Jorginho

Lives in Netherlands Netherlands
Joined on May 10, 2008

Comments

Total: 726, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

@Rishi: I agree that the best APS-c sensors are better than the best mFT sensors. As per DxO these differences virtually all fall in the category "insignificant" as they do not reach 2/3 stops level which is their (may be arbitrary) line between signficance/insignifcance.

However: there can be very valid points made as to how a specific mFT cam is better than any APS-c camera. Of course the opposite can be said too.

Your article seems to be in this vain too: "MF can be better etc, but think and look well if it works for you. " Which is why you look at it from various userangles and see how each FF cam compares, not?

How would that be categorically untrue for APS-c vs FF or mFT vs APS-c?

I think this is the main gripe of some: a seperate article is made for this notion when it comes to a Fuji MF, but not when it comes to any other cam from other angles (other than the sensor).

If Fuji uses the same tech as Sony, would you expect it to be singificantly better btw?

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 10:32 UTC as 91st comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

MShot: The same comparison can be made between M43 and ASP-C.

@Rishi: I agree that the best APS-c sensors are better than the best mFT sensors. As per DxO these differences virtually all fall in the category "insignificant" as they do not reach 2/3 stops level which is their (may be arbitrary) line between signficance/insignifcance.

However: there can be very valid points made as to how a specific mFT cam is better than any APS-c camera. Of course the opposite can be said too.

Your article seems to be in this vain too: "MF can be better etc, but think and look well if it works for you."

How would that be categorically untrue for APS-c vs FF or mFT vs APS-c?

I think this is the main gripe of some: a seperate article is made for this notion when it comes to a Fuji MF, but not when it comes to any other cam.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 10:30 UTC
In reply to:

jetronic63: This is a bizarre article and makes me suspicious of DPR's impartiality. To patch together an argument that a camera is not worth the outlay because it can be outperformed in specific areas by other models isn't sound reasoning. If you applied this logic to other cameras, its unlikely you would buy anything as they all have their strengths and weaknesses. Surely the only basis for rational evaluation is whether the overall features/performance of the GFX make it compelling for its target market. Whether or not it is good value is a seperate argument and your mileage will vary depending on your circumstances.

Why? Because it is cherrypicking. They take this from that cam, then they need another cam for another spec comparison and finally yet another one that beats it in another area.

Also they leave out some things like colour speeration, tonality, colour sensitivity etc. I am not saying it would be any different per se but it could.

Also: anyone with a little brains could know that a 1452 mm2 sensor with the same tech is better than than an 864 mm2 but also that that difference does not need to be serious at all.

1452 mm2 vs 864 mm2 means 68 % more surface area.
365 (APS Nikon/Sony) vs 225 (mFT) means 62% more surface area.

So we can expect a gap about the size of current APS-c vs mFTs.

If we take DxO's word for it, the noise performance of the EM1.2 is on par with the very best APS-c sensors out there. I think COlour Sensitivity is on par as well. But i loses out on DR especially at low ISO to the very best as well as tonality...

A similar thing is seen here. Nothing strange.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 14:49 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T20 Review (292 comments in total)
In reply to:

mikey fried: "but for a $900 camera, most people will be very satisfied with the output."

What have things come to that this huge amount of money is regarded as a reason to expect lower quality, especially when there are cheaper (lumix) cameras available that provide excellence for less.

@KWelguy...I have APS-c and it doesn't close to my EM1mark2 form an IQ POV.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 14:32 UTC
In reply to:

wjkotze: I also noticed that you use ACR in your comparisons. I would have assumed that you are aware of the fact that the current ACR support for the Fuji is a mess. Informed Fuji user currently only use jpeg or CaptureOne. In the case of CaptureOne you need to jump through various hoops to fool the program to see the Fuji file as a PhasOne back.

Thx. I should have known better. Em1.2 was a mess here too until the final version of ACR came about.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 07:57 UTC
In reply to:

Tommi K1: Interesting part is that every MF photo here is technically superior to every FF that there is compared.

Yet, put them on same paper size printed and even 1" format delivers same quality up to specific print sizes (big... not tiny).

And that just puts equivalents "theory" to totally another dilemma they can't solve... Why different formats sizes delivers same quality so that clear majority can't spot the difference on the large prints, opposite what their theory claims.

Fully agree! A good 1"sensor gives you very good output. Sabotaged by Nikon, not exploited in a mirrorless cam by others sadly.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 07:56 UTC

Well we do not need say the Canon 50DRS FF either. It is not always superior...Now: let's build a case....

Sports? Em1.2 mFT or D500 will beat it handily. You see that is the downside of a larger sensor with so many pixels.
Dynamic range: Well both the mFT and the APS-c have better DR. Let alone D7200 which beats it easily..
So colour sensitivity: not better inspite of a huge sensor and price tag (see DxO).
Any 4K in the Canon. I didn't think so either.

Low light without a tripod: the Oly will handily blow it off its socks you see IBIS is much easier on a small sensor so that is the downside of a big sensor.

Now for landscape let's compare that Canon sensor with the Oly in HiRes mode. Sure HiRes is not always usable, but it is pretty usable now. It has better colour, better noise, better detail, better dynamic range better everything the Canon.

So...beware. If you buy a D500, EM1.2 and D7200 you are better off you see...

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 07:43 UTC as 207th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

MichaelCourtney: It might be a bit of a red herring to say the Sony A7r II offers better low noise characteristics than the GFX. You're comparing the two at ISO 12,800.

For the vast majority of situations, I can't imagine shooting above ISO 1600, and based on your own visual comparison, the GFX appears to perform better through at least ISO 3200.

thx1138....now Canon only needs to up the DR a lot, the colour sensitivity and tonal range by a whole lot and it may look like MF cam. But currently the Canon shots from landscapes just look visibly worse then D810 and A7RII for that very reason.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 07:21 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: The Gangbang Theorum...

...aka lets hit on a single camera using a whole gang from a different system.

The spin:

Fast lens comparison - Canon 85/1.2
Noise comparison - Sony A7Rii with BSI Sensor
Dynamic Range - Nikon D810 with ISO 64
Resolution - Back to Canon with the 5DS R

The obfuscated message:

Fujifilm GFX 50, combining the best of the best from Canon, Sony and Nikon, in one compact mirrorless camera body.

That is exactly what I took from all this but I did not write it down since I could not read it all (work you know)...But that was exactly my thought: take that here, take that from another cam etc...

This all comes across as if they are trying to protect the companies involved because the logic is rather odd.

Also many aspects of FF and Medium Format like colour sensitivity, separation, tonal range are not discussed at all it seems.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 07:18 UTC
In reply to:

Beat Traveller: DPR 2 years ago: "Everyone is going to buy these new full-frame cameras because bigger sensors are just better."

DPR now: "Hang on a second, there's such a thing as a sweet spot in sensor size."

I don't disagree with anything written here, I just find it amusing.

Rishi: degree or not, everyone can fall into the trap of adhering a lot of value to his/her own subjectiveness...Good luck with that. I prefer objective data over subjective, in the case of personal preference I see a lot of room for adding that on top of data. I am not alone, I think people look at DxO for a reason. Would be nice if some sites combine both though...

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 07:10 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Kwon: I totally agree with Rishi. I was looking into purchasing the GFX up until I saw the studio scene a few days ago. I currently have Canon, Sony and Fuji gear. I was going to go all in with Fuji and sell off all of my Canon and Sony gear, but decided to only sell my Canon gear and go all in with the Sony. I'm still going to keep the Fuji, but I decided to pass on the GFX. The Sony ff system is cheaper and the IQ is about the same as the GFX as far as I can tell. I'm going to order a second a7r ii body. Thank you DP Review for posting the studio scene for easy comparison. :)

I agree for people shooting studioscenes for a review this Fuji cam is absolutely crap at the price. But for people shooting landscape, architecture, portraits (tonality, colour seperation anyone?) and other outlandish stuff the GFX might do the job better than any other cam below 8000 euro.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 07:01 UTC
In reply to:

wjkotze: I also noticed that you use ACR in your comparisons. I would have assumed that you are aware of the fact that the current ACR support for the Fuji is a mess. Informed Fuji user currently only use jpeg or CaptureOne. In the case of CaptureOne you need to jump through various hoops to fool the program to see the Fuji file as a PhasOne back.

This is not an Xtrans sensor so if that is your point, it is not very valid...

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 13:56 UTC
In reply to:

Rod McD: Surely all of the arguments raised here comparing FF & MF can just as well be cited between any two formats? 1" upgrading to MFT, MFT to APSC, APSC to FF and FF to MF as you see them in print here. Despite all these points, the IQ certainly looks great in online images and the early reviews seem to be dripping with enthusiasm.

To think that the systems are competition rather complementary options would be a mistake. MF will never offer the lens range or lens speed of smaller formats and it's likely to remain costly. OTOH lovers of resolution - landscape, architecture and fashion enthusiasts might just find it just ticks their boxes. Personally, I can't afford it anyway, so I've no vested interest here......

Well mFT started out with two lenses...Look now....I am baffled by this article of theirs. unless Fuji says no lenses will be produced from now on in which case they do have a point.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 13:29 UTC
In reply to:

wildbild: well, you can't beat physics. and although FF lenses have come a long way and produce the nicest of bokeh ever seen, I would still argue that even stopped down to f8 my Pentax 645d has a better separation of planes than every smaller sensor digital camera I own.

So which cams does he own then and how is he being wrong. Rishi? I do not see A7RII being any better than A7R...Really only IS12800 looks better. So that seems pretty insigificant to me yet the A7RII is hailed as some IQ king...

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 13:27 UTC

Well well...I would like to point people to compare the A7RII which was hailed here via countless subreviews with the A7R....Now up to ISO6400 Isee no difference at all. In fact in bulb scene look at the yellow where the A7R yellow = yellow. Whereas on A7RII seems beige.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 13:23 UTC as 371st comment
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (660 comments in total)
In reply to:

iamatrix: Jesus Christ the colors are frickin lovely. Gold Star ? I think we need to move beyond gold, Fuji is making photography fun again...

Must great for AF to be hit and miss. I guess the great colours will save the day...

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 09:06 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (660 comments in total)
In reply to:

Quantum Scientist: I returned my EM-1 M II because it kept locking up. It would just freeze and none of the buttons would work, you couldn't even turn it off. I had to pull the battery to re-boot it.

So I ended up with the X-T2, great little camera. I suppose if you mounted the 27mm pancake lens on the X-T2 it would be pretty much like the X100F, just a tad bigger.

"So I ended up.." would make sense if X-T2s (some, just like you Em1.2 is an exception) would not have this trait.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1450289/0

I can dig up a lot more. Some cams lock up. True. QC can be good, but not 100%. Not with any brand.

So you bought and X-T2 and like the cam which is good for you, but getting a different brand because someone got a faulty unit is beyond me. It is quite possible you'll switch some more in the future.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 09:02 UTC
In reply to:

match14: How does it compare to the OM-D E-M1 Mark II?

QS: you are not really a photographer, are you. More like a gearhead. All these cams will get you great results. But if you need the IQ to make your image great so bad (given the minute differences between XT2 and GH5 in IQ and many other things) your compositions must not be the main attraction. Because when it is, no one even sees the minute differences at all. They don't matter for a good shot. D500. Em1.2, Gh5, XT2 A6500 and yes if there was a 1" sensor with an EVF (like J5) even that cam: it mostly depends on your eye, technique and knowledge of how to use all that in any particular scene.
I am not good at it at all btw, so that is not it. I am still learning. But I know it is me and not some trivial difference between the various cams.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 09:42 UTC
In reply to:

Chris2210: Now the subject tracking tests have been done it may be useful to actually see a comparative test - how does it measure up against a range of similarly priced/positioned cameras? I'd expect it to be trounced by the D500, which I read as somewhere not far short of the near uncanny D5, but perhaps that isn't a fair comparison [as that seems to be primarily the aim of that particular camera]. It would be interesting to see how it fares against other small mirror less shooters including the EM1ii, the xt2 and the Sony A6500.

Shoot-out, please!

You lost it with your 4K comparison. The difference is night and day. 4kK alone doesn't cut it anymore nowadays surely not when compared to the GH5.
Double standards I feel here too: so you do mention a Nikon lens on one hand (400 dollar less) but when it is about weight apparantly we only need a body.

That combination, D500 + 200-500 mm F5.6 sets you back...
860 gram for the body and 2300 gram for the lens: that is 3160 gram or 3,16 Kg.

The Panasonic: 725 gram + 990 gram...That is 1.72 Kg. That is 1,5 Kg. It weighs almost half the Nikon combination.

Now if 1700 dollar or 1300 dollar ( a reduction) of 25% is significant (which it is) to my mind. Than surely a 45% reduction in weight is significant too.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 09:36 UTC
In reply to:

scifisteve: Personally, it is hard to get excited over a 4/3d's sensor camera. I do not care about all the bells and whistles. The bottom line is, the lenses let the camera down! If you decide to use a speed booster, you loose any advantage of auto-focusing, but you can get low light performance and wide angle lens options on that setup. Every native lens you put on this camera has a 2X multiplier!!! So--no wide lenses and poor low light performance !!! So, using this camera means that for the best results you will have to have total lighting control, or a very bright day. Then, you have to make do with many lenses with few wide angle options, and high F stops!!
But, if you are looking for wide angles and low light advantages, start with an APS-C or full frame camera, light and portable. Then build on that with an external recorder. Each system has its trade offs, that is true, but I am not a fan of small sensors. P.S. file size can be an issue. 60 to 100 Mb/sec easy, but 300 Mb/sec?

Scifisteve....rename to Fisteve. Seems more appropriate.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 18:53 UTC
Total: 726, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »