makes that a reality for cameras.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2020 at 02:50 UTC
On article Nikon Z 24-50mm F4-6.3 sample gallery (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

RexTremendae: Lot’s of apologists for this lens! $400 for a 24-50 that goes to f/6.3 seems like a lot. Canon is selling a 24-105 for the same money that goes to f/7.1 at 105mm, at 50mm it is a stop faster than this Nikon. Stopped down to the same aperture they’re probably the same image quality and the 24-105 gives you double the reach...

Not going to disagree with that. But, the RF 24-105 STM is stabilized which is a nice touch for video shooters. As an amateur video lens it’s not the worst thing ever created. Compared to the L version though it’s basically a waste of money. I picked up the “old” EF 24-105 L mk II and it’s really quite good, and the IS seems better than the advertised 4 stops. The bonus is it can be used with a speed booster on the new C70 making it basically a stop brighter. Point is there are better ways to spend your money than these cheepo junkers.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2020 at 19:16 UTC
On article Nikon Z 24-50mm F4-6.3 sample gallery (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: That is a pretty sharp little lens. There's no reason bother with bulky, cumbersome, expensive primes and f/2.8 lenses anymore.

@scokill, work on developing a photographic memory and explaining things in detail. Then you can stand in a gallery and talk to people about the pictures you "took" using your mind... might make a funny art project actually.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2020 at 18:37 UTC
On article Nikon Z 24-50mm F4-6.3 sample gallery (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

And-roid: The noise for a full frame sensor with these so called incredible low noise sensor is poor. Overall the image quality is just average, typical 3:2 ratio images in facts when many would be far better framed in 4:3, of course there is no 4:3 ratio on this camera!

That's good to know Dan. I would love to show you a comparison between Canon DPP and Lightroom with high ISO EOS RP files... wow. Lightroom is a mess of colorless noise, while DPP renders an actual picture. It seems Canon has their own way of interpreting the RAW data from the camera while Lightroom is more "literal" and lacks the built in intelligence about how the data *should* look.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2020 at 18:35 UTC
On article Nikon Z 24-50mm F4-6.3 sample gallery (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

More MegaPixels: Like fPrime said. Thank you for making this a 24-70 instead of a lame 28-70 like another company did. If you want a mediocre system, start with a lame 28-70 lens.

That's true Dan, but let's be honest, that zoom/aperture range is like something from the 1970's. Not saying it's not a nice little lens but come on! Even the Canon RF 24-240mm, goes to f/6.3 @ 240mm. But hey if this lens floats your boat it floats your boat...

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2020 at 18:30 UTC
On article Nikon Z 24-50mm F4-6.3 sample gallery (200 comments in total)

Lot’s of apologists for this lens! $400 for a 24-50 that goes to f/6.3 seems like a lot. Canon is selling a 24-105 for the same money that goes to f/7.1 at 105mm, at 50mm it is a stop faster than this Nikon. Stopped down to the same aperture they’re probably the same image quality and the 24-105 gives you double the reach...

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2020 at 17:27 UTC as 34th comment | 7 replies
On article Nikon Z 24-50mm F4-6.3 sample gallery (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

And-roid: The noise for a full frame sensor with these so called incredible low noise sensor is poor. Overall the image quality is just average, typical 3:2 ratio images in facts when many would be far better framed in 4:3, of course there is no 4:3 ratio on this camera!

Lightroom is very noisy by default. Too bad Nikon doesn’t have their own processing software like Canon does.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2020 at 17:24 UTC
On article Nikon Z 24-50mm F4-6.3 sample gallery (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

More MegaPixels: Like fPrime said. Thank you for making this a 24-70 instead of a lame 28-70 like another company did. If you want a mediocre system, start with a lame 28-70 lens.

LOL 24-50 @ f/6.3.... At least Canon did a 24-105 in that aperture range... Nice lens but the specs are sad.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2020 at 17:17 UTC
In reply to:

wondrouslightdotcom: Today, trying to corral photography into a well defined, rigid definition is a lost battle. I am a fine art photographer. I do not aim for clients looking at my landscapes to conclude: “I recognize this place”, but: “This is so beautiful/peaceful/inspiring etc. that I want to buy it, hang it in my home and look at it every day”. I use every tool available to me to create images of that kind, beginning with a photograph but ending only where my inspiration takes me. I have selling traditional painters who are intrigued but my work and buy my prints. I would not call this artwork photographs but some sort of mixed media. I am clear about it with my patrons. Also, there is a very large imaging market where realistic photography is not required nor expected (advertising comes to mind). I agree that, for people aiming for photo realism, (Luminar) sky replacement can be considered inappropriate, but photography, which I love and have been doing for over 50 years, does not end there.

Hooray for you.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2020 at 06:12 UTC
In reply to:

CTMRIGuy: I wish Adobe would just stop adding new features for a bit and focus every resource they have on rewriting Lightroom from the ground up with modern, efficient code. A broken down Yugo doesn’t need a massive spoiler and new rims - it needs a new engine first and foremost.

Does anyone at Adobe even use Lightroom Classic? Surely they must be aware of how it runs....right?

The conspiracy theorist in me thinks the Adobe/Apple relationship extends to making software run bad on anything but a Mac Pro... after all "Mac is for creatives"...

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2020 at 04:21 UTC
Total: 111, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »