Bjorn_L

Bjorn_L

Lives in United States Seattle, WA, United States
Works as a IT Director / Engineer
Joined on Jul 29, 2009
About me:

Current Cameras:
Nikon d750 with a number of lenses.
As well as a Panasonic Gh3 and Sony RX10 which I use mostly for videos.
Previous Cameras:
A few Minolta film cameras (and 1 Film Canon). Several DSLRs including Nikon d90, d300, d700, d800, a Minolta 7d, Canon 500d (aka T1i), and a close to a dozen bridge and pocket cameras. My favorite was the Minolta 7i.

Comments

Total: 141, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article D500 owner formally accuses Nikon of false advertising (475 comments in total)

Nikon fan and current owner of several Nikon cameras and maybe a dozen Nikon lenses. I admire and may buy a d500. But I agree with the complaint. The d500 can hardly be said to have WiFi capability given the current hoops that need to be jumped through to get anything to happen. I say they should fix this via a firmware update so that it has the same functionality as other cameras which are accepted to have WiFi capabilities or they should have to advertise what connectivity capabilities the d500 actually has.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2016 at 18:55 UTC as 183rd comment | 3 replies
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 2: Full-Frame (285 comments in total)

Why was the d750 not included? It is just under $2000 (1996.95 at both amazon and b&H). Clearly including multiple cameras from the same brand was not the issue (3 Sony's).

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 19:06 UTC as 48th comment | 5 replies
On article Video: Meet the Nikon D500 (187 comments in total)
In reply to:

tripler6: Call me crazy but I think the target market for a D500 already owns an FX body, so I'm not too sure pro-DX lenses are what's called for. I'm just using lenses that have crossover potential like the 70-200, 35s, etc.

@old cameras: The Tamron 150-600 is do-able hand-held. It is much easier to handle than its competition.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 16:39 UTC
On article Video: Meet the Nikon D500 (187 comments in total)
In reply to:

DukeCC: Big news for Sigma, with big sales of their f/1.8 ART DX zooms on the horizon thanks to the D500.

Since you are talking the d500 I have to assume you are talking at least a little sports. For sports the lack of IS is not a big deal as shutter speed will take care of that.
Similarly if you are buying the 50-100 for portraiture, then you are buying it for DOF control. In that scenario you will have plenty of shutter speed available as well since portraiture involves good, controlled light.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 16:37 UTC
In reply to:

Beckler8: This is so expensive I'd probly rather have the a6300 w/lens because I rarely need 24x zoom, so it's more of a specialist's camera. But more importantly the video quality I see on RX10ii youtube samples has none of the a7 type wide dynamic range look to it, whereas 6300 has more of it. It looks a bit too much like cheap home video.

I don't want this one, but there is a market for it.
For example, Have kids in sports? The only weather sealed options are the rx10 mk1, 2 & 3. The only other options are a gh3/gh4 w/ 35-100 f/2.8 lens, a better setup but no where near as flexible & changing lenses in the rain can be a challenge & if you do your video won't contain the full game.
The mk2 was interesting, but not worth the upgrade from the mk1 as I didn't need 4k & video/image quality was largely unchanged. The mk3 on the other hand takes me back to the fz1000 which I didn't like enough to keep. If I had to buy a new one today, I'd look at the mk1 & mk2 for the constant f/2.8 lens
I own a gh3 and a rx10 mk1, neither will replace my Nikon DSLRs, but neither will my DSLRs replace my more video capable devices. I don't see the a6300 as as interesting as any of them. Awkward ergonomics. Video not up to gh*, it can't replace the rx10 due to lens limitations, and not a match for a DSLR either (Ergo, controls & lenses)

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 16:50 UTC
In reply to:

Konstantin Mineev: I compared my Canon 6D and Sony A7 with Nikon D5 on ISO 6400.
ISO 6400 is more then sufficient to take portraits with artificial light
(wedding & birthday parties, portraits against the backdrop of the city at night, etc.) with a sufficient exposure time and apperture 1.4-2.8.

and I'm sure that Canon 6D can be used and compared without any problems with D5. I do not see the real benefits from Nikon in this ISO 6400 mode.

Sony A7 has visible ISO problems there, but not critical, I noticed more noise in the images when I bought it, I'm using it with manul lenses, because of EVF for coolest bokeh.

Nikon D5 is a topest cool camera, but I do not see in it an urgent need.

I find that I go well above 6400 all the time now that I have a camera capable of good results there. Before I would most typically not take the shot or make some compromise (insufficient shutter speed or perhaps an overly thin DOF and occasionally a very noisy shot and spend hours trying to clean it up).
I've no use for a d5 personally as the d750 meets my high ISO needs. But compare the various areas in the sample picture (use RAW) to the d5, 6d, etc and you will see a consistently lower level of noise.
It seems to have a full stop or maybe a bit more of an advantage over the 6d and at least 1/2 stop better than my d750. I also think the Sony a7s II does better than at high ISO noise but drops more DR at the higher levels.
The 3.3m level though seems hard to understand except as a marketing move. Too noisy and too little DR to produce useable shots IMHO.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2016 at 18:12 UTC
On article Here at last: Nikon announces D500 (1175 comments in total)

It's funny isn't it? You will whine and complain and pick it apart. You'll suggest strongly that it isn't as good as your d750. You'll state you'll see if the dxo reports are worth a hoot. But you already know you're gonna buy one.
2 grand is a steep price, so I'll wait a bit. Maybe by the time football season starts anew, that way I can pretend I was being prudent and doing my due diligence.
(yay)

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 02:09 UTC as 163rd comment

The image quality seems pretty good. I like the bokeh, the very flattering perspective too (from that FL as a long portrait lens). The lens looks like a real beast. It might balance a little better on Nikon or Canon full-frames with their larger bodies. A MF lens with that weight, bulk, and thin DOF really demands good support to give you a chance.

Two negatives jumped out at me one was the many of the photos seems a little soft and/or front focused. I suppose working with such a thin DOF must be very challenging. I've used 85 1.4 and 200 f/2.8 and both can be a challenge to nail focus with. This being a manual focus lens no doubt makes this even more of an issue.

The other was cold tone and seemingly poor DR of most of the images. Part of that would be the lighting used and/or what natural light is like here in the PNW. This was more of a style thing, and not lens related.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2015 at 03:10 UTC as 32nd comment

The negative reviews are not (for the most part) "bad people" or "bad comments". They are frank and honest.
I love kids. I love the photos my kids take (3 boys, which have all had their own cameras since they were very young). But their photos like the cute tykes above are generally bad photos which are precious to me as their father. However I am not exploitative nor manipulative to pretend stuff worthy of a refrigerator showcase is worthy of being mentioned on a site like this or in a book, etc.
What the father is doing is, in my opinion, not right. But then youtube is full of equally exploitative people just like him who are also trying to trade their kids "cuteness" for money.
Let kids be kids. If you are going to post about a photographer, post about one who is noteworthy for their skill not their age.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2015 at 22:45 UTC as 24th comment | 11 replies

This is a complete bone-head move. But one I suspect can (and likely will) eventually be addressed with a firmware update.

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2015 at 18:51 UTC as 254th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Tieu Ngao: I think the price of 200-500 is attractive, and that's probably because of the competition from the Tamron and Sigma C 150-600.
I hope that the new Nikon will optically outperform the Tamron and Sigma to justify the $400 and 300gr difference.

I'd say most of the cost is based on the different optics and different focus systems. Cost and weight are not reliable indicators of sealed not sealed.
And as I posted directly above:
As for moisture vs weather sealing.... water penetrates faster than dust and rain is generally comprised of water. So not sure what their claims do or do not mean.
But, I'm not making those claims only passing them along. I contacted Tamron for clarification. They've been timely in past replies. If they are again, I'll pass along their comments.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 03:31 UTC
In reply to:

Bjorn_L: Disappointed that sealed remains the exception not the rule. Particularly the super-telephoto.
Adding weather sealing to most lenses would seem to be a low cost option and an easy way to add differentiation.
I'm looking forward to the review of the 24-70 VR. Very curious why it commands such a price premium over the excellent out going model and the very strong contender from Tamron.

As for moisture vs weather sealing.... water penetrates faster than dust and rain is generally comprised of water. So not sure what their claims do or do not mean.
But, I'm not making those claims only passing them along. I contacted Tamron for clarification. They've been timely in past replies. If they are again, I'll pass along their comments.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 03:26 UTC
In reply to:

Bjorn_L: Disappointed that sealed remains the exception not the rule. Particularly the super-telephoto.
Adding weather sealing to most lenses would seem to be a low cost option and an easy way to add differentiation.
I'm looking forward to the review of the 24-70 VR. Very curious why it commands such a price premium over the excellent out going model and the very strong contender from Tamron.

I don't think it adds much to the cost. Both Sigma and Tamron offer sealing on their 150-600 options. In the case of the Tamron, it costs less than the Nikon.
From the Tamron website:
Moisture-resistant construction
Moisture-resistant construction helps prevent moisture from penetrating the lens.
Also, I know from having spoken with Nikon about this, that they already include most of what it would take to seal a lens on every lens. For example some sort of penetration sealing on the buttons and the front element as well as a rear gasket.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 19:04 UTC
In reply to:

Tieu Ngao: I think the price of 200-500 is attractive, and that's probably because of the competition from the Tamron and Sigma C 150-600.
I hope that the new Nikon will optically outperform the Tamron and Sigma to justify the $400 and 300gr difference.

According to multiple reviews the Tamron is also weather sealed. for example:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-150-600mm-f-5-6.3-Di-VC-USD-Lens.aspx
From the Tamron website:
Moisture-resistant construction
Moisture-resistant construction helps prevent moisture from penetrating the lens.
So sounds to me as if it has sealing.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 18:13 UTC
In reply to:

Tieu Ngao: I think the price of 200-500 is attractive, and that's probably because of the competition from the Tamron and Sigma C 150-600.
I hope that the new Nikon will optically outperform the Tamron and Sigma to justify the $400 and 300gr difference.

For openers the Nikon is not sealed and Sigma and Tamron offer sealed units. It will have to really out perform them to be interesting to me, and even then I'll probably pass because I am out in the elements from time to time.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 17:11 UTC

Disappointed that sealed remains the exception not the rule. Particularly the super-telephoto.
Adding weather sealing to most lenses would seem to be a low cost option and an easy way to add differentiation.
I'm looking forward to the review of the 24-70 VR. Very curious why it commands such a price premium over the excellent out going model and the very strong contender from Tamron.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 17:09 UTC as 33rd comment | 6 replies
On article Nikon offers AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm F2.8-4E ED VR (334 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dennis Linden: No WR sealing, no sale. Why go through all this trouble and not put a little dust resistance in there.

@pkosewski
The Nikon 24-70 is just bullet proof. Nothing better on the market. It is very well sealed.
The Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 adds stabilization (VC) and is also sealed, I would trust the Nikon to stand up to more abuse but think either one would work for most users.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2015 at 18:57 UTC
On article Nikon offers AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm F2.8-4E ED VR (334 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dennis Linden: No WR sealing, no sale. Why go through all this trouble and not put a little dust resistance in there.

Dennis,
All current Nikon lenses have some sealing. I wrote to Nikon a while ago to ask about it and they said brief use in a light rain would not be a problem. The rear has a gasket, the buttons are sealed and the rest has 'some sealing' and while not sealed like their professional lenses offer some resistance to the elements.
If you cut through the marketing (and my potential mangling the quote a bit), you're left with this:
No real sealing, but some limited sealing is there. FWIW, I'm disappointed and surprised this is not sealed. It leaves room for Tokina, Sigma, Tamron to offer a major advantage to out-door buffs such as myself.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2015 at 16:59 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 offers 4K video (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I am not seeing a lot to dislike about this camera. They would sell a lot more of these if they advertised them more and also sold them in stores like Best Buy right from day one. As it stands right now Canon will sell many times as many T6s/T6i cameras as Panasonic will sell G7 cameras.

That is also despite the fact that the Canon cameras had a significant defect in a large portion of their initial shipments(Which they addresses quickly), the T6s only does 5 FPS vs. the 7 FPS for the G7, The G7 is cheaper, and the G7 does 4K @ 30 FPS video vs just 1080p @ 30 FPS for the Canon cameras.

Panasonic’s issue is not that they don’t make great cameras. There issue is that not enough people even know they make cameras.

Steelhead3,
4k is not talking over. It remains a bit-player. In new TV sales it is less than 5%, much less. Also even if this doubles every year (from the current ~1-2%) how long before it becomes a significant player in the marketshare? How many years after that do you think 4k content will be available? No matter how you choose to do the math, it a decade or more.
Then there is the 4k content from the camera. I am quite sure most of those who say 4k is the future have never bothered to process 4k video files or paid any attention to the storage requirements. Storage is more than 4x. Processing time (on a typical PC) is close to 10x as the PC will be overwhelmed by the data size. Then there is the question of what will you use to play the darn thing. Oh, well we'll just make another 1080p version of the file too. You think a family videographer wants to add a 6TB disk per year, and spend multiple days on every single file?

Link | Posted on May 18, 2015 at 15:44 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II (534 comments in total)

What a fantastic sounding, innovative camera. I love the use of pixel shift to get a foveon image quality and reduction in high ISO noise. I also think the GPS function to reduce/eliminate star trails is also very clever.
I don't see the elimination of popup flash as a bad thing. Those things are just red-eye inducing, shadow ruining things as far as I'm concerned. They should develop a low cost flash-controller similar to the Nikon SU800 (which is not cheap). This would offset the loss of a built in command mode and reduce the need for a 2-flash minimum to have off camera flash.
I can't remember the last time I used the on board flash on a camera.... I "think" I did it once this past year when the batteries in my external flash died... I made a crude paper reflector/diffuser to reduce the nasties a built in adds to an image.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 12:24 UTC as 70th comment
Total: 141, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »