TrojMacReady

TrojMacReady

Lives in Netherlands Netherlands
Joined on May 17, 2010

Comments

Total: 1606, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sony 'striping': here's the fix (694 comments in total)
In reply to:

AstroStan: Looks like many Sony bashers are not even bothering to read the article before spewing ignorant "don't buy" dictates.

How does Sony "use" Professor Hank Dietz when he decides to create a tool to fix it? And how is he a "self-proclaimed professor" when you can look up his credentials and he clearly earned his title?

It helps your own credibility to be less fallacious when trying to make a point.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2018 at 15:38 UTC
In reply to:

Alexandre Racine photographer: The 250mp sensor was revealed in 2017... or 2016? Cant remember.

2015.

It's a long breath for some.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2018 at 05:59 UTC
In reply to:

Class A: How does this questionable piece of writing gel with the recent CIPA data: DSLRs up 4%, Mirrorless down 11%?

This article is a very disappointing piece that lacks fair representation of all users.

For a review site it may be better to cover a "new, energetic" (what is "energetic" supposed to mean for the customer anyway?) market, but for a customer it may be better to use a more mature technology.

For sure, mirror-less technology has advantages, but it also has disadvantages. To simply ignore the needs of those appreciating the advantages of optical viewfinders and not prepared to embrace the disadvantages of mirror-less, is just bad reader representation.

Trust DPreview to be unenthusiastic about Ricoh/Pentax again, despite the fact that many users are extremely grateful for Pentax providing them with a sensor-stabilised system with an optical viewfinder. The author should have praised Ricoh for providing a much welcome alternative instead of portraying them as lagging behind.

Unit sales for one month has little relevance to the article at hand. Especially if you consider that revenue for DSLR's was down and up for mirrorless again, an ongoing trend that highlights the race to the bottom for DSLR's, with an ever lowering average price (stripped entry level) and the mirrorless move to higher end markets (including the FF referred to here) driving up the mirrorless sales revenues. Lowering average sales prices continually resulting in essentially flat unit sales at best for one month, isn't going to keep a camera division afloat.

Either way, it's clear in which direction the R&D budgets are shifting and that's the key here.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 06:01 UTC
In reply to:

TrojMacReady: A little misleading numbers just by themselves, since DSLR's seem to be caught in a race to the bottom. Flat unit sales, but only because they keep lowering prices (-6%) while mirrorless cameras are still moving up to higher value models. Less unit sales indeed but more than offset by the higher price of the higher value models (+14% overall sales).

Neither is ideal by itself (you want keep your ground in the market of the lower cost models too, since it allows for a larger potential user base, many of which may at one point move up or add higher value models to their camera collection), but the race to the bottom will sooner or later eat away margins, followed by R&D budgets, market reputation and eventually lead to a downwards spiral. Many once large companies have faced the same battle (including Sony in other markets).

No, that doesn't explain the continual downwards trend in average DSLR price, the race to the bottom.

And looking at more than just 1 month, the tables on unit sales turn as well.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2018 at 18:35 UTC
In reply to:

M Chambers: Canon and Nikon's big problem is that for the past eight years they've attacked mirrorless with such hatred that to now get into the business, not only will they have to play catch up with Sony and Fuji but they'll have a hard time converting their own fan base.

Japan hasn't been representative as a camera market, since CIPA started reporting. They have always been the "odd" one out.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2018 at 17:57 UTC

A little misleading numbers just by themselves, since DSLR's seem to be caught in a race to the bottom. Flat unit sales, but only because they keep lowering prices (-6%) while mirrorless cameras are still moving up to higher value models. Less unit sales indeed but more than offset by the higher price of the higher value models (+14% overall sales).

Neither is ideal by itself (you want keep your ground in the market of the lower cost models too, since it allows for a larger potential user base, many of which may at one point move up or add higher value models to their camera collection), but the race to the bottom will sooner or later eat away margins, followed by R&D budgets, market reputation and eventually lead to a downwards spiral. Many once large companies have faced the same battle (including Sony in other markets).

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2018 at 05:22 UTC as 54th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

mediman30: Holy Mother of Zeus! This camera will definitely change the FF world not only for Sony but for other manufacturers too! Bring it on!

You forgot CD, DVD, Blu-ray, Playstation etc.

Hmm, yeah, they have a hand in changing landscapes. But nothing lasts forever in tech land.

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2018 at 04:49 UTC
On article Sony a7 III studio scene published (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dave Oddie: It's interesting to compare the A7 III with the APS-C Nikon 7500 (probably the best aps-c sensor implementation out there) in RAW.

There is probably just less than a stop in it at higher ISO as in @ 3200 on the Nikon you van be @ 6400 on the Sony. Same at 6400 (N) v 128000 (S).

Noise does start to appear lower down the scale on the Nikon (400) than the Sony but it is negligible.

The point? APS-C can be so good these days I question the need for FF sensors at resolutions of 24mp particularly for amateurs who are just lumbering themselves with the need to acquire FF lenses which soon get big, heavy and expensive once you leave slow primes behind.

For anyone who has a A7 R III for its 42mp I can see sense in having one as a second body (pro or amateur) but I don't see a compelling reason to go FF because of the A7 III itself.

PS The APS-C 7500 is as good as or better than the original A7 ISO-wise and no I don't own the Nikon!

Shadow noise is usually what limits your puctures the most in low light and there's more than a stop difference there.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7iii&attr13_1=nikon_d7500&attr13_2=sony_a7riii&attr13_3=pentax_k1&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&attr126_0=1&attr126_1=1&attr126_2=1&attr126_3=1&normalization=compare&widget=594&x=-0.18312945450491375&y=-0.8723596999619965

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2018 at 14:41 UTC
On article Sony a7 III studio scene published (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

just someone: wow, at 6400 the D850 is miles ahead of any Sonys and light years ahead of the Canons!

" Don’t be an apologist"

Just debunking your claims regarding NR being the reason for its lower noise performance in RAW. Which comes off as an apologist argument to detract from the A7III noise performance. Nice attempt to make others fit your shoes though.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2018 at 21:57 UTC
On article Sony a7 III studio scene published (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhozoKozmos: gritty noisier sharpened higher-rez
A7III, A7RIII, D850

vs

smoother cleaner non-sharpened lower-rez "optimized NR" (overall) ready-to-share-now ooc ...
EOS 6D

at "lower light"
new "normal" ISO 12,800

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7iii&attr13_1=canon_eos6d&attr13_2=sony_a7riii&attr13_3=nikon_d850&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&attr126_0=1&attr126_1=1&attr126_2=1&attr126_3=1&normalization=compare&widget=594&x=-0.906845307631553&y=0.7547076535061047

well, the majority masses will not be pleased, nor impressed by noisier images
and for more detail, THEY just shoot closer, or with better light

but diehard detractors (who embrace "noisy raw"="more (not better) detail" even after arduous post-processing) continue to insist otherwise (tweaking NR in post) ... only for the minority who have the extra means (and time)

plain as day

A little bit of wax on your monitor and all your pictures look just the way you like it.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2018 at 21:49 UTC
On article Sony a7 III studio scene published (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

just someone: wow, at 6400 the D850 is miles ahead of any Sonys and light years ahead of the Canons!

@Nexlupus:
You're comparing lenses (corner sharpness, field curvature, centering etc.) and possible slight focus differences, not detail retention at higher ISO's. Switch the same scene to the lowest ISO and you see a similar difference in detail, with NR taken out of the equation. Either way, the Nikon D850 is expected to retain more detail since it started with a higher MP count than any of the others in your comparison to begin with.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2018 at 18:29 UTC
On article Sony a7 III studio scene published (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

coudet: Seems outstanding in low light:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7iii&attr13_1=nikon_d750&attr13_2=sony_a7riii&attr13_3=canon_eos6dmkii&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=51200&attr16_1=51200&attr16_2=51200&attr16_3=51200&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=-0.15786458930003439&y=-0.9901566378498672

No, the image will not be like that. Remember that we're looking at the starting point and then 100% crops. But for small prints, this could still result in usable images, where results from others may not. See for example the crops below after NR treatment. On the left a crop from the same A7III file that would print at 300 dpi at 5x7 and on the right the same crop and same treatment for the D750 file. One is usable at that size, the other not so much (too much detail gone yet still too much noise and a much worse color cast).
https://1.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~forums/60925975/c7d8378208e44c0b8477963ecaf3dd95

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2018 at 18:13 UTC
On article Sony a7 III studio scene published (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

just someone: wow, at 6400 the D850 is miles ahead of any Sonys and light years ahead of the Canons!

The D850 is worse at higher ISO's than the A7RIII in low light, see above and below. The A7III beats the A7RIII by a hair in this regard.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7iii&attr13_1=nikon_d850&attr13_2=sony_a7riii&attr13_3=nikon_d750&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=25600&attr16_1=25600&attr16_2=25600&attr16_3=25600&attr126_0=1&attr126_1=1&attr126_2=1&attr126_3=1&normalization=compare&widget=594&x=-0.15356856455493184&y=-0.8553453736197892

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2018 at 17:45 UTC
On article Sony a7 III studio scene published (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

just someone: wow, at 6400 the D850 is miles ahead of any Sonys and light years ahead of the Canons!

Depends what you're looking for. In terms of low light performance, the D850 is worse.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7iii&attr13_1=nikon_d850&attr13_2=sony_a7riii&attr13_3=nikon_d750&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=6400&attr16_3=6400&attr126_0=1&attr126_1=1&attr126_2=1&attr126_3=1&normalization=compare&widget=594&x=-0.14020739216811037&y=-0.8774905168393298

A gap that grows to well over a stop in dark areas in low light, as you move through the ISO scale to higher ISO's.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2018 at 17:41 UTC
On article Sony a7 III studio scene published (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

JEROME NOLAS: A7RIII wins..

Except for shadow noise at very high ISO's.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2018 at 14:13 UTC
In reply to:

Fog Maker: I liked several of the shots and the stories

What I don’t like however,

is to be redirected to a pure propaganda site
like Radio Free Europe

@ Strados:

I wasn't talking about 1945. I'm talking about the cold war period during which the radio station mentioned in this article came to fruition. In most of Western Europe, radio stations from behind the Iron Curtain were not blocked (me being a witness of that is rather irrelevant too since it's already a well documented fact). The opposite was true for Western stations behind the Iron Curtain. Exceptions turned into general non existent policies just make false equivalencies.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2018 at 23:31 UTC
In reply to:

sunnycal: Where does this stand as compared to Nikon D750?

In terms of battery life, the D750 gets beaten once you start using video and/or LV, by a large margin. You can also ask yourself if a 2 day battery life vs 1 day is still worth an argument when for safety's sake, you'll carry a spare with both anyway.

Jpegs are subjective. But we're at the point where Sony jpegs handle sharpening (less halos, more detail at high ISO) and NR better than either Canon or Nikon. So calling them better or worse depends on which metrics you value more.

A similar point can be made regarding ergonomics. Yes, more space between controls, more direct controls and more camera to hold on to can contribute to better ergonomics. But so can less weight, everything (including menus, video and review) directly accessible in the viewfinder, no need to back away from the viewfinder.

Being able to power the camera with cheap and/ or large USB battery packs is something worth mentioning too, especially when it comes to video.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2018 at 07:49 UTC
In reply to:

PhozoKozmos: improving LV-technology is what matters
as it applies to both integrated lens dcams and icl dcams
likewise, it applies to mirror-capable LV dSLR-dcams and non-mirror-(mirrorless)-only dcams

tech for mirrorless-only dcams (integrated-lens or icl) is less demanding as it deals with processing incoming image light full-time

tech for mirror-capable OVF+LV dSLRs is more demanding where dual-optional shooting is available:

▪any AF system during OVF shooting must act within shorter timeframe part-time when mirror provides light path to AF sensor

▪any AF system during LV (non-mirror/mirror-up/mirrorless-only) shooting has the luxury of full-timeframe when light is "always" available to image sensor, where either PDAF or CDAF is being used

mfrs, like Canon, can do both AF (fast OVF or fast LV), have the advantage

mfrs, like Canon, have both AF (PDAF and CDAF) on image sensor*, have the advantage

Canon, uniquely has both proprietary ExpSimLV AF and Aperture stop-down LV-AF, has advantage

It's not about it being new, it about it being more usable plus a more seamless switch when you use either the viewfinder or LCD.

OSPDAF developments really brought it to the large sensor ILC's, since it made it useful with millions of existing lenses out there, where CDAF only was more of a gimmick with those (jerkiness galore). So in that sense, there indeed is a new wave of LV ILC's.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2018 at 20:10 UTC
In reply to:

PhozoKozmos: improving LV-technology is what matters
as it applies to both integrated lens dcams and icl dcams
likewise, it applies to mirror-capable LV dSLR-dcams and non-mirror-(mirrorless)-only dcams

tech for mirrorless-only dcams (integrated-lens or icl) is less demanding as it deals with processing incoming image light full-time

tech for mirror-capable OVF+LV dSLRs is more demanding where dual-optional shooting is available:

▪any AF system during OVF shooting must act within shorter timeframe part-time when mirror provides light path to AF sensor

▪any AF system during LV (non-mirror/mirror-up/mirrorless-only) shooting has the luxury of full-timeframe when light is "always" available to image sensor, where either PDAF or CDAF is being used

mfrs, like Canon, can do both AF (fast OVF or fast LV), have the advantage

mfrs, like Canon, have both AF (PDAF and CDAF) on image sensor*, have the advantage

Canon, uniquely has both proprietary ExpSimLV AF and Aperture stop-down LV-AF, has advantage

Having those developing AF, LV and video abilities just visually available for the LCD only, is by far the largest issue for DSLR's. Especially when it comes to fast paced stuff that requires those burst speeds.

Other than that, I get an Sdaniella vibe here.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2018 at 19:35 UTC
In reply to:

Fog Maker: I liked several of the shots and the stories

What I don’t like however,

is to be redirected to a pure propaganda site
like Radio Free Europe

" On the other hand transmissons from beyond iron curtain were blocked and radio signal was jammed by Western governments.So only truth is one from Western propaganda."

Ludicrous false equivalency since most of Western Europe had no problems receiving Russian state transmissions during the cold war, no hacks or banned hardware required.

Don't compare a few exceptions with a firm policy and even terror (murder) attacks against press agencies and their workers.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2018 at 20:10 UTC
Total: 1606, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »