NowHearThis

NowHearThis

Lives in United States United States
Works as a Enterprise Implementation Consultant
Joined on Aug 24, 2007
About me:

Future Considerations:
Speakers: (This was easy to decide on...)
Front:2 NHT Classic Three (When the 1.8s finally give out)
Rear: 2 NHT Classic Two
or
Klipsch Reference Series

Current Line Up:
Verve Subwoofer (Dual 10' & 200w amp)
Polk Audio T15 (2)
Polk Audio CS1 (for $60 this was just too good a deal to pass up on.)

Previous Audio Gear:
2-Infinity 42.5i in Custom center channel box wired in series (8 ohms) - still have, replaced w/CS1, will probably reuse these with the woofers from the 1.8's.
NHT 1.8 (2) (Midrange foam surrounds finally gave out - took 22yrs; 6.5" subs still work fine, and will be reused in a future project)

Current Camera Gear:
Olympus OM-D E-M10
Olympus 14-42 II R MSC

Previous Camera Gear:
Sony A65
Sony 18-135m f/3.5-5.6
Sony 85mm f/2.8
Sony HVL-F43AM

Sony NEX-7
Sony 18-200mm OSS
Sony 50mm F1.8 OSS
Sony HVL-F20AM

Canon T2i
Canon 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon 270EX

Nikon D40
Nikon 18-55 ED II
Nikon 55-200mm VR
Nikon 35mm F1.8
Nikon SB-400

Comments

Total: 214, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

KCook: An M4/3 lens requiring a 72mm filter???

justshootme

Yeah, didn't make sense to use a drop-in filter.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 16:08 UTC
In reply to:

sonics: Looks like a great lens, but gone is the compact m43 format:

http://camerasize.com/compact/#594.613,660.545,hd,t

You forgot to post this view:
http://camerasize.com/compact/#660.545,594.613,hd,f

Also I doubt that 18-135 canon lens will equal the optical quality of the 12-100/4. It also starts at 29mm not 24. Back when I shot Canon the only APS-C lens worth getting was the 15-85 and while it's a little shorter than the Olympus, it's also even heavier. Canon shooters ought to spend just a little more and get a better lens.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 12:59 UTC
In reply to:

sknai16: Is anyone seeing that the MFT company that promised smaller cheaper and just as good components now is supplying more expensive lenses than most anyone in the market? Go figure. I'm back with Nikon.

@Photo_AK, The problem is that Tamron lens has poor results for Chromatic Aborations, IQ drops pretty dramatically after 100mm and needs to be stopped down for best results - and even it's best results are still "just OK" (according to reviews). You can have your big beasty FF camera with mediocre glass superzoom, I'll keep my E-M10 and throw this great piece of glass on it instead.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 22:54 UTC
In reply to:

bereninga: Perfect for some street photography!

Lol! That was great!

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 17:19 UTC
In reply to:

JEROME NOLAS: Big, heavy, expensive. All I asked is sharp12-50/60 constant f4, short, light weight, rasonably priced...where is Sigma & Tamron when you need them?

This lens is actually lighter than the Canon 15-85 IS lens I used to own and with a more useful focal range. Add in the nice close focusing, great build, supposed great IQ, and you have a great lens IMO.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 17:08 UTC
In reply to:

tobicy68: This would have been big news if it wasn't over shadowed by mirrorless medium format...

And they are sooooo close in price.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 17:19 UTC

As I count it, 8 new lenses have been announced for M43. Most look like really nice offerings too.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 17:04 UTC as 24th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

NowHearThis: Even in a store most people are only going to be able to test out a few features: touchscreen, ergonomics, burst mode, user interface, and AF speed (maybe a few others but these are the major ones). They aren't going to be able to tell the salesman to unhook the camera from it's display mount and hook it up to the 70" 4K TV to test out their 4K video of little Jimmy waiving to the camera. On the Internet you can only take the gospel word of Ken Rockwell and some others like him (tongue-in-cheek). If Canon puts this in every Best Buy, Costco, & BAM camera store it can find, (not to mention all the usual internet outlets) it'll be a huge seller. Does it have every feature I want? Nope. Does anything else? Nope.

I've seen Sony A7 series, Canon 70D (when they came out), Nikon D7x00 series, those are $1000 plus bodies. At least they were when they were introduced and when I saw them there. Maybe I'll stop in this week and see if they have the 80D too.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 03:33 UTC
In reply to:

tallenvt: Help me out here, please. I have good Canon lenses and was hoping to cut down on size and weight by buying a mirrorless Canon, when the company released a decent one. I assumed [stupidly, i now see] that I would be able to use my Canon L lenses on a mirrorless Canon. From what i now read, I will need an adapter. So, do i actually get much of a size/weight advantage over say the 80D? And do i loose autofocus or other performance qualities when I use adapted L lenses with the M5. I REALLY dont want to have to buy 2 sets of lenses.

With the adapter the M5 will still be 1/2 pound lighter. Will probabably have to wait for reviews to confirm AF performance.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2016 at 21:42 UTC

Thanks for the early hint of your review: 85%, Silver Award.

</sarcasm>

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2016 at 21:22 UTC as 186th comment | 1 reply

Even in a store most people are only going to be able to test out a few features: touchscreen, ergonomics, burst mode, user interface, and AF speed (maybe a few others but these are the major ones). They aren't going to be able to tell the salesman to unhook the camera from it's display mount and hook it up to the 70" 4K TV to test out their 4K video of little Jimmy waiving to the camera. On the Internet you can only take the gospel word of Ken Rockwell and some others like him (tongue-in-cheek). If Canon puts this in every Best Buy, Costco, & BAM camera store it can find, (not to mention all the usual internet outlets) it'll be a huge seller. Does it have every feature I want? Nope. Does anything else? Nope.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2016 at 21:08 UTC as 190th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Tom Holton: No 4K? Sorry, Canon misses the mark again.

Most don't need 4K. Admittedly it would be a "nice to have". But for Canon's intended target market it isn't that critical. I'm sure their marketing department sent a lot of time and money researching what was needed. I'd like it to have a wireless flash commander, sweep panorama feature, dual SD cards, but apparently Canon thought those weren't as critical to have either - which is fine, it's still a nice camera.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2016 at 17:29 UTC
In reply to:

FuhTeng: I'm happy - a serious effort from the sales king, with some appealing technology and features.

I'm curious how many of these Canon will sell in the next year, compared to say X-T1 (because it's a similar price), or GX8, or a6300 sales.

I want Sony (and Fuji, even thought I don't shoot Fuji) to adopt that same touch-screen tech.

Fuji finally put a touchscreen in the X-A3. I suspect it'll make it's way to the X-T line.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 22:50 UTC
In reply to:

ttran88: Apple is projected to sell more iPhone 7 this coming weekend than Canon can sell all year ;)

ttran88, what's awesome about this is - my photos are going to look better than millions of other peoples!

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 22:48 UTC
In reply to:

deep7: Looks like a decent enough camera but, yet again, we have a fake SLR style. No mirror means you can put the viewfinder in the corner and have a more compact and more comfortable body but it looks like marketing has dictated this one (the buyer is convinced this is a "real camera like a 1DX")?

I've had two Mirrorless with both locations for EVFs; my NEX7 was in the corner, my E-M10 is centered above the lens. When I did use the EVF, which is less than 10% of the time. Neither location of the EVF was a problem, I do like that the centered EVF helps keep the built-in flash and hot shoe both over lens. But that's just a personal preference/observation.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 22:45 UTC
In reply to:

Aroart: Love the fact that people have the energy to comment about the image hump.. Doesn't the Sony a7, Olympus omd, Fuji xt1-2 all have this.. I think it makes them look a bit more pro... It's unfortunate that high end clients still want you to show up with a big camera... if you don't think it matters you haven't worked in cut throat NY photo market.. The Sony's a7 series with battery grip series are just starting to gain respect..

I don't have a problem with the viewfinder on my E-M10. Interestingly enough I was just looking at CameraSize and noticed that my E-M10 with the optional grip attached is probably about 3mm taller than the Canon M5. I think my E-M10 is small - that makes the Canon even smaller.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#521.97,684.608,660.545,ha,t
http://camerasize.com/compact/#521.97,684.608,660.545,ha,f

Given similar lenses it's about the same weight too. Nice work Canon! Well designed camera.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 22:38 UTC
In reply to:

Elaka Farmor: Shall be interesting to see if M5 can match the video quality of the 5 years old Nex-5n. I doubt it.

Pessimist much.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 22:03 UTC
In reply to:

kevindar: No 4K, The action AF will not compete with the 3 year old a6000, and they want 1K for the body (same price as the a6300, which shoots at 11fps, has 4K).
Otherwise great potential. this is a 500 dollar body.

"The action AF will not compete with the 3 year old a6000". Lol. These silly little trolls have never seen, held, or tried the camera and they make silly fictitious claims.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 22:01 UTC
In reply to:

Catalin Stavaru: This camera is great specs-wise, but it is almost identical in size to the Canon SL1, which has some compact lenses that can be used with it too. They took out the pentaprism and OVF, and added an expensive EVF which increased the price by about $300. And this just to capitalize on the word "mirrorless".

Hopefully an ultra-compact M50 with no EVF and the same internals is on the way. That's what I would buy.

There is no way that viewfinder alone is $300. My E-M10 and the E-PL7 are identical feature spec wise and the price difference is negligible - maybe $50 at most. It's all the other features in the M5 that justify the price. A hypothetical M50 with the same features would cost only a little less.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 17:14 UTC
In reply to:

Boeing skipper: People buy average and expensive Canon DSLR's for their broad range of excellent glass. I'm one of these people, as in my opinion glass is what really matters.

The M5 is catching up to the competition but still lags behind it, and it doesn't benefit much from the glass advantage Canon DSLR's have. Adapting EF lenses that are mostly too heavy and bulky onto a small mirrorless body doesn't make sense to me.

Where are the native EF-M 22/1.4, 35/1.4, 17-55/2.8, ... ?
Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji and now Sony all have excellent native lenses.

And Canon fanboys were the ones complaining about Sony's lack of native glass ...

@BS: More glass will come, let Canon see how well this sells, if it does they'll produce more enthusiast and pro glass. Personally, I prefer them make good, and small affordable f2 primes (like their existing 22mm) and smallish 16-80/2.8-4.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 17:05 UTC
Total: 214, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »