BozemanMark

Lives in United States Bozeman, MT, United States
Works as a Retired
Joined on Jun 15, 2011

Comments

Total: 17, showing: 1 – 17
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: Not being able to achieve a shallow depth of field when needed is the reason I cross off this camera off the list. An old GH4 and a good ultra zoom lens would be my choice plus a little Focal reducer put my cheapest 50mms on for a very shallow look.

I realize this has the better lens in terms of the super zoom one, and does have quite a bit if features (600mm, Video AF, PZ, DR in S-LOG2) over the GH4 the GH4 betters it where it hurts.

This camera, at this price point, sure has a very very very narrow band of target audience. For example I had the RX10 original (24-200 f/2.8 HD) for video so I am a perfect candidate for a target but they lose me at the teiring: if I am going as high as 2K I will want the ability to put a shallow lens. I am a sucker for bridge cameras and not even in the target market!

I expect you could get shallow depth of field with this camera. I have been able to get flower pictures with decent bokeh with my RX100 mkII.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 23:05 UTC
In reply to:

BozemanMark: I just finished a 5-day backpack in the Beartooths in Montana. My 3 lb kit was a Sony A6300 with 18-200 LE lens, 2 spare batteries (which I did not need) in a LowePro Toploader 45AW case. I liked the 27-300 mm equivalent range. I can even get pretty good bokeh with the lens for wildflower closeups. I also liked the quality of the 24MP APS-C Sony sensor. My wife's 12 oz kit was a Sony HX80 with 24-720mm range for those long range wildlife shots. Unfortunately, we didn't see much wildlife. I did my training carrying the camera and full pack weight (42 lb), so I was used to the weight on the trip.

Bear spray! We each carried a canister. From what I have read, it is more effective against grizzlies than a firearm. You are unlikely to kill a grizzly with most firearms. Then you have one angry injured bear. Bear spray, when used correctly, should drive them off, since the capsicum really makes their eyes and lungs burn.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 05:13 UTC
In reply to:

BozemanMark: I just finished a 5-day backpack in the Beartooths in Montana. My 3 lb kit was a Sony A6300 with 18-200 LE lens, 2 spare batteries (which I did not need) in a LowePro Toploader 45AW case. I liked the 27-300 mm equivalent range. I can even get pretty good bokeh with the lens for wildflower closeups. I also liked the quality of the 24MP APS-C Sony sensor. My wife's 12 oz kit was a Sony HX80 with 24-720mm range for those long range wildlife shots. Unfortunately, we didn't see much wildlife. I did my training carrying the camera and full pack weight (42 lb), so I was used to the weight on the trip.

Safety. Need to have at least three people when traveling in bear country. There are both black bears and grizzlies in the Beartooths. Fortunately, we did not encounter any bears.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 15:53 UTC
In reply to:

BozemanMark: I just finished a 5-day backpack in the Beartooths in Montana. My 3 lb kit was a Sony A6300 with 18-200 LE lens, 2 spare batteries (which I did not need) in a LowePro Toploader 45AW case. I liked the 27-300 mm equivalent range. I can even get pretty good bokeh with the lens for wildflower closeups. I also liked the quality of the 24MP APS-C Sony sensor. My wife's 12 oz kit was a Sony HX80 with 24-720mm range for those long range wildlife shots. Unfortunately, we didn't see much wildlife. I did my training carrying the camera and full pack weight (42 lb), so I was used to the weight on the trip.

Ah, yes - to be young again. I am 66; my wife is 60 (her pack was 31 lb), and our companion is 67. We carried what we felt were the essentials (plus the cameras). We trained for two months with increasing pack weights until we got up to our trip weights. We would love to carry less, but we left out everything we figured we could do without.
We could see the haze, but the smoke was not too bad.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 14:47 UTC

I just finished a 5-day backpack in the Beartooths in Montana. My 3 lb kit was a Sony A6300 with 18-200 LE lens, 2 spare batteries (which I did not need) in a LowePro Toploader 45AW case. I liked the 27-300 mm equivalent range. I can even get pretty good bokeh with the lens for wildflower closeups. I also liked the quality of the 24MP APS-C Sony sensor. My wife's 12 oz kit was a Sony HX80 with 24-720mm range for those long range wildlife shots. Unfortunately, we didn't see much wildlife. I did my training carrying the camera and full pack weight (42 lb), so I was used to the weight on the trip.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 05:45 UTC as 60th comment | 10 replies
On article 2017 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $900-1200 (478 comments in total)

Why is the Olympus PenF not included in this comparison? It is the same price as the Lumix GX8 and the Canon EOS 80D.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2016 at 01:34 UTC as 86th comment | 2 replies

DPReview, How about a review of the major E-mount adapters? Tell us how well they work with A-Mount lenses, Canon lenses, Sigma Canon mount lenses, and Sigma mount lenses (not just the subset targeted by the MC-11). Let us know how they work with the A7RII and A6300, and which of the AF modes on those cameras work with which adapters. I expect there are quite a few of us that would find such a test very useful.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2016 at 00:05 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

Benna78: Well, ok, I know it would need a new lens design, but why can't Sigma offer native E mount lenses?

When I told a Sigma rep that I will buy their 150-600 when they offer it in Sony FE mount. He said Sigma has gotten lots of requests to produce native E mount lenses. Apparently, they decided to produce this adapter, rather than native E-mount lenses. Too bad!

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 22:12 UTC
On article Samsung launches Galaxy TabPro S Windows tablet (98 comments in total)

It better be cheap, since it is underpowered compared to a Surface Pro 4. You can get a Surface Pro 4 with a Core I7 processor, 8 GB RAM and 256 GB SSD for $1599 - pricey, to be sure, but with plenty of power.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 21:29 UTC as 20th comment | 5 replies
On photo DSC00160 in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (3 comments in total)

I think the colors look pretty natural; you must be used to super-saturated colors.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2013 at 04:23 UTC as 2nd comment
On a photo in the Sony Cyber-shot RX100 II sample gallery (3 comments in total)

I think the colors look pretty natural; you must be used to super-saturated colors.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2013 at 04:23 UTC as 2nd comment

The G1X looks like it could be an interesting second camera, but the lack of an electronic viewfinder is a big negative for me. We have an S70 that we really like, except that the optical viewfinder doesn't accurately show the boundaries of the picture, and the LCD is hard to see in bright light. Thus, it is difficult to compose the shot the way you would like. With a good EVF, the G1X could be a compelling camera.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2012 at 03:06 UTC as 20th comment
On article Sony SLT-A77 studio comparison samples (226 comments in total)

The NEX-5N looked very good compared to just about everything at every ISO. Put that sensor in a NEX-7 body and Sony won't be able to make enough of them.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2011 at 04:14 UTC as 51st comment | 1 reply
On article Sony NEX-7 high-end APS-C mirrorless camera first look (355 comments in total)

The NEX-7 looks like a awesome camera with a very high price. I hope Sony migrates the compact body with viewfinder form factor down to the NEX-5 range. With a 16MP sensor and an $800 price, THAT would be a compelling camera.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2011 at 03:23 UTC as 42nd comment
In reply to:

pixel_colorado: It's a shame they made it bigger than the A33, A35 and the A55.

Yup. There is now quite a gap between the A35 (definitely entry level) and the A65. I hope Sony fills it with an upgraded version of the A55.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2011 at 18:56 UTC
In reply to:

pixel_colorado: It's a shame they made it bigger than the A33, A35 and the A55.

I was hoping the A65 would be closer in size and weight to the A55. You could get an A55 with18-250 lens weighing in about 2 lb. I want a great camera without excess bulk and weight. That was a big attraction of the SLT cameras. As I get older, I would rather carry less weight - especially backpacking. Now I am leaning toward the NEX-7.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2011 at 16:29 UTC
Total: 17, showing: 1 – 17