Joined on Feb 21, 2012


Total: 192, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV review (507 comments in total)

"there are times this reviewer craved something a tad wider than 24mm."

"And some landscape photographers will find 24mm not wide enough for their needs."

It is surprising there are relatively few <24mm equiv. fixed-lens zoom models available these days. I can think of one tiny-sensor FZ model from Panasonic. It is a feature some would like. For example, the DL18-50 might have filled that niche. But it's probably no easy task to make an affordable zoom that starts at ~20mm and ends above 200mm, for any sensor 1" or larger.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 21:24 UTC as 68th comment | 4 replies

"... could be an advantage if you're wanting to eliminate people from your photos, without necessarily needing an ND filter and a 30-second exposure."

Indeed. Great feature for that 'post-apocalyptic urban-landscape' look, or murals, billboards, limited types of surveillance.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2017 at 00:47 UTC as 39th comment
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 first impressions (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

mintblue: I love small and light products. The only reason why I bought a mft camera was the tiny Panasonic GM5 camera. Paired with the 15mm and 20mm you can get incredible good pictures, even in low light. And everything in a ultra light package. I would be happy, if Panasonic would make more cameras like the GM5 again.,725,ha,t

Agree, a new GM6 with improved handling/ergonomics would be tempting. Though for some the current Panasonic GX850 or GX85 might fill that niche.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 19:36 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 first impressions (396 comments in total)

I 'd add these other nice 'pro' features to the list on page 2:
*3.68 Mp, 0.83x Viewfinder with no EVF blackout (like A9)
*Top panel info LCD
*Copies settings, control & images to another G9

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 02:58 UTC as 29th comment
On article Canon G1 X III vs. Sony Cybershot RX100 V (632 comments in total)
In reply to:

pxchoi: I'm still bummed that Nikon did not release the 18-50 DL. I shoot wide majority of the time and having a wide angle compact with reasonable IQ would have been stellar. I was hoping that one of the other companies would fill the void but that doesn't appear to be happening...

One of the Panasonic super-zooms (FZ80?) reaches down to 20mm equiv, but has a tiny sensor. I also was intrigued by the DLs.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 19:15 UTC
On article Canon G1 X III vs. Sony Cybershot RX100 V (632 comments in total)
In reply to:

RMGoodLight: Sorry to say this but I find this writeup rather disapointing for a review site like DPR. I could write the same without handling any of those two cameras only by looking at the spec sheet and product images.

I would excpect that you handle both cameras to one of your writers and he/she should take both outside and shoot similair images / videos with it. And then write this kind of comparison with side by side images from both cameras. With images where both cameras are put side by side so one can see how big or small they are and how well they handle different situations.

I expect a little more commitment.

On the contrary it's one of best "short take" articles on comparing two competitive models. It's a well written, quick to read, honest assessment. There is no intent to make this a detailed, spec-by-spec comparison article, of which there are many here and elsewhere. I like these quick comparos. Well done.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 19:08 UTC
In reply to:

NG Resonance: The U.S. homeland insecurity apparatus is obsessed with dams. Ever try visiting one these days? The paranoia is absurd.

Yes and I experienced it first hand. Toured a Bureau of Reclamation Dam this year and it was no different than the TSA line at major airports. Plus the tour has been 'watered down' as they no longer allow the public in the inner tunnels. However it was free and they made the tour as interesting as possible, and surprisingly, cameras were just fine.

I'm not sure how a drone could harm a dam either, but I think it may be the surveillance aspect that the feds are concerned with, in addition to aesthetics, noise, & public safety, so agencies have deferred to the FAA for authority to limit nearby flights.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2017 at 18:31 UTC
In reply to:

multisystem: Nikon is making a good decision to intro a FF MILC body first because they are playing catch-up with the rest of the industry. You lead with your technological tour de force. It's so hilarious that some people seem offended that Nikon would release a FF MILC first before they release an apsc MILC or that having an FF excludes the possibility of having an aps later.

Also, a lot of these things get lost in translation so I would not sweat it out over the little details of his translated interview but just stick with the big over-all message. These may have been Japanese to Chinese to English, etc. so don't obsess over it.


Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 23:34 UTC
In reply to:

zakaria: The dslrs market is already divided among canon nikon and pentax.
aps/c mirrorless between
Four thirds between panasonic and olympus.
There is only one player on ff mirrorless cameras. it is sony.there is a big chance for nikon on this market.
Aps/c and four thirds are threatened by the smartphones which are developed day by day.and may be we will see smartphones with many lenses and big sensor.

Good points but where are the smartphones that truly replace APSC or 4/3 now? They should be here by now. It comes down to controls. Those who need larger sensors want more physical controls & viewfinders. However, I do see multi-sensor/multi-lens smarphones coming in slowly.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 21:32 UTC
In reply to:

dr8: Probably too late for this defense: Mr. Slater should inform the court that the monkey was his employee. Said monkey agreed to be paid a "hearty thank you" by Mr Slater for photo services rendered. Any work produced by employee belongs to employer. Case closed.....

@matthew - perfect. Best comment. But then it probably degrades into harassment, contract breach, false representation, you name it.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2017 at 00:16 UTC
On article Hands-on with new Fujifilm X-E3 (204 comments in total)
In reply to:

Faux2Grapher: According to Fujifilm's website, the eye point on the X-E3 has been reduced to 17.5 (same as the X-T20), down from the 23mm on the X-E2s. Yet the body thickness has been increased. Strange.

I wear glasses, so this is a disappointment.

Agree. One of the reasons I was anticipating this model. Looks doubtful now, or maybe just settle with an XE2s.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 17:50 UTC
On article Nikon D850 Review (2116 comments in total)

Looks fantastic but surprised Nikon is only offering a 17mm eyepoint on the viewfinder. I guess at this level users are not expected to be wearing eyeglasses. It can be a consideration, especially if an eyecup is installed. Other makers claim eyepoints up to 24mm; that 7mm difference is meaningful.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2017 at 21:21 UTC as 347th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Robert Krawitz: To be honest, I'd prefer 14-300 over 18-400. I have the 16-300 and on the whole like it. It was my go-to lens (on a 7DmkII) on our recent vacation; other than one evening concert where I used my 70-200 f/2.8, it was pretty much the only lens I used. I probably used my Sigma 8-16 a few times and often carried around my 50 f/1.8, but otherwise the 16-300 was on, everything from fireworks to landscapes to most everything else.

It's not a 70-200 in IQ. But that's simply not needed for everything. It's quite good at the short and long ends, and softer in the middle, but in a lot of landscape situations you're atmosphere-limited anyway, and since I do a lot of panoramas, lots o'pixels and sharpening hide a lot of problems.

As appealing as 18-400 sounds, there's not a lot I can shoot with a 400mm lens that I can't shoot almost equally as well with a 300 and crop. The other direction doesn't work. I'd rather go wider than longer on this kind of lens.

@Robert + PM: Agreed.
A 15-200mm or a 14-150mm would be handy. However the phrase "diminishing returns" comes to mind, as a 14-1XX might cut into true wide-angle zoom sales (10-20, 12-24 etc). On the other hand, perhaps Tamron will step into this market, as demand could be substantial.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2017 at 18:50 UTC
In reply to:

bertalan: You'd think by now they could make a 10-100.

@Tonio. You may be correct, but Sony offers quite a few 16-XXmm APS-C models:
16-50mm E f/3.3-5.6
16-50mm A f/2.8
16-70mm E f/4
16-80mm A f3.5-4.5
16-105mm A f3.5-5.6
So a 14-50mm could be in the future.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2017 at 21:58 UTC
In reply to:

bertalan: You'd think by now they could make a 10-100.

I think eventually we'll start seeing 14-50mm (and higher) for the APS-C market. In the 2000's we got 18-200mm; the 2010's got to 16-XXXmm and as we approach the 2020's it should reach down to 14mm-1XXmm.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2017 at 21:43 UTC
In reply to:

mosc: Seems to be growing on the wrong end for me. 450mm equiv was already needlessly long. I'd love to see some decent 15-90 or somesuch APS-C, sacrificing the tele considerably if it means some significant width.

Sigma's 17-70 is decent. It's even a half stop faster than these zooms typically are. Even that's not that wide though, particularly in EF-S form.

Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM ?

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2017 at 19:55 UTC
On article Ten things we're hoping for from the Nikon D850 (482 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nicolas Alexander Otto: I actually wrote a list some time ago in an elaborate mail to Nikon for the D810 replacement. But it boiled down to essentially this.

1. Fully articulated screen
2. Better ISO Performance
3. In camera stabilization
4. Live View Boost (for low light situations)
5. Live Time (seeing the histogramm during long exposures)
6. WiFi that works fine
7. Increased dynamic range
8. Focus Peaking
9. 2500€ Price Tag (I just added that knowing it'll be smart so they can get back the Sony crowd but most likely unrealistic)

10. Faster Live View AF.
Personally I like GPS too, but I know most don't care.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2017 at 19:49 UTC
In reply to:

goactive: Colors seem very dull and bland VS other cameras.

@goative/Mateus1: In some agreement here, but only in two cases:
1) landscape shots where there is green foliage or trees in the background. For some reason, distant green foliage seem to have a slight color shift or slightly under saturated "look" to it. Pixel peeping reveals slight mushiness.
2) skin color rendition

It seems true for both Oly and Panny (owned both). Something about green in u4/3 jpeg engines that may be a compromise.

That said, adjusting the default jpeg settings and/or post work can brighten things up a bit.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 23:28 UTC

DPR: While you are running this evaluation, pop on the Panasonic 12-60mm f/3.5.-5.6 for just a half-dozen images or so, right along side this f/2.8-4.0.
(I realize this is easier-said-that-done, but just asking. Thanks).

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 23:08 UTC as 14th comment

It's a publicity stunt by Pita (intentionally misspelled), nothing more. And this isn't a cruelty case, at all. What's worse is the often moronic 9th District Court of Appeals will probably side with them. I feel quite sad for Mr. Slater.
Where is the ACLU, when you really need them ??

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2017 at 18:26 UTC as 196th comment
Total: 192, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »