ptox

Joined on Dec 18, 2011

Comments

Total: 254, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (654 comments in total)
In reply to:

Truebar: The size of this camera&lens combo is clearly entering the dslr territory, and there I say full frame. Therefore the sensor in that camera has to be much, much bigger, otherwise what's the point? I'm sure that this camera has all the funky and fab bells and whistles, but no commercial photographer would want to touch this because of its sensor size.

"but no commercial photographer would want to touch this because of its sensor size"

Factually incorrect. Many commercial photographers have publicly announced their use of MFT for at least some of their shoots.

None of them give a toss about the sensor's _size_ ... only its performance. And in that regard, MFT gives up very little to APSC .. or, indeed, to any 35mm imager, film or digital, before six to eight years ago.

(And god knows no good images were shot with 35mm cameras before then...)

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 17:35 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (654 comments in total)
In reply to:

feritol: beautiful & stylish camera.... but(pic no 7) what a damn little sensor.just sized equal to tester's nail!

Seriously? Your impression of the physical size of a sensor is utterly irrelevant -- you might as well be comparing pants bulges.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 17:33 UTC
In reply to:

FantasticMrFox: And it's getting more and more DSLR like with every iteration - seems like it has slowly dawned on DSLM manufacturers that people actually want to be able to hold a camera without getting cramps in their hands, and that requires a certain size and decent ergonomics.

So what was the point of mirrorless again?!

"So what was the point of mirrorless again?!"

Am I really still reading this kind of crap in 2016?

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 20:36 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

dotyman: Nice job Olympus. Lens looks awesome–sharper than my 50 1.2L across the frame with good bokeh. Now to pair it with the M1II...

Roland: because DoF is all that matters!

Come on...

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 20:01 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

Androole: The quality of these images is almost enough to silence the lure of FF...

You'd have to be a rank fanboy to deny that the output from this lens is seriously impressive. You can't even say "for a Micro Four Thirds lens."

"I thought MFT was supposed to be light and affordable?"

MFT was never supposed to be "light and affordable". It was designed to be a modern digital system whose format (sensor size) is the best all-around compromise for IQ and portability .. especially as overall sensor technology continues to improve.

Think about it: in absolute terms MFT's IQ already exceeds any 35mm format (film or digital) prior to about eight years ago. Now think of the vast reams of extremely valuable photos that were taken with that older equipment...

Absolute IQ is all that matters. And on that front, MFT delivers for the vast majority of users and uses.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 18:24 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: This almost has the DoF and light gathering ability of my $100 50 1.8! Keep plugging away Olympus.... maybe one day!

"Am I missing something?"

Yes: DoF is not the only measure of a lens.

Or don't you care about sharpness, correction, and bokeh quality?

Then you'd be in the minority of photographers... though possibly not of FF-obsessed DPR members. :-)

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 18:18 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: This almost has the DoF and light gathering ability of my $100 50 1.8! Keep plugging away Olympus.... maybe one day!

Not funny -- merely obtuse.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 17:47 UTC

"The new TruePic VIII Image Processor will effectively suppress blur due to subject movement, making it possible to utilize High Res Shot Mode in a wide variety of shooting conditions, such as gently-blowing grass, tree leaves, or ocean waves."

That sounds interesting. Wonder how well it'll work...

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 17:35 UTC as 135th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

ArnoBrinkman: I really like it, get rid of those big Full frame heavy sh*t

abortabort: cameras require lenses, too -- you may have noticed them attached to the front of the bodies. Things with glass in them? You know.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 17:28 UTC
In reply to:

noflashplease: Wow, 18 FPS with AF-C or 60 FPS with AF-S? Impressive, unless you forget about that dinky 1/4 frame sensor. Big deal. The world has moved on to full frame and Olympus is stuck with the same FourThirds sensor dimensions. Sure, it's the convergence between still photography and video, but I could really care less about any 2x crop body, no matter how fast the frame rates are?

Olympus needed to bring out a full frame mirrorless body at Photokina, but instead we have yet another boring MicroFourThirds body, albeit a very expensive one. They're pushing a professional body in an amateur format. Sad, Olympus, very sad. At least now that the EM-1 II has premiered, Olympus can reassign the engineers back to the profit generating colonoscopy business.

Posts like yours are ridiculous -- as though the only important measures of image quality are relative, i.e. between formats.

Nevermind that modern MFT cameras produce sharper, higher-DR images than any 35mm film ever and any 35mm digital prior to eight or so years ago... and that this output is more than good enough in absolute terms for a significant majority of the photo-taking public...

Yours is a joke of a position. MFT quality is more than good enough in absolute terms for a huge number of people & photographic situations... relative quality is completely unimportant.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 17:26 UTC
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: ...And, in order to accomplish those things, we had to leave those tiny 4/3 sensors behind.

Don't be tiresome.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 17:04 UTC
On article This film camera is 100% 3D-printed, including the lens (136 comments in total)
In reply to:

RobbertJan: Very impressive and intriguing, I would say. This is obviously not about image quality, but about showing potential for doing things very differently, in this case innovating camera production. As a first step this is very admirable and to be applauded.

What! Aren't you forgetting the headache-inducing image quality, the limited practical usage, and the fact that working 35mm SLRs with lens are a dime a dozen on ebay?

Like most other fun and interesting projects done purely for personal enjoyment, this really should never have been attempted!

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 21:29 UTC
On article This film camera is 100% 3D-printed, including the lens (136 comments in total)
In reply to:

CopCarSS: Meyer-Optik is reportedly getting a Kickstarter campaign together to sell these lenses for $2200 a piece.

HA HA HA KICKSTARTER JOKE GOOD ONE

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 21:27 UTC
On article This film camera is 100% 3D-printed, including the lens (136 comments in total)
In reply to:

cosinaphile: it is a complete failure as far as i can see .... he should have committed to further development especially in the matter of the lens

Considering it made the front page of dpreview, I'd hardly consider this a "failure".

Anyway .. where's your sense of fun ?

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 21:26 UTC
On article This film camera is 100% 3D-printed, including the lens (136 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joe Ogiba: Working 35mm SLRs with lens are a dime a dozen on ebay so this was a waste of time and money IMHO. 3D printed parts that are hard to find is better use of it.

I really don't get the point or sentiment behind replies like this.

Takes all kinds, I guess.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 21:24 UTC
On article This film camera is 100% 3D-printed, including the lens (136 comments in total)
In reply to:

Steve in GA: 3D printing has the potential to completely change how we get things. Instead of having goods manufactured in one place, and then shipped to you or to a store, you will order something and it will be 3D printed at a location near you.

Someday.

But, cameras are not there, yet.

villagranvicent: so, according to you, printing a cellphone case is "amazing", but this printed camera and lens is "Completely waste of time, resources (and internet space)" ?

That's... weird.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 21:21 UTC

My first digital was an Apple QuickTake 100! Woo!

It sucked. I used it for about six months after the digital photo ID contract I had got it for was done, then went back to film.

The first digital I _liked_ was the Canon S10, purchased in '99. I got it on the strength of the DPR review: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons10

I had it for three years, then upgraded to the S400. Ahh, memories...

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 17:56 UTC as 47th comment
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

JordanAT: Until it produces a view which is rectilinear and nearly free of wide angle distortion, it will remain a gimmick. To be immersive the viewing experience needs to be like turning your head. It's like 3D content - so much of it is exaggerated to make you say "woah, look at that 3D effect" instead of "wow, that looks like real life".

Huh? The view _is_ rectilinear.

And the visible wideangle distortion is entirely dependent on the zoom level; zoom in enough and there's no distortion at all.

(How would you project a wideangle view in a narrow viewport without distortion, anyway?)

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 16:29 UTC
In reply to:

racenviper: Ha Ha Ha, show me a picture with all of that. Please include the purchased cables and batteries to run all of that. It will be a rats nest of cables.

I have something similar target shooting on a 300 yard range.

It requires exactly one cable: a USB connection between the router and camera.

And the router has a rechargeable integrated battery.

All of which I learned within one minute of clicking on the link.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 18:01 UTC
On article Faster flagship: Hands-on with the Fujifilm X-T2 (121 comments in total)
In reply to:

Beckler8: I'd like to know how this compares to Sony a6300, esp. video wise. I don't care for the retro looks though - seems like with these two you have to choose between ridiculous ergonomics or random retro.

"It's like saying who cares what a car looks like, just drive it."

No, it's not like that.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 17:41 UTC
Total: 254, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »