Atazoth

Atazoth

Lives in United States DE, United States
Works as a Photography student / pro
Joined on Aug 28, 2015
About me:

I hate people with nice cameras and no skills who pretend to be professional and charge people money.

Comments

Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2207 comments in total)

One thing is stopping me from switching from Nikon to Fuji, that is lighting / strobe compatibility. I do a lot of moving subjects and changing light, so TTL is important to me. I haven't tried Fuji's new flash but I know it is optical and I haven't had that good luck with optical triggers. There are some really nice TTL systems out there but Fuji is not compatable. I own an XE1 and a D600 with several lenses for both. I use Phottix TTL triggers with Nikon speed lights and a Paul C buff (Einstein) studio set-up. I know, XE1 autofocus sucks. I also had an XT1 for about a month.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 18:10 UTC as 34th comment | 1 reply
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1139 comments in total)

This is the best DX sensor SLR right now (for stills) technically. I, however may forgo practical concerns in favor of a more enjoyable ergonomic experience, smaller size and color rendering in the XPRO 2.

Link | Posted on May 28, 2016 at 21:34 UTC as 85th comment | 1 reply
On article Extreme made easy: GoPro HERO4 Session review (64 comments in total)
In reply to:

Atazoth: This thing looks like it would be fun to use because of it’s size and durability. I don’t do much video. I also don’t have a back up camera on my SUV I could also use it for that. Just a good back up camera cost 200 dollars or more and you have to have a dedicated screen. I haven’t seen one you can use a phone or tablet with.

Can you use the Chinese clones with a smart phone or tablet? I don’t know much about them.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 20:53 UTC
On article Leica Q In-depth Review (1261 comments in total)

NFW! Way too expensive for a fixed lens!

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2016 at 15:56 UTC as 85th comment
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2503 comments in total)

Your review was helpful...however, I am annoyed by almost every camera review I read by anybody. They almost always gloss over camera build quality. That is extremely important to determining quality and value. This camera (unlike just about any mirrorless camera) is designed to be used every day. The weather sealing, magnesium body and I assume internal components such as shutter construction etc are (or should be) more durable than average cameras that cost less. It is not all about features and image quality. The Nikon D5500 has a great image sensor but if a working professional tried to use it, it probably wouldn't last long. That's is the main reason for the D810 and the D5. Not features! Tell me about the shutter mechanism and internal component build!

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2016 at 18:58 UTC as 66th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

maccam: $1700 for an APSC body? I don't think I'll be going there even though I can afford it.

Nikon D500 1900.00. D600 / 610 1500.00 full frame - no better picture quality only DOF. Full frame is not necessarily better any more. This is 2016 not 2010. I own a D600 and an XE1 the XE1 is very close, even in high ISO. Just doesn’t focus as well with moving subjects and that is old technology.

You are also paying for a weather sealed body and magnesium chassis built for pro use.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2016 at 21:28 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-Pro2 release moved to early March (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

bubblyboo: Looks like the A6300 scared both Nikon and Fuji.
/s

The A6300 is not made for pro use. Cheaper cameras always have more features because amateurs need them. The A6300 is not built to withstand daily use, The Fuji is, thus the price difference. A better comparison would be the XE-2. That is like saying that a Chevy with a million bells and whistles is better than a BMW with basic equipment. I also do mechanical work and *there is no comparison*, it most certainly is not! Fuji also has a much better selection of lenses.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 16:46 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-Pro2 release moved to early March (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

RStyga: Fujifilm, you'd better take your time. It's far, far better to delay, a few months even, and get it right than rush to release a potentially problematic product.

The A6300 is not made for pro use. Cheaper cameras always have more features because amateurs need them. The A6300 is not built to withstand daily use, The Fuji is, thus the price difference. A better comparison would be the XE-2. That is like saying that a Chevy with a million bells and whistles is better than a BMW with basic equipment. I also do mechanical work and *there is no comparison*, it most certainly is not! Fuji also has a much better selection of lenses.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 16:01 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2503 comments in total)
In reply to:

Atazoth: I’m going to by an X Pro 1 and this is why;
Comparing studio scenes between the XPro 1 and D750 $1700 vs $2000, The Iso noise levels are very close. The D750 is only slightly better. At 12800 you can really notice the D750 has less noise but it looses a lot of detail (notice the lines on the cap of the tube of paint they are invisible on the D750 The XPro 1 is still pretty clear). The Fuji’s color also is better over all and much better in some situations. The type is also easier to read on the XPro 1. That is compared to a full frame body with an equivalent lens. The X pro 1 is also all metal body, the d750 is not and the Xpro 1 has better weather sealing. Fuji’s equivalent zoom lenses are also a *lot* cheaper and a little smaller.

I own a D600 and a XE-1 so I have a pretty good idea. I much, much prefer the XE1 on a motorcycle trip, so the size difference is a factor. Like I said, the equivalent zooms are much cheaper.
Nikon 24-70 2,8g=1800
Nikon 70-200 2.8g=2400
Nikon 16-35 f4=1100
Total 5300

Fuji 16-55 2.8=1200
Fuji 50-140 2.8=1600
Fuji 10-24 4=1000
Total 3800

1500 Difference will buy another nice lens.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 15:28 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2503 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jonathan Barber: Curious: I see that the Xpro, both 1 and 2, share the same power switch design as my Xe-2, at least externally. One of my beefs about the Xe (which I still like a lot) is that it's too easy to inadvertently turn the camera on, during handling or stowing it somewhere. Then you run down that little battery very fast. Even if the little lever operated more stiffly, it would help prevent accidental power-up.

Have Xpro 1 owners had that problem, too? Is there a fix available? Is the Xpro 2 power switch equally easy to move?

My XE-1 does the same thing. It isn’t that big a deal to me though.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 14:37 UTC
On article Extreme made easy: GoPro HERO4 Session review (64 comments in total)

This thing looks like it would be fun to use because of it’s size and durability. I don’t do much video. I also don’t have a back up camera on my SUV I could also use it for that. Just a good back up camera cost 200 dollars or more and you have to have a dedicated screen. I haven’t seen one you can use a phone or tablet with.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 14:11 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

pixelpiper: If Dxmo mark would/could review any of Fuji's flagship cameras, after looking at dpreview comperative image pictures and my personal experience. I seriously doubt that any lens body combination of Fuji will score above 25.Their bodies might have a cool design but at the end it comes down to sensor and lens quality and sony zeiss combination or even Nikon Sigma art combination surpases by far anything Fuji has in the market.

pixelpiper - I looked at Dp review’s studio comparisons. I don’t know what specific cameras you are referring to. I looked at XPRO 2 w 56mm 1.2 and D610 and 750 w 85 1.8. Both cameras are close to XPRO 2 in price. The D610 was about the same as Fuji in detail and close in color on raw files. Just like my test revealed. The D750 was slightly better than Fuji in both on raw files. The XPro 2 had better jpegs than both of them in both color and detail. I don’t see the huge deference you are talking about. The form and function of Fuji XT1 and XPRO 2 cameras is better by a mile than any DSLR I have used and both are built better than the Nikons I mentioned (I shot and processed film for years). This may make them a better value to me. Plus the equivalent zooms are much cheaper.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2016 at 21:26 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2503 comments in total)
In reply to:

Atazoth: First, I am confused. Why do some people keep saying you shouldn’t compare a mirrorless camera to a DSLR? A camera is a camera and if the price rang is similar then you should compare them. If the mirrorless is not as good, don’t buy it. Size shouldn’t matter that much unless maybe you are a small woman. The most important thing is picture quality, second is usability.

It is suspicious to me that this article compares a 1700.00 camera to a 750.00 camera. Xpro 1 vs D5500...What’s up with that? The comparison should be to the D750, its closest in price.

OK I see

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2016 at 19:39 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2503 comments in total)
In reply to:

Atazoth: I’m going to by an X Pro 1 and this is why;
Comparing studio scenes between the XPro 1 and D750 $1700 vs $2000, The Iso noise levels are very close. The D750 is only slightly better. At 12800 you can really notice the D750 has less noise but it looses a lot of detail (notice the lines on the cap of the tube of paint they are invisible on the D750 The XPro 1 is still pretty clear). The Fuji’s color also is better over all and much better in some situations. The type is also easier to read on the XPro 1. That is compared to a full frame body with an equivalent lens. The X pro 1 is also all metal body, the d750 is not and the Xpro 1 has better weather sealing. Fuji’s equivalent zoom lenses are also a *lot* cheaper and a little smaller.

I still think that The XPro 2 is a better value after looking at the RAW files. You really have to pixel peep to see the difference from the D750, even at high ISO. The Jpegs on the Fuji are better. That to me is when usability and size take over.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2016 at 18:49 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2503 comments in total)
In reply to:

Atazoth: I’m going to by an X Pro 1 and this is why;
Comparing studio scenes between the XPro 1 and D750 $1700 vs $2000, The Iso noise levels are very close. The D750 is only slightly better. At 12800 you can really notice the D750 has less noise but it looses a lot of detail (notice the lines on the cap of the tube of paint they are invisible on the D750 The XPro 1 is still pretty clear). The Fuji’s color also is better over all and much better in some situations. The type is also easier to read on the XPro 1. That is compared to a full frame body with an equivalent lens. The X pro 1 is also all metal body, the d750 is not and the Xpro 1 has better weather sealing. Fuji’s equivalent zoom lenses are also a *lot* cheaper and a little smaller.

Sorry, I meant XPro2 and I was looking at jpegs not raw. Now I’m not so sure.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2016 at 18:08 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2503 comments in total)

I’m going to by an X Pro 1 and this is why;
Comparing studio scenes between the XPro 1 and D750 $1700 vs $2000, The Iso noise levels are very close. The D750 is only slightly better. At 12800 you can really notice the D750 has less noise but it looses a lot of detail (notice the lines on the cap of the tube of paint they are invisible on the D750 The XPro 1 is still pretty clear). The Fuji’s color also is better over all and much better in some situations. The type is also easier to read on the XPro 1. That is compared to a full frame body with an equivalent lens. The X pro 1 is also all metal body, the d750 is not and the Xpro 1 has better weather sealing. Fuji’s equivalent zoom lenses are also a *lot* cheaper and a little smaller.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2016 at 16:57 UTC as 280th comment | 8 replies
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2503 comments in total)

First, I am confused. Why do some people keep saying you shouldn’t compare a mirrorless camera to a DSLR? A camera is a camera and if the price rang is similar then you should compare them. If the mirrorless is not as good, don’t buy it. Size shouldn’t matter that much unless maybe you are a small woman. The most important thing is picture quality, second is usability.

It is suspicious to me that this article compares a 1700.00 camera to a 750.00 camera. Xpro 1 vs D5500...What’s up with that? The comparison should be to the D750, its closest in price.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2016 at 16:20 UTC as 281st comment | 2 replies
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2503 comments in total)

I am thinking that I would like to have both an XPro 2 and a XT2. Just put wide angles on the XPro 2 and telephotos on the XT2.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 15:04 UTC as 383rd comment
In reply to:

dcolak: I came here to read not watch videos. Whole video could've been put in a small text which could be read much faster than watching it.

IF you don’t like videos, don’t watch them.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2016 at 16:29 UTC
In reply to:

pixelpiper: If Dxmo mark would/could review any of Fuji's flagship cameras, after looking at dpreview comperative image pictures and my personal experience. I seriously doubt that any lens body combination of Fuji will score above 25.Their bodies might have a cool design but at the end it comes down to sensor and lens quality and sony zeiss combination or even Nikon Sigma art combination surpases by far anything Fuji has in the market.

I think you are totally off. Of course, I don’t own an XPro 2 but I do own a XE1 and what used to be there 2 best zooms 18-55 2.8 and 55-200. I also own a Nikon D600. I tested both cameras side-by-side, the D600 had an 85mm 1,8 (one of Nikons best primes) Fuji had the 18-55 zoom. I use d video light to keep it constant. The color was much better on the Fuji. The only thing I could see that was possibly a major consideration for the Nikon was the shallower depth of field on the full frame sensor. High ISO was also very close. At the same setting there was not difference at 100% magnification but Fuji cheats buy one stop, so the nikon was 1 stop better (again this is an XE*1*). I also owned an XT1 for a short time and the auto focus in brighter light was faster and better in every mode than the D600. Only in very low light was the Nikon slightly better. Sigma Art lenses are not better than Fuji.Where did you get that from? The XPro2 sounds like a very viable alternative to Nikon.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2016 at 16:02 UTC
Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20