mmartel

Joined on Feb 3, 2013

Comments

Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article DxOMark Mobile Report: Lenovo Moto G Plus (15 comments in total)
In reply to:

mmarian: Who reads these reviews of mobile phones?? Don't dpr have anything more substantial to report on than yet another of hundreds of mobile phones flooding the already oversaturated market and DxO endless analyzing if the mobile camera has more or less artefacts and other totaly useless details ?? Who cares, I wonder. Has this world gone complete nuts or is it just me not undersanding it anymore ??????

I read them. I care.

Sincerely,
Current 2015 Moto G owner

Link | Posted on May 18, 2016 at 06:23 UTC
In reply to:

Jefftan: why don't make the 18-50mm lens available for the Nikon 1 system?

Perhaps I'm not using the right term when I say "vignetting." Perhaps the better way to phrase it would be to say the image circle of the lens at full wide simply doesn't cover the full sensor. It requires lot of in-body processing and correction to get a rectilinear image without "cut off" corners, which makes these corners extremely soft (though not necessarily noisy) at wide angle. Here is a link to a DPReview forum discussing the effect I'm describing: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3732788

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 00:20 UTC
In reply to:

Jefftan: why don't make the 18-50mm lens available for the Nikon 1 system?

Mato34: You are correct, and I was wrong. There were in fact several bug-fix firmware releases for N1.

The spirit behind my remarks, however, still stands. None of the firmware releases (AFAIK) actually added any new functionality. They were bug fix only. Even the seemingly trivial feature addition of allowing V1 users to disable image review was never released in a firmware upgrade.

If Nikon couldn't even bring itself to do that for its earliest N1 adopters, it seems totally inconceivable that they have either the will or capability to release new firmware capable of correcting massive lens distortion/vignetting for hypothetical new wide/fast lenses across their entire line of cameras (which span 4 different processors at this point - Expeed 3, 3A, 4A, 5A).

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 18:28 UTC
In reply to:

Jefftan: why don't make the 18-50mm lens available for the Nikon 1 system?

I've heard it explained as follows: These compact, collapsible f1.8-f2.8 lenses (whether from Canon, Sony, Nikon or whoever), by optical engineering necessity have massive distortion and vignetting at the wide end (like totally black corners). These require significant in-camera software-based correction to both JPEG and RAWs to create a normal image. If any of these new DL lenses were to be available for the N1 bodies, they'd have to come with the proper software to handle it. And if you've been following the Nikon 1 saga, you'd know that in the last 5 years since Nikon launched the Nikon 1, they've done precisely zero firmware updates for any of the umpteen models they've launched. So, no chance that'll happen.

I suppose it's possible that Nikon could launch new N1 models which could mount and use such optically gifted (flawed?) lenses. Many (including me) would like to see that happen. But I think that Nikon chose to launch fixed lens models suggests that their 1" ILCs are dead.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 04:33 UTC
In reply to:

Retzius: Its a good thing cellphones with cameras aren't popular.

All the folks these days are marching right into their brick and mortar stores and asking for compact cameras to carry along with their cell phones with cameras.

That whole cell phone camera thing is just a fad... Digital is also a fad, Kodak told me so.

Wait, didn't Sony prove there is a substantial market for premium compact cameras with 1" sensors if spec'd and priced correctly? These cameras are (obviously) not aimed at people satisfied with cell phone images, but rather those who are NOT satisfied with them but don't want to carry a DSLR.

But don't let that stop you from declaring anything smaller than full frame DOA.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 20:38 UTC
On a photo in the Sony 85mm F1.4 GM sample gallery sample gallery (2 comments in total)

Interesting choice of exposure compensation on this one ... -1.7 EV? Going for an artistic high contrast look? Or paranoid about blowing any highlights?

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 17:41 UTC as 2nd comment
On a photo in the Sony 85mm F1.4 GM sample gallery sample gallery (2 comments in total)

Just me, or is there quite a bit of unsightly moire in this one?

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 17:37 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

Steven Lungley: P is for Phooooey: I don’t want another variation of the basic, split aperture lens. At 5.6 the footage looks like it was shot on cell phone. Please add the new tech to a new lens, with a max f/2.0 aperture for some cinematic, selective focus video.

What a bunch of baloney.

If you can't see (or calculate) the depth of field differences between an APS-C sensor at 55mm/f5.6 vs. a phone sensor at ~4mm/f2.0, you're doing something wrong.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 18:28 UTC
In reply to:

Stephen Scharf: Glad to see the X100T here, it has been the most-used camera of mine in 2015 (bought mine January 2).

One thing continues to trouble me about your editorial content. Why do DPR editors continue to foist on their readers that we need more and more megapixels? 16 megapixels in an APS-C sized sensor is more than sufficient resolution for 99% of photographers in 99% of shooting situations and the "sweet-spot" for the functional conflict of resolution vs. noise for an APS-C sensor. All that adding more megapixels will do is add *noise*. We need EVFs with faster refresh rates, AF with servo tracking, and a more comprehensive set of lenses for any given mfr's system.

WE. DON'T. NEED. MORE. MEGAPIXELS.

Stephen, have you read this series on the topics? http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5365920428/the-effect-of-pixel-and-sensor-sizes-on-noise/2

Although I agree with your conclusion (most photographers, myself included, don't *need* more megapixels), your assertion that "All that adding more megapixels will do is add *noise*" is not correct.

Per-pixel noise may increase, but this is generally only a slight amount at higher ISOs. In better light, more pixels do allow more cropping, larger print sizes, and/or finer detail with equal noise (after downsizing to the same output dimensions).

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 17:56 UTC
On a photo in the Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 samples gallery sample gallery (2 comments in total)

Agreed. Nice range of test shots here, DPR. Good work.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 17:39 UTC as 1st comment
On article HTC One A9 launches with 13MP and OIS (26 comments in total)

Count me among the open minded, despite the "Applesque" design. I'm considering upgrading my current 2013 Moto X. But I'm really turned off by the large screen size of all the current Android flagships, and not interested in an iPhone. For those interested in a 5" screen size Android phone with decent performance, good camera, build quality, fingerprint scanner, microSD card, and quick charge functions, there really are not many choices. Maybe Z5 compact from Sony is the closest. But I've read that Sony's software is unimpressive, and I think it's also priced above this model. So this kinda hits a sweet spot in the Android market to some degree, knock off or not. I look forward to a review.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 02:52 UTC as 7th comment

Optical formula deserves some praise, from these samples. The contrast and sharpness look quite good across the frame, and at various lengths and apertures. That's pretty impressive and useful in an outdoor camera.

Also, some nice shots from what's usually a lovely trip. My favorites were of Haleakala, the volcano.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2015 at 04:11 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

Jim Evidon: DPReview has dedicated more space to this camera than any other in my recent memory. Do they own Sony stock or are they owned by Sony? There are a lot of other cameras out there that deserve some very close attention rather than a casual passing acknowledgement with some pictures.

Seriously, guys, it's a nice little camera and all that, but please give it a rest.

Barney, please ignore the "you're a Sony fanboy/on the Sony payroll" grumblers - although it's clear the moaning and groaning is painful to listen to. Trolls gonna troll.

Please continue to use your own data and sound editorial judgment to guide your calendar.

There is a big mass of RX100 (and RX10 and A7) owners who were pleased with their initial purchase and thinking about upgrading. There are also lots of enthusiasts (like myself) who have considered (and continue to consider) the past RX100 models but didn't bite for various reasons. I think a lot of us are excited to see the continued rapid innovation in the high end compact area, and follow this model family -- as well as other smaller mirrorless and high end compacts like the LX100, G7X, GM1/GM5, Nikon 1, etc. -- with great interest. Similar story for FF mirrorless, and "larger sensor superzoom/all-in-one" like Pany FZ1000, RX10, etc.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2015 at 15:00 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Review (19 comments in total)
In reply to:

wgerhartz: The LX7 offers a lot of camera for its money! I liked it from the very beginning.

However, my comment emphasizes its robustness. I was careless enough to let it drop from about 7 m unto a stone floor. It survived! It fell on the left upper edge (where the flash pops out).There is a dent, and the cover warps out by less than a mm. The flash needs fingernail assistance to pop out. Apart from that, there is not the slightest flaw in the optical quality of the photographs. I am amazed!

I've also got to give Panasonic some props. My LX7 also survived a nearly 2m fall onto a hardwood floor during a clumsy attempt to lift it from its shelf in a cabinet. I was horrified when it happened, certain that the camera was destroyed. But it powered right up and, aside from a slightly dented corner, hasn't skipped a beat. I've shot over 4000 images on it since the fall nearly a year ago with no problems. Credit the design, materials, and manufacturing.

As an aside, our Panasonic TS-5 rugged/waterproof camera also took a 1+m drop onto asphalt this past week when being passed between my wife and I. It also survived with just a couple scratches.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2015 at 05:16 UTC
In reply to:

vesa1tahti: Moon video recorded with Canon SX50 HS, @1200mm, no digital zoom:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/87469485@N08/13225485093/in/dateposted-public/

That's a great video!

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2015 at 20:22 UTC
On article X-Transformed? Fujifilm X30 Review (343 comments in total)
In reply to:

tedolf: I don't understand this camera. It is larger and heavier than an E-pl7 with the Panny 20mm f/1.7 lens. The sensor isn't as good and it doesn't cost much less.

What is the point?

tedolph

"The X30 does a tricky thing, which is to make the experience of shooting with a compact camera feel more like shooting with a 'real camera.'"

This camera is an affordable faux Leica rangefinder. It's for people with nostalgia for film days, either because they lived it, or they fantasize about it. They care as much or more about the shooting experience than the output. people who buy it have money to spare.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2015 at 03:51 UTC
On a photo in the Panasonic Lumix GF7 sample gallery sample gallery (2 comments in total)

I see more luma noise in the shadows than I would have expected at ISO 400 on a u4/3 sensor, recognizing that's easily tunable to taste. Doesn't really bother me, personally, just an observation that, as a Nikon CX and DX user, noise profile seems closer to what I see in my CX than DX.

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2015 at 13:18 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On photo 02-Dan-ISO_400-ACR in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (2 comments in total)

I see more luma noise in the shadows than I would have expected at ISO 400 on a u4/3 sensor, recognizing that's easily tunable to taste. Doesn't really bother me, personally, just an observation that, as a Nikon CX and DX user, noise profile seems closer to what I see in my CX than DX.

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2015 at 13:18 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On photo 20150110-DSC_4729 in mmartel's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

I will put you in time out if you keep taking my picture!

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2015 at 20:46 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »