Revenant

Joined on Jul 29, 2011

Comments

Total: 2142, showing: 521 – 540
« First‹ Previous2526272829Next ›Last »
In reply to:

MrTaikitso: As a GX8 owner, the fact they left out a flippy forward screen (ideal for composing video), mic input, exp comp dial and a flip up EVF indicates that other than the slightly improved stabilization and shutter, GX8 is still the top end.

It clearly sits below the GX8 in the lineup. That it offers some improvements over the GX8 is simply because it's a newer model. It's nothing unusual that models leapfrog each other like that, the only way to avoid it would be to update the entire product line-up at the same time.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2016 at 10:38 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: Panasonic makes great cameras with minimal hype. Sony makes great cameras with paid off photo bloggers who take Sony sponsored trips to Miami.

Do you think Sony is the only camera manufacturer to arrange such press events?

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2016 at 10:31 UTC
In reply to:

Raist3d: So some questions- did they allow exposure compensation in manual mode with auto ISO?

And is this the same old m4/3rds sensor or a new 16MP sensor?

Sony announced a new 16MP 4/3" sensor at the same time as the 20MP sensor. I don't know how it differs from the one they introduced in the original E-M5 model, or from Panasonic's 16MP sensor, but I guess they improved something.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2016 at 10:27 UTC
In reply to:

TheDarmok74: Finally a camera with 5-axis IBIS and hopefully no shutter shock issues.
BUT the 16 MP sensor, as good as it may be, is now 4 years old. It would be time to let it die. And the new model is not that cheap either, it would have deserved the latest sensor technology.

Sony announced a new 16MP 4/3" sensor at the same time as the 20MP sensor, so it isn't necessarily an "old" sensor.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2016 at 10:21 UTC
In reply to:

Smaug01: Why do you guys insist on calling it (and others) 'compact cameras?' Just because it is not an SLR, that doesn't make it 'compact.'

Looks pretty sweet, but at Sony prices, their menu system should be GREAT; it should beat Panasonic at everything, considering they ask hundreds of dollars more.

In the camera industry, 'compact camera' is widely used (and understood) to mean fixed-lens camera. It's just a convenient label that shouldn't be read literally, since it says nothing about the size of the camera.

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2016 at 19:13 UTC
In reply to:

Cynog ap Brychan: Out of interest, does any photographic medium - monitors, tablets, phones, photographic prints, newspapers, magazines - have a greater dynamic range than this camera at base ISO?

If the capture device has a greater DR than the output medium, then you have more control over how you want the image to be displayed or printed.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2016 at 23:23 UTC
In reply to:

bernardly: Is it possible that Sony is restricting the sensors they are willing to supply to Nikon in a bid to make their own cameras more competitive? There is a danger for Nikon in relying on an external source for key components such as image sensors. Sony really wants to steal Nikon's business eventually. They also want to do the same to Canon but they have less leverage there.

Nikon doesn't use Sony sensors in their FF flagship models. Both the D3 and D4 used Nikon-designed sensors manufactured by Renesas.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2016 at 23:06 UTC
In reply to:

Summi Luchs: Interesting concept, but maybe, at the time it might hit the market, we will see the next generation of EVFs. I doubt that the future will lie in complex opto-mechanical solutions.

The point of this patent is that it lets you use the camera either as a DSLR with an OVF, or as a mirrorless camera with an EVF. With on-sensor PDAF, there's no reason to suppose it will perform any worse than a mirrorless camera with the same AF system. You'll basically get a fully functional mirrorless camera and a DSLR in the same body, that's the point of this concept.

Anyway, your claim that the next gen EVF can't be used in such a camera is false. The camera uses the EVF in liveview mode, when there's no mirror in the way.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2016 at 22:20 UTC
In reply to:

Summi Luchs: Interesting concept, but maybe, at the time it might hit the market, we will see the next generation of EVFs. I doubt that the future will lie in complex opto-mechanical solutions.

"this mirror will be blocking the sensor so it can't capture the information for the EVF to display."

You do know that you can use a DSLR in live view mode, don't you? The patent is for a hybrid OVF/EVF; the former is used when the mirror is down, the latter when the mirror is up.

Basically, such a DSLR will be able to offer all the functionality of a mirrorless camera, plus an OVF for those who want one.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2016 at 02:32 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Permit: Back to the future with a pellicle mirror? Canon released the first pellicle mirror camera back in 1965. The technology had a small, loyal fanbase but never really thook off. Losing 1/3 of light at the sensor, and 2/3 of the light at the viewfinder were the majors drawback. If I remember correctly.

Not comparable to fuji at all. With Fuji, you get full light at both the viewfinder and the sensor.

This is not a pellicle/SLT solution. It's a moving mirror; when the mirror is down you use the OVF, and in live view you use the EVF (or LCD screen).

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2016 at 02:27 UTC
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: ....and this image is a perfect example of why I sold all my DSLR gear and switched to mirrorless. Ridiculously big setup.

"Every full frame lens for Sony's FE is as large as a DSLR equivalent, despite having a flange distance that shorter than even Leica's M."

Yes, that's correct. It still should be possible, in theory, to make WA lenses a little bit more compact for a mirrorless camera. But perhaps you're right that this isn't possible considering the performance requirements of modern lenses.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2016 at 13:30 UTC
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: ....and this image is a perfect example of why I sold all my DSLR gear and switched to mirrorless. Ridiculously big setup.

"Only smaller sensors and thus smaller coverage makes for smaller lenses."

That's mostly true, but there's also the flange distance, determining how wide you can go without having to use a retrofocal design.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2016 at 11:27 UTC
On article Taking it easy: Canon EOS 80D shooting experience (292 comments in total)
In reply to:

Coyote_Cody: Hard to fathom why Canon can not do 4kHD in this cam.

80D is large enuf for the heat (heatsink), and if the A6300 as small as it is can do full or almost full sensor 4kHD, why not the 80D ??

Wonder if a marketing issue or a purely tech inability issue or BOTH ?

"Marketing has nothing to do with product roadmaps. It's a pure business decision based on market trends, user research and competition."

Well, I think that's exactly what was meant by "marketing". Analyzing the market and the competition is part of the job of the marketing department, isn't it? And marketing executives are usually very involved in product planning.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2016 at 11:15 UTC
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: ....and this image is a perfect example of why I sold all my DSLR gear and switched to mirrorless. Ridiculously big setup.

For someone who mostly shoots landscapes or architecture with the camera on a tripod, the size of this setup is hardly a problem.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 22:53 UTC
In reply to:

bernardly: This new Sony RX10 lll drives a stake through the heart of the Canon G3X.

@PVCdroid

To achieve a certain 'look' through colour processing, is not just a question of adjusting the white balance. The difference between say Canon and Sony is more complex than that. Different colour hues are shifted in different ways.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 12:37 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony RX10 III (306 comments in total)
In reply to:

FodgeandDurn: A large proportion of the comments seem to be assuming that this model supersedes the II, whereas the text states in several places that this sits alongside the II, which will remain a current product.

On the one hand, people should read more of the article before they jump to the comments *grumble etc*, but on the other, what a stupid, an absolutely thoroughly stupid naming convention from Sony. If you are going to release a sister model put a letter on there, like with the A7's. If you call something a MKIII people are going to think it's the new MKIII replacing the MKII! People are logical that way!

Actually, this is the successor to the Mk II, but it doesn't replace it. This has been Sony's strategy from the start with both the RX10/RX100 and the A7/A7r/A7s series. Each new generation, each new 'Mark', is launched at a higher price point, while the previous generation(s) is retained in the line-up as a less expensive alternative.

Sony now offers four generations of RX100 at different price points, three generations of RX10, and two generations of the A7 trio. None have been officially discontinued yet, not even the first RX100. They seemingly still are producing all of these models. Either that, or they over-produced the early generations, so that inventories last for years.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 11:59 UTC
In reply to:

AkashRana: Good new additions to Sony E-mount range though primarily focused at full-frame as i see it. It will look out of place on A6xxx series of cameras with tiny grips and setup will be way unbalanced. Sony must bring in a DSLR styled APS-C bodies and bigger full frame bodies so lenses and cameras fell better balanced and have space for a real battery besides improving ergonomics; as the whole non-sense of size and weight savings is out of the window with recently released E-mount lenses which are indeed heavier and bigger than their A-mount or Canikon counterparts.

A good lens on an A3000 will surely produce better images than a bad lens on an A6300, everything else equal. The A6300 is a much better camera, of course, I'm just saying that the impact of the optics on IQ is often larger than that of the sensor.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 21:16 UTC
In reply to:

bernardly: This new Sony RX10 lll drives a stake through the heart of the Canon G3X.

Canon has used Sony sensors before. The old G11/G12/S90/S95 all used a Sony CCD chip, but the colours looked like classic Canon to me. And Sony, Nikon and Pentax DSLRs with the same sensor have produced very different colours. It's the processing that makes the difference.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 21:02 UTC
In reply to:

maljo@inreach.com: Certainly disappointing, no matter that it's a sports camera.
Image quality is ultimately the thing.

For a photojournalist, event or sports photographer, IQ might not always be the main thing. Fine arts, fashion, landscapes and such is a different story.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 20:34 UTC
In reply to:

FuhTeng: Sure, it has terrific low light ability (and a hilariously high ISO ceiling if you want to see what a tornado hitting a Jelly Belly factory looks like), but I can't see that low light is any better than the D750 until ISO 25600, and it's only significantly better at 51200.

You completely forget about AF performance, build quality and a few other things that makes the D5 a better camera for wildlife, sports and photojournalism.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 20:28 UTC
Total: 2142, showing: 521 – 540
« First‹ Previous2526272829Next ›Last »