PortraitPro 23 Sale: 50% Off Downloads + Save 20% With Code: EZJS



A quick view of swa's recent activity.

  • No photo comments.
  • No topics found.
  • No topics found.
  • Posted on: Meike 6.5mm f/2.0 Fisheye Lens Review

    What is the hyperfocal distance of this lens?
    • 18 Jan 2017 9:56PM
  • Posted on: Olympus PEN-F Full Review

    I appreciate the preview article, but have a couple of questions and a suggestion.

    First, I would like to know if the LCD is fully articulated so that it can close against the camera back with the screen protected. That capability can make for a better shooting experience that spares the LCD of skin oil when the camera is pressed to one's face for stability. It can also protect somewhat against the elements.

    I would also like to know if ephotozine captured the included images with a pre-production Pen F received last fall, perhaps before finishing touches were put on the processing engine. The reason I ask is because in one of the sample images, there are both green and yellow leaves on a tree. Green leaves can be seen in the background in another image.

    Lastly, when previewing a new camera and presenting sample images, it would be very helpful if image captions would include information about any art filters and/or post-processing correction (sharpening especially) and manipulation that were applied, or else say the images were straight out of camera. First impressions can be lasting ones, and the impression many of these images convey is of not being ready for prime time. ElSid notes excessive noise and softness. I suspect my elderly but still spry E-PL1 could do these scenes as well or better.

    I find it hard to believe Olympus would debut a camera at this price level, with as much care in development and design as the Pen F appears to have had, that produces such lackluster image quality. If it's not a case of a processing engine that needs work, I suppose there's a chance the provided Pen F could be a faulty sample. Any additional information you can provide would be appreciated.
    • 30 Jan 2016 4:11AM
  • Posted on: Pentax Q7 Review

    Josh, thanks for updating and adding depth to the review. The field-of-view comparison alone makes it much more helpful. Also, a respectful salute for accepting my remarks in the spirit in which they were given. If you'll pardon my use of a dated expression from your side of the pond, good show. Smile
    • 5 Aug 2013 9:11PM
  • Posted on: Pentax Q7 Review

    In the spirit of constructive criticism, I'm going to comment on this Q7 review. First, the reviewer should consider who comes here to learn more about the Q7 and what they hope to learn. Those people would include the person looking to move up from a point 'n' shoot and DSLR owner looking for something less bulky. Then there's the enthusiast who already owns a Q or Q10 and wonders if the outlay for a new Q7 would be worthwhile. What the reviewer has done for the most part is give us a catalog of features. Readers who want a list of all the buttons and examples of all the special effects can get those at Pentax's Web site.

    How about some shooting and handling impressions? How well did the LCD do in various lighting conditions, especially bright sun? Given the camera's ultra-small size, how comfortable was the reviewer using the buttons and other controls? How well did the flash do on group shots, when used for fill, macro close-ups, etc?

    Some comparison shots with Q results to show how much difference the wider field of view with the larger sensor makes when using the 01 prime lens, as well as the 02 zoom at various focal lengths, would've been most welcome. Then, how about some 1:1 magnification comparisons of the same shots made with the Q and Q7? What improvements, if any, does the Q7 offer over the Q where sharpness and noise are concerned?

    Finally, in his conclusions, the reviewer dings the Q7 for poor shadow detail. However, can't the camera's RAW capability and HDR modes mitigate that problem, and shouldn't that be mentioned?
    • 31 Jul 2013 8:59PM
  • Posted on: Canon Powershot SX500 IS Review

    I've been waiting to see if Canon would get this product line right, improving image quality instead of boosting pixel count and shrinking its size. I waited in vain, obviously. The lack of an eye-level viewfinder is a deal breaker all by itself. The smaller size isn't welcome either.

    Viewing the test images at full resolution on screen, I'm not bothered by this camera's grain characteristics. More notable and problematic are the pronounced chromatic aberration (purple fringing) and mushing of detail at the edges.

    The impression I get is that Canon is way oversold on downsizing its cameras, probably in reaction to Sony, which is going to absurd extremes in shrinking its non-DSLR cameras, in my opinion.

    In a choice between the Canon SX40 and my less-expensive SX130, I'll stick with the latter, if I'm going to have to do without a viewfinder anyway.

    I anxiously await reviews of Pentax's new X-5 bridge camera, which does have an electronic viewfinder.
    • 13 Sep 2012 2:00AM
  • Posted on: Fujifilm FinePix SL300 Digital Camera Review

    Good to see this camera reviewed, but there is an omission in the images, specifications list and narrative. The SL300 has an electronic viewfinder with dioptric adjustment. That feature is a godsend to those of us who covet an eye level viewfinder and wear glasses.

    That said, my own brief in-store examination of an SL300 yielded a somewhat less bright and clear view through the EVF than your testing apparently did. Compared under the same lighting with an adjacent Nikon P510, the SL300's EVF view was a bit grainy and dim. Not to the point of being unusable, but noticeably less smooth and snappy. There is a chance the particular SL300 I looked at was slightly out of adjustment or at the low end of acceptable performance tolerance in the EVF department. In fairness, it also bears mentioning that the Nikon P510 cost U.S. $70 more than the SL300.
    • 27 Jun 2012 5:32AM
  • Posted on: Fujifilm FinePix S3200 Digital Camera Review

    It's fair to say this and similar Fuji superzoom/bridge cameras will greatly satisfy people who rarely or never have big enlargements made of their images. Smaller prints and typical image viewing sizes on a computer monitor look good. Big blowups look less good. Maximum enlargements disappoint.

    I have a Fuji S4000 and enjoy it for what it is and does well, mindful of its limitations. I think others who approach these cameras in that way can get good use and value for money.
    • 6 Dec 2011 5:50AM
  • Posted on: Canon PowerShot SX150 IS Digital Camera Review

    AA battery power and a bit of heft are virtues, in my opinion. I wouldn't carry a camera in my shirt pocket no matter how small and slender. In a pinch, one can buy AA's almost anywhere.

    I looked at the SX-150's hi-res results just after reviewing the Fuji X-10's. The SX-150's image quality is extremely good, IMO. It's all the more impressive when compared to results from a camera that costs several times more. Not equal, true, but remarkably close.

    Perception of the value of features included or not included and some elements of handling and image results are subjective and personal, fair enough. Still, I think your value-for-money rating is one star shy of what the SX-150 deserves.

    (Disclaimer: I have no relationship with Canon except as a sometimes consumer of the company's products.)
    • 6 Dec 2011 5:05AM
  • Posted on: Fujifilm FinePix X10 Serious Compact Review

    High price is definitely a con, but "larger than other 'serious compacts'" suits me fine. I get the impression camera manufacturers look forward to the day when their products will be no larger or more interesting than an old Zippo lighter and weigh one tenth as much. I don't.

    The kick-down to 6mp in some circumstances seems a reasonable compromise to gain greater shooting flexibility. After all, how many available-darkness images do I really want to have enlarged to billboard size? (Answer: none).

    As to pro's, bless Fuji for including an optical viewfinder. It's something that should be standard on all point 'n' shoot cameras.
    • 6 Dec 2011 4:38AM

Limited to latest 30 results.

No profile comments.

Limited to latest 30 results.