Joined on May 15, 2008


Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20
In reply to:

D135ima: Very similar to 1dxII - ISO 100 gives minimal advantage compared to ISO 200 and ISO 200 have not too much advantage compared to 400, But from 400 we see approximately the same character as on the current Sony-Nikons: one step ISO - minus one step DR. I think this is enough for me, accustomed to the 5d2. But what we see in the coming Nikon body of this segment ?

The upcoming Nikon body (D810 successor I presume) is unlikely to be significantly better than the 42mp Sony sensor already found in A7R Mk.II. Or it might simply use that sensor.

I've shot with all of D750, D800E, D810 and A7R2. The difference between D800E/D810 and A7R2 in terms of sensor performance is not at all visible, while the D750 outdo all of them in terms of high ISO DR/noise.

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2016 at 06:10 UTC
In reply to:

Zoron: D900 better be good....or else

you do have to realize a lot of people shooting D800/D700 type of cameras are just hobbyists. And the A7 series happens to be a bit cheaper as well.

at this rate, if Sony can keep up improving the tracking performance of its AF in the A series cameras, I am afraid a good portion of the non-pro Nikon FF shooters might consider jumping ship. as these Nikon FF shooters age their tolerance for heavy equipment goes down, and the light and small A7 series do look very attractive for that...

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 06:42 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4: a quick summary (471 comments in total)
In reply to:

Maverick_: The MFT is becoming more and more a gear for indie filmmakers not wanting to go the 5D route. At the end of the day, it's sensor size that matters for stills. I am a long time GH series user and will not upgrade to another GH. My next camera will have a large sensor.

Or use GH3 for video and casual shooting. Nikon D800E / Canon 5D3 for stills. Best of both worlds this way.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2014 at 09:23 UTC
In reply to:

map1273: For the money, I'd rather have the new Sigma 120-300mm 2.8 that's coming out in a few weeks and use a teleconverter if needed on that.

almost totally forgot about the Sigma.
$2700 for a 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 VR,
$3600 for a 120-300 f/2.8 OS
Given the recent improvement in quality from Sigma, the only downside is the size and weight.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2013 at 18:08 UTC

Poor Nikon users. Sony is already onto their 2nd generation 70-400mm with SSM. The first version of the Nikon AF-S 70/80-400 is still yet to be found!

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2013 at 22:35 UTC as 4th comment
On article Roger Cicala compares three 24-70mm F2.8 lenses (142 comments in total)

the resolution of the said lenses seem to correlate with age more than anything. for premium lenses, the newer ones always resolve more.

Canon had a 24-70/2.8L for quite a while before the Nikon 24-70 shows up. Nikon 24-70 was crowed as the best out of the best for the past 5 years, until the Canon MkII shows up and claimed the throne.

I am sure once a Mark II from Nikon (hopefully with VR) shows up it would be the best again, so would be the Mark III from Canon. it's always a leap-frog between the two.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2013 at 17:40 UTC as 26th comment | 4 replies
On article Best Camera of 2012: And the Winner is... (1414 comments in total)

I'm not trying to be a snob, but if my daughter (or yours) fork out three grand of depreciating-like-no-body dollar for a once-in-a-life-time wedding, and you see the pro photog using a OM-D EM5, what would you think?

The photog might well be super duper skillful, but one would have a hard time wondering how much better the pictures would look if the same shots were made with a Nikon or Canon full frame. 2-3 stops better dynamic range and high iso noise characteristics. Whether it is a D700/D3, D800, D4, 5D2/5D3, 1DX, it doesn't matter. Given the aesthetic qualities are the same, you still cannot beat the law of physics. large sensor takes in more light and pictures do look better.

The m4/3s and NEXs has made themselves into very fine cameras. But would they be up to heavy duty pro use one day?

Link | Posted on Jan 2, 2013 at 02:57 UTC as 255th comment | 23 replies
On article Dpreview Users' Poll: Best Camera of 2012? (1507 comments in total)

D800E when matched with any of the modern nano-coated f/2.8 zooms or better yet primes produce an IQ that's totally out of this world.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2012 at 04:22 UTC as 611th comment

The UV filter option is for people who are paranoid about scratching the front element on their $2K Nikon 14-24.

Worth considering for people who shoot around salt water, sand, snow and ice. the new lens cap also elminates the need for the original plastic cover which falls off all the time and scratch the hood.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2012 at 16:52 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Hands-on with the AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR (259 comments in total)
In reply to:

Londongal: I'll purchase the Really Right Stuff tripod mount ring instead.

I bet almost everything from RRS would be better made and more sturdy than Nikon's.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2012 at 01:32 UTC
On article DxO Optics Pro 8: What's New (110 comments in total)

Lightroom 4 as a complete package was on sale for $75 during thanksgiving in the US.

The DXO upgrade from v7 elite to v8 elite is $99 US. Even during promotion period it was $69.

So a DXO upgrade cost the same or more than the LR4 complete package.

Not to mention starting with LR4, LR actually understand Nikon colors better than DXO. With DXO you usually have to start with ViewNX/CNX conversion to TIFF, and then run the TIFFs through DXO to fix the geometric distortion or perspective distortion. LR / ACR is now close enough to do it in one shot.

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2012 at 19:43 UTC as 16th comment | 1 reply

back in the days when Light Room actually cost $299 or $199 MSRP, the DXO pricing made a lot of sense.

Now that you can get LR for practically $79 or $99 with any lens or camera at B&H, why would anyone want to pay $299 (or $199 when they have special offers) for DXO optics elite?

People might own a full frame camera, but FF-owner doesn't translate into easier prey!

I got the v7 this June. I think V7 was out for a year perhaps? I am afraid DXO might have became a $69 annual subscription.... even LR/PS doesn't update to new major versions so often. CS5 was around for quite some time, as was LR3.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2012 at 20:47 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

delete: If this lens would have been available 6 months ago, it would be in my photo bag. Now I already have the f/2,8 VRII. Which is an excellent lens, but per physics also a very heavy and large one.

Not sure if to trade it in for the new f/4 would make sense for me. This would cost me probably nada. On the plus side would be the ~700g less, smaller size and better VR, on the negative side the one stop aperture.

Need to check my photos made with the big one, see how many of them were actually shot with f/2,8.

you paid $2399 for 7 pieces of ED glass on the f/2.8 version, now you are down to 3 for $1399.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 14:25 UTC
In reply to:

rekky: $224 for a tripod collar? You have got to be kidding me!

and chances are RRS would make a better one

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 14:21 UTC
In reply to:

Catallaxy: The reviewer failed to review one of the most important points about a battery grip - how it does on a tripod. Some of the third party grips have a bad reputation for flex or give or otherwise not being a sturdy platform when the camera plus grip is mounted on a tripod. Just because the body/grip interface does not appear to flex in normal operations does not mean that it will not flex or contribute to vibrations on a tripod.

I had the original MB-D12 grip mounted on my D800 for a while. Even with Nikon grip, no matter how tight I tried to bolt the grip onto my D800, it would still flex on my tripod. you push the viewfinder compartment and the body would move around a bit.

Before you would ask, I was using a RRS lever clamp and a wimberly body plate, on a gitzo 2-series tripod. the same combo with the D800 body itself leave very little play.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2012 at 21:05 UTC
In reply to:

Mr Fartleberry: Remember you need 36MP to do landscapes!

and then a 10-core server with RAID array to process the pictures?

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2012 at 00:30 UTC
In reply to:

Jord: This does seem a very good package but for the life of me I can't work out why the Elete version is double the price. I'd imagine the work going into calibrating a cheaper camera is the same as a pro camera!

I'd buy it tomorrow if the Elite version was the same as the normal version but the gap between this and lightroom is now nearly 3x.

Rant over. Great kit alas now my demo has timed out before I could check it on the D4 files.

Apparently in their eyes, the non-pros who bothered to own a full-frame camera are rich/serious enough to pay more?

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2012 at 23:36 UTC
On article Interview: Tetsuya Yamamoto of Nikon (194 comments in total)

Mr.Yamamoto, I wish nikon can make the FT1 to work with AF-C mode. giving us the ability to use all our long lenses with Nikon 1, with AF-S and VR support, but with continous AF not being supported is quite strange I have to say.

I would not mind even if the AF-C support are restricted to lenses with constant f/4 or constant f/2.8 and brighter.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2012 at 14:18 UTC as 39th comment
On article Variation Facts and Fallacies (230 comments in total)

Wide angle zoom lens may be an exception.

I tested 3 different copies of Nikon 16-35mm f/4G VR on my D700, only one of them does not display severe de-centering : with the two other copies one (or more) of the corners are significantly softer than the other corners at f/4. it was shocking to say the least.

If wide angle shots are your bread and butter, the moral of the lesson is buy at least 3 copies of the wide lens you want and cherry pick one. it definitely was worth it.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2011 at 02:52 UTC as 52nd comment | 1 reply
On article Nikon J1 real-world samples gallery (336 comments in total)

This camera is basically designed for people with a lot of fast / long nikkors and wanna go lighter and longer , not the P&S / mirrorless crowd actually....

with the f-mount adapter :

slap on a 24/1.4G and it becomes 70m f/1.4, with AF
50/1.4G becomes 135mm f/1.4
85/1.4G becomes 230mm f/1.4

all of the above combined with the camera weight about 2 pounds in a fairly small package. even with the 24/1.4 , shooting at f/1.4 it's A LOT of subject isolation. at f/1.4 you would hardly ever shoot above ISO800....

70-200 becomes 190-510mm f/2.8 VR
70-200 VR2 + 2X TC becomes 380-1080mm f/5.6 VR. (think telescope...)

i can't say i'm not excited....

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 18:53 UTC as 63rd comment | 26 replies
Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20