Michael Ma

Lives in United States San Diego, United States
Works as a Multimedia Professional
Joined on Jan 18, 2005

Comments

Total: 684, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sony a7R III added to studio scene comparison (289 comments in total)

What's up with camera manufacturers removing their AA filters when it's obvious they still need it? I would rather not have false color in my images at the cost of losing some detail that I'll have to discard anyway. Camera manufacturers need a reality check on what's more important.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 16:55 UTC as 4th comment | 5 replies
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2156 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael Ma: Dear DPREVIEW,

On Page 9 (Image Preview), it looks like the RAW preview was exported with the Adobe Standard profile instead of the usual Camera Standard profile, which explains the faded red color. I've verified this by downloading the CR2 file and opening it up in ACR.

I see. Then it looks like Adobe Standard Color profile for the 5D Mark IV is the issue as it doesn't match the reds in the previous Canon cameras when using the Adobe Standard profile.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2017 at 05:37 UTC

As I predicted and assumed, I knew this was going to get posted as soon as another camera was tested with a higher score. What I am guessing DxOmark is doing is they know they have marketing power, so when a camera tests as the new #1, they wait for a handout or some kind of buying-in to their product, and when the camera company is unwilling to play, the results are just held until they don't have any significance.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 04:23 UTC as 39th comment
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2156 comments in total)
In reply to:

jjstier: I have the 5D II and I"m seriously considering the IV. But I'm confused by the raw and jpg quality in the comparison to the II and III. Isn't the purpose of a camera, esp a very expensive camera, to produce excellent images? Am I missing something? Better dynamic range, etc. yet it's saying the image quality is less than my Mark II, I don't understand. Appreciate any explanation.

I know I'm replying to a 9 month old comment but I just discovered that their RAW preview sample on page 9 (for the 5D4) was exported with the wrong camera profile. It looks like it was exported with the Adobe standard camera profile instead of the usual Camera Standard (aka Canon Standard) that was used for Mark 1, 2, 3, 5DS, 5DS R but not the Mark IV. That's why the colors look flatter with less dynamic range.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 15:24 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2156 comments in total)

Dear DPREVIEW,

On Page 9 (Image Preview), it looks like the RAW preview was exported with the Adobe Standard profile instead of the usual Camera Standard profile, which explains the faded red color. I've verified this by downloading the CR2 file and opening it up in ACR.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 15:21 UTC as 33rd comment | 2 replies

If you look at the window, second to the top floor, third from the right, you will see some pixelshift artifacts. Not saying it looks bad. Just looks like you'll sometimes have to run your pics through a fine tooth comb to do either a content aware fill or maybe a composite with a non-pixel shifted shot.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 02:57 UTC as 44th comment | 2 replies
On article Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM sample gallery (319 comments in total)

Rendering looks boring. I never thought 85mm 1.2 needed IS. Faster autofocus for moving objects definitely.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2017 at 21:15 UTC as 14th comment

Oh no. You might as well throw your D850 right in the trash when the UPS man drops it off 6-8 weeks from now.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 17:16 UTC as 18th comment | 1 reply

I think Adobe is forgetting how people come to rely on their products. One month of free trial isn't going to win anyone over getting into photography with so many options out there. It would be nice if we got Lightroom for a year whenever we buy a new camera.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 02:49 UTC as 25th comment
On article More Nikon D850 samples images added (166 comments in total)
In reply to:

robegio: Why bother showing these photos? I was looking forward to owning D850. Now I'm not too sure.

I'm pretty sure some of these were shot with the iPhone.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 06:58 UTC
On article More Nikon D850 samples images added (166 comments in total)

Jpegs look pretty damn average like it was shot with a 10-year-old camera.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 02:34 UTC as 40th comment | 2 replies
On article Canon patents a huge, hinged and reversible DSLR LCD (179 comments in total)

I want to believe that the dials are on the back of the LCD, but looking at the later pics, it looks like you have to flip the LCD up to get access to the dials.

I just want the same type of swivel screen that is on the 6D2 to be on the 5D5. Is that so difficult?

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 23:07 UTC as 32nd comment

They never officially publically announced that they were exiting the camera business. They quietly closed up shop and disappeared. I think if they just toughed it out for a year more, they'd still be here today. Just when they closed up shop, that's when the praise for the NX1 started rolling in. I'm sure they saw that they did eventually get the recognition for the NX1 camera by the community. Too little too late but maybe one day they will come back with a full frame mirrorless. They still make camera sensors.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 14:53 UTC as 92nd comment | 3 replies
On article Meet the Canon PowerShot G1 X III (327 comments in total)
In reply to:

xsamie: Dear dpreview there is a typo in the article, it reads f5,6 @ 70mm. That can't be right.

The aperture gets smaller as you zoom in. Just guessing these numbers in between but it's gonna be something like this:
24mm @f2.8
35mm @f3.5
50mm @f4.5
72mm @f5.6

Keep in mind, those are f-numbers at 1.6x crop. If you want to calculate full frame dof equivalence, you have to add about 1 stop.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 09:36 UTC
On article Meet the Canon PowerShot G1 X III (327 comments in total)

Someone posted this in another thread. It looks like Canon hosted an event for the press to take photos with the G1X III. RAW files are available to download if you click on the photo (don't click on Download Original). It's really hard to gage the performance of this camera with these pics though.

RAW & Jpeg samples:
http://www.photographyblog.com/previews/canon_powershot_g1_x_mark_iii_photos

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 09:29 UTC as 18th comment
On article Meet the Canon PowerShot G1 X III (327 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael Ma: Except for a very small handful of people who have a very specific use for this camera, I think this camera is aimed at people who know just enough about cameras to make them dangerous to their wallet. The price tells me that people who are buying this camera are planning to buy this camera as a long-term investment and get serious about photography. And they think they are essentially getting a DSLR with all the most common focal ranges covered with a decent lens. It is definitely not the case

It doesn't have the reach for sports..
72mm is a bit short for portraits but more importantly at 72mm, you can only shoot at f5.6 (on a crop sensor, that's f/8 full frame dof equivalence). You're not going wow anyone including yourself.
It's not bad for landscapes but you'll be itching to go wider.
Lastly, 80D sensor is mediocre outside of ISO 100. It gets grainy very quickly because of it's high pixel density, and you won't be shooting too many photos at ISO 100 due to its slow lens.

I think people willing to spend $1300 for this camera (enthusiast) will outgrow this lens very quickly. It's a terrible place to be having just spent $1300 with zero room for flexibility. M5/M6 is a much better buy.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 16:04 UTC
On article Meet the Canon PowerShot G1 X III (327 comments in total)

Except for a very small handful of people who have a very specific use for this camera, I think this camera is aimed at people who know just enough about cameras to make them dangerous to their wallet. The price tells me that people who are buying this camera are planning to buy this camera as a long-term investment and get serious about photography. And they think they are essentially getting a DSLR with all the most common focal ranges covered with a decent lens. It is definitely not the case

It doesn't have the reach for sports..
72mm is a bit short for portraits but more importantly at 72mm, you can only shoot at f5.6 (on a crop sensor, that's f/8 full frame dof equivalence). You're not going wow anyone including yourself.
It's not bad for landscapes but you'll be itching to go wider.
Lastly, 80D sensor is mediocre outside of ISO 100. It gets grainy very quickly because of it's high pixel density, and you won't be shooting too many photos at ISO 100 due to its slow lens.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 13:22 UTC as 48th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Acrill: The M5 with 15-45mm kit lens and the 22mm 2.0 makes more sense than purchasing this. The 11-22mm wide angle is no slouch either.

It's a lot to pay for a point and shoot that will feel limiting very quickly as people realize the lens isn't very capable. I'd say a month in people will be itching to upgrade to atleast an M5 wondering why they even bought this camera in the first place for such a price.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 22:55 UTC

An opportunity wasted. I think Canon probably had a good idea in mind at first. A large sensor compact with a fixed lens. Maybe someone suggested to be bold and have a 50mm prime lens. A lens that even a novice can isolate subjects with easily. "With this, they will learn the joys of photography!" someone declared.

Then the marketing department said, "What do you mean it doesn't zoom? Who doesn't want zoom? Let's make sure it shoots wide and that it has 3x zoom." And the rest is history.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 15:34 UTC as 90th comment | 2 replies
On article iPhone 8 Plus sample gallery (203 comments in total)

I never minded how the iPhone 7's portraits looked, but somehow, these look artificial. It needs some tweaking.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2017 at 14:48 UTC as 18th comment
Total: 684, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »