Marty4650

Marty4650

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

Comments

Total: 863, showing: 401 – 420
« First‹ Previous1920212223Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Marty4650: They really haven't changed at all. Sure, the vegetation changes a little, but the landscape is the same.

75 years is like a nanosecond in geological time.

Now... if you want to see some changes, come back in 100,000 years and check again.

Good one!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 27, 2014 at 22:50 UTC
In reply to:

DarylK: IMHO, for true "retakes" they should have stayed away from infrared...shoot color and convert to B&W or shoot in B&W natively for more meaningful direct comparision. It is stated that IR was used to be able to show more distant detail - I think the old B&W shots are more effective at this. Just my opinion.

I'm not so sure if that is true, even if it sounds logical based on the current cultural alarmism over pollution.

The truth is, the air is actually cleaner in many places today than it was 75 years ago. Remember, there were no pollution controls back then, and we were burning coal like it was going out of style.

The point is, you just can't have it both ways by thinking we need pollution controls, then saying they don't work. They actually do work.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 27, 2014 at 22:16 UTC
In reply to:

Gibbosa: It's funny how even the mountains seem to have moved! (Seriously - as comparisons - to my untutored eye these are worse than useless.)

Or... you could move the slider back and forth.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 27, 2014 at 22:13 UTC

They really haven't changed at all. Sure, the vegetation changes a little, but the landscape is the same.

75 years is like a nanosecond in geological time.

Now... if you want to see some changes, come back in 100,000 years and check again.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 27, 2014 at 22:11 UTC as 12th comment | 2 replies
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1605 comments in total)
In reply to:

driftnomore: ..the pentax k-3 review is left in the cold....

other websites has reviewed it with fair results.you may not review it,dpr anyway..

ragmanjin...

That's true... if you assume there should be a first in first out method for reviews. All these new cameras queue up, and get reviewed in the order they were released.

But this website has ALWAYS prioritized reviews for new cameras that were innovative, interesting, or game changers.

The Pentax K3 is an extremely nice DSLR. Perhaps the best APSC DSLR ever made. By anyone. But there really is nothing new here.

The Sony A7 is truly different and innovative. It was a camera that everyone wanted to know more about. So it got priority.

I remember when the very first SLT was announced, the Sony A55... Dpreview had a full review up the very same day. (Obviously, they had an advance copy to test.) Similarly, the Olympus EP1 had a full review less than two weeks after it was announced.

Dpreview cannot be faulted for having a bias towards newer technologies. It is pretty much their job to keep us informed about these things.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 09:47 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1605 comments in total)
In reply to:

driftnomore: ..the pentax k-3 review is left in the cold....

other websites has reviewed it with fair results.you may not review it,dpr anyway..

Whenever Dpreview reviews ANY camera, some clever person tells us they reviewed the wrong camera. It was some other camera that should have been reviewed first.

There is always some other camera that someone wanted reviewed first.

They simply cannot win.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 09:03 UTC
On Reminder: Vote now for your product of 2013 article (64 comments in total)
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: I don't entirely disagree with you duckling. However, all the practical concerns are important, because equipment needs to be fit for purpose and reliable. These products are expensive and I might well consider the camera of 2013, to be a cheap Canon DSLR or the Panasonic LX7. Some of the items in this poll like the Sigma lens are unlikely to make better photographers of any average user. Nice to hang around your neck and show off as jewellery but not really needed to produce a range of good work. What does concern me is that the information provided in this poll, will simply be used by the companies in question for advertising purposes and therefore of little genuine use to DPR readers.

Let's assume you are right when you say "the information will be used by companies for advertising purposes."

Why is this a bad thing?
Why do you assume there will be no benefit for Dpreview users?

This website is supported by advertisers. There is no subscription fee for us to pay. Everything we like seeing here is paid for by companies who advertise their wares.

If a company advertises "Camera X won the Dpreview poll for best product of the year" that statement cannot possibly harm the users here. Assuming that camera actually won, it will be a truthful statement, that tells potential buyers "this is a popular camera."

I think your concerns are ill founded.

You probably need to find a website that charges you $19.99 a month and bans all advertising, so you won't have to worry about advertising and it's negative affects. If there actually are any.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2014 at 21:15 UTC
On Richard Franiec creates custom grip for Panasonic GM1 article (48 comments in total)

As usual, Franiec has designed a grip for a camera that is:

1. Better looking
2. Better ergonomically, and
3. Cheaper

than the optional grips offered by the camera makers.

I wonder why they just don't hire this guy to design their grips? He seems to do a much better job of it than the camera makers do.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2014 at 22:01 UTC as 10th comment
On Reminder: Vote now for your product of 2013 article (64 comments in total)

You always have to remember that this is a poll taken among a group of camera enthusiasts, and not one taken from a large group of mass market users.

If we polled them, then an Apple iPhone might win. And a Canon digital rebel might be the first runner up. Products made by Fuji, Pentax or Olympus might not even make the "top 100."

Direct link | Posted on Jan 20, 2014 at 16:25 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

iae aa eia: I don't understand why some guys here don't like the idea of a modular camera. They offer lens interchangeability, the sensor is not ridiculously small, you can have them mounted on your phone (whenever you want), you can achieve far better image quality, can have easier software updates/upgrades, and even pay a lower price. Some guys are even complaining this news should be anywhere else! What is wrong with you, guys?

I love the idea! I have a Nokia 701. Imagine they have its software compatible with Symbian OS and I could buy a mount for, let's say, 200-300 bucks, and then a lens. Awesome! They can even offer handgrips!

The only problem I see with this kind of product is if they ask the same price as an equivalent camera.

How well did that modular thing work out for Ricoh with their GXR?

If the big advantage of cell phone cameras is "they are compact, and always with you" then carrying around a lens/senor unit to strap on to it sort of defeats the whole purpose.

This is a Rube Golberg kludge device if every there was one.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2014 at 19:07 UTC
In reply to:

TFD: Why not just get Canon or Nikon to make cameras with a built in cell phone.

Many cellphone users today hardly ever make phone calls. They use their smartphones as gaming devices, GPS units, cameras, ereaders, web surfers and everything else except making phone calls.

It has come to the point where some cell phone providers are giving away unlimited free minutes to get you to buy a larger data plan.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2014 at 17:05 UTC
In reply to:

Eleson: I'm a bit surprised by the lack of imagination from many posters here, " not understanding the product".
For many (actually most) taking pictures is not about having them, it is about sharing them. Something 95% of current cameras suck at.
And for most, a lower quality image that gets shared is worth a helluva lot more than a great picture that noone sees.
Simple as that.

Eleson....

It may be a cultural or generational thing. Or one of priorities.

Many of us old timers think photography should be deliberate. You should plan the shot, execute it well, then post process carefully. Then... decide whether to share it or not.

Many of the younger shooters think photography must be instantaneous. You see something interesting, whip out your cell phone, and within 5 seconds you have posted it on facebook. So everyone can see what you ate for lunch.

Sometimes these two methods come in conflict, and some of us will sacrifice the ability to "share with lighting speed" for better quality results. While others will sacrifice better quality results so they can share everything they see, immediately after they see it.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2014 at 17:01 UTC

If you need very shallow DOF, then you will pay a very steep price for it. This lens costs even more than a flagship EM1 does.

Personally, the $350 45mm f/1.8 works well enough for me.

If I really wanted to spend $1600, it might be better spent on getting a 12-40mm f/2.8 plus a 60mm f/2.8 macro, or maybe a 17mm f/1.8 lens.

Point being.... $1600 is a lot of money. If the narrow DOF thing is something you only need once in a while, you will probably pass on this lens.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2014 at 10:24 UTC as 27th comment | 5 replies
On CES 2014: Samsung Stand Report article (15 comments in total)

No NX30 at the show?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2014 at 02:39 UTC as 6th comment
On Canon shows off new PowerShot N100 'Story Camera' article (162 comments in total)

Canon should get some sort of award for the "worst concept born out of desperation."

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2014 at 16:06 UTC as 33rd comment | 1 reply
On Best Gear of 2013: The results are in! article (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

cgarrard: I'm surprised the SL1 didn't do better, and even more surprised (this time in a good way) that the K3 took the show in the SLR category. Always thought high of Pentax, but nice to see more others are to. I'd say the RX10, K3, and X100S all have my current eye.

But what surprised me the most, no votes at all for Samsung.

Just kidding.

Carl

Voters in these polls get to pick something without spending their own money. So naturally, they will pick something pretty expensive and very desirable, and not the cheapest camera that offers the best value.

The SL1 didn't get very many votes because it really isn't anyone's dream camera. It's just a downsized version of a nice entry level DSLR. However, it did beat out five other value cameras (Pentax K-500, Canon 700D, Nikon D5300, Pentax K50, and Sony A58).

Direct link | Posted on Jan 3, 2014 at 13:39 UTC
On Best Gear of 2013: The results are in! article (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

fz750: Am I the only one wondering why the Pentax K3 got twice as many votes as any other camera in that group?

It doesn´t seem logical to me, given the reviews (of all the cameras), price (50% more than the D7100 here) and number of sales and lens support etc etc

I own none of these cameras voted upon, just an interested observer..

These polls cannot possibly reflect voter ownership. No one buys a camera in every category each year. I don't own any of the cameras or lenses I voted for.

The Pentax K-3 won because most of the readers felt it was the best (most innovative, most interesting, etc) DSLR of the year. And obviously NOT because they owned one.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 3, 2014 at 13:26 UTC
On Pentax K-50 real-world and test scene samples article (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: As someone who owned a Pentax film-SLR, it's sad to see what the company has become. The company was sold, and resold, and doesn't have much of a future. In 2010 they had a whopping 1.5% worldwide market share, and it's probably even worse now.

You don't need to be the market leader to be successful.

Leica has never been a top ten sales force in the industry. Neither has Porsche, BMW, or dozens of other very successful companies.

You need to offer quality and value, and I think Pentax does that.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 27, 2013 at 17:50 UTC
On The best in smartphone photography 2013 post (54 comments in total)

There is a real problem when you try to treat cell phones like cameras.

You can always replace a camera with a better one, but you can't upgrade your cell phone unless your contract is up or you are willing to pay a huge penalty.

At least, that's the way it works in the USA, We are pretty much locked into a phone for two years.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 23, 2013 at 17:32 UTC as 10th comment | 7 replies
On Samsung NX300 real-world and test scene samples article (92 comments in total)
In reply to:

kimchiflower: Samsung ILC = Pentax DSLR:

[x] bodies well-featured and good value
[x] some excellent lenses
[x] top quality IQ
[ ] available at all good quality camera retailers

Is there anything Samsung does that Sony or Fuji doesn't do better?

Oh yes... WIFI. Samsung is the WIFI king. Well, this might not be a killer feature for everyone.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 23, 2013 at 17:24 UTC
Total: 863, showing: 401 – 420
« First‹ Previous1920212223Next ›Last »