brendon1000

brendon1000

Lives in India India
Has a website at www.brendonshootspeople.com
Joined on Feb 7, 2009

Comments

Total: 2006, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2724 comments in total)
In reply to:

TheCollector: Very capable camera for sports and action photography.

I would be happy to read comparison with Nikon D5 and Canon 1DX MkII.

The only practical weak point is battery life, but it is twice lighter that Canikon - the neck would appreciate this :)

The A9 has a newer battery with 650 CIPA rating. With a battery grip you get approx 1300 shots with 2 batteries which is very decent. Not as good as a D5 or a 1DxII of course but no longer as abysmal as almost every other mirrorless camera out there.

My A7rII has bad battery life and I constant have to carry around 6 batteries for 2 cameras on long shoots. With the new battery having twice the capacity I would theoretically need only 3 batteries which is manageable.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 09:06 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2724 comments in total)

Dpreview why are you using the Sony 85mm f1.8 lens for this test ? I think the earlier Sony 55mm f1.8 was the sharper option or perhaps even a Sony 85mm f1.4 GM lens ?

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 07:37 UTC as 158th comment | 1 reply
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2724 comments in total)
In reply to:

jango: compering the a9 to the sony a6300/6500 show that the a6300/6500 has batter raw iq
how is it? i think it will be very inters tying test a9 vs a6300/6500

If you are referring to sharpness that is partially due to DPreview using a 85mm f1.8 lens on the A9 while all other Sony cameras use a 55mm f1.8 lens

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 07:37 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2724 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bombastic: Amazing camera indeed. Then again, my xt20 beats it in sheer detail (at the expense of higher noise).

@Bombastic - They used a different lens to test this. They used the 85mm f1.8 FE lens for some reason rather than the default 55mm f1.8 lens they use for other cameras.

Don't base your premise on chart performance. Real world usage can tell a very different story.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 06:44 UTC
On article Video: Nikon D7500 first look (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

dirkluchtman: Nikon completely lost my attention; nice stills cameras, no doubt, but way outdated in terms of live view or video functionality (proper continuous autofocus in video non-existent as far as I can tell). They really need to start catching up with this.

@Sandy - I am sure with your flawless logic you will tell movie critics to show you their movies if they dare to criticize any movie :P

None of the posters here professed to shooting videos. We only commented that Nikon continues to ignore video capabilities on its new cameras.

And having good AF in live view is not just for video but also for making use of that articulating screen that Nikon provides in the D7500.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2017 at 15:40 UTC
On article Video: Nikon D7500 first look (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

dirkluchtman: Nikon completely lost my attention; nice stills cameras, no doubt, but way outdated in terms of live view or video functionality (proper continuous autofocus in video non-existent as far as I can tell). They really need to start catching up with this.

You must some very important person that your opinion must be what everyone else wants :)

Glad I could at least make you laugh.

Well the truth is while Nikon makes fine cameras a lot more people are looking at video as well these days. If they don't have good video then guess what ? People WILL start looking elsewhere.

Canon is already gaining more market share at Nikon's expense which should partly be attributed to the complete lack of video options.

I don't care about video either even though my A7rII takes excellent video but guess what a lot of people who shoot just video have also bought the A7rII which adds to Sony's sales. If Nikon keeps avoiding video people then they can do so at their own peril.

Saying they have no pedigree in video is a stupid excuse. Nikon can tie up or licence tech from so many video camera makers.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2017 at 15:36 UTC
On article Video: Nikon D7500 first look (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

dirkluchtman: Nikon completely lost my attention; nice stills cameras, no doubt, but way outdated in terms of live view or video functionality (proper continuous autofocus in video non-existent as far as I can tell). They really need to start catching up with this.

^^ There is a reason Nikon is struggling right now. If you want both video and stills Nikon is not a very good option like Canon or Sony.

If Nikon doesn't move with the market there is a good chance they will continue to lose market share and money to the competition.

Comparing cine cameras that cost three to four times than what these DSLR cameras cost is ridiculous and unviable for most film makers on a budget and there are plenty of those around which is why the Sony A7s and GH5 sell so well.

If Nikon doesn't want a pie of all these customers who need both photos and video then guess who is going to be the loser

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2017 at 13:57 UTC
On article Video: Nikon D7500 first look (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

Emadn13: i dont see any real improvement ,and nikon always sucks in video,

Ultimately yes the differences are not huge. You want a better D7200 you need to step up to the D500 which is a real beast of a camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2017 at 12:34 UTC
On article Video: Nikon D7500 first look (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

Artak Hambarian: To be interesting as a DX camera for me it needs to be higher MP, e.g. 28-32 MP, instead of high buffer or frame rate, and GPS and all connectivity is needed and even more: should have a wireless network connection, like a smart phone. Certainly tilt touch high res monitor is a big welcome. Even bigger, e.g 5 inch monitor, @4K resolution. Its not a bad idea to look at mirrorless directions as well.

@Toni - Compare the 50 MP 5dr with the 5d mk 3 which has very similar performance. Noise performance is largely the same.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Canon-EOS-5DS-versus-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III___1009_1008_795

Also compare the Nikon D750 with 24 MP sensor to the Nikon D810 with 36 MP which are same gen sensors. Again very similar noise performance.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2017 at 07:40 UTC
On article Video: Nikon D7500 first look (416 comments in total)
In reply to:

Artak Hambarian: To be interesting as a DX camera for me it needs to be higher MP, e.g. 28-32 MP, instead of high buffer or frame rate, and GPS and all connectivity is needed and even more: should have a wireless network connection, like a smart phone. Certainly tilt touch high res monitor is a big welcome. Even bigger, e.g 5 inch monitor, @4K resolution. Its not a bad idea to look at mirrorless directions as well.

@Desmond - I don't know why you are spreading false information. Please refrain from doing so in future.

More megapixels doesn't have to mean more noise. That is a myth that was disproved quite a long time ago. As Dr Blackjack mentioned the A7rII is living proof of that.

And you get plenty of lenses that will outresolve or match closely the highest resolution sensors today. Even a kit lens that might resolve 14 MP from a 20 MP sensor might resolve something like 20 MP from a 36 MP sensor. So either way the same lens will resolve more MP from a higher MP sensor even if it can't out-resolve that sensor.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2017 at 06:08 UTC
On article Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 R LM WR sample gallery (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

OlyPent: FF'rs math of delusion:

APS<FF>Medium format

Just for your info there was ZERO f2 zoom lenses for APS-C or FF before 2014. A century of lens development didn't have any f2 zoom lenses for large sensors and suddenly Sigma launched 2 f2 zoom lenses that worked very well.

So talking about what happened in the past is pretty irrelevant in todays time with the rate of technology increasing.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2017 at 06:28 UTC
In reply to:

Indik: Great lens, if sharp (and it should be). Lightweight and cheap.

You probably had a bad copy. Every review out there that actually tests the lens unlike Dxomark that is theoretical only says its a very good lens.

Here is a photozone.de review -

http://www.photozone.de/sony-alpha-aps-c-lens-tests/849-sony35f18nex?start=1

They gave the lens 3 and half stars. And the lens is well built to boot.

You can't really compare this lens to the FE 35mm f2.8 as that costs a LOT more for one and has a much smaller aperture which is easier to design.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 13:18 UTC
In reply to:

Indik: Great lens, if sharp (and it should be). Lightweight and cheap.

What do you mean the 35mm f1.8 is not useable wide open ? :P

All reviews I have read say otherwise - https://www.ephotozine.com/article/sony-e-35mm-f-1-8-oss-lens-review-20665

And I don't know how old your information is but the newer Sigma Art lenses work just fine on even a old A6000.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 06:39 UTC
On article Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 R LM WR sample gallery (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

OlyPent: FF'rs math of delusion:

APS<FF>Medium format

^^ Whether they are good (or not) is irrelevant. That they are a reality IS what is important since there doesn't exist such fast lenses for medium format yet. So my point is that if lenses like this does exist we can expect more such lenses from better manufacturers once MF adoption improves

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 06:28 UTC
In reply to:

Indik: Great lens, if sharp (and it should be). Lightweight and cheap.

Actually they have quite a few cheap good lenses available though of course there are plenty of gaps.

There is the regular 35mm f1.8 OSS and 50mm f1.8 OSS which are both very decent lenses. Then there is the wide 20mm f2.8 pancake, Sigma 19mm f2.8, Sigma 30mm f2.8, 30mm f1.4 and 60mm f2.8. All sharp lenses.

Zooms are lacking somewhat but the 55-210mm is decent as is the 18-105mm.

Honestly for a decent cheap system Sony is pretty compelling

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 16:38 UTC
On article Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 R LM WR sample gallery (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

OlyPent: FF'rs math of delusion:

APS<FF>Medium format

^^ There exists TODAY f1.2 lenses for MF. Its just that they are manual focus lenses.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/9707208210/speedmaster-65mm-and-85mm-fast-primes-for-fujifilm-gfx-on-the-way

I am sure in a few years time with 3rd parties entering MF territory we might see more lenses added.

And yes I shoot for a living. So if MF can help my work improve ill spend the money if required. However right now its not good enough for my needs and so ill stick with my current system.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 14:59 UTC
In reply to:

Zeal2: Now I wonder if this can compete with my Sigma 10-20, If so might have to sell it and buy the Nikon

I had the Sigma and while I liked the colour and contrast it wasn't a particularly sharp lens though its possible I had a bad copy since that lens was infamous for its poor qc

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 05:46 UTC
In reply to:

Impulses: Nice rival to the Canon 10-18... With $300 UWA options on both of the most popular DSLR mounts I hope one of the mirrorless players tries to rival this sooner or later (even tho I'm already sorted as far as UWAs, I know price keeps a lot of people from trying them out).

Sony sorely lacks a cheap UWA. Though if people do have a canon or Nikon adapter then they can pick up one of those lenses. AF is unlikely to be great but for UWA you can get away with using a pure MF lens

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 05:44 UTC
In reply to:

Indik: Great lens, if sharp (and it should be). Lightweight and cheap.

Agreed. Wish all manufacturers had an inexpensive UWA lens like Canon and Nikon. Olympus has a 9-18mm but that's not as wide as this lens.

Sony also lacks a cheap UWA lens.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 05:42 UTC
On article Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 R LM WR sample gallery (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

OlyPent: FF'rs math of delusion:

APS<FF>Medium format

^^ This whole discussion has been about this particular camera and hence we are talking about digital medium format. And by mature I mean mature I mean not age but maturity of technology. Currently digital MF lags behind smaller sensor format cameras in almost every aspect and some of the things are quite glaring like AF and lens selection.

After a few years I am sure those shortcomings will mostly vanish and digital MF will become more mainstream. But currently due to very high prices and limited lens availability the system isn't going to attract too many people right now.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 03:14 UTC
Total: 2006, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »