•  Previous
  • 1
  • ...
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9(current)
  • 10
  • Next 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
I'm almost wondering ...
#81
(04-04-2020, 04:27 PM)ioled Wrote: By the way you sound like a dissappointed ex Pentaxian.
I've heard the same from other brands' fanboys... the ferocity with which one is attacking another, "vulnerable" brand is easily recognizable - it's called Othering.

It makes no sense to assume Pentax asked Tamron to customize a lens in order to make it worse. But hey, anything goes!

theCameraVille is not a trustful source. Not even when he's praising Pentax. Too unscientific in his "tests", too volatile in his evaluations.
Combined with an annoying presentation style.

(04-04-2020, 01:04 PM)davidmanze Wrote:  The Panasonic SH1 has an EVF of 5.76 million dots !
That is still presenting a less than 2MP "JPEG" out of the sensor's 24MP.
It's by no means bad, but when we're splitting hairs about some technology's limitations we should do this for the other technology, too Wink
#82
(04-04-2020, 05:07 PM)Kunzite Wrote:
(04-04-2020, 04:27 PM)ioled Wrote: By the way you sound like a dissappointed ex Pentaxian.
I've heard the same from other brands' fanboys... the ferocity with which one is attacking another, "vulnerable" brand is easily recognizable - it's called Othering.

It makes no sense to assume Pentax asked Tamron to customize a lens in order to make it worse. But hey, anything goes!

theCameraVille is not a trustful source. Not even when he's praising Pentax. Too unscientific in his "tests", too volatile in his evaluations.
Combined with an annoying presentation style.

I think I saw it but I can't take it a a review. 

To be honest all this negavity about Pentax got through to me years ago. And I learned not to take it at face value. I have 5 lenses aside the kit standard zoom so worst case scenario will have to ebay my lenses and pick another company in the future. Big deal.
#83
(04-04-2020, 04:10 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: Perhaps Pentax indeed did change two elements' with different refracting glass than the formula dictates, hence the absolutely crappy results at distance :-D

    I do so hope you're wrong ........ it would have been so much nicer to end on a higher note!
Dave's clichés
#84
(04-04-2020, 05:27 PM)davidmanze Wrote:     I do so hope you're wrong ........ it would have been so much nicer to end on a higher note!
Of course he's wrong. They always are.
#85
(04-04-2020, 02:42 PM)mst Wrote:
(04-04-2020, 02:05 PM)toni-a Wrote: Staying at home when you are into infectious disease and emergency medicine in the center of an epidemic ??? no way

That wasn't directed at you, Toni. I fully understand you're going through a really challenging situation, more than most of us do, and I hope you get the gratitude you deserve, and most of all get through this crisis healthy and safe.
i

Why should I consider it directed at me ?? of course I didn't
In Lebanon we managed to flatten the curve, number of new cases dropping, if trend continues we will become next week one of the few places where the numbers are actually shrinking...And I am so excited about that... last tests were negative and I am back with my family for the weekend.

Please stay safe
#86
(04-04-2020, 02:42 PM)mst Wrote: I don't think lack of resolution is an issue with modern EVFs anymore. Plus, they can do things that no optical viewfinder ever could, like focus peaking, a live histogram, show the effect of the chosen white balance, simulate under- or over-exposure, maybe even motion blur based on the chosen shutter speed.
But then, as mentioned earlier, there are also things where they still simply can not match an OVF, mostly when it comes to contrast ratio, or colour accuracy.
I agree on contrast ratio in very bright sunlight, but as soon as there's low light, you have to balance in that EVFs can show more detail (with some noise, of course) than OVF.

And colour accuracy? How? Sorry, when I set white balance to incorrect values (and am not shooting RAW, but JPG) I'm in trouble as long as I don't re-check the first pictures. Sometimes I see it in the EVF, but daylight or flashlight setting are rather similar. I never see my mistake in the OVF.

My colour accuracy of the final pic I get (if I have to) with a gray-card and later in the RAW-developer - and this is unchanged since my first days of DSLR. I don't think that anyone gets colour accuracy by looking through an OVF - or you meant something else? I'm talking about the final picture.

kunzite Wrote:Respect for each other's choice as well, I'd add. Sadly, not a trait of some "latest-and-greatest" fans...
I'm so glad, it's then a trait of some "earliest-and-smallest"-fans (or what would be the opposite of "latest-and-greatest"? It's good to have a drawer for each opinion, that makes discussions so much easier, right?). How about your respect for people choosing for some good reasons a mirrorless system (which btw is already two years old) additionally to a DSLR? How about rethinking your conception instead of talking about a system you were briefly looking through at the last photokina two years ago? A lack of personal experience apparently doesn't prohibit strong opinions. But that doesn't make them well-based.

Using EVF for over two years now I never felt limited in the way that I could not take the picture or had to change for the OVF. It's not perfect, but most of my concerns against EVF turnt out to be prejudices or outdated. I don't want to pull anybody "to the other side" and I'm not participating on camera sales, keep your DSLRs as long as you like. I also will not sell the D850, mainly because Nikon failed in making a proper Z battery grip. But each time I use I feel limited. My focus and recompose tryouts never gave me accurate sharpness in critical situations, so I changed my AF-technique and get more keepers, but still not as much as with ML.
#87
(04-05-2020, 11:19 AM)JJ_SO Wrote: I agree on contrast ratio in very bright sunlight, but as soon as there's low light, you have to balance in that EVFs can show more detail (with some noise, of course) than OVF.
Here we have it: in some cases the EVFs are better, in others, the OVFs are. It's not the one sided "win" I often hear about.

(04-05-2020, 11:19 AM)JJ_SO Wrote: And colour accuracy? How? Sorry, when I set white balance to incorrect values (and am not shooting RAW, but JPG) I'm in trouble as long as I don't re-check the first pictures. Sometimes I see it in the EVF, but daylight or flashlight setting are rather similar. I never see my mistake in the OVF.
I wouldn't call EVFs color accurate... yes, if you're shooting JPEG and set a blatantly incorrect white balance you would see that.
IMO if you don't care about color accuracy, just knowing what WB you've set (and roughly its effect) would suffice.
If you do care about color accuracy... there's a reason to color calibrated displays / processing chains.
You might prefer EVFs, but they are by no means essential in this regard.

(04-05-2020, 11:19 AM)JJ_SO Wrote: I'm so glad, it's then a trait of some "earliest-and-smallest"-fans (or what would be the opposite of "latest-and-greatest"? It's good to have a drawer for each opinion, that makes discussions so much easier, right?). How about your respect for people choosing for some good reasons a mirrorless system (which btw is already two years old) additionally to a DSLR? How about rethinking your conception instead of talking about a system you were briefly looking through at the last photokina two years ago? A lack of personal experience apparently doesn't prohibit strong opinions. But that doesn't make them well-based.
I'm respecting those who choose MILCs by not going to MILC threads telling them how their choice is wrong. As you can see, I'm not telling you your choice is wrong even here - while I'm being told mine is.

Why are you assuming that was my entire experience with EVFs? Throwing "lack of personal experience" is both rude and untrue, and an often used tactic of the MILC propaganda.
And how much do you think I should use them until I'd notice how uncomfortable and unnatural they are for me?


(04-05-2020, 11:19 AM)JJ_SO Wrote: Using EVF for over two years now I never felt limited in the way that I could not take the picture or had to change for the OVF. It's not perfect, but most of my concerns against EVF turnt out to be prejudices or outdated. I don't want to pull anybody "to the other side" and I'm not participating on camera sales, keep your DSLRs as long as you like. I also will not sell the D850, mainly because Nikon failed in making a proper Z battery grip. But each time I use I feel limited. My focus and recompose tryouts never gave me accurate sharpness in critical situations, so I changed my AF-technique and get more keepers, but still not as much as with ML.

Good for you; but why do you feel the need to tell us this, here?
#88
Why do we insist on which is better ??
Maybe we are not comparing apples to oranges, but also we are not comparing oranges to oranges...
Each has its advantages and shortcomings
The wise guy is the one who chooses the right tool for the job, or the tool that fits him best.
IF you have been shooting for ages with a DSLR and you have plenty of experience and dexterity using it and your results are as good as they could be why change ??
Plenty still use manual transmission cars despite the great evolution in automatic transmissions are they wrong ??
#89
(04-06-2020, 06:12 AM)toni-a Wrote: Why do we insist on which is better ??
How could we insist that one is better than other when we have no clue what "better" means?
#90
(04-06-2020, 06:12 AM)toni-a Wrote: Why do we insist on which is better ??



  
  You've got your Canon forum for all that ...... please use it!!
Dave's clichés
  
  •  Previous
  • 1
  • ...
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9(current)
  • 10
  • Next 


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
4 Guest(s)