Dafffid

Dafffid

Joined on Jan 19, 2012

Comments

Total: 48, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

Suggestion 1

As so many threads are making or asking for comparisons between models perhaps you should consider adding a couple of new groupings. The most obvious would be:
Large Sensor Compact Talk - which would give a sensible home to the RX1, RX100, X100, Sigma DPs and so forth. (Possibly the Ricoh GXR might belong in there, depending on how you view it)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 28, 2012 at 09:21 UTC as 215th comment

Let me guess: it'll be white, every button will have three functions - none of them clear, and it won't come with any instructions, because if you have to ask, you're not one of the klan...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2012 at 11:56 UTC as 19th comment | 1 reply
On CES 2012: Sigma stand report article (25 comments in total)
In reply to:

zzapamiga: Sigma please sell Foveon to Canon or Sony. Your camera division cannot be profitable and you are primarily a lens maker. That way we can all enjoy Foveon sensors in great bodies with a better supported lens mount.

Canon will always be market-leaders who follow the innovation of others, and Sony already make the best CMOS sensors. Nikon are a conservative company - no chance. If we want Foveon developed it would have to be sold to someone with a need to trailblaze.

Olympus don't have the money, and although Fuji like experimenting with their sensors (I'm sad the S5's sensor was never taken forward) they have their hands full with their latest idea. That leaves Pentax, Panasonic and Samsung. Samsung are more interested in android cameras and new UIs. Panasonic have the resources and it would create differentiation between them and Olympus, but can't see it happening (unless rumours are true that they've ditched their own sensors for Sony in the GH3).
But Pentax are in desperate need of something to make them contenders again. Their APS-C cameras are 'nice' - but 99% will still buy an Canikon instead. But put a Foveon inside one and you have a genuine unique selling point again.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 19, 2012 at 09:49 UTC

These guys will buy it:
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10151161162199851.471883.96845044850&type=1

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2012 at 19:17 UTC as 275th comment
On Just Posted: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 preview article (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

Valiant Thor: What about lenses? Does anyone know if you will be able to use M4/3 lenses that work with the G5 and OM-D systems on this camera? Thanks.

Yes

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2012 at 13:50 UTC
On Fujifilm XF1 Preview preview (129 comments in total)

Seems perverse to leave the XZ-2 off the comparison chart. The XZ-1 was the best of the last generation after all

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2012 at 10:25 UTC as 56th comment
In reply to:

photofan1986: And what's this thing exactly for?

Making calls and taking photos... which bit of the story confused you?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2012 at 18:01 UTC
In reply to:

bradleyg5: This is getting absurd dpreview you should be ashamed.

This listing the focal length "equivalence" right next to unadjusted aperture is border line disingenuous.

It is not a f1.8 150mm "equivalent" lens, it is and forever will be a 75mm lens, it doesn't magically become a 150mm lens just because you put it on a camera with a small sensor.

If you insist on listing "equivalent" figures, list the equivalent aperture right next to it so people don't get the wrong impression.

This lens at f1.8 75mm will produce an image on a micro four thirds camera that will look identical to a F3.5 150mm on a full frame camera, for you to imply it will look like f1.8 150mm is flat out wrong and shameful.

Jon, I was referring to autofocus performance, ISO didn't enter into it.
A 2.8 line sensor will not work on a 3.5 lens. End of story.
Period. The end.

Secondly, I own a 5D II and a GF1. Your comparison of ISO 200 to 800 is nonsense. I don't mean that rudely, but it depends entirely on available light, and a handful of other factors (lens quality, sensor manufacturer, software etc.) and you can't simply bump the numbers like that and assume a two stop advantage across the board in all conditions and at all sensitivities.

Direct link | Posted on May 24, 2012 at 11:27 UTC
In reply to:

bradleyg5: This is getting absurd dpreview you should be ashamed.

This listing the focal length "equivalence" right next to unadjusted aperture is border line disingenuous.

It is not a f1.8 150mm "equivalent" lens, it is and forever will be a 75mm lens, it doesn't magically become a 150mm lens just because you put it on a camera with a small sensor.

If you insist on listing "equivalent" figures, list the equivalent aperture right next to it so people don't get the wrong impression.

This lens at f1.8 75mm will produce an image on a micro four thirds camera that will look identical to a F3.5 150mm on a full frame camera, for you to imply it will look like f1.8 150mm is flat out wrong and shameful.

Tell an f/2.8 sensor line on a phase-detect autofocus system that f1.8 = f3.5, see if it listens to you.

(Yes I know micros 4/3 is contrast detect. The point still stands, as presumably our friend makes similar ridiculous comparisons between crop and full frame)

Direct link | Posted on May 24, 2012 at 08:48 UTC
On Pentax K-01 studio test shots published article (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

IcyVeins: Thic camera CHEATS, you can't reduce noise in RAW and still call it RAW.

It's their camera, they can do what they want. Would you prefer to be offered the Red Green and Blue sensor data separately and interpolate them yourself? Perhaps just the stream of numbers and let you decide how they should add up?

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2012 at 08:55 UTC
On Facebook buys photo sharing service Instagram for $1bn article (144 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stollen1234: but why do we have to read this on this website..

we all heard about this on google news..yahoo..or Foxnews..

Please keep this site about photography..i mean about cameras and how to take photos..

not how to share it on social networks

'No camera reviews were hurt in the posting of this story'

Direct link | Posted on Apr 10, 2012 at 11:03 UTC
On Pentax K-01 preview (376 comments in total)

I have a very soft spot for Pentax and I'm all in favour of attempts to shake up the current paradigm and lack of choice regarding bodies, but only to improve outdated systems, not to exercise the designer's ego. I saw an interview in which he seemed far more concerned with imposing his own signature and style upon it than whether or not it actually worked. Like a Phillipe Starck grapefruit squeezer, this camera appears designed to sit there looking striking, not to actually be used. Shame that a once great company has, I suspect, goofed again.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 22, 2012 at 11:38 UTC as 89th comment
On Images of Panasonic GF5 start to appear article (118 comments in total)

Everybody complains when a review isn't posted immediately after a launch, now everybody complains when news comes off the grapevine early. It must be hell being forced to come to this website every day, being made to pay the hefty subscription price and then not finding it to your taste...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 12:15 UTC as 34th comment | 1 reply

The irony is that Samsung have not even bothered to bring decent connectivity together in the products they already have, instead they're providing components for main rivals Apple to do just that in the near future. My TV should be my hi-fi and have a dock for my Mp3 player/HD video camera, and should be linked wirelessly to my media centre and external storage, which should all be remotely controlled by my phone/tablet. (As just one theoretical example - there are plenty of others) That was all doable years ago and should be absolute standard, but Samsung sell their products individually with precious little interplay between them - compare the Samsung store in London to the Apple store, and it's an enormous missed opportunity. If they want leverage in the camera market they should be selling packages of products, offering cheap cameras with their TVs, phones and laptops, all of which have a good slice of the action, but ensuring first that they're properly integrated.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2012 at 10:54 UTC as 45th comment | 1 reply
On Lightroom 4 Review article (469 comments in total)

And have they addressed any of its major UI failings present since its first incarnation? No. The incredibly wasteful use of screen space, the ludicrously unhelpful access to controls etc. Typical Adobe release, add things but don't fix. Such a shame. The software boys certainly know what they're doing but the designers screw it up.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2012 at 10:13 UTC as 121st comment | 3 replies
On Flickr poised for much-needed interface improvements article (82 comments in total)

Not needing 5 clicks to do the simplest thing would be a start. But customisation should be the goal, not imposing another designer led, fixed concept on people, but letting them choose.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 22, 2012 at 09:52 UTC as 37th comment
On 'No Future in Photojournalism' Interview: Dan Chung article (278 comments in total)

Video is here to stay and I have no problem with that, it's another tool. But I do have a problem with the lack of imagination shown by editorial staff in their handling of stills and online newspapers, and their slavish assumption that if you stick a video into a report you've automatically achieved something worthwhile. I had an argument with some Guardian bods as far back as 2005, that the direction they were taking was utterly unimaginative and half-hearted, they were trying to dump a newspaper on to the internet, rather than start with an appreciation of what the net can do and build a new format from the ground up. And here we are in 2012, and online newspapers are still laid out abysmally, the navigation is still hopeless, and more and more we're offered video even when we would prefer to read in silence - something the still image complements perfectly. I think with the growth of tablets we'll slowly see an improvement, but there's a real lack of vision.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2012 at 10:10 UTC as 77th comment
In reply to:

Mssimo: 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) !!! wow..better than the D800/5D mk2

Of course, regardless of its advertised capabilities... if its as hackable as the Panasonics... ;)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2012 at 11:34 UTC
In reply to:

thethirdcoast: Good luck shooting macro or telephoto handheld with that tiny grip.

Well I've been holding cameras by the lens for thirty years now, why break the habit of a lifetime?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2012 at 11:33 UTC
In reply to:

Harold66: it would have been perfect but why on earth did they move from a 41mm to a 45mm FOV ? they maintained the 28mm FOV so why not do the same with the dp2 successor ? :(
any words on a external finder . another minus of changing the FOV . I do not know of any 45mm external finder :(

also they should try to offer the option of a ratio in addition to the 3;2 ratio

Harold

I imagine someone felt the two cameras were differentiated enough and needed more air between them. I agree, I don't like the move to 45, but a move to 43 might have been a good advertising sell - 'the camera that gives you what your eye sees' kind of a thing.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2012 at 11:25 UTC
Total: 48, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »