quatpat

Lives in Greece Ta, Greece
Works as a Product Designer
Joined on Sep 16, 2007

Comments

Total: 317, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Lessiter: Wow, a sample gallery with one hundred and eight photographs!

So what? The Canon R5 has one hundred and fifty six photographs!

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2020 at 11:57 UTC
In reply to:

Beckler8: If that lens were the same closed size but 28-280, that would be amazing. Also smooth power zoom for video.

Yeah, why not make a 16-600 pancake lens while we're at it?

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2020 at 11:53 UTC
In reply to:

ggc: I'm asking for some landscapes with minimal iso and maybe tripod with that lens. Else it will be difficult to understand how it performs. Maybe 28mm full open, F8-F11, 40mm the same, and 60mm the same? Pictures are really nice, but imho they aren't that useful to understand the lens!

I agree with ggc, they could test the lenses a bit more at their extremes instead of just taking random photos of various scences with what looks like random settings.

The long end looks generally very good on this lens. I also found one photo at 28mm wide open, which doesn't look bad either. The extreme corners look a bit stretched, probably through in-camera distortion correction, but nothing bad. https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/6941396376/sony-a7c-sample-gallery/1728856087

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2020 at 05:56 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony a7C review (414 comments in total)
In reply to:

Halftrack: Sony came *so close* to having an incredible camera here. If they could have found a way to give it a decent viewfinder, their new menus, and either a joystick or a better touchscreen this thing would absolutely slay. Unfortunately, some of the compromises they made really hurt, as far as I am concerned. (I don't care about the dial situation, others may disagree.) Manufacturers seem bound and determined to never make a camera that is truly all you would ever need. Every single one on the market has some really annoying shortfall. So frustrating! Why can't any of them ever get it 100% right?

@Halftrack "Why can't any of them ever get it 100% right?"

That's simply because if they would make a camera 100% right for you, it would still only be 50% right for some others. "Right" isn't an absulute term, and very relative. What's right for you today won't be right for you tomorrow, and as soon as you see that there is another camera with a slightly more sophisticated feature, the "grass is greener"-effect will kick in, and your camera won't be so right any more. Your camera may still have the same excellent IQ in 20 years from now, only you won't use it because you'd be ashamed to walk around with it.

That's just the world we live in. (We = the gearheads on dpreview who are real "pros" at trashing other brands' cameras, but not so much at taking great photos.)

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2020 at 15:30 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony a7C review (414 comments in total)
In reply to:

quatpat: The viewfinder seems to be around the same magnification as the older APS-C cameras such as Canon 7D or Nikon D300. (0.59x for the new Sony, vs 0.62 for the others). Definitely a small viewfinder for a full-frame camera, but as far as I remember, nobody complained about the viewfinder size on a 7D or a D300. It's not large, but certainly usable.

"But if you buy a camera with a viewfinder because you need that feature, then you probably prefer a good one over a mediocre one."

Yes right, but then again most people look through the viewfinder in the store before they buy a camera, or if not, they inform themselves about what they buy before. And don't forget, the A7c does have a quite usable viewfinder, just not the largest one out there.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2020 at 15:10 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony a7C review (414 comments in total)
In reply to:

quatpat: The viewfinder seems to be around the same magnification as the older APS-C cameras such as Canon 7D or Nikon D300. (0.59x for the new Sony, vs 0.62 for the others). Definitely a small viewfinder for a full-frame camera, but as far as I remember, nobody complained about the viewfinder size on a 7D or a D300. It's not large, but certainly usable.

@Thoughts R Us: Sure, but a small viewfinder is still better than no viewfinder, like on the Canon M6 II... ;-)))

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2020 at 10:23 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Sony a7C review (414 comments in total)

The viewfinder seems to be around the same magnification as the older APS-C cameras such as Canon 7D or Nikon D300. (0.59x for the new Sony, vs 0.62 for the others). Definitely a small viewfinder for a full-frame camera, but as far as I remember, nobody complained about the viewfinder size on a 7D or a D300. It's not large, but certainly usable.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2020 at 08:40 UTC as 33rd comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Jx9: My least favorite thing about the A7III is the horrible IS in video mode. Apparently, this one doesn't have Active (digital) IS and the IBIS is worse. Worse?! How is that possible?

Who said that the IS is worse than on the A7III? Source?

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2020 at 06:09 UTC
In reply to:

nk4002r: I am gonna wait for the A7RCII which will have the same improved grip as the A6500. Why are we going back to 2013 NEX-6 for inspiration? The original first gen A7 grip always got pointed out in the reviews and Sony have been tweaking it every new generation.

If you look carefully, the grip isn't quite the same as on the older APS-C models. It has much to do how the actual grip is formed, more than its depth. I think one would need to try it out for real before making any conculsions.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2020 at 06:07 UTC
In reply to:

entoman: I'm not a thermal engineer but it would seem to me that the logical thing to do would be to transfer the heat by conduction directly to a part of the camera body that isn't touched by the hands, i.e. the base plate.

Another option would be to transfer it to a thermal port, into which an accessory cooling device could be plugged. This accessory could then be pruchased by the presumably very small number of R5 buyers who actually want or need to shoot video for periods in excess of 30 mins.

Why not air rips, like on the Sigma FP?

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2020 at 06:16 UTC
In reply to:

poipoipoi_2016: Camera makers (re?)discovering what computer people have known for decades: Sealed boxes are bad juju for heat, but sealed boxes also keep the water and cat hair out.

So pick your poison.

/It feels like an excellent stills camera that is supposed to do video for some reason?

"It feels like an excellent stills camera that is supposed to do video for some reason?"

Maybe the reason is, that Canon massively advertised it as the ultimate 8K video camera?

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2020 at 06:02 UTC
On article Fujifilm XF 50mm F1.0 pre-production sample gallery (246 comments in total)

Those images remind me very much of my old Minolta 85mm f1.4 - same softness and PF wide open, but can make for very pleasing portraits.

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2020 at 07:25 UTC as 69th comment
On article Canon RF 600mm F11 real-world samples (381 comments in total)
In reply to:

Terrible Photographer: THE ONLY SHOT in this gallery where you can really see what this lens can do is the Cat photo. The rest are destroyed by heat blur shooting way off distance stuff in the middle of the day. It’s like “what did you expect?”

Too bad the photo of the cat’s at ISO 3200 and not even very sharp.

Might be the worst sample gallery I’ve seen on DPR.

I think the rabbit photos, in particular the second one, demonstrate nicely what the lens can do. The lens seems to be adequately sharp, but the relatively high ISO needed in anything but very bright light will degrade image quality. Birders and wildlife photographers often crop their images substanially, but this ability will be limited with this lens, again because of the high ISO often needed.
Otherwise, in terms of pure sharpeness, I think the airplane shot gives a good idea - obviously there wasn't much air movement influencing sharpness here, and ISO 500 would hardly degrade the IQ.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2020 at 06:05 UTC
In reply to:

lightnchade: Is it just me or does the emotional intelligence level of these comments sections seem really really low?

PS: 90% - Gold - Eat my shorts Sony!

@purist: Yep, and it keeps on descending... ;-))

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2020 at 13:43 UTC
In reply to:

lightnchade: Is it just me or does the emotional intelligence level of these comments sections seem really really low?

PS: 90% - Gold - Eat my shorts Sony!

I think Sony won't eat your shorts, and yes, the emotional intelligence level is really, really, really, low... somwhere around the shorts level, actually.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2020 at 09:38 UTC
On article Canon RF 600mm F11 real-world samples (381 comments in total)
In reply to:

GinoSVK: Super telephoto lenses in general, need some AI trained to recover all those details ruined by warm air and other particles in the atmosphere.

Not really, because with faster super telelphoto lenses you can also go out when the air is moving less - early in the morning and in late afternoon.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2020 at 12:53 UTC
On article Canon RF 600mm F11 real-world samples (381 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donald B: who took these ? beginners ? a yacht image 1/1250 sec f22 iso 3200 couldn't stop laughing.

@Donald B: Obviously, you have very little knowledge about athmospheric conditions when using long lenses... the real problem with this image is not the high ISO, but the air movement. Check out photo 21, it's without converter at 600mm and ISO 500... still the same mush. But of course, the forum members here are always glad to bow to your incredible photographic wisdom... ;-))))

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2020 at 12:46 UTC
On article Canon RF 600mm F11 real-world samples (381 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donald B: who took these ? beginners ? a yacht image 1/1250 sec f22 iso 3200 couldn't stop laughing.

So, what should have been the right settings here, according to your wisdom? The f22 is a given with the 2x converter, and it is handheld at 1200mm... some shutter speed is needed at that FL.
The problem here are not the settings, but rather to take any photo over the sea with such a high level of air movement. For the later, yes, they could have done better, but that's why there are other photos in the gallery.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2020 at 06:54 UTC
On article Canon RF 600mm F11 real-world samples (381 comments in total)
In reply to:

biggercountry: More pixel-peeper problems. You can take great shots with this lens. You can make perfectly acceptable prints with this lens - even large ones. Will you have some limitations in the type of shots you can take? Sure. And you won’t be able to please people who look at prints from a distance of 6 inches. Oh well. But hey... at least you didn’t spend used-car money for your super-telephoto.

Sure you're right, but you can also get the same IQ for about half the money if you count the cost for the camera in.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2020 at 14:22 UTC
On article Canon RF 600mm F11 real-world samples (381 comments in total)
In reply to:

phouphou: i see people are claiming superzooms/bridge cameras are better.
I really doubt that at the tele end they can compete.
I even doubt MFT can compete.
Will be very interesting to see which is the best budget ultratele solution now that these two Canons are out.

I've only compared superzoom to 300mmf4 on FF and IQ was so much better... i doubt that changes with longer lenses.

I don't see much difference, really... see here, RX104, ISO1600 @ f/4 and 600mm equivalent:
https://2.img-dpreview.com/files/p/sample_galleries/1816870055/1537585688.jpg

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2020 at 14:20 UTC
Total: 317, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »