D Cox

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Joined on Jan 17, 2011

Comments

Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Terry M: Wow! I was a newsstand buyer of Pop Photo for YEARS. After discovering back issues in my local library there was no question in my mind they were the preeminent source on photography and photographic equipment. Everything I bought was run by their reviews first. Of course that was a while back. Now I do most of my photography-related reading online, whether it's standalone photo websites or web-based corollaries to photography magazines. On that count, PopPhoto.com is a pretty awful site. Shutterbug's done a lot better job with their site, and of course, the British magazines are still out there. So long, PopPhoto.

The British Journal of Photography has done a very good job of re-inventing itself for the digital age. It is quite expensive, production standards are very high, and there is a strong web presence.

But it is about images and ideas rather than equipment. Equipment reviews are just a few pages at the back of the magazine.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2017 at 09:33 UTC
In reply to:

Betico: Modern Photography was the first to go, purchased by Popular Photography. I still remember their annual top cameras issue.

I think Modern was the better magazine. I learned a lot from those guys.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2017 at 09:25 UTC
In reply to:

bossnas: This is the best photographic news I've heard in a long time. What a great start to the year and 2017 has only just started. I've always loved looking at slides on a lightbox and never get tired of it. Meanwhile thousands of RAW files sit on hard-drives never being looked at. Use what you enjoy. I for one will be using this new Ektachrome film. Thanks, Kodak.

If you digitize your film, you can do plenty of post-production.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 11:02 UTC
In reply to:

iae aa eia: I think that I still have to see multilayer sensors a standard to believe digital has really surpassed analog. At low ISO, pictures taken with Sigma's Foveon sensor are unbeatable. Nothing compares to the depth produced by a multilayer sensor.

The Sigma cameras are more like film than most digital cameras. But as with film, your ISO options are limited.

Two of the best models are the DP3M (discontinued -- try eBay) and the DP0Q.
Both have excellent lenses.

Monochrome images from Sigma cameras are particularly good and can be very film-like.

Expect a steep learning curve with the raw processing.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 10:57 UTC
In reply to:

VisualFX: Ektachrome. The old film my dad had all turned pink/red. Only the Kodachrome still has its original colors. I say bring back KODACHROME!

Ektachrome before about 1964 tends to change colour, but you can correct this in a digitized image. After that time, there was formaldehyde in the final rinse to prevent fungi, and the colours in films I have from the late 60s appear unchanged.

Kodachrome keeps extremely well in the dark but fades badly if left in the light.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 10:09 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Re: Stopped down AF.

Does this vary by body/lens combination. For example, on an A7R ii does it open up some lenses for AF but not others, like this one?

In your review of the A7R ii you noted this as a criticism only for AF-C

I would open up by two stops, not to fully wide open.
If you are shooting at f/11, the image at f/1.8 is so different from the final photo that the viewfinder becomes quite misleading.

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2016 at 10:01 UTC
In reply to:

maridia: Two more interesting cameras from Sigma with great potential gimped AGAIN even before release due to Sigma's incomprehensible reliance on their SPP software and mostly incompatible proprietary raw file format. Ugh.

The best solution would be to export 16-bit TIF as well as JPG.

Not quite as recoverable as raw in case of overexposure, but still better than JPG.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 16:23 UTC
In reply to:

veritalens: Damned you SIGMA!!! I want to like this camera so much, but the selfish narrow-minded thought on the mount is killing this for me! WHY!?!?!?!?!??!

I won't buy one with a Canon, Nikon, Pentax, SA or any other SLR mount.

Any camera I buy has to be usable with all of these, and with other lenses (fully manual) that I have.

Still, they made the big steps forward of replacing the mirror with an EVF, putting some PDAF pixels on the sensor, and adding peaking. They are very near to offering a useful interchangeable-lens camera.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 16:20 UTC
In reply to:

Mike FL: Can DPR ask Sigma why the sensor is very poor in higher ISO?

"a one trick pony."

Yes, but the trick is producing superb still images in good light. That is quite useful.

They don't do video.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 16:12 UTC
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: Very interesting cameras, but why oh why did they use a DSLR flange distance? Had they used a shorter flange, AND produced Sigma, Canon, Nikon and Sony mount adapters, they would have sold a lot more cameras. Doubly so, if the mount adapters were AF capable.

Who wants to buy Sigma mount lenses, other than current Sigma owners?

"The majority I would say don't want to use adaptors"

The Adapted Lens forum here is pretty popular.

For me, the whole point of a mirrorless camera is being able to use a wide variety of lenses.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 16:05 UTC
In reply to:

Everlast66: Looks like for the design of the back panel they hired a washing machine designer ;p

Why is the finder in such an awkward position, and why make the grip shorter, when the main advantage of large bodies is a large grip.
They also made this gigantic body and didn't even put a flippable screen?

What you call a "macro ring" is the SA to E mount adapter that Sigma announced yesterday.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 16:02 UTC
On article Sony A3000 First Impressions Review (621 comments in total)
In reply to:

PORTRAIT: But,wait a sec., so the A3000 Sony is an "E" Mount system cam,same Nex series lenses right? Now what about "A" Mount ?? Can this cam carry the "A" mount?? or not? Or will Sony make another cam specific for "A" mount"..? I'm puzzled..

The camera shown above is marked Alpha 3000, not A3000.

One is a Greek letter, the other is a Latin letter.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 13:59 UTC
On article Sony A3000 First Impressions Review (621 comments in total)
In reply to:

plevyadophy: SILLY NAMING CONVENTION

Until now, Alpha stood for interchangeable lenses on the Alpha mount.

This is an Alpha branded camera with a NEX mount. Daft.

There is no upgrade path between this cam and the existing Alpha cams; if you buy this cam and decide to upgrade later to a bigger Alpha cam, you will then have to re-buy all your lenses.

If the idea was to produce a better handling camera for NEX, then they could easily have done that without changing the name to Alpha.

I don't even get the Alpha connection. What is it; just because it looks like an SLR?

Idiotic.

But that aside, it seems like a very good entry level camera at a stupidly good price; Christmas shopping in camera stores is gonna be interesting.

The mount is the A mount, not the Alpha mount. A for Autofocus, I believe.

All NEX cameras are Alpha cameras - they come from Sony's Alpha division.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 13:55 UTC
On article Interview - Phil Molyneux, President Sony Electronics (129 comments in total)
In reply to:

tesilab: I hope Mr Molyneux will read these comments. There is NO contradiction between touch screen operation and the EVF. Touch-shutter is a critical tool for a certain style of photography. It simultaneously establishes both when to shoot and where to focus. It is also criticalyl for discreet street photography.

But many of us require an EVF for all those occasions where the LCD simply won't work, when we either need a steadier hold on the camera, or the LCD is unreadable in bright sun.

I agree. It is absurd to think that a user buys an expensive camera for only one type of photography. Many people will want to use the EVF in some situations (for instance sports) and the touch screen in others (such as macro).

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2012 at 19:53 UTC
On article Just deployed: New dpreview.com forums system (699 comments in total)

The popup panels are quite annoying, and the popup EXIF data destroys the composition of any image you are looking at.

The larger size type is easier to read than the old. Blue on black is the worst possible colour combination for type, because of the low blue resolution of the eye.

Generally, it is all too jumpy and distracting, like a fairground.

I suggest you cut out all the features you are most proud of.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2012 at 07:47 UTC as 247th comment
On article Coming soon: Lens Reviews to return to dpreview.com (272 comments in total)

Will you be testing just one copy of each design, or a representative sample?

One of the biggest problems for a buyer is to know which lenses are consistently good and which vary from excellent to bad.

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2012 at 16:35 UTC as 117th comment | 1 reply
On article Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 review (373 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jens_G: I wish Sony would make one with a fixed, 35mm (even 40mm) equivalent fov lens, with even larger physical aperture. Imagine the IQ!

That would be practically the Sigma DP2M.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2012 at 13:13 UTC
On article Compositional Rules (120 comments in total)
In reply to:

ashwins: Very clear and informative article.

I agree. A good clear summary, especially for beginners.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2012 at 08:53 UTC
On article Compositional Rules (120 comments in total)
In reply to:

Camediadude: Thank you for the well illustrated article. I definitely appreciate the concepts of various "compositional aids" and arrangements, but it's just the act of calling them "rules" that has always irked me some! I mean not to minimise the effectiveness of it all, for I recognise that these "guidelines" (a name which I prefer!) have long been used to devastating effects by the giants of photography, for decades and by painter legends for centuries before that. Perhaps it is just semantics.. (Rules, at least those which do Not pertain to the keeping of some from harming others, often tend to rub me the wrong way! But that is personality-based mainly, from what I can tell.)

The photographic equivalent of the rules of grammar is not composition, but focussing, exposure and white balance.

If you want a literary equivalent of composition, it would be the pacing and contrast of scenes in a story. For example, the famous scene of the porter in Macbeth, where the comedy acts as a contrast to the prevailing darkness.

The "Rules of Composition" are starting points, not constraints like the rules of a sport.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2012 at 08:45 UTC
In reply to:

Elaka Farmor: Is the resoultion 46MP or 14.6MP?
Must be 14.6 because the final size is 4,800×3,200....hmmm.

It is 14.6MP, but a Bayer sensor that claims 15MP is really at best 5MP.

So if you are going to multiply one by three, you should multiply the other.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2012 at 16:08 UTC
Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »