Mattoid

Joined on Mar 6, 2011

Comments

Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

norman shearer: Key question that needs answering - is the EVF better than that on the GX80?

Edit: Its looks like the stat for the GX85 is wrong. Its actually 1.39× (0.7× 35mm equiv.) On paper thats the same as the GX9 but the reality is that its 16:9 ratio so when shooting 4:3 stills it is effectively 0.57x equiv.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 18:53 UTC
In reply to:

Jacques Cornell: The EVF magnification is the same as the GX7 & GX85, but those both have 16:9 panels that use only a fraction of their area to display 4:3 images. I wonder whether this is a 4:3 panel, in which case images would appear larger. Can DPR clarify?

Edit: Its looks like the stat for the GX85 is wrong. Its actually 1.39× (0.7× 35mm equiv.) On paper thats the same as the GX9 but the reality is that its 16:9 ratio so when shooting 4:3 stills it is effectively 0.57x equiv.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 18:51 UTC
In reply to:

Jacques Cornell: The EVF magnification is the same as the GX7 & GX85, but those both have 16:9 panels that use only a fraction of their area to display 4:3 images. I wonder whether this is a 4:3 panel, in which case images would appear larger. Can DPR clarify?

Its funny that people keep saying that its the same EVF as the GX80 and GX7 but the stats actually indicate it is far bigger. GX85 is 0.7(0.35 equiv) and the GX9 is 1.39 (0.7 equiv). Though its easy to see how the mix up could happen. So are the stats wrong or are people just asuming because the reviewer only compared it to the GX8 and not the GX80?

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 18:27 UTC
In reply to:

chrisno: terrible choice removing articulating screen
and a 30% drop in battery life is absolutely nono

otto k - Who looks DIRECTLY down at a screen? I imagine 80 degrees is the perfect angle for most senarios and its not like you cant see it if looking directly down.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 18:19 UTC
In reply to:

norman shearer: Key question that needs answering - is the EVF better than that on the GX80?

It looks to be a far bigger EVF than the GX85. Stats show GX85 is 0.7(0.35 equiv) and the GX9 is 1.39 (0.7 equiv). Though its easy to see how the mix up could happen.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 18:16 UTC
In reply to:

caulixtla: No, this is not a GX8 downgrade. It’s a GX85 upgrade: Slightly bigger, same shooting speed, same lack of weather sealing, same !@#$ EVF, same video quality. The main upgrades are 20mp instead of 16mp, somewhat better ergonomics, and a bigger and better kit lens.

Panasonic's biggest mistake was calling this a GX9 instead of a GX95, which more accurately describes it.

I sense that Panasonic has the G9 for people who want a bigger stills body and weather sealing; this GX9 for people who want long 4K videos in a smaller and less expensive package; the GH5 and GH5s for really good video; and the GX850 will probably hang around as their tiny entry level model.

It looks to be a far bigger EVF than the GX85. Stats show GX85 is 0.7(0.35 equiv) and the GX9 is 1.39 (0.7 equiv). Though its easy to see how the mix up could happen.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 18:09 UTC
On article TriLens triple lens holder coming to Kickstarter (165 comments in total)

Not dorky at all! Cool idea though.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 15:16 UTC as 32nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

thomas2279f: Excellent Nikon... could be replacing my Rx100 MK 1 with one of these models 18-50, 24-85mm once price comes down and image + video quality samples are released. Although the Sony Rx100 still produces excellent images and is it worth replacing with a new model ?.

I really wished Nikon brought the DL range out same time as the RX100 and RX10 / Panasonic FZ1000 were announced

re Mato34. Yeah a 25% length reduction and a 2 stop light and DOF advantage. Its loose loose.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 13:43 UTC
In reply to:

Mattoid: 15 fps isn't video. Stop mis-reporting!

A non point made well!

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2016 at 01:43 UTC

15 fps isn't video. Stop mis-reporting!

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 22:54 UTC as 29th comment | 2 replies
On article YoCam is world's smallest waterproof 'life' camera (28 comments in total)

Why do these things always have fish eye lenses? Give us a wide rectilinear!

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2016 at 23:58 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
On article Video: a look at the Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

VadymA: Hmm, that's a strange review. Not sure if it's intentional but it makes the camera look rather bad. After watching the whole video all I could remember is bad UI, bad responsiveness, bad battery, bad eye cover... I would not want to buy this camera based on this review. There is no analysis of image quality, autofocus, ergonomics, lens quality, competition, etc. And even if I missed any of this, it means it wasn't presented well. And on top of that, the accent and fast pronunciation make it difficult to understand for some of your audience. Just wanted to share my honest impression. Personally, I like camara reviewes of The Camera Store on YouTube and this one was lacking in comparison.

Yeah, the nerve of them having an English accent in an English language review!

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2015 at 12:10 UTC
In reply to:

PicOne: Wondering if like the 11-16, how much of the 11-20mm's range will work on a FF sensor? The 11-16 worked on a 5d at 15-16mm, so in many ways the 11-16mm offered a lot of value by giving you a 15mm lens as well as an APS zoom.

I would guess it might work from 15-16 upwards. You can never be sure, but it will be an interesting thing to test.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2015 at 00:25 UTC
On article Real-world test: Nikon D750 at the Museum of Flight (280 comments in total)

Great video, and amazing location! What camera was the majority of the video filmed on? It looked very good. was it another Nikon? Also is it possible to use active d lighting during video shooting or just stills?

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2014 at 00:52 UTC as 88th comment | 2 replies
On article Samsung NX1 real-world sample images (324 comments in total)
In reply to:

aftab: Few observations.
1. The lens is great. Combined with high MP the camera renders excellent detail in good light.
2. JPEG engine is below average, seems to be struggling with noise in low light. The monument scene is ISO100 and the sky and water are full of posterization, a sign of heavy NR. Despite this black/dark areas are full noise starting from ISO200 (first series, sides of the building).
3. Incidentally, all RAW images involve some shadow lifting and NX1 sensor appears to be way behind Exmor or Toshiba (D7100) in this regard. Lady in the beach for example (ISO200), side of her hair got shadow lifted and any modern Japanese sensor would have done better.
4. While skin tone is good some colors appears unnatural. Monument night sky for example.
5. Barney is a very good photographer. I like his sense of composition.
6. There is more to sensor technology than BSI and 60nm manufacturing process. Samsung still needs lots of work to do.

Ok, my issue may have been more uncomon than I thought then. Im glad you dont have it. The posterization I was seing was in a differernt leage to this image. But yeah there is probably a lot of bad noise reduction going on here.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2014 at 19:58 UTC
On article Samsung NX1 real-world sample images (324 comments in total)
In reply to:

aftab: Few observations.
1. The lens is great. Combined with high MP the camera renders excellent detail in good light.
2. JPEG engine is below average, seems to be struggling with noise in low light. The monument scene is ISO100 and the sky and water are full of posterization, a sign of heavy NR. Despite this black/dark areas are full noise starting from ISO200 (first series, sides of the building).
3. Incidentally, all RAW images involve some shadow lifting and NX1 sensor appears to be way behind Exmor or Toshiba (D7100) in this regard. Lady in the beach for example (ISO200), side of her hair got shadow lifted and any modern Japanese sensor would have done better.
4. While skin tone is good some colors appears unnatural. Monument night sky for example.
5. Barney is a very good photographer. I like his sense of composition.
6. There is more to sensor technology than BSI and 60nm manufacturing process. Samsung still needs lots of work to do.

I bet you are using either firefox or chrome with windows 7.
Copy the url and load it up with internet explorer and tell me if you still see the posterization. I recently noticed this after upgrading to windows 7. XP didn't do it.
The good news is that if you use firefox you can fix it by using about:config to set "gfx.color_management.mode" to 0.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2014 at 18:19 UTC
In reply to:

Mattoid: Looks like some pretty extreme distortion correction is happening here, and not working. Im seeing weird wavey lines all over the place. Look at the green lampost in shot 4: its bent. As are the edges of the walls of the building in shot 8. ok its an old building but that bad? Shot 24, another example. Sometimes a bit of barrel distortion looks more natural. Did they just go over the top with correction or is there some weirder moustache like distortion caused by extreme light bending (to make the lens small) being hidden here?

Carlnor, Is that condescending tone really necessary? People who see potential faults will mention them. People who want to buy a camera will act deffensively to potential faults no matter what. If you can't see the curvature in the examples I have given, I can't help you. Maybe everything they photographed was wonky in that town, but it's curved, trust me. As for distortion correction, we know panasonic does it automatically for m4/3rds lenses even in raw. And the panasonic rep even said they had to do a a lot of light bending to get the lens so small, and that if it had been a mere enlargement of the LX7 lens it would stick out something like 10cm infront of the camera. So I'm not pulling that out of thin air either.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2014 at 20:10 UTC

Looks like some pretty extreme distortion correction is happening here, and not working. Im seeing weird wavey lines all over the place. Look at the green lampost in shot 4: its bent. As are the edges of the walls of the building in shot 8. ok its an old building but that bad? Shot 24, another example. Sometimes a bit of barrel distortion looks more natural. Did they just go over the top with correction or is there some weirder moustache like distortion caused by extreme light bending (to make the lens small) being hidden here?

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 17:32 UTC as 127th comment | 4 replies
On article In Photos: Iceland captured in infrared (77 comments in total)

I don't get what is infrared about these. How would they have looked if they had not been infrared? What would look different?

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2014 at 01:02 UTC as 24th comment | 4 replies
On article Wyoming's stunning weather and landscapes in time-lapse (231 comments in total)

I think the music sucks. I muted. Its not worthy to go along with a video that took so much effort.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 07:08 UTC as 15th comment | 2 replies
Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »