Dan

Lives in United States USA, MO, United States
Joined on Oct 1, 2001

Comments

Total: 239, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Is it necessary to use an ND filter to protect a video camera (Sony FDR-AX100) if I want to record the eclipse? I don't really care about the before and after, but I want to capture the moment of totality, so in order to do that, I would need to have my camera pointed at the sun for a few minutes, and I don't want to damage it. It does have a built-in 3-stop ND filter, so I'm wondering if I need to add another filter to protect the sensor.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 04:02 UTC as 9th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Stefan Sobol: All you knuckleheads, put the phones and cameras down and savor the experience. It is unlikely that any given person who sees the Aug '17 eclipse will ever see a total eclipse again. Don't waste it by spending the time fiddling with a camera to get that one shot you know will put you at the top of all the other eclipse photos (ain't goin' to happen).

Don't even think of taking a selfie!

Just forget the camera, relax, and take it all in. You're probably not going to ever see anything like it again in your life time.

If that's how YOU want to enjoy it, that fine. But I will enjoy it by bringing 4 video cameras and my DSLR.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 03:57 UTC
In reply to:

stratplaya: A friend asked if she could watch the eclipse with her smartphone. I told her it would be better and safer to just buy some solar glasses. You wouldn't see anything but a very bright light on the phone's screen until about 60% plus coverage.

But that got me thinking, can a smartphone sensor be damaged if it's pointed while active at the sun?

Not according to Apple. http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article166443237.html

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 03:54 UTC
On article All about that lens: Sony Cyber-shot RX10 III review (480 comments in total)
In reply to:

DickBas: Don't believe any of the negative comments from the trolls who don't even have the RX-10 MK3! They don't know what they are talking about!
I am a Canon Pro and have $30k worth of pro Canon gear.
I purchased a Mk3 two weeks ago because in my advancing years in have difficulty in holding up a 6 lb 1Dx with a 9 lb 200-400 F4 L IS.
I have been absolutely blown away by the capabilities and quality of the MK 3! The detail and resolution is on a par with my much more expensive equipment, and at a much lighter weight!
The Zeiss lens is super sharp!!
I'll post some shots soon.

When people claim they have $xx,xxx in gear and they say things like this about a bridge camera, it makes me wonder if they're using their "pro" gear to its fullest extent.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 07:37 UTC
On article All about that lens: Sony Cyber-shot RX10 III review (480 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tactical Falcon: The biggest thing is POU, who really wants this camera for $1500.00 up front? Someone who doesn't want lenses to think about. Wants 4K video. A good build. It is to me all in one, and ready to go. Optimized? Nope. Quality, and ready to go? Yep. It will not be the right one for everyone. For me, I just can't make that financial leap up front. Over time, I may spend more. But for now, a body I want. And choice lenses are a better way for me. Video is not that critical for me. Purpose of Use is POU by the way.

Among many things, the D500 has vastly improved AF and buffering. This can significantly increase one's hit rate. It also has 4K video and digital image stabilization.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 07:28 UTC
On article All about that lens: Sony Cyber-shot RX10 III review (480 comments in total)
In reply to:

luxborealis: Having now used the RX10iii for 10 days in Iceland, right out of the box with almost no time to learn it AND having used the Panasonic FZ1000 for almost 6 months (and a dedicated D800E shooter for 3 years now), there is no doubt, the RX10iii is a superior machine to the FZ1000 producing superior IQ across the board. Yes, the FZ1000 has better AF for sports, but I was still able to shoot whales and seabirds from a heaving boat. Anyone who is looking for a walk-around, travel-oriented camera will not be disappointed. The images from the 1" sensor are even sharper than the nearest FF equivalent: D8xx w/ AF-S Nikkor 28-300. The viewfinder with focus peaking and zebra highlights makes for very confident, quick, accurate set-up and shooting. And, let's face it, unless you are shooting professionally, the RX10iii produces book- and fine-print-quality photos up to at least 13x19" (Super A3) for 300ppi with room to stretch it to 17x25" (A2). It is definitely worth the premium over the FZ1000.

Comparing this with a D810? The difference in sharpness you see is just in software. Just turn up the sharpening in the 810 and I think you'll see it is far superior.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 07:23 UTC
On article All about that lens: Sony Cyber-shot RX10 III review (480 comments in total)
In reply to:

guachi: Me, when I first started reading the review: Wow, this is a great looking camera! Good specs, nice pics, and... OMG! Look at the price!

I guess quality isn't cheap, but..

I don't know about quality. I'd say it's convenience. That's the only reason to buy something like this. I'm only interested in it because I don't always feel like lugging around my DSLR, but I don't know if I can give up the quality a DSLR can offer.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 07:21 UTC
In reply to:

AngryCorgi: This is a great idea, and seems to perform fantastically. My only question: how much of a hit in light transmissivity do the added optics introduce? The answer can't be ZERO.

Well, it gives you an extra stop...so why does this matter?

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2016 at 17:41 UTC
On article Ultra-compact: Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II review (581 comments in total)
In reply to:

EvilTed: @Nowelly

It's useless as a street camera.
I tried one yesterday and the AF is too slow and sluggish and then there's the extreme high resolution that is none too forgiving of bad technique.

The result of my 1 hour test shooting F8 1/500s on the streets yesterday was ZERO sharp or in focus images.

If you favor the camping style of street photography (wait somewhere for someone to walk into your scene), this may be an acceptable camera, but for those of us who shoot one-handed and constantly on the move, it's just not going to cut it.

I was trying to show you how awesome its performance is based on controlled lab tests. Your experience goes against others', so either you're doing something wrong, or there's something wrong with your camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2016 at 04:17 UTC
On article Nikon D750 Review (2025 comments in total)
In reply to:

LukeLT63: I still do not understand why the manufacturers of cameras integrate Wi-Fi into their bodies and not the GPS which I think for most photographers (especially naturalists, landscaping, street and holiday) is much more useful ... .I find it hard to think that the Wi-Fi is more required than GPS ...... I hope will have their right motivation market ...

WiFi would be much more useful to me...if I used it. I have privacy concerns with GPS, so I would never use it.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2016 at 04:14 UTC
On article Nikon D750 Review (2025 comments in total)
In reply to:

alligator: "the ISO 200 image is slightly cleaner in darker tones than the ISO 100 shot"

Does this mean the image quality of an ISO 200 image is better than an ISO 100 image?

Does this really matter?

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2016 at 04:13 UTC
On article Nikon D750 Review (2025 comments in total)
In reply to:

Carl Sanders: Shame that it did not have 4K, huge difference!

I agree with Carl. If this camera had 4K, I would be much more likely to consider it. For now, I will wait, or get a Sony mirrorless. I already have an FDR-AX100 4K Handycam.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2016 at 04:09 UTC
On article Nikon D750 Review (2025 comments in total)
In reply to:

fadilrexhepi: I just purchased the D750 and I upgraded from D5200.
I am a beginner in photography but I believe I've done so well understanding and mastering the Exposure on my current D5200 so I shoot fully manual as the other modes confuse me more so I shoot fully on manual mode and I am producing really good shots with my Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art and Nikon 50mm F1.8.

I got my new D750 yesterday, and I'm seeing a bit trouble understanding this cameras settings (of course still going through the manual). But, for example, I would use same logic as in my D5200 to take a picture on manual mode, and for some reason I'm getting a different photo results so with same settings I get better photo on my D5200.
Is this normal?

Is "Auto ISO" enabled on either body? Why are you shooting full manual anyway? I've been shooting for 25+ years, and I my favorite mode is aperture priority. How do you determine the exposure by yourself? Anyway, what problems are you having?

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2016 at 04:07 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2165 comments in total)
In reply to:

JEROME NOLAS: As someone wrote here "with 16-50mm lens the IQ is degraded to smart phone quality..." What's the point of this camera? You don't drive Benz with cheap tires, do you? :(

It does not degrade it to smart phone quality. That is ludicrous. Besides, you buy this camera for its speed. Lets shoot an event with a smart phone vs the A6300 to see which one comes out with more usable shots.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2016 at 21:36 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2165 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aviator737: I heard that the rolling shutter is not good in this camera. How to get rid of this problem?

The best think you can do is to view video samples to determine if the output is acceptable. It is different with all cameras.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2016 at 21:35 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2165 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aviator737: How about the image stabilisation ? I want to use telephoto lens with this camera to make videos but I'm worried about the image stabilisation. What should I do to get the best results? Maybe another camera?

I'm surprised how rude so many are to this individual. If you don't want to answer their question, just move on. Have some social grace! To answer the question, choose a lens that has OSS (built-in stabilization).

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2016 at 21:33 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2165 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: IR claims the A6300 locks up for 22 seconds after a burst. Yet no mention of this by dpreview?

Or did I miss it in the review?

"buffer clearing is slow and the camera doesn't allow you to do anything while the camera is clearing the buffer. Clearing an 11.1fps burst of 21 RAW+JPEG files takes 22 seconds, which is quite slow. "

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a6300/sony-a6300A.HTM#overview_start

I would like to know if it locks up as well. The A6000 is a different camera. The new con for the A6300 is the early shutter penalty. The A6000 doesn't have this. I'd like to know how this would affect me.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2016 at 21:30 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2165 comments in total)
In reply to:

marcus_lang: In december I bought the predecessor, the a6000, due to "superb sensor performance compared to competition", as the salesman told me. How good the sensor maybe whatsoever: When I take indoor photos in program mode "P", the camera defaults to shutter speed 1/60 - this results in 100% blurred photos of my 1 year-old son. My 11 year-old olympus did not have this issue (although the sensor-performance was poor, undoubtedly). With appropriate settings I got better pictures from my old camera...

Have you tried using the sports setting?

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2016 at 21:26 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2165 comments in total)

You should add to the con list that it does not have Active Mode Steadyshot while shooting video. Sony has this on their Handycams and Cybershot models, and it makes the video so, so, so much smoother. This has been bothering me for years! Their VG models have it. Why can't these? This is such a huge deal to me that I have not been considering Sony mirrorless cameras because of this. They even left it out for the 4K mode on their RX10 III and RX10 II. When I found out about the III, I jumped to find out if they added Active Mode to 4K shooting, but nope. It must be a marketing decision, so if you add it to the con list, maybe they will reconsider.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2016 at 21:23 UTC as 51st comment | 1 reply
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2165 comments in total)
In reply to:

EwanMC: Don't wate your money on the Zeiss 16-70mm f/4 lens, it has been roundly panned by nearly every review I've ever read. I would use my 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC (OS)* HSM A-mount, with an adapter, instead. My example is an early type with OS, unfortunately Sigma later stopped including OS into their A-mount version of this lens

That won't help me when I want 70mm though.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2016 at 21:16 UTC
Total: 239, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »