Ariston

Lives in Iraq Iraq
Joined on Aug 13, 2011

Comments

Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

tkbslc: 45mm seems like an odd choice for APS-C. Did they just try and copy m4/3?

copy? are into some weird substance?

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2013 at 22:56 UTC
In reply to:

viking79: I see this comment a lot: 45mm focal length on APS-C is weird. It is not at all. It is a 70mm equivalent. A 24-70mm or 70-200mm are not weird focal lengths, 70mm is the stopping/starting point of each of those, and you spend a lot of time at either end on a zoom, so it should be fairly natural. Actually, take the 16mm f/2.4, 30mm f/2, and 45mm f/1.8 and you basically have your 24-70mm zoom in a fraction the size.

45mm on APS_C sensor? definitely not weird.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2013 at 22:54 UTC

why would anyone post their bigger size photos just for FB to make money out of them and don't give you a share of what you really own.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2013 at 00:55 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply
On article Just posted: Fujifilm X-E1 Review (525 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ariston: oh my. this is getting ridiculous. a lot of pointless brand bashing just because the camera got a gold star.you people should be more concerned shooting with your equipment rather than cry about a camera for getting an honor. are people here that pathetic?

@sgoldswo, I completely agree. not to mention pointlessly shallow.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2013 at 01:59 UTC
On article Just posted: Fujifilm X-E1 Review (525 comments in total)

oh my. this is getting ridiculous. a lot of pointless brand bashing just because the camera got a gold star.you people should be more concerned shooting with your equipment rather than cry about a camera for getting an honor. are people here that pathetic?

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2013 at 23:11 UTC as 80th comment | 3 replies
On article Hands-on with the Fujifilm X100S (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

Greg Gebhardt: The biggest advantage the X100S has is it is cheaper. As far as image quality and detail the RX1 will always win. Those who do not agree are in denial and likely are regretful Fuji owners. Lol.

this has to be the biggest BS post I have read.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2013 at 22:48 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Fujifilm X100S (57 comments in total)

the X100s shames the RX1 by a mile.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2013 at 08:23 UTC as 16th comment
On article Just Posted: Fujifilm X100S first-look preview (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kokeen4231: This is the closest competitor to leicas and the sony RX1. If the price is right, I would rather have this.

the sensor size is something to consider, but who would use that for such an occasion if you have the D800? not to mention the setup needed for those shots.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2013 at 13:36 UTC
On article Just Posted: Fujifilm X100S first-look preview (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

photobeans: This is such a beautiful camera. I want to hold it, admire it, and use it.

looks delicious compared to the RX1.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2013 at 13:32 UTC
On article Just posted: Fujifilm X20 hands-on preview (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jimmy jang Boo: Looks like a nice camera on the outside, but nowhere near enough inside to compete with Sony's juggernaut. Fuji will be lucky to move these things at $400.

Sony juggernaut? oh my, the fanboyism always brings out the stupidity in people. lol

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2013 at 13:25 UTC
On article Just posted: Fujifilm X20 hands-on preview (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kokeen4231: I wonder how this sensor can compete with 1" sensor found in the rx100.

I wonder how the NEX-7 couldn't compete against the XP1.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2013 at 13:23 UTC
On article Just posted: Fujifilm X20 hands-on preview (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

veato: I'm loving the hilarious "it will fail because it doesn't have a 1" sensor" comments. So any compact that doesn't feature a larger sensor is now destined to fail (regardless of other features), right?

Presumably all photos taken on the X20 will be crap because, you know, sensor.

the 1" sensor will fail because of m4/3.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2013 at 09:10 UTC
In reply to:

Chris Tofalos: No EVF - again! Amazing and very disappointing omission...

buy an NX20. problem solved.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2013 at 01:54 UTC
In reply to:

zoranT: Samsung copy everything, first Sony's NEX series, and now they go a bit towards the retro concept of Fuji. And IQ-wise they have been always a bit behind, no surprise. They could bring it on however, if they wanted to be more serious about leading the market.

what a stupid comment. the NX system came out first than the NEX. get your facts straight before commenting something like this.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2013 at 01:25 UTC
On article Just Posted: Nikon D600 In-depth Review (498 comments in total)
In reply to:

KeeChiuPeng: How can a cheaper D600 body trounce a premium D800 by that much? The iso noise performance is significantly better than D800 in all ranges.

the High ISO noise performance is basically the same with the D800 when downsized to D600 pixel level.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2012 at 02:54 UTC
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: For the existing K5 users, the new duo doesn't look much of a temptation for an upgrade, unless of course money is no object. For those that are new to the DSLR and want the best in the APS-C class, they are serious candidates among its peers. The 7D after all these years received only a good firmware upgrade recently and the D7000 until now remains practically the same as ever.

the improved autofocus would be a big consideration.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2012 at 14:53 UTC
On article Samsung NX 12-24mm to cost $600, 45mm F1.8 around $300 (119 comments in total)
In reply to:

jsis: meh.... Nikon's offering is better.

if it's a dlsr, I agree. if it's their V1, I'll laugh at you.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2012 at 08:44 UTC
On article Samsung NX 12-24mm to cost $600, 45mm F1.8 around $300 (119 comments in total)
In reply to:

audijam: only fools buy samsung...

by that statement, you don't know photography.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2012 at 08:43 UTC
On article Samsung NX 12-24mm to cost $600, 45mm F1.8 around $300 (119 comments in total)
In reply to:

qwertyasdf: On a previous lens roadmap, Samsung indicated a 55/1.8 pancake.
It turned out to be a cupcake.

The following lens are on the roadmap for the 2nd half of 2012 lol...
80-400mm f/4-5.6 OIS SSA iFn
135mm f/2 OIS SSA iFn
24mm f/1.8 ED SSA iFn

Personally I would hope they ditch the 135/2, which translates to 202.5mm

I have use for 135-200mm lenses.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2012 at 08:39 UTC
On article Samsung NX 12-24mm to cost $600, 45mm F1.8 around $300 (119 comments in total)
In reply to:

plasnu: Canon and Samsung are a lot behind their competitors.

which competitors? the only competitor that has more lenses than the NX is the m4/3.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2012 at 08:34 UTC
Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »