Joined on Aug 8, 2005


Total: 3, showing: 1 – 3
On article Fujifilm X-T20 Review (375 comments in total)
In reply to:

Contra Mundum: Another fail.

I've had X-T10 before and it was an ergonomic disaster. Fuji repeated the same awful design in X-T20.

This camera is too small even for the Japanese ladies' hands. There is no grip and there is no room on the back for palm support. Your palm will be accidentally pressing rear buttons. You literally hold this camera with two fingers like a dirty diaper. Even a kit 18-55 lens is too heavy for it. I even tried an add-on grip, which is just another disaster.

Fuji should learn a thing or two from Sony. I can hold A7 with a 70-200mm lens attached without any troubles with one hand.

I, too, have XL hands and I had no problems with X-T10. Praising Sony's ergonomics over Fuji's sounds insane to anybody who really used both.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2017 at 22:40 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T20 Review (375 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: Confusion central. Checking out the raw files from the X-Trans 3 cameras just doesn't support what you have been writing about these cameras.

Here's the queen of spades in the comparison scene, XT2, XT20, X100F and GR2.

The X-T2 looks great. The X-T20 is softer and the X100F is softer still.

The X100F output shows about the same resolution as the 16MP Ricoh GR 2, just uprezzed to 24MP. Clearly the old lens cant match the new sensor, it should have been upgraded for this price point. For sure, the Xtrans 3 output is nicer than Xtrans 2, and that helps a bit, but gold award, at this price, Meh!

Now the XT20 should deliver very similar results to the X-T2 and in the review you say it does, but the raw shown above is clearly softer (eg the ruby). Is it a testing error or something more serious, like the camera being prone to shutter vibration on some shots?

Note, switching from raw to the JPEG does make the XT20 match the XT2. But why is the raw so soft.

Jpeg on X-T20 actually looks sharper than on X-T2 in that comparison.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2017 at 22:06 UTC
On article Nikon D4 & D800: What do the Professionals Think? (390 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: D4 = ExpSim LV (maybe; most likely for stills and video); more MP than past 12Mp but only a bit; allows for fast fps still; but not fastest; video now 1080p, but DR poor, too contrasty, blowouts hard to control, not good for cinematography.
D3s = ExpSim LV (stills; video, but only 720p); resolved less than 5D2, a given; but had better hi-ISO IQ; good AF
D3x = ExpSim LV (stills); hi-MP (but IQ iffy; resolves less than 5D2 at higher ISOs); AF iffy.
D3 = ExpSim LV (stills); lo-MP (but IQ superb at higher ISOs; but resolves less; a given; offers higher fps (for lo-MP; this is a given)); AF good.

D800 = NO ExpSim LV (for neither stills or videos; like D700, but D700 only lacked video); but now has very hi-Mp; IQ will only be good at lower ISOs; lesson learned from D3x, and best left for studio. video only as good as D4 or less; also too contrasty and hard to control DR unremarkable for cinematography. AF be similar to what D3x faced for hi-MP. Much cheaper than non-ExpSim LV 645D or any MF

You lady are on crack. D800 has ExpSim LV.

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2012 at 15:35 UTC
Total: 3, showing: 1 – 3