Mais78

Lives in United Kingdom London, United Kingdom
Joined on Apr 28, 2010

Comments

Total: 117, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Mais78: I am a long time user of LR (now called "classic"). Is there a good reason to download also LR CC? What does it do that Classic cannot do?

Thanks, sounds like I don't need to bother

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 21:10 UTC

I am a long time user of LR (now called "classic"). Is there a good reason to download also LR CC? What does it do that Classic cannot do?

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 19:51 UTC as 25th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

Mais78: Pixel density way too look. Need 8k at that size

I am assuming that if you do photo editing you don't put the screen 5 meters away from you

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 17:35 UTC

Pixel density way too look. Need 8k at that size

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 08:00 UTC as 19th comment | 3 replies
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1236 comments in total)

"For a start, there's the large 1280 x 960 pixel viewfinder, which gives either a highly detailed or rapidly refreshed one, depending on whether it's run in standard or high refresh rate mode."

Are you sure? isn't the difference just battery usage?

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 16:40 UTC as 202nd comment | 2 replies
On article Sony a7R III added to studio scene comparison (453 comments in total)
In reply to:

Life recorder: Two things.

1) the D850 appears to be a better camera with higher output IQ.
2) if you don’t believe #1 then you are agreeing these comparisons are of little value because too many things can affect results.

The truth is there are a dozen things more important when considering a camera....unless you are a gear head who thinks pixels viewed at 200% are more important than content...and the D850 output is clearly better.

@BlueBomber I doubt it is Adobe as this camera is not yet supported by them

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 11:35 UTC
On article Sony a7R III added to studio scene comparison (453 comments in total)
In reply to:

Life recorder: Two things.

1) the D850 appears to be a better camera with higher output IQ.
2) if you don’t believe #1 then you are agreeing these comparisons are of little value because too many things can affect results.

The truth is there are a dozen things more important when considering a camera....unless you are a gear head who thinks pixels viewed at 200% are more important than content...and the D850 output is clearly better.

Looks like the standard Raw settings for the A7riii hide noise in the shadows by closing them more than the other cameras. Once you open them to the same level you will get same amount of noise of mkii and d850?

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 09:12 UTC
On article Sony a7R III added to studio scene comparison (453 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: using just limited reference exemplar:

"best IQ resolution at base unboosted ISO" jpegs straight ooc is not adequate
nor
"best DR at base unboosted ISO" raw pp to fix-it-afterwards is not adequate

there are other reference exemplars that matter to far more endusers
and that is "practical immediacy" of:
"best IQ resolution at progressively higher ISOs as light progressively diminishes"
until
"any+all undesireable digital artifacts spoiling IQ resolution become unacceptable"
more so jpegs ooc, than "fix-it-too-late" raw

with the latter "practical immediacy" reference exemplar
i've been using 20mp+ FF Canon EOS 6D ISO 12,800 as my "acceptable minimum norm"

any+all others must exceed it, 20mp or higher, ISO 12,800 or higher, jpeg first, raw always second, and CLEAN UPSCALABILITY (NO downscaling shenanigans), in order to gain my due attention
otherwise, failing my minimum "reference norm" requirements, the other candidates instantly drop from any consideration

????

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 21:24 UTC
On article Sony a7R III added to studio scene comparison (453 comments in total)
In reply to:

tbcass: I know the pixel peepers will disagree but I don't see a significant improvement in the A7Riii over the A7Rii. Yes the A7Riii is marginally better but not enough to matter in real world use. Someone below said "way better". No way.

Quite incredible to see how in your selected area the Canon 6D MkI beats all the newer cameras and is almost a match to the A7R MkIII up to ISO 6400

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 18:08 UTC
In reply to:

LessMirrored19: Shutting down operation sales
Cancelling camera series
Closing factories
..... Signs of slow death ..

Sony will buy them cheaply and rebrand itself to Nikon

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2017 at 21:29 UTC
In reply to:

ekaton: They know how to make a buck without working. I almost wrote: "it's part of their culture",..... but could hold myself back.

@ M Berg You comment is more stupid than the first. Setting a new standard.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 21:50 UTC
In reply to:

ekaton: They know how to make a buck without working. I almost wrote: "it's part of their culture",..... but could hold myself back.

Nice racist comment. Congrats to you and people who liked your comment.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 09:48 UTC
In reply to:

Mais78: 27" is too big for 4k if you want Retina-like sharpness. 4k is just enough for 24". 27" needs 5k but unfortunately there are not many in the market.

My eyes are spoiled, when i switched from pc to mac i could not use 24” Full hd anymore. Some people are fine with grainy screens some others are not. I really value a sharp screen.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 09:46 UTC

27" is too big for 4k if you want Retina-like sharpness. 4k is just enough for 24". 27" needs 5k but unfortunately there are not many in the market.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2017 at 11:15 UTC as 2nd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Mais78: What is this ISO 640 thing....??

Rishi is saying to underexpose but not too much? I.e. not to use ISO lower than ISO 640 if the intention is to push shadows in post? Do I understand correctly?

The part that starts with "But there's simply no excuse to the camera's traditional ISO 6400 method of shooting ISO 6400-appropriate exposure..." is chinese to me.

Thanks, you lost me here :-) "This is a dual conversion gain sensor" but it seems like my conclusion was right.

What about the second part where he says no excuse for the traditional....what does this camera do that is wrong??
Thanks

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 16:27 UTC

What is this ISO 640 thing....??

Rishi is saying to underexpose but not too much? I.e. not to use ISO lower than ISO 640 if the intention is to push shadows in post? Do I understand correctly?

The part that starts with "But there's simply no excuse to the camera's traditional ISO 6400 method of shooting ISO 6400-appropriate exposure..." is chinese to me.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 15:50 UTC as 19th comment | 3 replies
On article Demo: Here is the Sony a7R III shooting at 10 fps (119 comments in total)
In reply to:

ivan1973: 10fps on something that don’t move?

@DL The ergonomics (especially aperture wheel) are the ones of A9 or A7RII? I hate that recessed aperture wheel of the A7RII.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 16:32 UTC

Good news

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 13:04 UTC as 128th comment
In reply to:

Ayoh: "Although the body is essentially that of the a7R II" No the body is essentially the same as the a9 but without the second control knob. Why keep saying that it is more similar to the A7rii than the A9? its pretty much an a9

I really hope the aperture wheel is the one of the a9 as the very recessed one of the a7rii was a good reason not to buy the camera

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 07:04 UTC
In reply to:

Mais78: wow, I sold my 6D to upgrade but the Mk II seems even worse in the noise department. I regret selling.

Samuel, what you say might be true for the Canon vs Nikon comparison but what about Canon vs Canon? The 6D Mkii does worse than the 6D.
I think I will buy back the 6D or wait for Sony A7RIII.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2017 at 13:07 UTC
Total: 117, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »