Lives in Australia ACT, Australia
Works as a z/OS IT, freelance
Joined on Jun 28, 2009
About me:

Was gifted a second hand Minolta rangefinder at 11yo. No manual, no Google, no money. I learned DOF, shutter speed, motion, flare, sharpness and film speeds at a time when you had to WAIT a week for your photos. Colour was too expensive!
Since then, I've always had trouble putting a camera down especially a FULL frame Mamiya RB-67 outfit :)
Semi-pro since the '80s. 6x7 and 35mm then, Micro four thirds now: A good compromise.
Pro results without bulk and weight to lug around.
Years ago, I recovered from "Equivalence Phobia" that so many suffer from, and find that people react better to a smaller setup and love the results.
Customers want results, not "format psychobabble".
Enjoy photography - not silly format arguments!


Total: 355, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Hibiscusbloom: So my question is , sorry if it's already answered in which case I sincerely apologise, can the AF produce results that are on par with either the Nikon D500, D5 or Canon 1DXII? And can it do so with the Leica-Panasonic 100-400 with lightning AF acquisition and super-glue like tracking? I want to see real life reviews and pictorial evidence.

If so, I am sold cos it will deliver me from the burden of DSLR WEIGHT!!

Please, can someone convince me! I am ready to toss away all Canon/Nikon DSLR gear.

Thank you sincerely from my the depth of my heart. . . . . . Not a bad showing at all.
There's a video shot out of a truck somewhere.
It's impressively stabilised - something NO CaNikon can do unaided.
Does it it do what you want? You have to decide that.

Link | Posted on Jan 1, 2017 at 16:16 UTC
In reply to:

SLOOPB: I have an Olympus OM-D E-M1- good camera. I have a Nikon D750.
A Nikon D750 at $2000 okay.
An Olympus OM-D E-M1 II at $2000 ridiculous.

Yeah? How's the D750's IS and how is its 60FPS and weight? Does its glass VF allow you to see in near dark?

Portability, handling and speed are king for most real world purposes - unless you have a caddy :)
Big stuff usually STAYS at home.

Link | Posted on Jan 1, 2017 at 14:57 UTC
In reply to:

NicoPPC: At base ISO (200), the pictures looks pretty bad and not appealing at all. However, the pictures of the camera (product) looks very good!

Agree - the surroundings were very drab indeed - but probably faithfully captured.
That dullness is environmental - they should have picked better scenery - like the local park when they got home. Must be too hard.

Link | Posted on Jan 1, 2017 at 14:54 UTC
In reply to:

Marksphoto: good detail, not a big fan of the presented colors, a lot of gray.

Agree - the surroundings were very drab - but probably faithfully captured.
The dullness is environmental - they should have picked better scenery - like the local park when they got home. Must be too hard.

Link | Posted on Jan 1, 2017 at 14:52 UTC

Still the usual trolls who think that the film (sensor) is all there is to a camera along with gimmicky wafer thin DOF.
How naive ..
Portability, speed, IS capability and handling are just as important in the real world and that's where this camera shines. The M1-Mk2's IS bests any other camera for now.
Have a look at the galloping horse video shot from a truck. It looks like a steadycam (etc.) was used.
IQ is very usable - especially in capable (not troll) hands.
The others will either try to copy, but more likely they will MARKET their war around their own deficiencies (like they still DO with sensor clean - for which they offer the "innovative solution" of spot removal software - LOL).
They will continue to sell a lot of huge cameras, that get left at home most of the time.
DSLR size and MASS sure has helped phone photography along ...

Link | Posted on Jan 1, 2017 at 14:45 UTC as 6th comment
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1393 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lombard59: I can not understand why EM1 II has lost value in ISO and RAW in relation to EM1. Can anyone explain to me why Olympus has let the new EM1 II lose in such important values as ISO and RAW? How is it possible that a camera that has taken 3 years to exit, according to Preview, is worse in those values, compared to its predecessor the EM1? Are you sure Depreview has done that comparison well? . It is very strange that the EM1 II is worse than the EM1 in ISO and RAW. I do not understand and it has no logic. Does anyone have any comparisons between EM1 and EM1 II, regarding ISO and RAW?

I didn't notice that first time, and I couldn't see that said on the second read. Are you talking per pixel results?

Mine's on order, and have seen nothing I don't like nor any "worse".

I spend no time on the sony forum rubbishing their speed and focus performance.
Nor the severe vignetting present in many sony lenses.
Nor the poor IBIS (except the OLD EM-1 system they have just licensed from Olympus and are putting in a "new" model).

When my Mk 2 arrives I will probably be absent for a while - taking pictures. Portability rules.
Call me crazy, but that is what I like to use cameras for - not criticising bricks 'n' bazookas in another forum.

If really I need a bigger sensor, I'll bypass the full MARKETING frame cameras and their 1.2 lenses that are v.soft and look at a new Fuji 33x44mm sensor mirrorless.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 11:38 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1393 comments in total)
In reply to:

my hobby: Hi there,I dont know where did you find the score of 85 percent ? First RAW and JPG are not good,video is not extra quality and final product is not what we expected,only body-machine seems good build what is not point if we don`t take it because of bad product-photo or videos..................

Mine's on order - ALL gear is a compromise, this set is right for many people who don't need to win moaning contests in the pub.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2016 at 12:36 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1393 comments in total)

That price, it isn't really "body only" it is body plus a small, useful, detachable bounce flash.
It may not be powerful, but given the IS capability not an issue and represents a saving.
Are any competitors packaged with a flash - at all?
Here, it also comes with a fast 23Gb UHS 2 card saving #2.
And it WILL be taken along because the kit doesn't weigh 15 Kilos :(

If you want to lug full MARKETING frame gear around then feel free.
Wassamadda? Bricks 'n' Bazooka camera injured your back so have to whine, chair-bound on other forums?
More likely, whiners don't even HAVE a camera.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2016 at 12:34 UTC as 108th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

steviewa: As nobody's stupid enough to buy one of these compact cameras they defo need to give them away !

Oh yeah?
Features the others will copy NEXT YEAR **MAYBE**)

IS that kills **ANY** dSLR or "competing" mirrorless STONE DEAD?

What's not to like? It is a tool, not jewelry for fools ..

NO gallery from the OP ... probably does not even understand a pinhole camera.

Here's what people who actually HAVE cameras and USE them, seek: (capable in just about ANY suituation)

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 03:47 UTC

I applaud you in the extra effort for real world images.

Thank you - EXCEPT that it makes the wait all the more agonising ;)

The "mirror slap fan boy" comments are ignored, as is appropriate .

The features are unobtainable elsewhere (until they COPY next year).
This IS KILLS any other pro (consumer not $50,000) camera stone dead - period.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 02:58 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

Lan: Nice to see actual money as a prize, and no entry fee either. Well played Olympus!

EVERY photo contest I've ever seen, (even where there is NO prize) expect rights to USE the picture(s) you submit.
What's the point if the promoter can't publish the pictures? That would be moronic.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 01:21 UTC
In reply to:

janist74: I think the tech is there to have better IQ from the M4/3 size sensor, but it might be somewhat expensive. Compare the Sony RX100V and tell me if you see 1 stop difference....

I hope the GH5 gets a Sony sensor with the tech of the RX100V (IQ and AF) and then we have a winner there. The I would even pay 1999CHF/EUR/USD.... ;)

I can see it - I'd make it 2/3- to 1 stop.
Not earth shattering - worthwhile, very usable. and satisfying. You know for actually making images?
The other stills features are unavailable in ANY other camera, let alone a compact SYSTEM.
The OMD-EM1 Mark 2's IS leaves all other "competitors" in the veritable dust You know, when you are NOT playing a game of "test twerps".
NO "ifs" .. "buts" .. or "maybes", in places I LIKE to shoot in, e.g. museums old buildings - this ability KILLS other portable cameras - stone dead.
I can't wait and I plan to reshoot some old work ASAP!

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 00:52 UTC
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: Good luck, Olympus.

Good luck mirror slapping Bricks 'n' Bazookas - BnB (tm)
Got some images for us to look at?
Without them, "credibility as a photographer" = 0

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 00:48 UTC
In reply to:

Valterj: The image is out of focus... all other cameras have better images than Olympus Mark II

The photographer didn't focus where you "think" it should be? L effing OL ..

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 00:43 UTC
In reply to:

razadaz: If photographers had been as derogative as some of the posters here over resolution and grain size when Oskar Barnack developed his 35mm camera, we would probably never have heard of Leica cameras, or Nikon or Canon 35mm. I can imagine the comments now about how the image quality was a joke compared to their Speed Graphic sheet film camera.

Quite right - gear heads NOT photographers at all, they certainly RARELY have a gallery of their wonderful work to look at.
Worse .. they rarely even HAVE what they are praising.
They can criticise, posture, whine away - HERE . . .

I'm sure there's SOMETHING "wrong" with each and every shot, be it serious efforts, images made in crowded venues or just snaps.

"Coulda" been this", "shoulda been that" L effing OL

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 00:41 UTC
In reply to:

CheersUK: I just took a quick look through the comparison. After the initial launch price shock of the Mark II, I was starting to lean back towards I dont know again. I'm certainly not seeing image quality to rival the best APS-C fact, I'm not seeing much improvement beyond current M43 bodies.
Without doubt, feature wise, the camera is amazing, but nobody has shown me any output from this camera that rivals Olympus' IQ claims for this camera. High ISO (1600 for example) and image sharpness, dont look great. Thats a worry. The G85 wasn't even on my is now.

Seen this insane IS capability? While Olympus may have licensed their OLD IS tech sony - they didn't let them have THIS!

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 00:32 UTC
In reply to:

Sigma82: You are using the Olympus 45 1.8 (250 euro) on the em1 II , the Nikon 50 1.4 (450 euro) on the d500 and the Fuji 56 1.2 (950 euro) on the xt2? How is it a fair comparison?

I agree, it will be a very good TOOL that I think will offer me a whole lot of new CHOICES not available elsewhere - ESPECIALLY in a compact system.
In size/weight terms the SYSTEM is reminiscent of my 35mm systems
In performance it VASTLY exceeds the quality my Mamiya RB-67 system could deliver - in *EVERY* respect.
I pixel peep for a few minutes. Soon I get back into the real world and just use the tool.
Looking forward to mine.

Seen this? 15s hand held! Insane all right!

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 00:30 UTC
In reply to: EM1-2 image detail looksvery much as good as the APS-C images, at least up to ISO 1600. Olympus has done a nice job.

Agree maljo ... it appears well done - can't wait for mine. It is on the way.
@Mike99999 got any PROOF for that wild speculation?
If this drivel were correct, can you explain WHY they don't also do that to Nikon - who they also supply with sensors?

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 00:15 UTC
In reply to:

pdelux: at ISO 200 the PEN-F appears sharper and has better tones (especially in the faces) - and punchier than the EM1-2. I dont believe that it could be worse than the PEN-F at the very least on par. I can only assume this is a result of the beta raw converter not working the files to its potential.

Correct - there are too many variables - PP has a huge effect :) I put it half a stop behind the D500 given the sharpness seems a tad better (to me) with the EM-1 MKii

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 00:13 UTC
In reply to:

brycesteiner: I always thought the original E-M1 test shots here looked like there was always a slight amount of blur--either motion or out of OOF. Clear back in 2013 it would be that way and so I would compare to the E-M5 even though that wasn't the camera I was looking at.
Compared to the E-M1mk2 it's pretty clear the E-M1 is a little out of focus.
It might explain what might be the problem with people's view on the new camera, thinking it doesn't resolve well at 200

@deep7 - don't hold your breath for an EM-1 retest.
Sometimes cameras are not even configured properly when "tested" - let alone with up to date FW.
Not saying that is the case here, but it is common enough.
FW added EFSC to drastically reduce the effects of the mechanicals moving. It also introduced a rolling (silent) shutter mode which allows for even sharper shots of relatively slow moving subjects - especially with teles.

I used that mode here:

and most of here:
Most camera mechanisms move the camera a bit. dSLr shutters do too, but due to the sheer mass of the body, it is less noticeable.
Mirrors are even WORSE.
This is WHY the top model dSLRs have mirror lock-up:
To avoid mirror slap softening every image.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 00:03 UTC
Total: 355, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »