quatpat

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

Comments

Total: 103, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

JordanDrake: I adored the 300mm F4, great to see more compact, pro grade teles!

@Ruekon: More like $5000.... The 300mm f4 cost almost $2000 when it was released, do you really think this one is going for the same price?

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2018 at 06:35 UTC
In reply to:

kungpaogao: Seems like this will be a nice budget lens for budding wildlife/sport photographers.

If your budget includes around 5'000 dollars, then probably yes.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2018 at 06:28 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX100 VI sample gallery (239 comments in total)
In reply to:

quatpat: DPR should maybe take the misfocused and shaky ones out, but the rest of the samples look excellent, in particular considering the relatively small sensor. I'd still prefer a slightly shorter put faster lens, but at least they kept the very high IQ of the previous models.

Shake can of course indicate a mediocre IS, but it can also mean that the subject moved. Blurry photos simply don't allow to judge the image quality.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2018 at 18:13 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX100 VI sample gallery (239 comments in total)

DPR should maybe take the misfocused and shaky ones out, but the rest of the samples look excellent, in particular considering the relatively small sensor. I'd still prefer a slightly shorter put faster lens, but at least they kept the very high IQ of the previous models.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2018 at 14:22 UTC as 63rd comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

ovatab: did they use a stuffed animal for those two backlight pictures?

Unless they brought two stuffed animals, that couldn't possibly be... on one there are the left feet in front, on the other the right feet. :-)

Link | Posted on May 11, 2018 at 08:47 UTC
On article Sample gallery: Nikon 180-400mm F4E TC1.4 FL ED VR (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

quatpat: Looking at these samples, I think I'm going to keep my old Minolta 400/4.5 for a while longer... I don't see any difference in IQ.

On my Apple 27" 5K Retina display, you certainly wanted to mumble... 😂😂😂

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2018 at 14:43 UTC
On article Sample gallery: Nikon 180-400mm F4E TC1.4 FL ED VR (127 comments in total)

Looking at these samples, I think I'm going to keep my old Minolta 400/4.5 for a while longer... I don't see any difference in IQ.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2018 at 13:54 UTC as 43rd comment | 2 replies
On article Taking your drone to a wedding? Read this first (95 comments in total)

What boring photos (the ones from the drone), in comparison to wedding photos which are made by photographers who actually hold a camera in their hands. These wide-angle views from above are so... yaaaaaawnnn....

I think I need a nap. :-)

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2018 at 12:24 UTC as 49th comment
In reply to:

quatpat: "...the original a7 and a7 II lagged in high ISO performance, often failing to surpass the best APS-C sensors" - What's that crap, DPR?

The link they give to the comparison between the Sony a7II and the Nikon D5300 suggests clearly otherwise, although not with an enormous difference, but still.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7ii&attr13_1=nikon_d5300&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&normalization=print&widget=189&x=0.1096306142999378&y=0.5562046439659758

No more arguments? :-)

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

quatpat: "...the original a7 and a7 II lagged in high ISO performance, often failing to surpass the best APS-C sensors" - What's that crap, DPR?

The link they give to the comparison between the Sony a7II and the Nikon D5300 suggests clearly otherwise, although not with an enormous difference, but still.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7ii&attr13_1=nikon_d5300&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&normalization=print&widget=189&x=0.1096306142999378&y=0.5562046439659758

Yes, but if the sun shines brighter when taking the A7ii shot you can lower the ISO even more...! Apples to oranges, sorry... ;-)

Does a 50mm f1.4 lens become a 50mm f1.0 lens on APS-C?

Also, you don't need to stop down the FF cam to "match the DOF", you only need to go a bit closer to the subject. In fact, DOF is actually exactly the same on FF and APS-C at equal subject distance and aperture, but that's another story.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2018 at 09:54 UTC
In reply to:

quatpat: "...the original a7 and a7 II lagged in high ISO performance, often failing to surpass the best APS-C sensors" - What's that crap, DPR?

The link they give to the comparison between the Sony a7II and the Nikon D5300 suggests clearly otherwise, although not with an enormous difference, but still.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7ii&attr13_1=nikon_d5300&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&normalization=print&widget=189&x=0.1096306142999378&y=0.5562046439659758

@Pixel Pooper: "... the A7Ii scores less than a stop better ISO than the D7500, so it performs worse at equivalent settings."

Heuh? There aren't any equivalent settings, just settings. And there the A7ii might be less than a stop better ISO than the D7500, but still better.

So what was your point?

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2018 at 08:17 UTC
In reply to:

quatpat: "...the original a7 and a7 II lagged in high ISO performance, often failing to surpass the best APS-C sensors" - What's that crap, DPR?

The link they give to the comparison between the Sony a7II and the Nikon D5300 suggests clearly otherwise, although not with an enormous difference, but still.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7ii&attr13_1=nikon_d5300&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&normalization=print&widget=189&x=0.1096306142999378&y=0.5562046439659758

@ SharkWeek: I'm not denying that the A7 / A7ii might punch below their weight in high ISO performance for modern FF cameras, but they are still not "failing to surpass the best APS-C sensors", as wrote DPR. That statement is just plain wrong.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2018 at 20:42 UTC

"...the original a7 and a7 II lagged in high ISO performance, often failing to surpass the best APS-C sensors" - What's that crap, DPR?

The link they give to the comparison between the Sony a7II and the Nikon D5300 suggests clearly otherwise, although not with an enormous difference, but still.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7ii&attr13_1=nikon_d5300&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&normalization=print&widget=189&x=0.1096306142999378&y=0.5562046439659758

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2018 at 07:07 UTC as 47th comment | 11 replies
In reply to:

AE-1Burnham: Well done Sony. Again.

...If Canon doesn't soon release a full-frame mirrorless (a format that clearly has many benefits over DSLR), I am jumping ship! For personal shoots, I use a ho"L"y trinity that could be replaced by native Sigma/Sony. It is getting hard to stay -- COME ON CANON!

@ AE-1Burnham: Canon will most likely release a FF mirrorless this year, but your great "trinity" lenses will only fit with an adapter.... So, either you'll need new lenses anyway, or you can as well buy a Sony FF already and adapt them.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2018 at 07:01 UTC
In reply to:

proudfather: I need to see that the other photographer has his own RAW files for confirmation. Otherwise I have a difficult time believing that the water changed as much as it did while the crashing waves and stationary light house did not.

Yep. The water didn't change, but the point of view is different.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 20:10 UTC
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (554 comments in total)
In reply to:

yukonchris: Lots of hype as usual. I was excited about the possibilities. Then I looked at the images. The first thing that jumped out at me was the amount of noise suppression in the low light shots. Now standing firmly back on earth. Excitement effectively dissipated. Wallet safe once again.

Or shoot raw and process to your liking?

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2018 at 13:42 UTC
On article CP+ 2018: First Look - Sony 400mm F2.8 G Master (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sean65: Nice colour scheme. I wonder where they got that idea!

For example from here: http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/Minolta-AF-400mm-F4.5-HS-APO-G_lens22.html

Minolta used white for their long prime lenses since the 1980's.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2018 at 13:36 UTC
On article CP+ 2018: First Look - Sony 400mm F2.8 G Master (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

quatpat: Looks like they will miss the chance to make a "smaller and lighter" 400/2.8 than the competition, by using refractive elements and a light-weight construction, like the Nikon 300/4 PF has. What will distinguish this design from the Canikon versions?

@Magnar W: Euhm, that was just about my entire point...! ;-)

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2018 at 11:13 UTC
On article CP+ 2018: First Look - Sony 400mm F2.8 G Master (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

quatpat: Looks like they will miss the chance to make a "smaller and lighter" 400/2.8 than the competition, by using refractive elements and a light-weight construction, like the Nikon 300/4 PF has. What will distinguish this design from the Canikon versions?

@Magnar W: I think bulk and weight always matter, even for sports photographers who use tripods, because the rest of the time they still have to drag all that gear around, get it into airplanes, etc. Of course, the front element still needs to be the same size, but the Nikon 300/4 PF has shown that a substantial weight reduction is possible, although maybe with less high-quality materials used. Partly the point of the Sony FE system is to have a smaller and lighter system, so why not translate this to the lens design if it is possible?

And no, I don't have any weight information, but given the size of the lens, it is not likely to be much lighter than the competition.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2018 at 10:22 UTC
On article CP+ 2018: First Look - Sony 400mm F2.8 G Master (462 comments in total)
In reply to:

quatpat: Looks like they will miss the chance to make a "smaller and lighter" 400/2.8 than the competition, by using refractive elements and a light-weight construction, like the Nikon 300/4 PF has. What will distinguish this design from the Canikon versions?

I think it would make the Sony system more attractive if the flagship lens would distinguish itself from the competition in a positive way, yes. Optically that would be a near-impossible task, but maybe weight-wise there would be some margin. Also price wise of course, but that is more likely to go the other direction... ;-)

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2018 at 07:56 UTC
Total: 103, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »