armandino

Lives in Canada Canada
Has a website at www.neatpicture.com
Joined on Nov 13, 2009

Comments

Total: 1967, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sony a7 III Review (1124 comments in total)
In reply to:

thx1138: Pretty impressive feature set for $1999, but having got the A7R3, 4 months ago, I still wouldn't swap. Trouble for Sony is it makes pricing of A9 look poor value and what sales the A7R3 didn't steal, the A73 will steal. I think they are selling A73 at razor thin margins to make some noise before they have Canon and Nikon to contend with. Normally I would expect this to be $2499.

some people here forget the economies of scale. How many people are going to purchase the A7III vs the A9? I do not know a single photographer physically (not on the internet) with an A9. Again the A9 competes and in many regards surpasses more expensive cameras, also offering unique very valuable features. Sure it looks like a lot less than a 1DX II or a D5 but so does a Leica too. At the end of the day is not the way the camera looks that get me the shot, but what the camera can do.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2018 at 03:55 UTC
On article Sony a7 III Review (1124 comments in total)
In reply to:

randfee2: good and detailed review, thanks.
What I don't quite get is your rating system at the end. This could use some overhaul and seems random to me, sometimes.

For instance:
Why does the A7Riii score higher on "build quality" & "ergonomics & handling"? I understand the casing is the VERY same and besides the missing lock for the mode dial (which improves ergonomics imho) there is zero to no difference in either category. This makes no sense to me.

Another issue with is "image quality". I'd really wish you'd split (still) image quality from resolution. Then find a scientific method to measure it. Again, I don't see how the A7Riii is significantly better at RAW image quality besides the obvious, which is resolution - so in this case again, I find it a bit confusing why the 7Riii gets a higher score.

Then in "Movie / video mode" you have a combined measure again. Is it "video quality" or also features... since you have a dedicated group "features", probably for still images only?

@lawny13
the test performed from imagingresource is far from scientific. Lensrentals showed that the top portion of the camera is as well sealed as as any, the lack of sealing is on the bottom. It is possible that the water can make its way up via capillarity.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2018 at 00:28 UTC
On article Sony a7 III Review (1124 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fotoni: This camera doesn't have 10-bit 4:2:2 4K video recording, but you still rated video very very high. It feels like A7S III can't do any better in video because there is tiny space left in the bar.

At least you punish Sony a bit by giving <90% score. I hope it was because of those stripes and only 8-bit video. Pixel shift missing too.

@Fotoni
although not 10 bit it will record 4K prores 4:2:2 on an external recorder. That is pretty decent

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2018 at 00:20 UTC
On article Sony a7 III Review (1124 comments in total)
In reply to:

thx1138: Pretty impressive feature set for $1999, but having got the A7R3, 4 months ago, I still wouldn't swap. Trouble for Sony is it makes pricing of A9 look poor value and what sales the A7R3 didn't steal, the A73 will steal. I think they are selling A73 at razor thin margins to make some noise before they have Canon and Nikon to contend with. Normally I would expect this to be $2499.

@thx1138
while arguably the A9 might be overpriced it still allows you to take pictures in a manner that no other camera does, additionally the EVF response has no match in the Sony line up. For some (like me) these features are huge because, again, I can deliver under certain conditions results that no one can unless they also have an A9 (and not many do). So for some, again like me, the price difference is still worth it because clients see results have never seen before and it has an impact on our reputation that is extremely valuable.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2018 at 00:05 UTC
On article Sony a7 III Review (1124 comments in total)
In reply to:

CanonKen: Seems like a fairly long list of negatives for 89%. Not suggesting this get like 75%, but 89% would be if the viewfinder was good, the touch experience was good, etc. Those are things that affect all users.

@CanonKen
long list of cons conflicting with a high score has been brought up frequently in the past. It is not how many, but how relevant and what good instead it has to offer. The 6DII got 80% are you seriously proposing that the A7III is lesser than the Canon? Are you kidding me?

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2018 at 00:01 UTC
On article These are the best cameras you can buy right now (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

Retzius: Interesting... most of the working pros I know that shoot day in and day out for weddings or portraiture are using 5D Mark IVs

@Black_Daifuku
that would be nice. I am going to soon sell my 1DX and A7RII. It will be the A7SIII or the new Canon mirrorless, whichever will fit the bill.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2018 at 09:41 UTC
On article These are the best cameras you can buy right now (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

AdrianPocea: One thing that they don't mention is that the new shoppers rarely have 8000 dollars to drop on a new system camera and two essential lenses( talking about Sony A7r3 plus 24-70 and 70-200 G masters). Most of the pros already bought Canon 5dmark iv and they are stuck with it, otherwise thwy would lose like 4000 dollars switching. And guess what, it works. Like a charm. That's me, waiting for 5dsrII

@Dr_Jon
With all the limitations mentioned above pretty much all relatively new Canon glass on a Sony like the A7iii, A9 and A7Riii still works very well and comparably to the performance on Canon bodies and for somethings better (i.e. eye AF still available) especially the fast glass. I used my A7Rii with the Canon 70-200/2.8II for two years with no complains at all. I eventually got the Sony lens only because with the A9 I wanted something that would leverage the full potential of such camera for sports.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2018 at 15:36 UTC
In reply to:

compositor20: Does anyone know where the picture is taken? Vatican ?

definitely no latin

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2018 at 01:33 UTC

They need to modify it so I can take easy selfies and to proper vlogging with it, please motorize the zoom too!

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2018 at 01:40 UTC as 39th comment | 1 reply

here you have it again, the reason why I do not have instagram and I always hated the thing:
hand the tools of master photography to everyone so that they can use and abuse them. In return a real piece of art will not get the appreciation it deserves because people's senses are saturated by crap spoiling it all. It is like using classical music for commercials. Someone will say: this blur technique is no close to what a 200/2.0 will do. Sure still the subject isolation effect is spoiled by overuse and misuse. I stopped adding filter effects on my images a few years ago already, with the exception of B&W. People will trash my pics in social media anyways adding their ridiculous washed out filters.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2018 at 01:31 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

MrBrightSide: Based on what we’ve seen from smaller mirrorless formats, what exactly will be the benefit of full frame mirrorless? It won’t be smaller lenses, and they’ll need monster batteries to provide comparable shooting time and to handle the demands of a high-quality viewfinder.

@Ebrahim Saadawi
"my point is DSLRs can and will get most of the ML technology benefits! Flip up the mirror to liveview: you have a mirrorless camera."
On paper my friend, on paper... you clearly have not much of a clue of the actually usability difference.

" (With the side capability of shooting thousands of images using the OVF, and no the 5000 number is not a stretch, one charge with 1DXII left me with 5640 images and 20% to go!)"
that is easily reachable with the A9 on a single battery, I get actually far more than that. I got something like 15,000 pictures with the battery grip (2 batteries) on the A9 and it still weights like a 5DIII.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2018 at 16:03 UTC
In reply to:

entoman: Canon continue to bring out stacks of new L glass for DSLRs - 85mm F1.4, TS-E 50mm macro, TS-E 90mm macro, TS-E 135mm macro, 16-35mm F2.8 iii, 24-105mm F4 ii, all in the last 18 months. New 70-200mm F2.8 and 70-200mm F4 are expected very soon, and you can be sure many other optics will be updated. That indicates strongly that Canon have no intention of abandoning DSLRs any time soon. 7DMKiii and 5DSMkii bodies are sure to be announced this year too.

Mirrorless will be developed alongside DSLRS, but it's exceedingly unlikely that pros will abandon DSLR for Canon mirrorless until it's been thoroughly proven. Canon have wisely chosen to beta-test their mirrorless tech with the EOS-M series. The first Canon FF mirrorless is sure to emerge this year, and the system will grow and develop, but DSLRs will still be around in 5 years time, maybe even 10 or 15 years.

@entoman

You might want to check out this guy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaBhBhSQBVI&t=89s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFW1ctYhHtM
it is critical to select "release" priority in AF-C to get the needed responsiveness. Camera is by default "balanced" or "AF".
I can share some of my own rugby/soccer etc if interested.
The tracking speed is quite good for a relatively far subject, the A9 will not be as fast as the 1DX (on canon glass) for subjects moving fast toward the photographer if they are at close distance, for these you better switch to Sony 100-400 or Sony 70-200. On the up side Sony will lock and maintain the focus on a randomly moving subject better than the 1DX. It will also have more precise focus. Focusing area is similar to what you have on the 1DX and fps is limited to 10fps. The AF is very quick if the subject is not badly oof, comparable to the 1DX never really tested if faster or slower, however it will be slower if the subject is completely oof.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2018 at 00:51 UTC
In reply to:

entoman: Canon continue to bring out stacks of new L glass for DSLRs - 85mm F1.4, TS-E 50mm macro, TS-E 90mm macro, TS-E 135mm macro, 16-35mm F2.8 iii, 24-105mm F4 ii, all in the last 18 months. New 70-200mm F2.8 and 70-200mm F4 are expected very soon, and you can be sure many other optics will be updated. That indicates strongly that Canon have no intention of abandoning DSLRs any time soon. 7DMKiii and 5DSMkii bodies are sure to be announced this year too.

Mirrorless will be developed alongside DSLRS, but it's exceedingly unlikely that pros will abandon DSLR for Canon mirrorless until it's been thoroughly proven. Canon have wisely chosen to beta-test their mirrorless tech with the EOS-M series. The first Canon FF mirrorless is sure to emerge this year, and the system will grow and develop, but DSLRs will still be around in 5 years time, maybe even 10 or 15 years.

@netmage @entoman

I use Canon 500/4L all the time with my A9 when I shoot sports. My 1DX stays at home. Does it tell you anything about A9 AF with Canon glass?

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 20:17 UTC
In reply to:

KeepCalm: If the mirrorless makers enforced silent shutter at all their news conferences and it caught on that would be a bit of a problem for DSLRs.

@sirhawkeye64
Here your are saying that silent shooting is good but not a dealbreaker, elsewhere you are adopting the same philosophy for eye AF, I would not be surprised if in others threads you would be making the same argument for IBIS, no mirror blackout and no mechanical limitation to FPS. Has it occurred to you that if you sum all these up and a lot more you are just trying to defend an archaic technology that has served us well but is about to be done with its duty cycle?

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 20:12 UTC
In reply to:

ttran88: It's quite interesting to see everyone equate mirrorless to Sony only.

@Dareshooter
no worries, I was responding to ttran88

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 08:44 UTC
In reply to:

Michael - Visual Pursuit: I don't see any need for Canon to drop EF.
The minute they introduce a FF mirrorless camera, many people
who now use adapted Canon glass on Sony bodies will switch back.

Look at the complaints about non native EF-M lenses and the mount converter.

People are not happy with adapters.

As long as Canon stops teasing with crippled features and is not going to take too long to deliver a competitive mirrorless. Canon is going to have a tough time matching the A7III specifications at the same price point. Such a camera would mean collapsing the 6DII and 5DIV market and that is strongly against current Canon marketing strategies.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 07:24 UTC
In reply to:

donmarse: Isn't automatic eye focusing and following a feature that wedding photographers could use and appreciate?

@donmarse
Typically everyone downplaying eye AF are people that at the most have read articles about it or watched a youtube video. Anyone who actually used it could not deny how useful that is.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 07:20 UTC
In reply to:

ttran88: It's quite interesting to see everyone equate mirrorless to Sony only.

Well, if are looking at FF there is not much else to choose from is it? That is where the real battlefield is going to be.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 07:17 UTC
In reply to:

hikerdoc: Time and Technology marches on.
I am a DSLR user. I also prefer a maintaining a landline telephone, wired loudspeakers, printed rather than e-books, speaking with rather than texting, and local hardware stores instead of Amazon.

Ten years from now all of the current new camera tech will be outdated. Ten years from now I will be at an age where I am no longer concerned with having the latest version of any new camera. Ten years from now those currently foretelling the last days of the DSLR will find themselves comfortable with their versions of current new technology and unconcerned with its inevitable obsolescence.

@hikerdoc
sure... but what is the point of writing this on a site's forum which interest is camera innovation?

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 06:51 UTC
In reply to:

Felts: "Consider features like face / eye-detection AF, full-frame autofocus coverage and 4K video.."

I have and I don't need / use any of them.

@sirhawkeye64
"I'm sure many veterned wedding photographers on here have shot tons of weddings without this feature and they still nailed the shots"
You can process your raw images with a 10 years old computer. Would your rather use a current state of the art machine? Is a currently powerful computer a "marketing stunt"?
Your "marketing stunt" definition is what I am objecting, passing a personal opinion for am more general conclusion. I can tell you that eye AF is definitely high up in my list of camera features. Now is my turn to ask you a question:
What experience do you have in using eye AF? In order to support your statement "marketing stunt" you must have some evidence to back it up. Please be specific. I have plenty of situations I have shot that would have been challenging without eye AF. Again, not impossible but eye AF turned situations in a breeze that otherwise would have been challenging or simply more work. Happy to detail them out for you if you are interested.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 06:40 UTC
Total: 1967, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »