thxbb12

Lives in Switzerland Geneva, Switzerland
Joined on May 4, 2007

Comments

Total: 90, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

In the last paragraph, you wrote "... 25mm, 35mm and 90mm equivalent ...". This is not correct given the 1.6x crop factor.
You should have written "... 26mm, 48mm and 90mm equivalent ...".
I rounded the focal lengths to the nearest non fractional number.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2019 at 11:21 UTC as 241st comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

thxbb12: As expected, very weak at the long end according to both the samples provided (and DPR gallery) and the MTF charts from Olympus: https://www.olympus.com.au/getattachment...099682.gif

A compact but more reasonable and optically good 12-100 4-5.6 would make more sense.
Or something more unique and not found in any other system, like a 10-50.
Would be the ultimate travel zoom IMO.

@NetMage: the 12-50 is not comparable to a 10-50. The latter would be unique in the lens catalog of any manufaturer. A zoom starting at 10mm (20mm FF equiv) would be quite something.

@John Clinch: no. The 12-100 f4 is a very large lens. A compact but slower (and with high IQ) 12-100 would be an ideal travel lens.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2019 at 19:51 UTC
In reply to:

thxbb12: As expected, very weak at the long end according to both the samples provided (and DPR gallery) and the MTF charts from Olympus: https://www.olympus.com.au/getattachment...099682.gif

A compact but more reasonable and optically good 12-100 4-5.6 would make more sense.
Or something more unique and not found in any other system, like a 10-50.
Would be the ultimate travel zoom IMO.

The above link for the MTF curves was wrong. Here is the correct one: https://www.olympus.com.au/getattachment/80ab9e04-c69f-4d43-8ad4-6d9910722b00/000099682.gif.aspx

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2019 at 14:23 UTC

As expected, very weak at the long end according to both the samples provided (and DPR gallery) and the MTF charts from Olympus: https://www.olympus.com.au/getattachment...099682.gif

A compact but more reasonable and optically good 12-100 4-5.6 would make more sense.
Or something more unique and not found in any other system, like a 10-50.
Would be the ultimate travel zoom IMO.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2019 at 14:00 UTC as 39th comment | 7 replies

It looks like the 16-80 features a marked aperture ring, nice :-) It's one silly omission of the 10-24 IMO, glad they fixed it with this new lens. I'm very much looking forward to trying this new standard zoom. Great focal range, somewhat compact and constant aperture.

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2019 at 14:30 UTC as 21st comment
In reply to:

Markrl: My Fuji X-T3 does not have IBIS, but I really like it anyway. No way to get that size and form factor with IBIS, so I am willing to have that trade-off for now. Maybe someday, the technology will allow it to be used in cameras without affecting the form factor and we can have the best of both worlds.

It doesn't fly. Fuji already has the technology, it's implemented in the X-H1. Regarding Sony acquiring Oly's tech, do you have a source claiming so? Also, Panasonic has very good IBIS tech and now Nikon. Every company (besides Canon) is jumping into the bandwagon and for good reason.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2018 at 07:43 UTC
In reply to:

Markrl: My Fuji X-T3 does not have IBIS, but I really like it anyway. No way to get that size and form factor with IBIS, so I am willing to have that trade-off for now. Maybe someday, the technology will allow it to be used in cameras without affecting the form factor and we can have the best of both worlds.

I'm a Fuji user and the Fuji claim that IBIS is not doable because of space is total BS. Look at Sony A7 series or Nikon Z6/7. Both are FF camera which are barely larger than a X-T3, yet they feature IBIS.
This claim is utter non sense.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2018 at 17:22 UTC
In reply to:

tzm41: Computational photography will be a real challenge for traditional camera companies to keep up with, as stated by Nikon.

I agree with the comments above in term of enjoyment. I don't use my cell phone to take pictures, I love shooting with a proper camera and the whole process. However, we are a vast minority and it's only going to get worse...

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2018 at 21:55 UTC
In reply to:

tzm41: Computational photography will be a real challenge for traditional camera companies to keep up with, as stated by Nikon.

People were thinking the same back then about eye focus. Yet, it's now featured in most pro-class bodies. It's a matter of time until all manufacturers provide these useful features. If camera maker don't innovate (makes it easy to share photos, include computational photography), their days are numbered. Systems camera's future will probably be niche and their use will probably be limited to some very specific scenarii. When you can see the results from what google is doing and current phones, it's pretty scary. It's evolving very very fast.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2018 at 18:33 UTC
On article Lightroom CC 2.0: What's new, and where is it headed? (375 comments in total)

I have a library of about 40k raw files, so sorry Adobe, but I simply don't want to upload my photos to some remote cloud servers in the US. I'm not alone in this. It's unpractical, inefficient, a total rip-off, and more importantly it goes against customers data privacy. No thank you.
For the time being, I use Lightroom 6 with Iridient to convert my RAW files to DNG. In some distant future I'll probably go the open-source way with DarkTable.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2018 at 08:55 UTC as 41st comment | 1 reply

I was going to ask the exact same question! LOL

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2018 at 19:22 UTC as 83rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

UllerellU: At the moment the lens line of Sony is unrivaled, Zeiss 24-70 f4 is cheaper than the lens of the Nikon kit, I have serious doubts that the 50 f1.8 is close to the optical quality of the Zeiss 55 f1. 8 and that 35mm f1.8 seems monstrous, in general I think all the presented lenses. The lenses that are to come interest me more, but there will be to see the prices. Sony has equivalent G Master lenses that are the best glasses in the market, but the price is within reach of very few.

The Zeiss 24-70 f4 is quite crappy optically. It's likely the Nikkor will be better.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2018 at 14:22 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9 review (875 comments in total)

@Dpreview: why didn't you include the Fuji X-E3 in your comparison table? It would have made sense to include it since you also had a Sony APS-C in there.

Link | Posted on Aug 20, 2018 at 20:38 UTC as 66th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Ruekon: The impressive X-T product line is getting increasingly shaped:
X-T1 -- X-T10 -- * X-T100 *
X-T2 -- X-T20 --
Wishing Fujifilm success that hopefully will show up in increased market share. Also looking forward to seeing new kinds of reviews, like entry level mirrorless with viewfinder: X-T100 vs Canon M50 vs Sony something.

Being afraid though that Dual Pixel AF will make the race and hoping that this will not wipe out Fuji and Sony.

Except that one can mount these FF lenses on an APS-C body and still get smaller optics than Fuji's APS-C counterparts. The fact they were designed for FF is irrelevant from a usability point of view.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2018 at 13:00 UTC
In reply to:

Mr R Adams: I agree and still consider the DSLR the ultimate photography tool if you need speed, toughness and longevity. If size and weight doesn't matter, why have mirrorless at all.

I get a sense nikon tried this with Nikon 1 but ended up building a coolpix upgrade instead of a system that appealed to enthusiasts. I'd still buy a one if they produced a nice retro body or even one like the Canon g5x

@Mr R Adams: the mirror is a mechanical part that makes the system more complicated, more expensive, limits the max FPS achievable, all for the sake of an OVF. An OVF will never be able to achieve what can be done with an EVF (limitless). In a few years EVF will inevitably be indistinguishable from OVF. Despite Canon's dual pixel tech, how come that their EOS-1D X still provides AFMA? It's just band-aid for AF inaccuracies. DSLRs can't match CDAF for accuracy (check lensrentals.com "autofocus-reality"). As far as speed is concerned, Sony A9 shows that it's now a wash. Soon, entry-level mirrorless will have completely surpassed the most high-end DSLRs for speed and tracking. As far as face recognition is concerned, without an EVF one can't see what's going on, whether it's face recognition or more advanced things. If you look at an OVF today and one from 1990, almost nothing has changed. Think about where EVF will be in just 10 years. A mirror-box is simply outdated and archaic.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2018 at 12:02 UTC
In reply to:

Mr R Adams: I agree and still consider the DSLR the ultimate photography tool if you need speed, toughness and longevity. If size and weight doesn't matter, why have mirrorless at all.

I get a sense nikon tried this with Nikon 1 but ended up building a coolpix upgrade instead of a system that appealed to enthusiasts. I'd still buy a one if they produced a nice retro body or even one like the Canon g5x

Why do ppl always think the number one advantage of mirrorless is size?
In truth the main advantage of mirrorless is that there is no mirror! The camera has direct access to the sensor in realtime.
It means unmatched AF accuracy: bye bye lens/body calibration and micro-adjustments. It's liberating to be able to use f1.2 lenses wide-open without having to worry about calibrating them. It's even better with fast zooms which often need different micro-adjustments at various focal lengths on a DSLR.
Furthermore, mirrorless means a whole lots of "new" things archaic DSLRs can't do: viewing exposure changes in realtime, realtime histograms, over/under exposed areas, face/eye recognition, movement prediction, any IA on the image, etc. The possibilities are endless and they are bound to get better really fast (image recognition, AI algorithms and hardware improve dramatically fast).
Why nobody seems to realize these limitless possibilities?
The advantage over a DSLR is size only?... Really?

Link | Posted on May 22, 2018 at 23:48 UTC

Why do ppl always think the number one advantage of mirrorless is size?
In truth the main advantage of mirrorless is that there is no mirror! The camera has direct access to the sensor in realtime.
It means unmatched AF accuracy: bye bye lens/body calibration and micro-adjustments. It's liberating to be able to use f1.2 lenses wide-open without having to worry about calibrating them. It's even better with fast zooms which often need different micro-adjustments at various focal lengths on a DSLR.
Furthermore, mirrorless means a whole lots of "new" things archaic DSLRs can't do: viewing exposure changes in realtime, realtime histograms, over/under exposed areas, face/eye recognition, movement prediction, any IA on the image, etc. The possibilities are endless and they are bound to get better really fast (image recognition, AI algorithms and hardware improve dramatically fast).
Why nobody seems to realize these limitless possibilities?
The advantage over a DSLR is size only?... Really?

Link | Posted on May 22, 2018 at 22:43 UTC as 219th comment | 2 replies

What's the difference between this and a X-T20, besides the Bayer filter array?

Link | Posted on May 18, 2018 at 22:36 UTC as 72nd comment | 2 replies

If they had used a 1'' sensor and allowed RAW shooting it could have been very interesting. As it is, no thanks. What a waste of engineering resources unfortunately...

Link | Posted on May 11, 2018 at 15:36 UTC as 67th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

thxbb12: This is a f2.8-4 lens. I'd have expected to see many 200mm photos shot at f4 instead of f5.6 or higher. A shame that there is only a single one of an animal shot wide-open at 200mm. Personally, if I buy this lens it is to shoot at at f4 and not f5.6, f8 or so. Pretty lame and useless gallery.

Pretty much any lens performs well once stopped down to f6.7 or smaller. In MFT land, past f5.6 and you're into diffraction territory (usually before that even).
So it's pretty much pointless indeed. Tell me this: if dpr were testing the Oly 45mm f1.2, would you be happy if all the shots except a single one were shot at f8?

Link | Posted on May 7, 2018 at 20:14 UTC
Total: 90, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »