MrHollywood

MrHollywood

Joined on Oct 23, 2017

Comments

Total: 615, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Nikon Z fc Review (2127 comments in total)
In reply to:

MrHollywood: I'm using the Zfc along with my Z7II.
It's a beautiful camera that's fun to use. I shoot with it on my boat where the lighter weight is really helpful. I shoot with the kit lens and the 24-200 while sailing, but of course I can use lenses like my 24-70 2.8 S or any of the amazing Z primes as well.
AF is a nice upgrade over the Z50 and Z6, very close to my Z7II. Overall a fun camera that provides excellent IQ and handling.

For me it is. The Zfc is a LOT lighter and easier to carry around.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2021 at 04:22 UTC
On article Nikon Z fc Review (2127 comments in total)
In reply to:

MrHollywood: I'm using the Zfc along with my Z7II.
It's a beautiful camera that's fun to use. I shoot with it on my boat where the lighter weight is really helpful. I shoot with the kit lens and the 24-200 while sailing, but of course I can use lenses like my 24-70 2.8 S or any of the amazing Z primes as well.
AF is a nice upgrade over the Z50 and Z6, very close to my Z7II. Overall a fun camera that provides excellent IQ and handling.

I don't know the answer, but the AF on the Zfc is very good. We'll have to wait and see if the Z50 & Z6 can get a bump in AF.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2021 at 02:43 UTC
On article Nikon Z fc Review (2127 comments in total)

I'm using the Zfc along with my Z7II.
It's a beautiful camera that's fun to use. I shoot with it on my boat where the lighter weight is really helpful. I shoot with the kit lens and the 24-200 while sailing, but of course I can use lenses like my 24-70 2.8 S or any of the amazing Z primes as well.
AF is a nice upgrade over the Z50 and Z6, very close to my Z7II. Overall a fun camera that provides excellent IQ and handling.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2021 at 17:02 UTC as 78th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

Tungsten Nordstein: Great to see a new player in the mobile phone market. But Android? Really? That's like putting a Trabant engine in a Ferrari.

What else would they use? Android is nearly 75% of the market now. It works nicely (better than our iPhones) and it has the best support. Not sure who'd buy one though.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2021 at 19:21 UTC
In reply to:

Dchin: All these arguments about which of the two cameras is better for landscape photography or for that matter any kind of photography is pointless. Practically all the cameras now available in the market will enable you or anyone to take genuinely excellent pictures. We should all improve our skills learning how to take better pictures instead and stop wasting our time saying this camera is better than the other one and vice versa.

We're at a point where ALL of the current cameras are pretty amazing. The same goes for phones. I prefer Nikon, but I could easily shoot ANY system and be happy. I shoot more than one system and I feel that Nikon has the best camera in the price range that the Z7II occupies. Part of that is also the amazing Z lenses, which I've compared directly to Canon and Sony. Does ANY of that mean that Sony and Canon aren't fantastic? Nope. We're talking tiny differences and a lot of my choice is based on ergonomics.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2021 at 14:16 UTC
In reply to:

BrentSchumer: This seems like a weird comparison, when the X-S10 is the same price and the X-T3 is $250 more. Either of which is far more robust than the X-T30 and this Nikon and both of which have a massive catalog of LENSES that match the aesthetics of the bodies (as these are all cameras bought for looks). The type of people who buy Z fcs will never want to mount big back Z-DX or F lenses on their novelty camera, so the Z fc will likely have 3 lenses for all of eternity.

I own a lot of lenses, including the latest Z glass (24-70 and 70-200 Z mount). I will use it all on my ZFc just like I use it on my Z7II and will likely use it on my Z9.
I have no idea why critics don't understand this.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2021 at 17:50 UTC
In reply to:

quatpat: Five shots out of eleven winning shots were taken with Sony gear... Times They Are a-Changin'. :-)

So much to all of those who are still convinced that only "pro" Canikon gear is suited for wildlife photography.

Well...I own some Sony stuff. I like their smaller stuff, such as the RX100 VI. The ergonomics and constant issues on hot days have kept me out of the system. But everyone makes good gear these days and great pics can be taken with virtually any camera. The grand prize pic was taken with a Nikon and the reason? Because Nikon is a camera designed for artists. Same for Canon. LOL...just kidding! Sony has amazing gear! I could easily switch to it and any other brand for that matter! ;-)

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2021 at 23:01 UTC
In reply to:

snapa: These are all excellent pictures, my picks are 3 & 12.
It's also interesting that 5 out of 12 where taken with Sony cameras, but that's not surprising.

Some of the greatest bird pics have been taken with far more primitive cameras. I've shot with the A9II and own the Z7II and owned the D850 and D500....and others going back to the Nikon D70 and Canon 5D. If you have the skills and talent, any of these cameras can get you a prize. A good camera is COMMON. Talent and skill are not.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2021 at 18:27 UTC
In reply to:

quatpat: Five shots out of eleven winning shots were taken with Sony gear... Times They Are a-Changin'. :-)

So much to all of those who are still convinced that only "pro" Canikon gear is suited for wildlife photography.

Nikon took the grand prize! So Nikon rules! LOL!
But seriously...ANY camera could take these pics. Brands don't matter any more. The differences are so tiny to be almost meaningless. These photos are wonderful because of the skill and talent, not the choice of gear.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2021 at 22:19 UTC
In reply to:

snapa: These are all excellent pictures, my picks are 3 & 12.
It's also interesting that 5 out of 12 where taken with Sony cameras, but that's not surprising.

Any good camera could have taken any of these photos. The grand prize was taken with a Nikon, but again, any good camera and lens can do that. Brands really don't matter anymore.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2021 at 22:16 UTC

Some folks really miss the point of this lens...and the Zfc.
Plastic mount is PERFECT on this lens and saves weight. What would a metal mount add beyond weight? I never even heard of a plastic mount being an issue. On another note, why worry over the Zfc not being FX? Most of us know that a crop sensor, such as the one used in the D500 and now Zfc, offers outstanding IQ. Given the low price, Z lens compatibility and gorgeous looks, it's no wonder that the Zfc is generating the same kind of pre-order frenzy last seen when the D800 was first announced.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2021 at 13:17 UTC as 19th comment | 3 replies
On article Nikon Z fc Review (2127 comments in total)
In reply to:

MrHollywood: Yep...it will sell. Pick all the nits you want! It's a beautiful camera with solid specs. I'll use it alongside of my Z7II.

These specs are not 5 years old. The Z lenses are far better and so is the AF on these cameras. IQ will be outstanding, probably a bit better than a D500, which remains fantastic. Sensors have been about the same for years, with only very small improvements. What Nikon mirrorless camera had eye AF five years ago or shot at this speed and combined that performance with a design like this? Twice as fast as my Df that I sold 6 years ago and faster than my D850 that I sold when I picked up my Z7II. So where are the 5 year old specs that actually hurt this camera??? Proven and well-loved sensor, modern AF and fast shooting wrapped in a classic design. It will sell like mad!

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2021 at 22:08 UTC
On article Nikon Z fc Review (2127 comments in total)
In reply to:

Trowsemouse: I really don't get this. Why have a retro body and use modern lenses? From looking at this review a Fuji X-T2/3/4 would be much better, as they are really old school in terms of design and feel and are vey much like an Olympus OM in terms of build quality and size.

Because my modern Z lenses blow away all of my older F glass.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2021 at 18:01 UTC
On article Nikon Z fc Review (2127 comments in total)
In reply to:

mferencz: Other than fashion, this camera is offering what competitors like Sony and Fuji have been offering for 3 years+. It's dressed in a tuxedo and looks good, but other than wanting to get in the Nikon ecosystem why would I get this or more important why would I invest the time and money to switch to it.

Exactly. Looks good, great ergonomics and Nikon IQ. It's a winner. Smart move by Nikon. Sony has nothing like it. Fuji certainly does and I enjoy my X100V, but Fuji will never be Nikon and this new camera looks like an instant classic with a true legacy built in.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2021 at 18:00 UTC
On article Nikon Z fc Review (2127 comments in total)

Yep...it will sell. Pick all the nits you want! It's a beautiful camera with solid specs. I'll use it alongside of my Z7II.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2021 at 17:58 UTC as 343rd comment | 4 replies
On article Sigma fp L initial review (615 comments in total)
In reply to:

tbcass: "The viewfinder will cost $699 if purchased on its own, but only adds $500 to the cost of the camera when bought as a kit."

"Only $500". LOL. What's it worth? $50?

500 does seem a bit high.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2021 at 04:27 UTC
In reply to:

MrHollywood: Here's the big problem...I own a 16" MPB with all the extras, a i7 iMac with all the extras and a new M1 based system. I also own a very fast gaming PC, which is no slouch for video either.
The M1 is a MONSTER when it comes to video and photography. That M1 chip is no joke and no hype. Even my wife's "cheap" M1 based Air is insanely fast compared to my 3000.00 i9 based MBP and it's even faster than the gaming system.
So Apple builds these annoying systems that are expensive and not upgradable, but the performance is undeniable. So if you want the top level performance out of the box, Apple is pretty much your only choice. I'm waiting for the larger screens with an M1 based system and I'll certainly upgrade. Annoying? Yup. But the performance gains are very real.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ux0z1NFRClg

You can pretend that this is not impressive. But you'll be just pretending. Now try running photoshop with 10 RAW files open from a Sony A9 or Nikon Z7II (which I have) and add layers and see which machine is faster. Good luck!

Link | Posted on May 29, 2021 at 06:50 UTC
In reply to:

MrHollywood: Here's the big problem...I own a 16" MPB with all the extras, a i7 iMac with all the extras and a new M1 based system. I also own a very fast gaming PC, which is no slouch for video either.
The M1 is a MONSTER when it comes to video and photography. That M1 chip is no joke and no hype. Even my wife's "cheap" M1 based Air is insanely fast compared to my 3000.00 i9 based MBP and it's even faster than the gaming system.
So Apple builds these annoying systems that are expensive and not upgradable, but the performance is undeniable. So if you want the top level performance out of the box, Apple is pretty much your only choice. I'm waiting for the larger screens with an M1 based system and I'll certainly upgrade. Annoying? Yup. But the performance gains are very real.

LOL, dude. I work in the film industry. I think I know what systems handle video and photo files fastest. My son's gaming PC is very high spec, but it's not as fast as a M1 Mac.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2021 at 05:50 UTC
In reply to:

MrHollywood: Here's the big problem...I own a 16" MPB with all the extras, a i7 iMac with all the extras and a new M1 based system. I also own a very fast gaming PC, which is no slouch for video either.
The M1 is a MONSTER when it comes to video and photography. That M1 chip is no joke and no hype. Even my wife's "cheap" M1 based Air is insanely fast compared to my 3000.00 i9 based MBP and it's even faster than the gaming system.
So Apple builds these annoying systems that are expensive and not upgradable, but the performance is undeniable. So if you want the top level performance out of the box, Apple is pretty much your only choice. I'm waiting for the larger screens with an M1 based system and I'll certainly upgrade. Annoying? Yup. But the performance gains are very real.

You folks are ignoring facts. The M1 air will render 4K video faster than my I9 based MBP (2TB and 32GB of RAM) 16".
It'll also run full photoshop with Raw files from my Nikon Z7II faster. No matter what planet of denial you may live on, that's some pretty sick performance for a system costing a lot less. It's practically a given that the larger iMac's will be video/photo monsters and I'll certainly be picking one up.

Link | Posted on May 28, 2021 at 21:53 UTC
In reply to:

MrHollywood: Here's the big problem...I own a 16" MPB with all the extras, a i7 iMac with all the extras and a new M1 based system. I also own a very fast gaming PC, which is no slouch for video either.
The M1 is a MONSTER when it comes to video and photography. That M1 chip is no joke and no hype. Even my wife's "cheap" M1 based Air is insanely fast compared to my 3000.00 i9 based MBP and it's even faster than the gaming system.
So Apple builds these annoying systems that are expensive and not upgradable, but the performance is undeniable. So if you want the top level performance out of the box, Apple is pretty much your only choice. I'm waiting for the larger screens with an M1 based system and I'll certainly upgrade. Annoying? Yup. But the performance gains are very real.

I suggest you look at the M1 scores. They trounce virtually everything. And the M1 is still a first gen CPU. When my wife's 1300 dollar M1 MB Air handles video faster than my 3X more expensive i9 16" MBP, it's time to take notice.

Link | Posted on May 28, 2021 at 18:34 UTC
Total: 615, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »