Clint Dunn

Clint Dunn

Lives in Canada Vancouver, Canada
Joined on Dec 2, 2008

Comments

Total: 406, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (615 comments in total)
In reply to:

Panda Addict: I'm not a professional photographer , just an amateur...Do you advise me this camera for pictures of animals ? Thx a lot.

Depends on whether you plan to shoot donkeys or ardvaarks. This camera will definitely work for donkeys but maybe not ardvaarks....and don't even think about using it for lemurs.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 17:14 UTC
In reply to:

LJ - Eljot: What is Project 21? I mean if that does not specifically means "Man standing in the water, looking straight to the camera, a net over the shoulder and a ray in one hand" I don't get it why it is a winner.

So...a blown out distracting sky is 'ok'?? If you say so, but I disagree. The man standing in the water with the ray isn't such a bad part of the photo...a properly exposed sky would have improved things immensely...and was perfectly possible given the subject was obviously lit with a flash anyway.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 18, 2016 at 18:12 UTC
In reply to:

LJ - Eljot: What is Project 21? I mean if that does not specifically means "Man standing in the water, looking straight to the camera, a net over the shoulder and a ray in one hand" I don't get it why it is a winner.

I guess we don't know what the other 'under 21' submissions were like but I tend to agree with you. The first thing I see in that shot is a distracting, blown out sky...at least on my uncalibrated office computer.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 18, 2016 at 17:52 UTC
On article Here at last: Nikon announces D500 (1173 comments in total)
In reply to:

photomedium: Not convinced. $2k APSC? Only time I see pro shooting crop is when they are ambassador-ing in some YouTube vid. Weighs almost 1kg, it can only record a blazing 3min of 4K (and 10 min HD) footage (enough to earn the 4K tramp stamp). Wonder if it overheats...
It does have a touchscreen and 10fps but no flash, it's only 20mp...what else...I rather get the d750 and a plastic bag for when it rains? Thanks.

You think that's bad...Fuji is releasing the X-Pro2 at $1700....

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 22:49 UTC
In reply to:

koseng: If you can convince me that it's 10 times better than the Pentax 645Z, I might be willing to pay for the price.

Of course it's not 10 times better...it's called diminishing returns. The fact you even make a statement like that is evidence that A) you can't afford it and B) you have no need for it.

This is a camera for pros doing commercial work with big budgets, or amateurs with very deep pockets.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 15:54 UTC
In reply to:

watson076: Over the last few years manufacturers have really lost touch with what photographers love, but I believe Fuji really hit the reset button. 40-50 mp this and that, 4k video, blah blah blah - who the f**k cares ? What I want is a true photographic experience (and I speak for many friends of mine who feel the same way). Fuji concentrates on what true photographers want, not what focus groups tell them to manufacture. Thank god someone is listening.

I agree with the OP...but for me the brand that inspires me these days is my Leica rangefinder. No, it isn't cutting edge tech but the image quality is still stellar and I enjoy using the camera. I gave up my 'one size fits all' Canon setup a year ago and haven't looked back.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 24, 2015 at 19:03 UTC
In reply to:

mailman88: Sony...reduce the Sony RX1RII to its real value price....about $1600.00 and triple your sales.

Mailman88, thank God you don't work for me....

Direct link | Posted on Dec 22, 2015 at 23:25 UTC
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: Maybe I'm jumping on the bandwagon here but I'm amazed at the lack of detail and the amount of noise in the bridge shot (at iso 400!!!). I got better results shooting my 5D at night back in 2006. All I can think is maybe Barney couldn't hand-hold the shot and way underexposed and then tried to compensate in post.

I would have to think that if it would have been correctly exposed in-camera the results would have been better...right???

Hi Barney: It's a nice shot, wasn't criticising it as a photo so much as questioning the quality of the file. Now that you say it was a VSCO filter then it makes more sense that it is as noisey as it is (or film-like if that is what you want to call it).

Direct link | Posted on Dec 22, 2015 at 18:57 UTC
In reply to:

ChrClowes: Tremendous amount of whinging and moaning going on here, then again - seems to be the norm these days. Scores of people claiming their keyboard warrior status as if they have in their possession the perfect "holy grail" camera themselves.

I can read past the ego's swinging around here (notably a user complaining about noise from a full size 42mp image shot at night, no doubt) but I can't deal with the continual moaning about why things aren't perfect for *them*. Get over yourselves, its a tool and no tool is quantifiably perfect for everyone. Be lucky that this year you even have the opportunity to be in the position to shop for, or own a camera - plenty of people in the world don't, and realising this will go a long way into understanding all this petty internet bashing is...sad, really.

Get over yourself...this is a gear site where people are here to discuss gear. Thanks for pointing out that we are 'lucky to be in a position to shop for a camera'. Nothing wrong with having a social conscience but seriously, know your audience. This is a camera site dedicated to new camera gear...so obviously we are going to nitpick and overanalyze the latest models...that's what it is all about.

Don't want to listen to it, move on to a website more conducive to your temperament.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 22, 2015 at 16:42 UTC

Maybe I'm jumping on the bandwagon here but I'm amazed at the lack of detail and the amount of noise in the bridge shot (at iso 400!!!). I got better results shooting my 5D at night back in 2006. All I can think is maybe Barney couldn't hand-hold the shot and way underexposed and then tried to compensate in post.

I would have to think that if it would have been correctly exposed in-camera the results would have been better...right???

Direct link | Posted on Dec 22, 2015 at 16:34 UTC as 27th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

HBowman: Guys... do not get that excited. Sigma work with HOYA. Most of the glass used by Sigma come from HOYA. This is simply Hoya technology under SIGMA branding.

Just have a look 5 news lower and try to find difference (apart marketing speach).

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9270348596/hoya-uses-antistatic-coating-to-repel-dust-and-water-for-new-fusion-series

What's wrong with that...Hoya make great filters.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2015 at 17:06 UTC
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: So...until VERY recently the industry didn't even have a standard for 4k. $5000 TV's sold just a year ago (and to this day) are not even HDCP 2.2 compliant and now the industry wants to throw 8k on us?? 8k will be the next 3D...nobody needs it and fewer will want it.

@Greenarcher - I would rather watch a high quality Blu Ray with uncompressed audio and a solid 1080P picture with a good bit rate then a highly compressed 4K feed from a torrent. Just because it's 4k doesn't mean it's better. In the world of digital compresion kills quality. I've yet to see a full size uncompressed 4K torrent but maybe I just don't know where to look:)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 23:22 UTC
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: So...until VERY recently the industry didn't even have a standard for 4k. $5000 TV's sold just a year ago (and to this day) are not even HDCP 2.2 compliant and now the industry wants to throw 8k on us?? 8k will be the next 3D...nobody needs it and fewer will want it.

RedFox, you're almost certainly wrong. Any of the 'cheap' 4K TV's I've seen are missing HDCP 2.2 compliance which means they will be useless when Cable companies and Blu Rays actually offer 4K.

Which leads me to my next point...cable companies and Blu Ray don't offer 4k....and to be honest I rather they didn't. I would far rather they focussed on high quality audio (Dolby True HD as an example) instead of higly compressed 5.1 Digital. Of course Blu Ray has the high quality audio but Net Flix, Cable, Apple Tv etc do not. Also, Apple only just recently released the new Apple TV and they didn't even bother with 4K. I realize we are headed to 4k but V-E-R-Y slowly. Do you think that when the masses finally get on board with 4K (maybe 10 years from now) that they will want to buy 8K?? I don't.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 23:17 UTC

So...until VERY recently the industry didn't even have a standard for 4k. $5000 TV's sold just a year ago (and to this day) are not even HDCP 2.2 compliant and now the industry wants to throw 8k on us?? 8k will be the next 3D...nobody needs it and fewer will want it.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 17:28 UTC as 13th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Cjar: Apparently wedding photography is about the photographer's wants and the bride and groom are props.

Did you ever think that the clients choose this guy specifically for his style?? Anyone getting married looks at the portfolio of the prospective photographer and picks a style they like.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 3, 2015 at 17:40 UTC
On article Studio tests and samples: Leica SL (beta) (750 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tim C.: When a 12k Leica camera lags behind in sensor performance compared to class leading competitors such as Canon, Nikon, and Sony, it is going to be a tough sell.

People don't buy cameras on the basis of just sensor performance, if that was the case Sony would be the only company selling cameras.

My M240 sensor is excellent, although not as good as the current Sony offerings. However, just about everything else I prefer with my Leica over a Sony.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 28, 2015 at 17:47 UTC
On article 20:20 vision: Hands-on with Sigma's 20mm F1.4 'Art' (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

4054: Curious, anybody tried adapted on an A7RII? If so, how are the corners?

No, haven't tried it but I expect it would work perfectly fine on the A7R2. It's lenses that are designed to sit close to the sensor/film plane (W/A rangefinder lenses) that are usually the problem.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2015 at 18:02 UTC
On photo VIKING CHURCH in the Places of worship in a non-urban setting challenge (16 comments in total)

There are a lot of great elements to this photo, from the sky, to the church, to the mountains....and perhaps that is why it won. That said, I don't understand why so many people insist on such garish, overdone processing. I guarantee you if I had the original file I could have made something so much better then this. Great photo, absolutely horrid processing.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 18:36 UTC as 1st comment
On article ZEISS goes wide with Loxia 21mm F2.8 for Sony E-mount (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZoranHR: One more million dollar lens for Sony.

ZoranHR - Speak for yourself, I would rather be able to buy high quality glass then cheap middle of the road any day. If you want cheap glass you already have lots of options...there are a tonne of used legacy Canikon/Pentax/Etc manual lenses out there that will cost you next to nothing.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 17:40 UTC
In reply to:

Babka08: Canon releases the M10 (four years late), and Sony is evolving its Leica killer already. Canon owns the lens market for sure, but Sony is the innovator in cameras.

Leica killer?? I would rather own a Leica Q then this Sony RX1R. The Sony is great but for me it's just too small, the Leica is perfect size with much better ergonomics IMO. The only thing I like better about the RX1R is the 35mm focal length instead of Leica's 28mm.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 17:35 UTC
Total: 406, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »