mick232

Joined on Oct 23, 2011

Comments

Total: 249, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article DxOMark confirms Canon EOS 1D X II sensor advances (197 comments in total)
In reply to:

miggylicious: Didn't think that my 4 year old A99 would still perform better (in good light) than Canon's latest beast.

It performs better in the DXOmark, that doesn't mean it performs better in good light.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2016 at 20:41 UTC
On article Sony warns against use of unauthorized third-party apps (178 comments in total)

If I use such an app and an unrelated part such the built-in flash or battery fails, I will insist on my warranty, whether Sony likes it or not. If I have a firmware problem, that is a different story.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2016 at 20:58 UTC as 40th comment | 3 replies

If it covers medium format, it could be good enough for the selfie-cam in my guest bathroom.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2016 at 21:07 UTC as 54th comment
On article Fast telezoom: Sigma 50-100mm F1.8 sample images (164 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Squire: The kitten in #29 looks soft to me.

:-D

To me it looks fluffy

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2016 at 12:41 UTC
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: App wasn't big enough yet.

Rumors have it that the comment textbox will soon be usable as a word processor.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2016 at 12:40 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 1 - Crop-Sensor (187 comments in total)

I'll wait for part 2 (full frame). Why watch minor league when you can watch major league for the same price?

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2016 at 21:13 UTC as 12th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

EcoR1: For god sake dpreview, stop using the name "FE-mount". Now! There is no FE-mount, there is only E-mount. These lenses mentioned in this article are full frame E-mount lenses, not FE-mount-lenses. By using the non-existent name, you give impression to people that these lenses are somehow incompatible with a smaller sensor E-mount cameras like a6300. If you go and read some cameraforums you can already see that some people think that there are two different mirrorless mounts made by Sony. Stop confusing people!

Tell that SLR Magic who use this name in their press release.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2016 at 11:07 UTC
In reply to:

John McMillin: Glad to see they've finally solved the big-SLR weight problem.

As long as you need a rocket to carry it the problem is NOT solved.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2016 at 07:05 UTC

It probably was a mistake not to use a Sony sensor in the D5...

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2016 at 22:07 UTC as 183rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

mick232: the old firmware must have been pretty bad then and did by far not exploit the hardware capabilities

Granted, my initial comment was a bit provocative. You almost seem to take such things personal, though.

You should also get the numbers right. They improved it by 20% to 50%, not by 10% as you conveniently argue. Do you realize how unrealistic your estimate of "thousands of man hours" actually is? Put some facts on the table before you throw around such numbers.

It's fair to ship the improvement. They couldn't have done that without the USB dock, though.

So apparently what became possible due to the USB dock is to release the lens in a premature state and fix it later. Why finalize and optimize the design when you can do it later? It also helps to sell the dock, obviously. I am not sure I like that trend.

By the way: no need to educate me about software engineering. I work in that field.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2016 at 22:54 UTC

the old firmware must have been pretty bad then and did by far not exploit the hardware capabilities

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2016 at 17:21 UTC as 15th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

km25: The Nikon 105mm f2.5, that was a very sharp lens. This lens looks to be well make, at least in performance. I had a Leica R8 and there 100mm 2.8 micro. I had a picture very close to one you have here. I feel as if the Leica lens was sharper and had better out of focus the this lens, but not a great deal. seems like a nice lens. But so may companies are producing good lens now a days

no lens will give you comparable bokeh except the sony/minolta STF

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2016 at 12:56 UTC
On article Action packed: Shooting the Sony a6300 in Miami (241 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: Really not trying to troll here (I know, great preface) but would it have been possible to hand the model a pencil or a lolly pop or something to replace the cigarette? I did notice and it did bother me. Sorry if this stirs trouble.

That is your problem, not the photog's.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2016 at 18:42 UTC
On article UPDATED: CP+ 2016: shooting the Pentax K-1 in Yokohama (377 comments in total)

We'll soon be seeing the big picture.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2016 at 19:58 UTC as 37th comment
In reply to:

Snikt228: What happened to the other 5 new FE lenses?

"A month ago Sony announced that 8 new FE lenses will be available til Spring 2016. "

Only see 3 new ones so far

The other 5 have been sold already.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2016 at 21:03 UTC
In reply to:

Rooru S: And of course, nothing for A-mount. How long will it take for Sony to stop being cowards to their legacy customers?

rishi sanyal, please do a-mount users a favor and start raising awareness using the publishing power of this site.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2016 at 18:08 UTC
In reply to:

Digitalis32: AF with a Leica lens? BLASPHEMY! BURN the AF loving heathens where they stand! and scatter their ashes to the winds!

when chuck norris focuses his leica, the entire universe will bend until proper focus is achieved.

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2016 at 21:20 UTC
In reply to:

villagranvicent: Remember the Contax AX?? autofocuses by changing the lens-to-film distance. I wonder why nobody else followed that route.

because it requires on-sensor PDAF points which was not available until recently

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2016 at 21:17 UTC
In reply to:

Sir Nick of High Point: This seems brilliant, and in hind-sight should have been obvious, given the way rangefinder lenses couple to the body. I'm surprised Leica didn't think of it first. Or perhaps they did, and there is some fundamental issue with the concept that I'm not seeing. Perhaps it's hazardous to the lens?

it requires on-sensor PDAF which is fairly new

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2016 at 21:12 UTC
In reply to:

zamorac: TLDR after the first sentence. "Forever lenses" from a company that changed three lens mounts in the fast five years? Oh wow!

I am talking about full-frame.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 22:54 UTC
Total: 249, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »