williams359

Lives in United Kingdom bristol, United Kingdom
Works as a photographer
Joined on Sep 30, 2004

Comments

Total: 34, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

I love the 1DX II for one main reason, I don't need it. Ive had canons from the 10D and each time a new camera came out I felt I needed to upgrade. Over the years this has cost a fortune. I now shoot weddings on a 1DX and I just don't see the need to upgrade for the first time. FANTASTIC, time to buy a bigger boat.

Link | Posted on May 5, 2016 at 11:27 UTC as 48th comment

Canon do make some strange decisions. They bring out a high end compact in the g5x and the cripple it with a raw shooting speed of less than one photo per second. Why would you do that?

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 06:35 UTC as 59th comment
In reply to:

Eagle430s: SO canon finally released a camera with an evf (something that sony and Panasonic have done a few years ago)..and what is canon giving us?
A camera with 1" sensor that is more expensive than sony a6000 with its excellent aps-c sensor.. For me as a semi-pro photographer image quality and low noise are very important , something that 1" sensors will not stand a chance against the newer aps-c sensors.
I think canon should hire a new r&d department and start looking at what the other brands are offering the last years.
Just because is Canon brand does not make it a super camera anymore

The kit lens on the A6000 is very poor so add to that the cost of decent glass to get real price. As for no super camera, I like my 1DX a lot, it's super!!

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2015 at 12:26 UTC

If you were reading the posts without knowing what camera it's about, you would think this is a video camera first, stills second. It's not it's a camera to take photographs that also does video. There are very few post on here on the photographic capability, only 4K and how it looks.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2015 at 10:18 UTC as 2nd comment

I think i'm the only one who likes the way it looks.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 09:23 UTC as 3rd comment

Like any camera, if you want the best out of it you have to pay for the right lenses. I have it just as a holiday camera with the kit lens, it's ok but not great.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2015 at 04:13 UTC as 116th comment
On article WaterWeight rethinks the sandbag approach to stability (77 comments in total)

$50 thats ridiculous.

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2014 at 11:15 UTC as 5th comment
On article High-end full frame roundup (2014) (610 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alex Permit: Strange to include the RX1R, a great compact fixed lens camera, in a roundup named "Heavy Hitters: high-end full frame roundup". While it is "full frame", it is not, nor does it pretend to be, a "heavy hitter".

Stranger still to exclude the D4S and 1DX because "they're aimed at working photojournalists and sports photographers." Its like excluding the Klitschko brothers from list of heavyweight boxing contenders because they're too tall.

The title does say enthusiast camera, the D4S and 1DX are many things but they are not, enthusiast. Unless you are rich.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2014 at 16:20 UTC
On article Canon India teases 'something big' coming soon (150 comments in total)

Whatever it is, it will cost twice what it replaces.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2014 at 09:52 UTC as 19th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon announces 16-35mm F4L and 10-18mm F4.5-5.6 lenses (368 comments in total)

Twice the price of the lens it replaces, it must be canon. £1200

Link | Posted on May 14, 2014 at 08:34 UTC as 18th comment | 2 replies
On article Nikon announces flagship D4s professional DSLR (70 comments in total)

I think part of the problem for both canon and nikon is that we have got to a stage where we do no need to upgrade every time. The D3 D3s and the D4 were all such great cameras a lot of pros will not need to upgrade. Remember not all professional photographs are earning $100,000 a year. Most earn a lot less and these cameras are so expensive. Canon were very crafty in bring out a fantastic flash system that would not work fully with the 1D MKIV forcing me to get a 1DX when my trusty MK IV could have lasted a lot longer.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2014 at 09:44 UTC as 7th comment
On article Nikon announces flagship D4s professional DSLR (70 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lucas_: I'll never be convinced by a 16MP FF sensor.

for what this camera is designed for 16mp is perfect

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2014 at 09:34 UTC
On article Nikon announces flagship D4s professional DSLR (70 comments in total)
In reply to:

peevee1: What does that mean: "approximately half the size (2464 x 1640) of standard uncompressed RAW files"

If they reduce resolution to 2464 x 1640 = 4Mpix, and reduce bitness to 12 bit, how come it is only half the size of full 16mpix 14-bit files?

Its the same with canon

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2014 at 09:32 UTC
On article CES 2014: Sigma Stand Report (40 comments in total)

Im still waiting for a full frame 17 or 18 good quality prime thats under £500

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2014 at 09:19 UTC as 14th comment
On article Tamron to develop 150-600mm F5-6.3 ultra-telephoto zoom (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

Debankur Mukherjee: Good news but what about a 18-800 mm lens......8-))

I think he was joking James (18-800)

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2013 at 09:44 UTC
On article Canon EOS 70D Review (720 comments in total)

Please canon or a third party maker is there any way of making a grip with a extra memory card slot

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2013 at 08:45 UTC as 154th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

ezradja: Canon should at least raise the MP to 24MP, IMO

16-18 MP is the sweet spot for me

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2013 at 08:53 UTC

great lens - stupid price

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2013 at 18:23 UTC as 33rd comment

the new pricing structure in the real world double the price.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2013 at 22:37 UTC as 751st comment
On article Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction (1852 comments in total)

I don't mind paying monthly, I'm fine with it. But the price. I have upgraded photoshop each time at a cost of £150 - £199 but now they want £17.58 a month. We used to upgrade every 18 months so now the cost is up to £316. THATS MORE THAN DOUBLE THE PRICE. This has to have been the most obvious question of all to ask them.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2013 at 08:22 UTC as 574th comment | 4 replies
Total: 34, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »