Jim in Hudson

Lives in United States OH, United States
Joined on Jun 15, 2012

Comments

Total: 108, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Jim in Hudson: I did the test in reverse, thinking that all of these are generally quite good but which camera would I steer away from if I had to choose? All I scored was the what I judged as the worst of the three images in each set. Results:

Canon -- 6
Sony -- 3
Nikon -- 3

Another factor that's hard to isolate is any monitor bias between right, center, and left.

@Duncan D -- When choosing between multiple good options, it's often worthwhile to get a handle on which option is going to cause the most disappointment. Here's the most simple example: Would you choose a camera that produced a noticeably poor result in some of the images even if was very marginally better in all of the other images? A "one to ten" scale for each would have brought this out. A "nine" may be better than an "eight" in one image but does that matter if you judged that "nine" to be a "one" in another? Probably not.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2017 at 19:25 UTC

I did the test in reverse, thinking that all of these are generally quite good but which camera would I steer away from if I had to choose? All I scored was the what I judged as the worst of the three images in each set. Results:

Canon -- 6
Sony -- 3
Nikon -- 3

Another factor that's hard to isolate is any monitor bias between right, center, and left.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2017 at 15:40 UTC as 28th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Jim in Hudson: Is there any reason these presets wouldn't work with any camera's RAW file?

yoahv -- are you saying the presets won't work with RAW files that are not X-Trans?

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2017 at 00:16 UTC

Is there any reason these presets wouldn't work with any camera's RAW file?

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2017 at 22:17 UTC as 13th comment | 4 replies
On article Ask the staff: wedding season weirdness (273 comments in total)
In reply to:

Paul Petersen: A couple of weeks ago I married my first son off. I shot the rehearsal and dinner party for fun.
Day of the wedding I bagged the camera and musingly watched the paid folks hustle. I have yet to see their results, will be interesting.
https://flic.kr/s/aHsm3jPFfm
Pete

@JimP101-- I took the original post to mean he took pictures at the rehearsal and rehearsal dinner but left the camera in the bag for the wedding and wedding reception. Exactly what i did at our son's wedding a few weeks ago.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 13:03 UTC
In reply to:

Iloveaircraftnoise: Apart from the wingtip fences or sharklets or whatever they are called I can't see much external difference between this 737-9 max and the 737-900. Is it another plastic plane like the 787?

I think Boeing made a huge strategic mistake when they decided to focus on twin engine long haul products like the 777 and 787. Disregarding the 747 heritage gave huge ground to Airbus.

Sorry . Is this a camera forum?

@iloveaircraftnoise: Airbus only produces two 4-engine aircraft themselves: the A380 which so far has not been a commercial success and the A340-600 which is a very low volume aircraft. Almost all development by both Boeing and Airbus is in twin-engine aircraft.

That said, some feel continuation of the 737 line with the MAX is a mistake as the landing gear was never designed for aircraft of this length. For Boeing to signficantly change the gear, it would have to certify the aircraft as "all new" or something like that which is a far more extensive process. In this area, Airbus has a leg up. For the most part, the MAX series is little changed from the current but with completely new engines.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2017 at 16:37 UTC
On article Hands-on with Ricoh's compact Pentax KP (634 comments in total)

Does it have the loud or quiet shutter mechanism? Considering the top speed is 1/6000, I fear it's the loud one.

I don't mind the looks. It's kind of an anti-Canon look.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2017 at 23:13 UTC as 176th comment

Sam -- Where does this info about the E-M1 II being priced at "nearly $2000" come from? Was this provided to you off-the-record by Olympus or is it from somewhere else? To my knowledge, they've made no statement on price. Thanks.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 13:51 UTC as 21st comment | 2 replies
On article The long, difficult road to Pentax full-frame (609 comments in total)

The next 12 months or so will tell us a lot about the state of K-mount lenses. Many think Ricoh will update the FA Limited primes to better match the K-1. If they do, can they still maintain what's so special about the lenses?

Also, many are waiting/hoping to see how Sigma responds. They've generally chosen not to release new full frame lenses in K-mount (sticking to APS-C) but maybe that will change.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2016 at 13:43 UTC as 149th comment
In reply to:

webber15: More bashing of the fuji autofocus (continuous)...a tired argument now...
I own the xt10,,and do bif's...the fuji wipes the floor with the oly em5 I had and is easily comparable to the pentax k20d and 300mm f4...

Good grief, webber15. The K-20D is an EIGHT year old camera. I would hope anything Fujifilm comes out with would be nowhere close to it in AF performance. Also, the E-M5 doesn't have PDAF capability and was never meant to be good at C-AF. You need to find some relevant comparisons.

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2016 at 03:12 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (561 comments in total)
In reply to:

Neez: "Furthermore, the need to constantly power a screen while shooting, combined with attempts to capitalize on the size benefits of mirrorless mean that battery life is much more limited on most mirrorless cameras - sometimes to a restrictive degree. "

This statement isn't correct because DSLR's have LCD screens that are on all the time as well. They don't suck down nearly as much juice as a mirrorless. LCD screens are known to be fairly efficient as long as backlighting is kept to a minimum, the LCD itself uses very little energy.

It's actually because the IMAGE SENSOR has to be on all the time, regardless of whether you're taking a shot or not, is why the battery life sucks on mirrorless cameras.

I own a sony a6000 and A7II, and have learned to just carry 3 spare batteries with me when i go out. But you are right, was never a concern on my canons.

Many DSLR users turn off the rear LCD in the settings menu and leave it there, especially if they have a top LCD (which draws essentially no power). However, this is not the source of most of the power draw. It's the sensor itself that draws much of the power and which must be on to create an image for either the rear LCD or the EVF. So even with equivalent battery power, the mirrorless will not last as long.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2015 at 20:28 UTC
On article 2015 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $500-800 (276 comments in total)
In reply to:

Everlast66: A fair review. In terms of performance the A6000 nearly caught up with the DSLRs in this category.
At the same time A6000 offers several strategic advantages that are very important in this ENTHUSIAST category (and DSLRs don't have).

- compact and discrete so one can use more often and in more locations, very important for enthusiasts. Yes, hte majority of lenses are big, but you can make it compact when you want to;

- short flange distance that allows experimentation with legacy glass, any focal length or aperture, even rangefinder glass;

- modern mirrorless technology and EVF - you see the effect of changes instantly, best for learning and experimentation, focus peaking, no mirror slap, no issues with AF sensor calibration, etc;

A lot of potential to grow it, you can even get native Zeiss lenses with AF (Touit and Batis).

Actually, I don't see why anyone would buy a DSLR in this category.

It's important to remember that this is a comparison of ILC cameras, not expensive P&S ones. The A6000 is a fine choice with the kit lens but people supposedly buy into this class of cameras so they can use multiple lenses. When you stick a relatively large telephoto on the A6000, all of its ergonomics fall apart and it instantly becomes a poor selection.

To be named at the head of this class, a camera needs to be really good under multiple setups and the A6000 isn't.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2015 at 14:56 UTC
In reply to:

Azzy: I'm surprised they put SDM instead of DC motor in this

By all accounts, it's not at all similar to the SDM motors previously used by Pentax.

Link | Posted on Sep 24, 2015 at 22:31 UTC
On article What difference does it make? Sony uncompressed Raw (622 comments in total)

What's the practical difference between these new lossless files and a TIFF file? Seems the new Sony RAW files are approaching the corresponding size of a TIFF.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2015 at 13:41 UTC as 121st comment | 5 replies
On article Sony Alpha 7R II: Real-world ISO invariance study (373 comments in total)

Rishi, thanks for the fine article. One question: Do you expect the Studio Comparison Tool for DR will be changed from fixed ISO with underexposure by faster shutter speed (plus corresponding PP pushing) to your method here of fixed shutter speed with underexposure by decreasing ISO (again, with corresponding PP pushing)? Thanks.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 19:13 UTC as 25th comment
On article Fujifilm X-T10 Review (511 comments in total)
In reply to:

PedroMZ: Ok now let us discuss 16mp. Everybody talks down the 16mp sensors as being inadequate nowadays. It is certainly adequate for A3 . I look at my Olympus OM-1 and am beginning to feel that it cannot be taken seriously anymore.yet 5 yrs ago professional photographers (I am a rank amateur) seemed to be quite happy with 12MP . I have seen great magazine photos taken with cameras of this sort of resolution in the past. What is adequate? Only polite comments requested-thanks.

DPReview's graphs are for JPEGs. Here's their explanation:

"Technically, the camera achieves this by applying less amplification to the sensor's output than usual prior to AD conversion to avoid clipping highlight data, then pulling-up the midtones to the correct brightness in JPEG processing. This is essentially the same process as Canon and Pentax use for their highlight-expansion modes."

All Fujifilm (as well as Canon and Pentax per the text) are doing is underexposing the shot by 1 stop (DR200) or 2 stops (DR400) and then boosting the JPEG output for all but the highlights accordingly. I've verified this myself as the RAW file under DR200 is exactly one stop underexposed when viewed in Aperture. LR reads the tone curve tag and automatically boosts by one stop to normalize the RAW file.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 12:21 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T10 Review (511 comments in total)
In reply to:

PedroMZ: Ok now let us discuss 16mp. Everybody talks down the 16mp sensors as being inadequate nowadays. It is certainly adequate for A3 . I look at my Olympus OM-1 and am beginning to feel that it cannot be taken seriously anymore.yet 5 yrs ago professional photographers (I am a rank amateur) seemed to be quite happy with 12MP . I have seen great magazine photos taken with cameras of this sort of resolution in the past. What is adequate? Only polite comments requested-thanks.

@photominion -- I thought the Fujifilm DR200 and 400 settings only impacted JPEG output. "RAW is RAW" regardless and that's what DR is measured on.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 11:48 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T10 Review (511 comments in total)

Historically, the big stated advantage of X-Trans was the lack of an anti-alias filter. The review mentions it. However, many Bayer pattern cameras no longer use an AA filter. Are there other elements of X-Trans that warrant its selection over a Bayer pattern camera?

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 23:07 UTC as 87th comment | 1 reply
On article Quick Review: PhotoKeeper (103 comments in total)

The review is about a service and how it stacks up to others like it. Why have some posters turned this into a debate about whether this type of service should even exist?

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2015 at 15:51 UTC as 30th comment | 1 reply
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (467 comments in total)
In reply to:

DCSteve: I got the cc: subscription for $100. $8/month -- the cost of a sandwich. Or, put another way, 1/1000 the cost of my camera gear. For that, I get regular updates, a mobile app that allows me to download and edit on the road (with automatic syncing of full-size images when I get home) and a well-established, cross platform software suite. I don't think it's a bad deal.

Excuse me, Steve... do I understand that correctly you are spending $8000/month on camera gear? If yes, can you understand that probably makes you unique and maybe unqualified to opine on the value of software?

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 11:23 UTC
Total: 108, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »