Hannu108

Hannu108

Lives in Netherlands Netherlands
Works as a Civil Engineer
Joined on Sep 2, 2011
About me:

Professional hobbyist photographer

Comments

Total: 50, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Osa25: Or you could just pick up an NX500 on closeout....and avoid this water-treading masquerading as innovation.

Having used extensively Sony's 16-50 pancake on Nex-F3, Fuji's 16-50 XC on X-A1 & X-M1 and Samsung's 16-50 on NX500 I can say that the Fujinon is the best of them. NX 16-50 is the runner-up being prone to flare and a bit softer. Sony's pancake is sharpish in the centre and lags behind in sharpness. All these lenses suffer from CA.

Just my 2¢s...

Cheers!

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 08:38 UTC

Smooooth bokeh!

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 18:48 UTC as 35th comment
On article Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sample Gallery (269 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nigel Tafferham: Sad but true, on the web a 35mm sensor shot looks no better than a 1/2.3" shot, but sometimes better than a cell-phone shot.

Those iphone prize winning pics, imagine if taken with a 'real' cam a m43, aps-c, 35mm, med format cam, then those pics would look great MUCH larger on a wall, even up close - but very likely NOT those cell-phone pics.

Of course cell-phone pics hearken back to the Old 110 days, pics only good enuf for a 3" x5" or so print.

The cam makers should hope that cell-phone pics can lead the user to 'real' cams some day soon !!

After getting a D600 after one of the best APS-C made and seeing the step up in Image quality it made me wonder how much more in image quality would a medium format camera give.

I have also a compact camera and a modern Android smartphone so I know what they can do. I'm quite sure cell phones will never reach full frame cams in IQ. The physical advantage of large sensors is just too big...

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 14:28 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1297 comments in total)

Looks really good. Well done, Fuji!

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 18:59 UTC as 127th comment

“ Mirrorless is 'probably' the future”

Battery technology has to improve a lot to achieve this...

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2016 at 12:06 UTC as 94th comment | 35 replies
On article Canon EOS 80D Field Test: Barney builds a boat (220 comments in total)

A great one!

Link | Posted on May 24, 2016 at 20:43 UTC as 111th comment
On article Beta: try out our new 'light' color scheme (722 comments in total)

I prefer the light color scheme. The white text on the black background stay on retina and really disturbs when checking the photos.

White is a bit too “light”. I think light grey would be maybe even better that white.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 05:15 UTC as 152nd comment

Fantastic low light performance!

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2016 at 12:07 UTC as 58th comment
On article CP+ 2016: Hands-on with new Sigma SD cameras and lenses (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

PKDanny: What size do SD Quattro H's sensor?

Here's some more info:

"The biggest differentiation between the Sigma sd Quattro and the sd Quattro H is the latter's 26.6 x 17.9mm APS-H sized sensor, providing a crop-factor of about 1.3x instead of the 23.5 x 15.5mm APS-C version's 1.5x crop factor."

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sigma-sd-quattro-h/sigma-sd-quattro-hA.HTM#

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 17:25 UTC
In reply to:

JurijTurnsek: Why bother producing the non-VR version? Does this mean that low range Dx bodies will get the lesser kit lens and the mid rangers will get the VR version?

lots of heat here...

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 12:36 UTC
In reply to:

JurijTurnsek: Why bother producing the non-VR version? Does this mean that low range Dx bodies will get the lesser kit lens and the mid rangers will get the VR version?

For video recording tripods etc. are often used and in these cases VR is not needed...

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 09:33 UTC

They doubt nobody ever landed on the Moon. Even a photo of a waving flag seems to be a fake.

“On the moon, there's no air to breathe, no breezes to make the flags planted there by the Apollo missions flutter”

http://www.space.com/18067-moon-atmosphere.html

Weird...

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2015 at 19:23 UTC as 60th comment | 13 replies
In reply to:

Laszlo13: Strange that there are different interpretations of the images. To me - detail and tonal range seems improved at base ISO (200) over EM5-II. It falls somewhere between the EM5-II and A6000. Both RAW and JPEG. At higher ISOs, i.e. 1600, the GX8 does show more color noise than the E-M5II, slightly, but with still greater detail. I always find Fuji to lack detail, both RAW and JPEG, in every single comparison, including this one. Yes it's got clean images, up the ISO scale, but show less detail and tonal range.

Anyway, to me, the sensor while improved is not a huge improvement at base ISO, and minimal at high ISO (if any).

As a Fuji X-M1 user I can tell that the loss of details in Fuji X cam's RAW files seen here on DPReview is due to the use of Adobe Camera RAW in conversion. ACR is just not good enough for it. I use Iridient Developer and it gives a much finer images and resolution.

Using ACR for all cameras fundamentally demonstrates ACR's capabilities, not that of cameras.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2015 at 05:03 UTC
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pictus: Simple and effective solution...
Works like the normal ACR!
http://thepluginsite.com/products/metaraw/

I have nothing against WIndows. I run Virtualbox occasionally. It's good enough for using for some specific and rare programs I can't find for OS X. Virtulization would just totally break my workflow of photo processing.

I use CS6 and Elements.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2015 at 06:19 UTC
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pictus: Simple and effective solution...
Works like the normal ACR!
http://thepluginsite.com/products/metaraw/

No Mac OS X support -- useless for me...

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 19:39 UTC
On article Nikon D7200 real-world samples gallery posted (145 comments in total)

ISO900 looks great. I wish there more ISO3200 shots and even couple of ISO6400 ones!

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2015 at 09:06 UTC as 34th comment
On photo DSC_0492-ISO3200- in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

ISO900 looks great. I wish there more ISO3200 shots and even couple of ISO6400 ones!

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2015 at 09:05 UTC as 1st comment
On a photo in the Nikon D7200 Real-world Samples sample gallery (1 comment in total)

ISO900 looks great. I wish there more ISO3200 shots and even couple of ISO6400 ones!

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2015 at 09:05 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

Meuh: Is this the same AF as in the k5ii with f2.8 center point and the ability to focus in low light?

yes, check a proper hands-on preview at imaging-resource.com

They do it professionally and don't fall into sarcastic comments like here at dpr ("no blinking lights").

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 16:49 UTC
On article Nikon D750 Review (2003 comments in total)
In reply to:

R Stacy: " ... downsides are limited buffer capacity, slow live view AF, and poor camera control from a smartphone."

And yet you give it a 90%........... wth ???

No bias here of course.

FWIW I sold my D7000 with a premium Nikon lens because the images frankly sucked along with Nikon's ridiculously complex menu system.

Having owned and used four different Nikon DSLRs and two Sony NEXs along with three Olympus Pens and one Panasonic G, Pentax DSLR and Fuji X cam I can say that Nikon's menu system is NOT complex. Each of the systems are different and require some learning. My experience is that Nikons one is in the better end of all mentioned above.

Cheers!

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2014 at 07:03 UTC
Total: 50, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »