Shooting DNG, with zero noise reduction, I’d happily use ISO 3200 with a bit of work; there’s a big jump in noise to ISO 6400, which renders that and the top 12500 setting strictly for those shots of the Loch Ness Monster assassinating JFK.
Problem with this review is its a very talented photographer who can make any camera look good shooting in some beautiful and exotic locations.
That guy could use his iPhone and I'd probably say "wow" those images are great
I've always said that giving a total hack a camera and putting them into some boring town in the midwest and then see what the camera can do is a real way to review a camera
millsart wrote:
Problem with this review is its a very talented photographer who can make any camera look good shooting in some beautiful and exotic locations.
That guy could use his iPhone and I'd probably say "wow" those images are great
I've always said that giving a total hack a camera and putting them into some boring town in the midwest and then see what the camera can do is a real way to review a camera
the same photographer reviewing all the different things i'm interested in is much more important than what they shoot. that way i can compare to some degree. consistency is what is important.
i really don't think i could make it through a review of some hack shooting flowers, cats, and benches in the midwest. i've got my own photos of flowers, cats, and benches in the midwest to sort through. besides, i can't trust the review of somebody that can't take an engaging photograph. somebody who can't make an image that speaks to me isn't using the camera right, so their opinion about how the camera works isn't worth much to me.
sebboh wrote:
somebody who can't make an image that speaks to me isn't using the camera right, so their opinion about how the camera works isn't worth much to me.
By the same token though, a really good photographer and some great locations can make any camera really sing.
Looking at the other reviews and images though, even with the Dlux5 aka LX5, I don't think Ming can take (or at least doesn't post) a bad image.
Amazingly talented photographer and a visually interesting place like Kuala Lumpur makes for great photos.
Now obviously we rationally know the camera is but a tool, yet, who here can't say they also have an emotional response when seeing some great images ??
Thats one thing thats nice about a lot of the shots someone like Steve Huff post. They are visually uninteresting for me. Thats not to suggest he's a bad photographer, but when he simply post some photo of his son or whatever, your simply seeing the image as nothing more than a test image to illustrate the lens/camera.
Now to him of course, I'm sure that shot of his son means something, but to me, its a totally disposable image. I can be totally objective in looking at the shot.
Don't get me wrong, I'm saying all this half tongue in check and its more of an academic argument, but there is some truth to it.
One could write copy totally bashing a given camera, but if its accompanied by some really breathtaking images, at least part of me is still going to thinking "that camera looks amazing, I want it"
millsart wrote:
Problem with this review is its a very talented photographer who can make any camera look good shooting in some beautiful and exotic locations.
That guy could use his iPhone and I'd probably say "wow" those images are great
I've always said that giving a total hack a camera and putting them into some boring town in the midwest and then see what the camera can do is a real way to review a camera
Well, you wouldn't really expect big companies give thousands of $ to nobody's that don't even know how to turn them on, would you? They give them to people that know photography which can indeed turn a Brownie into a supercamera.
Well, I guess that confirms that the Leica EVF is, in fact the Olympus VF-2 with a Leica name scratched on the front. (Not only are they similar, the Leica viewfinder actually WORKED on his Pen Mini and OM-D.)
A very good review. I enjoyed it and actually probably looked at it a few times together with Sean Reid's review as I'm considering a X2. For me to decide on a new toy, opps I mean tool, I would like to look at both technical reviews (aka dp review, etc) and also some "real world" reviews (aka Steve Huff,etc). Ming's review is smacked in between both as he covers both technical info and also has excellent photography. Agree with Ron, his S2 and D800 comparison was interesting. I also enjoyed his use of the M9 for horology photography. His horology photography is one of the finest I have seen anywhere.
The most interesting thing that I'm trying to figure out on the X2 is the 230k LCD. I am sure Leica could have improved it, but it could be their design philosophy to keep it "poor" and at the same time not have to raise the entry price of the X2?
millsart wrote:
Problem with this review is its a very talented photographer who can make any camera look good shooting in some beautiful and exotic locations.
I doubt they've made it worse in terms of image quality compared to the X1. And image quality was never a problem with the X1 - it has a great lens attached to a great sensor. The problem of the X1 is it's (lack of) usability. It's incredibly annoying to use, mostly due to the slow AF. They seem to have fixed that with the X2 - although the LCD has still unforgivably low resolution for a live-view only camera. I guess the X3 will be the ultimate large sensor P&S camera to get
I enjoyed my X1 unless I was trying to shoot anything moving. Horrible AF. I carried mine in St. Croix and took some nice shots. I lost some good shots due to the Sun on the LCD as well. All in all, it was a nice little camera minus the AF and lack of a view finder. I may pick up an X2.
