thxbb12

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

Comments

Total: 90, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
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.

Which is pointless when the tested lens is f2.8-4. If I buy a 2.8-4 lens I want to see how well it perform wide-open as it will very likely the most used aperture.
Say you see the review for a f1.4 lens. Are you that much interested in seeing how well it performs at f8? Obviously if you consider a f1.4 lens it is to be used wide-open... Go figure.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2018 at 23:27 UTC

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.

Link | Posted on May 1, 2018 at 19:14 UTC as 26th comment | 7 replies
On article Opinion: the Sony a7 III could be the new Nikon D750 (1178 comments in total)
In reply to:

aftab: Looking at the body price only can be a bit misleading.
Let's add a commonly used lens, 24-70/2.8.
At B&H A7III + 24-70/2.8 GM = 4200 USD
D750+ 24-70/2.8 (non VR)= 3600 USD
For those who don't need video, A7III is quite expensive compared to D750. D750 is an extremely popular camera. I am sure A7III will be very popular too. But I doubt it will be as popular as it's Nikon counterpart, because price matters, lens collection matters, reputation matters, photographer matters, weather sealing matters, battery life matters and OVF and larger size (and ergonomics) matters to many.
(just a thought from a Canon user)

@afab The difference is three fold: 1) Eye AF can focus on an eye anywhere on the scene, whereas with a DSLR if the person's face is outside of the center area you're out of luck (and focus and recompose is too inaccurate with a bright lens) 2) Eye AF is more accurate: the AF can focus on the wanted eye with better accuracy (DSLRs' focus points are fairly large), 3) Eye AF is faster and it's bound to become faster still. I bet that if you had tried Sony's implementation you would think quite differently. After having used mirrorless cameras there is no way I'd consider going back to the archaic way of DSLRs...

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2018 at 14:12 UTC
On article Opinion: the Sony a7 III could be the new Nikon D750 (1178 comments in total)
In reply to:

aftab: Looking at the body price only can be a bit misleading.
Let's add a commonly used lens, 24-70/2.8.
At B&H A7III + 24-70/2.8 GM = 4200 USD
D750+ 24-70/2.8 (non VR)= 3600 USD
For those who don't need video, A7III is quite expensive compared to D750. D750 is an extremely popular camera. I am sure A7III will be very popular too. But I doubt it will be as popular as it's Nikon counterpart, because price matters, lens collection matters, reputation matters, photographer matters, weather sealing matters, battery life matters and OVF and larger size (and ergonomics) matters to many.
(just a thought from a Canon user)

@aftab Following up your reasoning: millions of photographers have been taking great photographs without AF and without zoom lenses for decades. Who really needs AF and zooms?

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2018 at 09:10 UTC
On article Opinion: the Sony a7 III could be the new Nikon D750 (1178 comments in total)

The main pro of mirrorless that is hardly ever mentioned (here included) is that lenses do not need calibration. AF is almost always spot on with very fast glass (e.g. f1.4) which is hardly the case with a DSLR. In the case of DSLRs, calibrating a zoom lens might not be sufficient since different micro-adjustment might be needed at various focal lengths (never mind at different focus distances). I always find it puzzling that most sites or articles totally fail to mention this fact. They always tout how great and quick DSLRs' AF is, yet they never talk about accuracy (or the lack of it). This is IMO the greatest strength of mirrorless: AF accuracy and no need for lens/body calibration.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2018 at 09:04 UTC as 105th comment | 6 replies
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9 review (875 comments in total)
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?

Unfortunately I'm almost sure it's the exact same panel as the one from the GX85/GX80 and GX7.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 16:01 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9 review (875 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dostoy: This camera might be called a GX9, but it is actually a 20 megapixel GX95.
I can only assume that, by calling it a GX9, Panasonic is saying: "There will be no true successor to the GX8."
And that is disappointing!

@Tommi K1
1) Very likely the same small sequential field 16:9 crappy EVF as the one in the GX7... from 2013 !
2) No weather sealing
3) No fully articulated LCD
4) Abysmal battery life

As it is, it's very much a GX80 with 20MP.
Shame on you Panasonic. It could have been the perfect MFT camera :-(

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 14:26 UTC

Does the 15-45 have a plastic mount?

The powerzoom features sucks big time but I guess they want to appeal to the video crowd.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 08:28 UTC as 36th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

thx1138: 20 years from now these clowns will still be using that garbage sensor size and it's crap IQ. It's a zombie sensor that will never die. Still no one stepping up with an answer to the Nikon AW1. 1" sensor should be the basis for all future compact products.

Probably, but 20 years is still a rather long time to wait... ;-)

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2018 at 17:49 UTC
In reply to:

thx1138: 20 years from now these clowns will still be using that garbage sensor size and it's crap IQ. It's a zombie sensor that will never die. Still no one stepping up with an answer to the Nikon AW1. 1" sensor should be the basis for all future compact products.

Yes, indeed.
Do you know if it supports RAW files?

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2018 at 10:35 UTC
In reply to:

thx1138: 20 years from now these clowns will still be using that garbage sensor size and it's crap IQ. It's a zombie sensor that will never die. Still no one stepping up with an answer to the Nikon AW1. 1" sensor should be the basis for all future compact products.

100% agree.
All compacts should at least feature a 1'' sensor these days.
Otherwise you basically get phone IQ so what's the point.
The only exceptions are specific cameras like this one (waterproof and so).

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2018 at 09:04 UTC

This type of camera might be interesting for snorkeling or scuba diving.
Can it shoot in RAW?
If not, then it won't be very useful because underwater shots are always off in terms of white balance.
A shame that the aperture range is so slow. The system is already diffraction limited already at the largest aperture...

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2018 at 09:03 UTC as 44th comment

Very disappointed by the IQ.
Pretty much none of the landscape shots at f/5.6 or f/6.3 (at ISO 200) are really sharp. For a prime, it's a major disappointment.
Also, at f/1.4 I have trouble finding the area of focus because nothing is really sharp either (except for a couple of shots).
Pretty much any MFT prime is better than this.
I wonder if this lens sample is faulty or sub-par.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2018 at 19:51 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply
On article Why you should own a 135mm F2 lens (385 comments in total)

"But I would argue that a 135mm F2 lens produces even greater bokeh.". The author mixes up bokeh and amount of blur. This sentence should really be "But I would argue that a 135mm F2 lens produces a greater amount of blur.". Bokeh qualifies the quality of the blur, not how much blur a lens produces.

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2018 at 09:25 UTC as 53rd comment | 3 replies
On article Have your say: Best zoom lens of 2017 (58 comments in total)

Any reason why neither the Olympus 12-100 f/4, nor the Panasonic 8-18 f2.8-4 are in the list?

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2017 at 16:44 UTC as 22nd comment | 6 replies
On article Best cameras under $1000 (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boissez: What I really love about these round-ups is how consistent they are with DPR's own reviews.

Still, it doesn't make much sense. If a camera earns a high rating, it must be for a good reason and justified. One would assume, it would stand the test of time (at least for a some months). It appears it does not which makes me think you are not able to properly rank cameras.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2017 at 19:52 UTC
On article First samples: Leica Thambar-M 90mm F2.2 (222 comments in total)

Wait a minute, is it April fools' day already?
I just cannot fathom how a lens featuring such horrendous IQ could possibly sell for more than say, what? 10 bucks?
Never mind the utterly ridiculous price tag. Truly pathetic.
One has to wonder what the marketing department is currently smoking at Leica...
That would be quite an accomplishment if they even manage to sell more than half a dozen of these worldwide ;-)

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2017 at 19:24 UTC as 128th comment | 1 reply
On photo Patrick Finds Inner Peace in the Your best photo of the week! challenge (14 comments in total)

Very beautiful; well done!
I suppose you placed the starfish there?

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2017 at 19:32 UTC as 4th comment
On article Fujifilm X-E3 Review (772 comments in total)
In reply to:

thxbb12: Thanks for this first impression preview.

@Richard Butler: does auto ISO work the same as other Fuji models or is it now possible to link shutter speed with focal length (with an adjustable bias) like what Pentax and Nikon do?

@dpreview: there is a typo in the last paragraph of the article: "betwixt" -> "between"

Thanks!

Thanks for the correction, I wasn't aware of it :-)

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2017 at 15:04 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E3 Review (772 comments in total)

Thanks for this first impression preview.

@Richard Butler: does auto ISO work the same as other Fuji models or is it now possible to link shutter speed with focal length (with an adjustable bias) like what Pentax and Nikon do?

@dpreview: there is a typo in the last paragraph of the article: "betwixt" -> "between"

Thanks!

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 16:45 UTC as 159th comment | 3 replies
Total: 90, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »