gatorowl

gatorowl

Lives in United States FL, United States
Joined on Oct 26, 2007

Comments

Total: 56, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Have Your Say: Best Zoom Lens of 2016 (50 comments in total)
In reply to:

mixem227: Tough choice as all here a great lens. I voted:

1. Sigma 50-100 --- fast, great performance available across many camera platforms. Yes please!
2. Sony 70-200 --- Sony *finally* gets a competitive telephoto zoom
3. Canon 16-35 --- Admittedly, I voted this one based on speculation. Its predecessor was wonderful so I have to assume Canon took this one up a notch.

Again, all these zooms are excellent and there is zero doubt they brought joy to their respective owners.

I hear it's pretty good, but only marginally better than contemporaries. From what I hear, the 11-24mm has IQ that is comparable in overlapping FLs. The Canon 16-35mm f/4 isn't far off either. If you need f/2.8, there's the Nikon 14-24mm and the Tamron 15-30mm (which adds VC to boot). Again, the Canon is probably better, but it's hardly night and day.

Now, tell me what zooms are close in IQ to the 50-100mm (hint: none of the 50-150 or 50-135mm lenses need apply). Hell, you have to look to primes for true IQ competition to this lens, and there aren't that many in this range I would take over the 50-100mm (under $1100, 85mm primes match or exceed the IQ, but few other primes need apply).

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2016 at 00:50 UTC
On article Have Your Say: Best Zoom Lens of 2016 (50 comments in total)
In reply to:

mixem227: Tough choice as all here a great lens. I voted:

1. Sigma 50-100 --- fast, great performance available across many camera platforms. Yes please!
2. Sony 70-200 --- Sony *finally* gets a competitive telephoto zoom
3. Canon 16-35 --- Admittedly, I voted this one based on speculation. Its predecessor was wonderful so I have to assume Canon took this one up a notch.

Again, all these zooms are excellent and there is zero doubt they brought joy to their respective owners.

Ah, I stand corrected. I didn't realize the poll was about "best engineering accomplishment." Silly me, I voted based on best IQ.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2016 at 15:27 UTC
On article Have Your Say: Best Zoom Lens of 2016 (50 comments in total)
In reply to:

mixem227: Tough choice as all here a great lens. I voted:

1. Sigma 50-100 --- fast, great performance available across many camera platforms. Yes please!
2. Sony 70-200 --- Sony *finally* gets a competitive telephoto zoom
3. Canon 16-35 --- Admittedly, I voted this one based on speculation. Its predecessor was wonderful so I have to assume Canon took this one up a notch.

Again, all these zooms are excellent and there is zero doubt they brought joy to their respective owners.

"[the Canon UWA] is the greatest...because it's ...in the PJ form-factor...". Really, you voted for it because of...it's shape, and you dismiss the Sigma because it's just a 2x zoom? Hmm, we obviously do not share the same values in evaluating lenses.

the above just shows that there are people voting and expressing opinions about lenses they have never used and focusing on attributes that are of primary importance only to photographers who probably don't/can't appreciate what the unique 50-100mm brings to the table.

The 50-100mm is a very special zoom. It is not only sharp, but color, contrast, and bokeh are at extremely high levels as well. In essence, it is the most prime-like zoom in terms of picture rendering that I have ever used. Yes, it's not perfect, and sure it may not be the first choice for a PJ. But having high-quality prime-like quality from 50mm to 100mm, with all the focal lengths in between (including 58, 70, and 85mm), makes this zoom very special indeed.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2016 at 18:46 UTC
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (204 comments in total)
In reply to:

QuarryCat: So bad - Sigma failed again.
We all want the best Performance for half the price.
But all Nikon-Users will have to pay for the 14-24 mm monster or stay with the 16-35 mm VR -
all Canon-Users will dream from the heavy-fat 11-24 mm L or live with the very good 4/16-35 mm L IS
all others still wait for a real good ultra-wideangle or use single focal lenses.
The Tamron 15-30 mm doesn't deliver, not for Pentax, nor for Canon or Nikon.
And the new Sigma stays disappointing for to much money.
Next chance is Nikon, to built a real good, not so large 4.0/14-24 mm.

"The Tamron 15-30 mm doesn't deliver, not for Pentax, nor for Canon or Nikon."

I was with you until you made this statement. Other than the lack of extreme width, the Tamron is a remarkable lens that provides unique capabilities. It is in the same range of sharpness as the OEM lenses, offers excellent f/2.8 performance, and VR.

No lens has it all--try shooting f/2.8 with the Canon or go wider than 16mm with the Canon 16-35 IS. So depending on your needs there are several reasonable options, and the Tamron might provide the most affordable mix combined with excellent IQ.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 15:35 UTC
On article Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Review (353 comments in total)

Curious, the lens seems to perform much better on the Nikon D7100 than on the Canon 7D. I'm not comparing magnitudes--I know that those cross-platform comparisons are a no-no--, rather the performance is qualitatively difference. The Canon sample does get much sharper when stopped down, and is very even from edge-to-edge. By contrast, the D7100 sample gets (much) sharper at every FL when stopped down to f/4, and the center is much sharper than the edges, again at f/4.

I noticed that the lens tested on the D7000 performed similarly to the 7D. So, was this an unusual lens? If so, LOL, how do I get one from that batch? Or is there another explanation? My fear is that there may be significant sample variation, and with my luck I'd get on on the left end of the distribution.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2016 at 21:49 UTC as 12th comment
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV added to studio scene comparison (363 comments in total)
In reply to:

vscd: Seems Canon is up on par again... in high ISO range it's way better than even the D810 or A7R2. Let's wait for the dynamic range test.

Definitely hyperbole. The Canon and Nikon are about even at ISO6400. Nikon, due to higher resolution and absent AA filter, is better below, and the Canon, due to better noise handling, is better above. However, the Sony is best at all ISO levels up to 25K (I don't care about higher because they all suck at those levels) due to higher resolution and better noise handling. Now, if only Sony--or Nikon--could put that sensor into a decent camera body, I'd seriously be tempted.

Disclosure: my current landscape camera is the D810.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2016 at 00:59 UTC
In reply to:

nnickn: When the 18-55 AF-P was released, there was speculation that it would only work on three bodies. Some people said that AF would not work at all on anything from the D7X00 line, while others said that VR was disabled. What's the truth to this, and does the new 70-300 suffer any issues on older bodies such as the D7100? The Nikon website notes that "1Because AF-P lenses incorporate a stepping motor, the number of compatible cameras is limited. Even for compatible cameras, firmware update may be required." What does this mean? All I can see is that a user would not be able to turn toggle VR on or off, since the menu option does not exist.

I've had the 18-55 AF-P for several months now (it's already available in non-US markets and on Ebay). It works fine with both my D7200 and D500.

You are correct that the VR seems to be always on. Other than that AF works fine and seems reasonably fast (no, I haven't conducted scientifically verifiable tests), and I am happy with the IQ for what it's worth. I purchased the lens to create a reasonably compact kit with my D7200. Since Nikon doesn't make any current pancake lenses, the collapsible AF-P is about as small as it gets. Although it's no substitute for my Sigma 35mm Art or Niikon 85mm 1.4G lenses, I'm satisfied with what it produces.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 17:38 UTC
In reply to:

User8303410032: I don't see a VR-Off button, is it permanent VR?

Released in the US in September, but the 18-55 AF-P lenses have been available in other parts of the world for months now. You can pick up one off of Ebay now for a little more than $100.

It is a nice lens. Other than the lack of controls, I'm impressed with its compact size--it's noticeably smaller than its Canon counterpart (I bought it specifically for its size)--and its IQ.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 14:05 UTC
In reply to:

User8303410032: I don't see a VR-Off button, is it permanent VR?

The VR version does not have an option to turn off the VR. There may be a way to disable it from a camera menu option, but I haven't searched for it. I picked up one of these lenses off of EBay a couple of months ago. It is a nice, compact, lens with decent to very good IQ on my D500.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2016 at 15:16 UTC
On article The price is right: Canon EOS Rebel T6 / 1300D Review (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thermidor: I wish Canon would come up with a successor to the 100D. It's a far better beginner's camera than a 1000D series. All they need to do is deepen the hand grip and update the sensor, and if they can give it Dual Pixel live view as well, it'd be outstanding.

Oops! I responded to the wrong thread. Oh well. Just ignore my previous response.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2016 at 18:04 UTC
On article The price is right: Canon EOS Rebel T6 / 1300D Review (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thermidor: I wish Canon would come up with a successor to the 100D. It's a far better beginner's camera than a 1000D series. All they need to do is deepen the hand grip and update the sensor, and if they can give it Dual Pixel live view as well, it'd be outstanding.

Yep, just one more thing to keep track of--or to remember to take--on an outing or trip.

Unless an add-on adds significant value over a built-in (e.g., an external flash that provides far more flexibility, control, and power), then it is always inferior to having that capability built into the camera's feature set.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2016 at 16:46 UTC
On article The price is right: Canon EOS Rebel T6 / 1300D Review (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

FRANCISQUAN: DPR by their own admission find the two and a half year old Nikon D3300 pretty well wins in all situations here.
But then the EOS 1300D has Wi-Fi which according to this DPR review makes it the best ????

Wow?

At Thanksgiving, I pulled out my DSLR. I attached the flash. However, after less than 20 shots, the flash died (I forgot to charge the batteries). I then cranked up the ISO, and felt that I'd have decent results to share in a day or two. Meanwhile, the youngsters were firing away with their smartphones which shots were immediately posted to a gallery that was shared with everyone present. The shots were good enough, and we all enjoyed the pictures in real time.

So, yes, Wi-Fi--because beginners might actually use the camera instead of their smart phones--makes an entry-level camera unequivocally better than one without.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2016 at 15:47 UTC
On article The price is right: Canon EOS Rebel T6 / 1300D Review (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

007peter: Can T6 do Video Tracking in Live View (like EOS-M). I'm thinking about buying one for vlog. Its a cheap DSLR, my only complain is the inclusion of old 18-55 IS instead of the newest 18-55mm STM lens. Had T6 comes with the 18-55 STM, It would have been a head & shoulder above Nikon.

Perhaps. Canon dominates Nikon in video, but not in stills. In many markets Nikon is selling the D3300 with its latest 18-55mm AF-P lens. This lens has a stepper motor and, I believe, comparable IQ to the 18-55 STM (I have the Nikon lens and will have the Canon STM next week for comparison testing). The new Nikon kit lens removes some (but not all) of Canon's entry-and-consumer-level video advantages.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2016 at 19:26 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1988 comments in total)
In reply to:

JerryShots: Looking at the "Real World Dynamic Range
Image comparison tool" just below the main structure of the Space Needle there is quite a bit of CA present in the Nikon image provided. Almost none in the SONY shot.
There are many places where the detail (phone wires, etc) is missing in the Nikon shot. Obviously the Nikon shot is less noisy but was it well focused? The CA and the lack of detail make it tough to judge.
Isn't CA produced by the lens? With 'one button correction' right there in ACR, what was the decision making process in leaving so much CA in place on these otherwise highly processed shots?
Is the Nikon shot some kind of Penalty Shot? Would have been interesting to see a more direct comparison provided as well, both bodies set to the same ISO. That way we could have potentially seen the advantage of this 'new feature' more directly and the new sensor vrs the one in the SONY.
Omitting the D800 (or D800E) from the DR comparison chart while including the D7100 makes little sense.

"The Nikon simply doesn't look well focused and with greater CA in the shot - What's left to compare in the shot?"

Uh, noise levels perhaps, which I think is the purpose of the particular test you are referring to.

The "lack of focus" you are seeing is the six megapixel advantage that the Sony has over the Nikon.

So, what do you prefer, the slightly sharper, higher resolution image or the cleaner, lower noise one?

Link | Posted on May 14, 2016 at 00:31 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1988 comments in total)
In reply to:

JerryShots: Looking at the "Real World Dynamic Range
Image comparison tool" just below the main structure of the Space Needle there is quite a bit of CA present in the Nikon image provided. Almost none in the SONY shot.
There are many places where the detail (phone wires, etc) is missing in the Nikon shot. Obviously the Nikon shot is less noisy but was it well focused? The CA and the lack of detail make it tough to judge.
Isn't CA produced by the lens? With 'one button correction' right there in ACR, what was the decision making process in leaving so much CA in place on these otherwise highly processed shots?
Is the Nikon shot some kind of Penalty Shot? Would have been interesting to see a more direct comparison provided as well, both bodies set to the same ISO. That way we could have potentially seen the advantage of this 'new feature' more directly and the new sensor vrs the one in the SONY.
Omitting the D800 (or D800E) from the DR comparison chart while including the D7100 makes little sense.

Really?

I see the CA, but quite a bit? Note, the Sony has CA as well, albeit less, but CA nonetheless. It also has more moire than the D810. This is a test shot. You don't clean up RAW shots when you're trying to see how much noise the camera produces.

As for the missing detail, I'm not seeing it. I'm not doubting you, it's just that both images have more than enough detail for my taste. I have no desire to develop eye strain trying to track down a missing line that is only a few pixels wide in the Sony shot. The Sony shot does appear sharper. Perhaps, the sharpness edge and greater detail might be due to the 42 MP relative to the Nikon's 36MP?

Link | Posted on May 13, 2016 at 23:09 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1988 comments in total)
In reply to:

zakaria: first of all thanks to the talented photographer that push me quickly to see photos than reading the review since the d 810 is at the end of its life cycle!!
hope dpr use the same photographer when reviewing the pentax k1.

I don't think anyone outside of Nikon has a clue where the D810 is in its life cycle. Yes, the D810 was released a mere two years after the release of the D800/e twins. However, two years is a very short interval for releasing professional-level cameras. The D800 twins were released four years after the D700.

I suspect that the early release was, like the D610, due to the early problems with the D800. Nikon, thinking that the model was perhaps poisoned by all the bad publicity rushed to replace them. Fortunately, unlike the D610, they had enough upgrades to justify a new release.

Accordingly, I wouldn't expect to see a D810 replacement for another 2-4 years.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2016 at 20:57 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1988 comments in total)
In reply to:

zakaria: first of all thanks to the talented photographer that push me quickly to see photos than reading the review since the d 810 is at the end of its life cycle!!
hope dpr use the same photographer when reviewing the pentax k1.

Why is it at the end of its life cycle when it is unequivocally the best all-around DSLR on the market today? The landscape photography that this camera is capable of doing at ISO 64 has me rethinking my shooting strategy. I had seriously considered giving up FF, but this review makes it clear that would be a mistake. I see the D810 as my goto camera for years to come.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2016 at 15:45 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1988 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gesture: "Autofocus hunts in low light more than expected, and accuracy is reduced
Non-central, non-cross-type AF points can hunt in challenging light
Low light, high ISO performance surpassed by peers
JPEGs not as sharp or detailed as some competitors"

Would knock it down to 84.

Your opinion is greatly appreciated.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2016 at 15:42 UTC
In reply to:

doctor digi: Never mind the text. What's most telling is the etching on the left, of the people looking at the painting.

The K1 pixel-shift beats everything including the 645Z.

It beats the D810 in a lot of places. Look at the paper money in the bottom center, especially the bottom part of the bill. The pixel shift shows much more detail in the fine lines many of which are smudged in the other photos.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2016 at 12:36 UTC
In reply to:

halfwaythere: Before this gets out of hand, the D5 looks better at ISO 25600 and up. If that matters to you and you are fine with the Nikon lens selection than by all means the Nikon might be a better choice.

OTOH the better low ISO, better video, better video AF of the Canon might swing some folks the other way.

Professionals from both camps are a bit spoiled these days.

Fair enough.

I never shoot jpg, and I understand most PJs only shoot jpg.

I took another look--this time using the jpg setting--and the D5 does indeed blow the D750 out of the water.

However, the call is much closer compared to the D4S and 1DMII. I think that the D5 is better at high ISO than both. But it isn't overwhelmingly better. The 1DMII image looks slightly softer at ISO512K, but I'm not detecting any less detail. And this is at 100%. Frankly, it strikes me a a matter of taste. Do you pefer the slightly softer Canon images to the more contrasty Nikon images albeit both provide the same amount of detail?

Clearly, the difference isn't such that I'd be willing to switch from Canon to Nikon. And if the lottery came through, this primarily Nikon shooter would likely opt for a 1DX MII over the D5 provided the AF is close.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2016 at 14:57 UTC
Total: 56, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »