Lan

Lives in United Kingdom South East, United Kingdom
Works as a IT
Joined on Jul 12, 2001
About me:

Hobbies:
Photography
Computers
Reading SF/Fantasy
Travel

Comments

Total: 646, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Leonp: The sensor size seems a secret, so it will be microscopic.
So I shlouldn't have wasted my time reading the article.

General consensus of the internet appears to be that it uses the 21-megapixel 1/2.4" Sony Exmor RS IMX230 sensor, it has 6-axis optical IS, and a 26.5mm (equiv) f/2 lens.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 20:05 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (741 comments in total)
In reply to:

Savannah0986: Rather in the same vein as the other day's very odd 'Roundup: Semi-Pro Interchangeable Lens Cameras', there are some peculiar omissions and indeed, inclusions in this equally odd list.
S.

It's easy to complain; instead how's about providing a list of the cameras you think should have been included? Remember the caveats though, affordable and excellent!

I was pleased to see my grandfather's last camera made the list, an AE1-Program. Also my favourite compact camera the Oly Mju-II.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2017 at 18:39 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (741 comments in total)
In reply to:

absquatulate: You missed off the Kodak disc camera, but to be fair I'd rather stick a fork in my nads than use one again.

LOL; I think you're confused, the article said excellent. The Disc cameras were excrement.

My first camera was a Kodak Disc 3600, and it had to be one of the worst cameras made by the human race!

Link | Posted on May 21, 2017 at 18:34 UTC
On article Sony FE 12-24mm F4 G sample gallery (60 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lan: Nice in the center, but the corner sharpness is disappointing and the sunstars could be prettier. Not bad for the size/price though!

When judging corner sharpness for some reason I prefer to look at the corners ;)

I shoot ultrawide regularly, so I'm familiar with distortion. What I'm seeing is looks like a combination of astigmatism and field curvature. It's a general haziness and smearing of detail at the corners.

This one (stopped down to f8) is disappointing in the corners given the 24MP camera, but acceptable:
https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/9004820076/sony-fe-12-24mm-f4-g-sample-gallery/8247681068

This one is not acceptable, and again it's stopped down (only to f/5.6). The corners are very nearly visibly soft at thumbnail size:
https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/9004820076/sony-fe-12-24mm-f4-g-sample-gallery/2440131595

Both samples were shot on the A9, so they'd look significantly worse on the A7R or A7R2. This lens certainly isn't going to beat the Canon 11-24mm. Heck, it doesn't even beat my Samyang 14mm!

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 18:32 UTC
On article Sony FE 12-24mm F4 G sample gallery (60 comments in total)

Nice in the center, but the corner sharpness is disappointing and the sunstars could be prettier. Not bad for the size/price though!

Link | Posted on May 17, 2017 at 21:06 UTC as 11th comment | 2 replies
On a photo in the Sony FE 12-24mm F4 G sample gallery sample gallery (1 comment in total)

Disappointing lower corners!

Link | Posted on May 17, 2017 at 20:54 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

Bambi24: CMOSIS and other brands have been making more advanced machine vision sensors for years, yet you only talk about Sony Sony Sony Sony.

@Bambi24: Yes, but that may just be a function of better marketing by Sony; if CMOSIS doesn't send them any info, it's unlikely a news item will be written about them.

...and as to why this sensor could be a big deal - I could see something like this being used as an subject tracking sensor in a dSLR. It handles all the hard stuff, so you don't have to do it in camera. "Oi! AF! Move to the next focus point on the left; your subject has moved!"

Link | Posted on May 17, 2017 at 00:18 UTC
On article Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM sample gallery (142 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tieu Ngao: A review from CAMERALABS says that "the OS is not very effective at 400mm with shutter speeds around 1/100 sec and 1/50 sec". I suggest that DPREVIEW should have photos taken with that shutter speed range next time. Thanks.

Contra: Actually it's a useful thing to know you have in reserve to use at a pinch. Yes, ideally you'll be shooting in excellent light, but sometimes you have to roll with what you have. Also, not everyone shoots fast moving things.

I have to say the stabilization on the Canon 100-400 mk2 is absolutely superb. Whilst I wouldn't recommend people shoot at those sorts of shutter speeds, in my informal testing the Canon acquits itself very very well in precisely that sort of situation. I've been really impressed by it. Really impressed.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2017 at 19:52 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF gallery and first impressions (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

Docno: Strange. I've had this lens on my A7Rii for more than three weeks and I'm not finding that it struggles in low light. No hunting to speak of, and very few focus misses.

MrBrightSide: Both CDAF and PDAF systems have advantages and disadvantages, that's why both systems exist. Why not rent your intended system, and see whether you find the advantages outweigh the disadvantages for you?

For me the key advantage of mirrorless is definitely not CDAF, but the fact that it enables smaller, cheaper and lighter bodies.

Remember that some of the mirrorless systems have on-sensor PDAF, and that may offer the best solution - no alignment issues (so no microadjust), and no hunting.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2017 at 12:50 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF gallery and first impressions (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

Docno: Strange. I've had this lens on my A7Rii for more than three weeks and I'm not finding that it struggles in low light. No hunting to speak of, and very few focus misses.

MrBrightSide: for the sake of AF speed and to reduce AF wobble, the camera may stop focussing after a certain number of AF swings. 1, miss; 2, miss (but closer) ; 3, miss (closer still) ; 4, ah stuff it, close enough ;) It doesn't matter if you have a slow lens (as it'll wash out in the DOF), but with a fast one, it's a problem.

The review also states that the lens has a minor focus shift when stopped down. If the AF focusses wide open, but the lens stops down to take the picture, that may result in missed focus; particularly if the AF stops on the near side of a swing, and the lens's focus shift pushes the true focus back. Two small errors can equal a large error afterall; of course if you're lucky they cancel out ;)

With AF performance people also have different definitions of low light and hunting. We all know shooting different subject matter will impact the speed and accuracy of the AF - low contrast subjects can cause some CDAF systems to hunt like starved demons ;)

Link | Posted on May 10, 2017 at 01:33 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF gallery and first impressions (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lan: No doubt a silly question, but why are none of the samples shot at f/2.8 - according to the gallery tool? The lens is designed for shallow DOF, so why not showcase that? Every single shot is f/5.6 or narrower. Interestingly the only f/2.8 shot according to the EXIF on the review is the one from the Nikon lens!

Thank you for explaining Rishi, that makes sense. I would have thought reporting the actual aperture value rather than the t-corrected value would have made more sense though; at least for the sake of consistency. They don't report the t-stop for any other lenses afterall - unless this is the first of the new wave of course...?

Link | Posted on May 10, 2017 at 01:06 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF gallery and first impressions (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lan: No doubt a silly question, but why are none of the samples shot at f/2.8 - according to the gallery tool? The lens is designed for shallow DOF, so why not showcase that? Every single shot is f/5.6 or narrower. Interestingly the only f/2.8 shot according to the EXIF on the review is the one from the Nikon lens!

You've gotta love marketing departments ;)

Link | Posted on May 9, 2017 at 21:25 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF gallery and first impressions (316 comments in total)

No doubt a silly question, but why are none of the samples shot at f/2.8 - according to the gallery tool? The lens is designed for shallow DOF, so why not showcase that? Every single shot is f/5.6 or narrower. Interestingly the only f/2.8 shot according to the EXIF on the review is the one from the Nikon lens!

Link | Posted on May 9, 2017 at 20:32 UTC as 35th comment | 9 replies

Dammit Erez; I'd just about managed to persaude myself that I didn't need this lens, then you come along and post these pictures! Excellent work - both on selling the lens, and the pictures ;)

I know you probably shoot with a spirit level, but to my eye the Goðafoss shot feels slightly tilted - I know sometimes the perceptual horizon is different from the real horizon; but to me the shot feels better if you rotate it 1.5°CW? Might be worth experimenting a little to see what you think!

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 17:16 UTC as 74th comment
In reply to:

Evil_Sheep: Please, for the love of God, do not use footnotes outside of academia. In the now departed world of paper you just had to look down to see footnotes. Now you have to scroll to the end, and on a phone? No chance.

Do you see footnotes in the New York Times?

No, but that's because the New York Times is a footnote ;)

Link | Posted on May 4, 2017 at 20:21 UTC
In reply to:

Ruekon: It is a pity that Nikon came that far. Wasn't it Nippon Kogaku once piggybacking on Zeiss Ikon, providing more innovative lenses and then developing Nikon cameras to perfection?

I wished Nikon would still focus on better and more innovative products, in particular lenses, instead of resting on former success and claiming against companies that take the lead today.

I agree with your sentiment; but if you don't protect your patents they're worthless.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2017 at 00:58 UTC
In reply to:

Frank_BR: Nikon is a notoriously difficult company to deal with. Who does not know, for example, the compatibility problems that Sigma has faced in their lenses for Nikon cameras? Nikon leaves real booby traps hidden in the software for communication between cameras and lenses, so whenever Nikon launches a new camera, Sigma engineers have nightmares because Sigma lenses may suddenly stop working with the new Nikon camera. To counteract such Nikon tricks, Sigma launched the Sigma USB dock that allows easy firmware update of its lenses.

Now Nikon fights with ASML and Zeiss is a battle of giants. If Nikon misses, bye, bye Nikon.

Frank: As I understand it Sigma's problems with the lens compatibility are because they don't licence the communications protocol from Nikon. If they paid the licence fees, they'd be fine; so I'd say that's rather more Sigma's fault than Nikon's. Witness the other 3rd party manufacturers whose lenses do work on Nikon's bodies without any fuss...

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2017 at 00:52 UTC

OK, so a contrast ratio of 100m:1 has to be the dynamic contrast - what's the static contrast?

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2017 at 18:20 UTC as 21st comment
In reply to:

s_grins: Speakers? This is a gaming monitor

Apparently a pair of (optional) 2W units. And no, this isn't a gaming monitor, those are the Predator models that were released at the same time. The best info I've found so far was over at Tom's Hardware:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/acer-predator-professional-new-monitors,news-55466.html

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2017 at 17:40 UTC
In reply to:

Potemkin_Photo: Once computational photography comes into its own dslr will be dead.

Ahh, but just imagine what you could with that same computational photography on a decent dSLR/MILC...

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 20:46 UTC
Total: 646, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »