GaryJP

GaryJP

Lives in Hong Kong Hong Kong
Works as a TV Production, Directing, Shooting, Editing
Joined on Mar 11, 2006

Comments

Total: 1182, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Dimijis: why someone would spend that kind of money for this lens when you can get the excellent Tamron 15-30 at half the price with at least 90% of the quality is beyond me...

DOMINIK
http://dominik-photography.com/

For the extra 10%.

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 12:16 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

Asarhaddon: it will sell because name is canon
Because there is a klan that thinks canon will do the best
A6300,6500, xt2, Em1 ii better than M5
But name is Canon
No matter what you say to them, their ideas do not change :)

Watching the denial of Sony fans about the color is as amusing as watching Canon fans' former denial about DR. The only time they admit there IS a difference, even in RAW is when they are claiming the Sony colour is better. If anyone can match the colours with Grey card and colour chart and a custom profile in Raw, why don't you do it and make a fortune? I've seen it claimed. I have never seen it done.

I have purchased and tried those profiles, including Huelight. They don't do it for me. If they work well enough for you, then Sony is fine for you.

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2016 at 11:04 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

GiovanniB: What do you mean by "JPEG colors are still second-to-none"? IMO Canon's green hues still miss the richness of any of their competitors, resulting in almost uniform green areas with brownish shadows. Skin colors are quite good but for landscapers, Canon means trouble - lots of effort in post-processing and some irrecoverably spoiled shots, particularly in challenging high-contrast lighting conditions. Of course my observations are based more on RAW files than JPEGs but in the JPEGs I've shot and seen so far I found nothing yet to support any claim of a particularly good color fidelity, again except for skin tones for which Canon equipment seems to be primarily optimized.

Have never seen one that works to my satisfaction.

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2016 at 10:56 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

GiovanniB: What do you mean by "JPEG colors are still second-to-none"? IMO Canon's green hues still miss the richness of any of their competitors, resulting in almost uniform green areas with brownish shadows. Skin colors are quite good but for landscapers, Canon means trouble - lots of effort in post-processing and some irrecoverably spoiled shots, particularly in challenging high-contrast lighting conditions. Of course my observations are based more on RAW files than JPEGs but in the JPEGs I've shot and seen so far I found nothing yet to support any claim of a particularly good color fidelity, again except for skin tones for which Canon equipment seems to be primarily optimized.

Been burned by Fujifilm. Never again.

Find their raws a bit troublesome too.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2016 at 03:20 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

Asarhaddon: it will sell because name is canon
Because there is a klan that thinks canon will do the best
A6300,6500, xt2, Em1 ii better than M5
But name is Canon
No matter what you say to them, their ideas do not change :)

Wrong. I only shoot in raw and the Sony colours are not in the ballpark. Despite what some claim, NO ONE has matched Canon or Nikon's colour science, and that includes Sony's own engineers. If they could, they would. I still shoot an A7RII for video, but traded in the ASRII for a 5D MkIV and don't look back. Zombie faces and greens that vary from mud brown to fluorescent are not my thing. In the end the "specifications" war is useless.

As for "Canon is the Apple of the photography world. " Nope. My reasons for going BACK to Canon, after the not cheap switch to Sony include ergonomics, menu system, ruggedness, reliability, weatherproofing. after sales service, native lens selection, speed of response, and - yes - colours. I have shot Sony video, where i am willing to put up with their idiosyncrasies - for years. But their stills don't do it for me. That's not to say other people don't get good results . But the fanboy brand bashing on every Canon announcement gets pathetic.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2016 at 02:29 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

GiovanniB: What do you mean by "JPEG colors are still second-to-none"? IMO Canon's green hues still miss the richness of any of their competitors, resulting in almost uniform green areas with brownish shadows. Skin colors are quite good but for landscapers, Canon means trouble - lots of effort in post-processing and some irrecoverably spoiled shots, particularly in challenging high-contrast lighting conditions. Of course my observations are based more on RAW files than JPEGs but in the JPEGs I've shot and seen so far I found nothing yet to support any claim of a particularly good color fidelity, again except for skin tones for which Canon equipment seems to be primarily optimized.

Personally I returned to Canon partly because I disliked both Sony's skin colour and its greens. Nor am I the only one. Just had a lot of very disappointing landscape shots from Spain shot on a A7RII. In film days I used to like Fuji (not the hated Provia) and Agfa for greens but that's a dream now.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2016 at 01:01 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

Asarhaddon: it will sell because name is canon
Because there is a klan that thinks canon will do the best
A6300,6500, xt2, Em1 ii better than M5
But name is Canon
No matter what you say to them, their ideas do not change :)

Well for me, Canon's "insufficient DR" may have affected at most one shot in a hundred. Sony's "colour science" affected every single one. And nor were the ergonomics by any means pleasant to work with.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2016 at 00:54 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

Asarhaddon: it will sell because name is canon
Because there is a klan that thinks canon will do the best
A6300,6500, xt2, Em1 ii better than M5
But name is Canon
No matter what you say to them, their ideas do not change :)

Rather like those of the steadfast bashers then.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 23:52 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1600 comments in total)
In reply to:

entoman: Some Sony and Olympus models definitely offer better specifications, and possibly marginally better image quality, but unlike them (in my opinion) this little Canon is much better designed, and because of that, it will I believe be far more pleasurable to use. And that means it will be used more often, and more productively. However I won't be getting one - mainly because I'm a left-eyed shooter, and I don't want to be poking my thumb in my eye all the time. For me, the 80D would be a better choice, but for right-eyed shooters who want something smaller and lighter it seems ideal.

Ergonomics and robustness are two of the big reasons I keep coming back to Canon. Colour and after-sales service are two of the others. I just recommended this camera to someone who wants a first camera system. Not least because she can buy extra L lenses if she thinks she might want to step up later.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 04:48 UTC
In reply to:

razadaz: A lot of critical reviews here from people who don’t seem to want to see the positive aspects of this program. Remember this is the first version of a program and it is being compared to Photoshop that has been in development for over 20 years. The program is still in development and features are being added all the time. No, it can’t make toast, change light bulbs, or fix your car, but there is a great deal it can do.

Don't use Photoshop and you'll have more to donate to charity

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 20:14 UTC
In reply to:

razadaz: A lot of critical reviews here from people who don’t seem to want to see the positive aspects of this program. Remember this is the first version of a program and it is being compared to Photoshop that has been in development for over 20 years. The program is still in development and features are being added all the time. No, it can’t make toast, change light bulbs, or fix your car, but there is a great deal it can do.

Some people, for reasons I can't quite fathom, are rather heavily emotionally invested in paying rent to Adobe. I am equally as heavily invested in not doing so if I can help it.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2016 at 00:13 UTC
In reply to:

SantaFeBill: Sorry there's no Windows trial version. As a senior on limited means, even a U.S. $40 expenditure has to be carefully considered. Even a 30-day money-back guarantee (as I understand On1 offers for Photo RAW) would be welcome.

As it costs less than three months of Photoshop CC in my area, I'd say the value of the expense depends on how long you plan to live. Having limited means is one of the best reasons to avoid renting your software, particularly if you don't need all the more complex bells and whistles for professional reasons.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2016 at 10:42 UTC
In reply to:

s_grins: It is hard do decide between 2017 ON1 RAW developer and Affinity 1.5
ON1 software UI is made for photographer, while Affinity UI is more of traditional PS.
Should I buy both? That is why it is hard to decide.

History view is bottom right on the basic screen on my Mac.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2016 at 04:19 UTC

Just bought the Mac version at the bargain price. Not even sure how much I'll use it yet (I also have Pixelmator and Capture One), but screw Adobe subscriptions basically. I don't mind a little outlay just to support any decent competition.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2016 at 04:08 UTC as 35th comment
In reply to:

NicoPPC: Humm. Can it "Save as ..." layered tiff ?

It seems so, judging from what I can see on my Mac version.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2016 at 04:04 UTC

It's an update to the non CC version as well, although you don't get all the features.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2016 at 10:49 UTC as 13th comment | 2 replies
On article Gear of the Year: Carey's choice - Canon PowerShot G9 X (212 comments in total)
In reply to:

a voice of reason: i dismiss the canon 1 inch sensor wonders .... for the pschyocowardness of canikon

the 5 was a paragon of ugliness and clumsy design ... the cowardly insistance of a central evf... and a truely notre dame worthy hump showing their obsessive slr formfactor bend and unwillingness to persue a corner evf loved by leica sony and fuji shooters as well as panasonic and even finally olympus with my lovely pen f

i can at least respect the speed of the lens if not its image quality , which is dismal, if the comparisons here are to be believed.

the 9x is tiny .... admirably so ... but stupidly slow at the long end ... and the evf
missing makes it less that the capable sonys and fujis .... iq is weak sadly
in spite of the excellent sensor.

i dream of a fuji x 30 successor with a evolved sensor that will make a dim memory of this latest canon disappointment .......to me,......... oh well.

My point is I am fine with it in the centre. Depending on the shooting situation I may keep either eye free for what else is going on.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 02:40 UTC
On article Gear of the Year: Carey's choice - Canon PowerShot G9 X (212 comments in total)
In reply to:

a voice of reason: i dismiss the canon 1 inch sensor wonders .... for the pschyocowardness of canikon

the 5 was a paragon of ugliness and clumsy design ... the cowardly insistance of a central evf... and a truely notre dame worthy hump showing their obsessive slr formfactor bend and unwillingness to persue a corner evf loved by leica sony and fuji shooters as well as panasonic and even finally olympus with my lovely pen f

i can at least respect the speed of the lens if not its image quality , which is dismal, if the comparisons here are to be believed.

the 9x is tiny .... admirably so ... but stupidly slow at the long end ... and the evf
missing makes it less that the capable sonys and fujis .... iq is weak sadly
in spite of the excellent sensor.

i dream of a fuji x 30 successor with a evolved sensor that will make a dim memory of this latest canon disappointment .......to me,......... oh well.

And there goes more of that varying mileage. I traded in my G7X for the G5X precisely BECAUSE I wanted the EVF you hate so much. Funny how people want different features, isn't it? It's almost as if there's actually more than one customer in the world.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 00:50 UTC
On article Gear of the Year: Carey's choice - Canon PowerShot G9 X (212 comments in total)
In reply to:

OlyPent: Put that in your pocket, and that annoying trap-door in front of the lens will jam from lint and debris in no time.

I do, occasionally, and it doesn't. But then I don't share the obsession with cameras having to go in pockets anyway.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 00:48 UTC
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (764 comments in total)

Like many photographers this whole thread reminds me how much I miss my dad.. Without him I would not be here.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2016 at 05:32 UTC as 244th comment
Total: 1182, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »