ZAnton

ZAnton

Lives in Germany B-W, Germany
Joined on May 4, 2008

Comments

Total: 281, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (312 comments in total)

Excellent camera!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2014 at 20:17 UTC as 84th comment
On Adobe Camera Raw 8.4 and Lightroom 5.4 now available news story (66 comments in total)

is there any other difference between LR4 and LR5, except for the updated camera list?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2014 at 05:43 UTC as 14th comment | 6 replies
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Review preview (423 comments in total)

That is what I was expecting, when Nikon had announced Nikon 1 cameras. But instead of doing good, bright zoom, they concentrated on expensive and useless slow tele- and standard lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2014 at 12:26 UTC as 76th comment | 1 reply
On Samyang announces 12mm 1:2.0 NCS CS wideangle for mirrorless news story (139 comments in total)

please make it with AF

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2014 at 12:19 UTC as 36th comment
On Samsung NX mini First Impressions Review preview (520 comments in total)

Samsung... good in a digital technologies, but total loosers in optics.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 11:44 UTC as 86th comment | 8 replies
On Hungarian law bans photos taken without seeking consent news story (325 comments in total)

Same law in Germany exists for years.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 18, 2014 at 20:27 UTC as 97th comment | 2 replies
On Nikon 1 V3: a quick summary article (580 comments in total)
In reply to:

burnymeister: I think people are missing the point on this camera. $1200 isn't that bad when you consider what you're getting. For under $3k you can get a system that covers the focal range of 18-800mm with pretty good features and small enough to fit in a backpack.

How is this not a great thing? 800mm in any other system will either result in a horrible unbalanced mess or $11k just for the lens and will be so heavy you won't hike it anywhere. This is the first time I'm interested in the 1 series. I think Nikon's finally coming through.

There are many bridge cameras with >1000mm tele end and brighter lens and 3 times cheaper. I am quite sure that comparing f-stop of the lens and sensor size, there will be little to no difference between V3 and a bridge cam.
So the only advantage of V3 is the AF speed. Well, try to justify the 800 Euro overprice with faster AF to my mom.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 15, 2014 at 10:39 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3: a quick summary article (580 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZAnton: "The Nikon 1 V1 and V2 are two cameras that are not frequently discussed among camera enthusiasts."
The only way they can change that is to make bright lenses for it. Bright zooms (f/2) AND very bright fixes (f/1.4).
Otherwise Canon G1X mk2 is way better than Nikon 1 line.
There are also Sony RX, Canon G15/16, and Nikon P7700/7800, although the last one is a tiny bit slower on AF than G16.
So basically Nikon 1 loose to the whole bunch of the "normal" enthusiast P&Ss.
UPD. Oh, that dark camera doesn't even have a hot shoe, so that i could mount my SB700?
I assume the DPreview authors must rethink the market placement of V3. I don't see _any_ reason for an enthusiast to buy this camera.

@Richard
First, I didn't meant constant aperture zoom. But the system must be either mighty or cheap. No one is gonna pay 850 euro for a dark lens and a small sensor.
To say nothing about wideangle. 24mm wide-end is a standard today.
This Nikon 1 is like a Fiat Panda with a 500hp engine - it could go fast, but the rest of the car will fall apart.
Why would you need 20-60fps if your exposure is 1/15sec. Who needs 20fps anyway? 2 geeks in Japan?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 14, 2014 at 05:32 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (563 comments in total)
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: Actually the explanation for the 1 system is very simple: Nikon doesn't want their mirrorless cameras eating in on their own DSLR cameras sales. That's why so many deem the 1's 'half-hearted.' Nikon is not commited to mirrorless, but wants to keep a foot on that market.

They want it, but they don't want it. So they are shooting their leg.
That is the most stupid strategy ever (at least in a shrinking market). They sink their money, and they will loose the market anyway.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 21:03 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (563 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZAnton: Useless external VF for a heap of bucks (attempt to get some $$ from an old grandpa), useless grip (the whole idea of 1" is the size&weight, right?), insane starting price...
The camera is clearly oriented on earning of money. But the irony is, that when the company do that, they will loose money.
Sony did a RX10 with same sensor size and lens 24-200mm f/2.8.
Canon did G1X with a bigger sensor 24-120 f/2.0-3.9.
Only Nikon is still doing f/4.5-6.7 for a tiny sensor.
I have an Oly with 14-42 f/3.5-5.6, and indoors it is useless. At the long end I get exposures like 1/4 second even at ISO1600.
So Nikon - even smaller sensor and similar dark lens. Well, no wonder they have troubles with sales.
The Nikon 1 line does not have a selling point.
Canon G16 - brightest lens in its range (28-...), smallest, fastest AF.
Oly XZ - brightest 24mm
Canon G1X - biggest sensor on a bright zoomed compact
Sony RX-line -- all bright-lensed and good sensor.

Nikon 1 - nothing. It is neither the widest, nor the longest, nor the brightest, nor the biggest zoom, or sensor, or DR.
Well maybe fastest AF. You'll focus in a 0.001sec and then open the shutter for 2 seconds. Useless. It doesn't even have a hotshoe (external Flash is a MUST with such camera indoors).

Sorry Nikon, I just don't see any reason to buy this camera or recommend it to someone.
The whole point of 1" sensor is that it is cheap, and lenses are cheap and small, and the camera is cheap and small. If they aren't - kill the line.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 20:49 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (563 comments in total)

Useless external VF for a heap of bucks (attempt to get some $$ from an old grandpa), useless grip (the whole idea of 1" is the size&weight, right?), insane starting price...
The camera is clearly oriented on earning of money. But the irony is, that when the company do that, they will loose money.
Sony did a RX10 with same sensor size and lens 24-200mm f/2.8.
Canon did G1X with a bigger sensor 24-120 f/2.0-3.9.
Only Nikon is still doing f/4.5-6.7 for a tiny sensor.
I have an Oly with 14-42 f/3.5-5.6, and indoors it is useless. At the long end I get exposures like 1/4 second even at ISO1600.
So Nikon - even smaller sensor and similar dark lens. Well, no wonder they have troubles with sales.
The Nikon 1 line does not have a selling point.
Canon G16 - brightest lens in its range (28-...), smallest, fastest AF.
Oly XZ - brightest 24mm
Canon G1X - biggest sensor on a bright zoomed compact
Sony RX-line -- all bright-lensed and good sensor.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 20:46 UTC as 102nd comment | 3 replies
On Nikon 1 V3: a quick summary article (580 comments in total)

"The Nikon 1 V1 and V2 are two cameras that are not frequently discussed among camera enthusiasts."
The only way they can change that is to make bright lenses for it. Bright zooms (f/2) AND very bright fixes (f/1.4).
Otherwise Canon G1X mk2 is way better than Nikon 1 line.
There are also Sony RX, Canon G15/16, and Nikon P7700/7800, although the last one is a tiny bit slower on AF than G16.
So basically Nikon 1 loose to the whole bunch of the "normal" enthusiast P&Ss.
UPD. Oh, that dark camera doesn't even have a hot shoe, so that i could mount my SB700?
I assume the DPreview authors must rethink the market placement of V3. I don't see _any_ reason for an enthusiast to buy this camera.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 20:21 UTC as 88th comment | 6 replies

Just another superzoom.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2014 at 10:07 UTC as 16th comment
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (819 comments in total)
In reply to:

babalu: ...in five to ten years any camera with a mirror box will be as antiquated as film cameras are today .

I've heard that 5 years ago

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2014 at 18:04 UTC
On Exposing another side of Sochi news story (178 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZAnton: It is very simple. You can go to a city and photograph its garbage heaps, then find a 5 drunk and 5 ugly people and make "a portrait of a Russian".
That is what western media always did.
Photos on this site are recent, but PP-ed to be old-looking, combining with what I said it makes a feeling of an ugly, underdeveloped country with stupid people just a bit higher than African tribes. (and those crazy apes have a BOMB???)
Some other tricks used by western media:
- cool (blue) filter (although european part of Russia is WAAAAY hotter in summer than most of the Europe)
- shooting from the ground level - more dirt&dust, strange POV = strange people
Just think about it, when you will see just another shots of Moscow in a Hollywood movie.

So my advice - don't watch the propaganda, buy a ticket, visit a country and see it by yourself. Make your own route. In a group of western tourists you will still visit all garbage heaps in the region and stinky ditches, instead of real cultural objects.

By the way, were these photos on the main page?
http://www.maciejdakowicz.com/cardiff-after-dark/cardiff-after-dark-photos/

Direct link | Posted on Feb 20, 2014 at 21:51 UTC
On Exposing another side of Sochi news story (178 comments in total)

It is very simple. You can go to a city and photograph its garbage heaps, then find a 5 drunk and 5 ugly people and make "a portrait of a Russian".
That is what western media always did.
Photos on this site are recent, but PP-ed to be old-looking, combining with what I said it makes a feeling of an ugly, underdeveloped country with stupid people just a bit higher than African tribes. (and those crazy apes have a BOMB???)
Some other tricks used by western media:
- cool (blue) filter (although european part of Russia is WAAAAY hotter in summer than most of the Europe)
- shooting from the ground level - more dirt&dust, strange POV = strange people
Just think about it, when you will see just another shots of Moscow in a Hollywood movie.

So my advice - don't watch the propaganda, buy a ticket, visit a country and see it by yourself. Make your own route. In a group of western tourists you will still visit all garbage heaps in the region and stinky ditches, instead of real cultural objects.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 20, 2014 at 21:36 UTC as 18th comment | 2 replies
On Exposing another side of Sochi news story (178 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stephan K: To put the expenditure at Sochi into perspective, the cost of USD 51 billion is equivalent to 50% of the annual govt expenditure of my country, South Africa (population 50 million). Putin and his friends in the construction business have had a field day.

$51 godzillion is an "estimate" with no actual proofs.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 20, 2014 at 21:18 UTC
In reply to:

Josh152: This nice and all but what I would love to see from Tamron is a wide angle f/2.8 zoom on the level of their 24-70 and 70-200 so Tamron has a full trinity to compete with the Nikon and Canon versions.

VC on a wide angle makes no sense.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2014 at 16:22 UTC
In reply to:

Josh152: This nice and all but what I would love to see from Tamron is a wide angle f/2.8 zoom on the level of their 24-70 and 70-200 so Tamron has a full trinity to compete with the Nikon and Canon versions.

Agreed. I'd like to have something like 14-24, 15-30 f/2.8 from Tamron. But it _must_ be wider than 16mm.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2014 at 08:05 UTC

well... at least it is not ugly as previous attempts.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2014 at 18:43 UTC as 72nd comment | 2 replies
Total: 281, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »