Marty4650

Marty4650

Lives in United States NC, United States
Works as a Retired Industrial Engineer
Joined on May 20, 2005

Comments

Total: 868, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Canon EOS-1D C sees $4000 price drop in North America article (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

Howard Moftich: Welcome to capitalism. Charge what you think the market will pay. In this case, Canon is obviously sitting on a warehouse full of them so they need to get rid of them as their value is decreasing by them sitting unsold.

@Papi61

China is a unique situation, since they have abandoned a "communist economy" in favor of a capitalist one (although I will admit that many industries are mostly own by generals in their army).

But they have retained their communist style police state.

So you probably could call them a hybrid of sorts.

North Korea, Cuba, Laos or Vietnam would be a much better example of a purely communist state. And the last two seem to be drifting towards the Chinese model of a hybrid state.

In any case, China has the world's largest economy today, and with a population of 1.35 billion it shouldn't be shocking that 10,000 Bentleys are sold there. Which is around the same number sold in the USA, despite China having three times the population.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 31, 2015 at 20:25 UTC
On Canon EOS-1D C sees $4000 price drop in North America article (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

Howard Moftich: Welcome to capitalism. Charge what you think the market will pay. In this case, Canon is obviously sitting on a warehouse full of them so they need to get rid of them as their value is decreasing by them sitting unsold.

@Dave.... here's a free lesson in Economics 101:

"Exploitation" is when you can charge $7,999 for a loaf of bread. And when no one else but you can make them and sell them.

This just isn't the same thing as selling an expensive luxury item, that very few people need, that has many competitors also making similar ones. And the people who do buy them have plenty of money to pay for it.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 31, 2015 at 17:05 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Review preview (394 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: The real star of these tiny cameras is the kit lens. That 12-32mm lens is a lot better than you would expect a kit lens to be.

In addition to the 14mm, 12-34mm, and 35-100mm lenses, I think the 17mm f/1.7 should be added as a "lens well suited for a GM camera." In fact, that lens was designed with the GM1 in mind, and was sold bundled with it in some markets.

I really think Panasonic is onto something with these high quality mini cameras. They make ideal street shooters, travel cams, or second cameras to a DSLR or high end MILC model.

Yes, that is exactly what I meant.

Thanks for the correction.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 30, 2015 at 00:28 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Review preview (394 comments in total)
In reply to:

bluevellet: Why does DPR keep on using the 45mm f1.8 for the studio scene? Not so long ago, they used the old 50mm f2 macro for earlier m43 cameras and it is sharper.

I would think the 25mm f/1.8 would be the most appropriate choice for studio tests.

But of course, any lens should do. It just depends on far away you want to put the tripod....

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2015 at 00:36 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Review preview (394 comments in total)

The real star of these tiny cameras is the kit lens. That 12-32mm lens is a lot better than you would expect a kit lens to be.

In addition to the 14mm, 12-34mm, and 35-100mm lenses, I think the 17mm f/1.7 should be added as a "lens well suited for a GM camera." In fact, that lens was designed with the GM1 in mind, and was sold bundled with it in some markets.

I really think Panasonic is onto something with these high quality mini cameras. They make ideal street shooters, travel cams, or second cameras to a DSLR or high end MILC model.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2015 at 00:34 UTC as 46th comment | 3 replies
On 2014 Readers' Polls: The results are in! article (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Lets be honest. Most of the people who voted in that poll never touched ANY of the cameras they voted for. Perhaps a few did, but most didn't.

And absolutely no one has tested them all. Not even Dpreview had done that, and they have a staff of fifteen people.

So this poll is pretty much a popularity contest. We just voted for the camera we thought was the "most significant of the year" based on what we knew about it from reading various reviews and looking at the spec sheets.

Once you understand that point, then all the claims that a camera wasn't available for sale long enough, or wasn't available in all markets, becomes meaningless.

@Everlast66...

Well, since I have no personal experience with ANY of the models listed, I simply "voted for" the cameras I felt were the most significant for the year. And they were... in this order...

1. Sony A7 II
2. Nikon D750
3. Fuji X-T1

I don't see why it matters to you which models I "voted for" but I have provided them. If you are still curious, I can tell you why I picked them in that order.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2015 at 13:26 UTC
On 2014 Readers' Polls: The results are in! article (364 comments in total)

Lets be honest. Most of the people who voted in that poll never touched ANY of the cameras they voted for. Perhaps a few did, but most didn't.

And absolutely no one has tested them all. Not even Dpreview had done that, and they have a staff of fifteen people.

So this poll is pretty much a popularity contest. We just voted for the camera we thought was the "most significant of the year" based on what we knew about it from reading various reviews and looking at the spec sheets.

Once you understand that point, then all the claims that a camera wasn't available for sale long enough, or wasn't available in all markets, becomes meaningless.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2015 at 03:07 UTC as 44th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

DaveCS: "What will those photographers do now?

Well the good news here I think is that they’re so well-known, and they’re such high-calibre photographers that I doubt they’ll have trouble finding another job whether it's as staff photographers or freelancers."

Translation:
They're out of a job - they get to pound the pavement and knock on doors to see if anyone wants to hire them.. .

And they will be out of work for maybe around six minutes.

Because those guys are really great photographers.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2015 at 20:39 UTC

I'm sure PLENTY of sports fans will give SI their smartphone photos, shot from the top row....

They should have no problem using those...

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2015 at 20:37 UTC as 62nd comment | 1 reply
On 2014 Readers' Polls: The results are in! article (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zeisschen: Surprise surprise!

Only mirrorless cameras on top. Times have changed ;)

For example... look at all the space devoted to innovative cameras like the Lytro. I'd be shocked if they actually sold more than a few hundred of those, but every photo enthusiast wants to read about them.

Because they are new. They are innovative. And they are different.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2015 at 14:22 UTC
On 2014 Readers' Polls: The results are in! article (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zeisschen: Surprise surprise!

Only mirrorless cameras on top. Times have changed ;)

Just remember... this is a gear site which is populated by a lot of us gearheads. And here we are excited by new technologies and bored with the old ones. So we really are NOT representative of the entire market for cameras and lenses.

If you went by editorial content and forum space here, then you might believe that MILC cameras have a 50% market share. But they really only have around an 8% share.

That's just the way it is. And that's the way it always will be. The latest inventions and innovations will get the most ink.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2015 at 11:45 UTC
On 2014 Readers' Polls: The results are in! article (364 comments in total)
In reply to:

MPA1: How can that Sony win - it's not even in the shops in NZ yet!

Very few of the cameras you see on this website are available in shops anywhere. There are just too many models for every store to display all of them.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2015 at 11:39 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF7 flips for selfies article (373 comments in total)
In reply to:

goblover: There goes my hope for a new sensor, or 4k recording on the cheap. Oh well, not this year it seems.

This is like deja vu... all over again.

We used to whine about the 12 MP sensor. Now we whine about the 16 MP sensor. And even though this is the third 16 MP sensor from Panasonic, it still isn't good enough. We always want more.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2015 at 19:49 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF7 flips for selfies article (373 comments in total)
In reply to:

whyamihere: I like the adorable grumpiness and lack of awareness of the anti-selfie, anti-social media crowd. It's as if nobody in the history of the world ever photographed (or painted, or sketched) a self-portrait, published that picture in a public location for all to see (like an art gallery, or an online portfolio), or shared their photos with friends and family (photo albums, 35mm slide shows).

It's not narcissism. It's the same thing as before, just in a form you're all uncomfortable with because you don't know how it works.

Oh come on!

Those aren't the photos that people find so vapid, unispiring and boring.

It's those billions of photos of teenaged girls holding a smartphone at arm's length so they can take selfies of them with their friends getting drunk.

It's all those photos taken at Starbucks of lattes that are uploaded in a flash to facebook pages.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 20, 2015 at 22:07 UTC
On Panasonic reveals Lumix DMC-GF7 with tilting LCD article (78 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ben O Connor: Not looks as good as my GM1, but I wish I would have a svivel screen too!

Its brilliantly designed Fn button also will be 2nd shutter! Ergonomically, SUPERB.

This looks like a slightly bigger, somewhat improved GM1... for $200 LESS at release.

If it is $599 now, then it will be $499 a few months from now, and dealers in Hong Kong will be splitting the kits and selling the lenses and bodies separately on ebay.

Wait and see....

Direct link | Posted on Jan 20, 2015 at 13:12 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF7 flips for selfies article (373 comments in total)
In reply to:

elkhidir: Both Sony a5100 and Olympus E-PL7 are selling (quite well it seems) for that price. Both have "selfie" screens and lack viewfinders. If there's a market for it, there's nothing wrong with Panasonic getting in. For us consumers it will add to competition and push prices down.

@ Piggy

Believe it or not.... 1.2 billion smartphone users somehow get by without an OVF or an eye level EVF. And so did another 1 billion people who bought P&S cameras before them.

At some point, you have to stop projecting your own preferences on everyone else. Your personal preferences are yours, and not everyones.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 20, 2015 at 13:08 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF7 flips for selfies article (373 comments in total)

$599?

And it comes with a $375 lens. Not a bad deal, if you ask me.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 20, 2015 at 08:22 UTC as 100th comment | 3 replies

Superzoom lenses are notorious for their mediocre image quality, and this lens is no exception. Sure, they are convenient, because you "never have to change lenses." But if that was your goal, then why did you buy an interchangeable lens camera?

Two cheap kit lenses do the same job better, and cheaper. I just don't get the point of these lenses.

Anyone who has a lens changing phobia should just buy a Panasonic FZ1000 and call it a day.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2015 at 10:46 UTC as 6th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Linerider: Sorry if this is a dumb question, but why cant manufactures make a 14-150mm (21-225mm) for APS-C cameras?
This would be a great range and very versatile.
Why do all manufactures feel the need to start at 28mm?
Is this just marketing to force us to by more lenses?

Yes, it could be done. But it would be huge, it would be slow, it would probably cost $1,500, and the image quality would probably be mediocre.

The 14-150mm lens for M4/3 is the equivalent of an 18-200mm lens for APSC. Both end up being the equivalent of a 28-300mm lens on full frame.

If there were a 12-120mm APS lens it would be the equivalent of a 16-180mm full frame lens. Imagine what that would cost!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2015 at 10:40 UTC
On Budget X: Hands-on with Fujifilm's new X-A2 article (155 comments in total)

meanwhile... I see a Fuji X-A1 with kit lens selling on Amazon for $339.

Making it "the bargain of the year".....

Direct link | Posted on Jan 16, 2015 at 03:41 UTC as 25th comment | 2 replies
Total: 868, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »