Caerolle

Caerolle

Lives in United States IN, United States
Has a website at http://500px.com/carolteater
Joined on Jul 23, 2013

Comments

Total: 237, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Canon EOS 5DS / SR First Impressions Review preview (3324 comments in total)
In reply to:

futile32: Anyone else seeing comments marked as 4months ago? on page 4/5 onward

DPR has learned from Canon. This same article will appear, slightly updated, for the next ten years.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 17:31 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1023 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photomonkey: The real miracle that Sony put all these features into one body instead of dribbling them out over a period of years.

I am talking about compared with the competition. I suppose 8 MP was 'best available' a few years ago, too. The D750 and even the 6D just kill the a7 for high ISO. Probably the D7200 matches it even.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 12:18 UTC
On Canon EOS Rebel T6i Review preview (287 comments in total)
In reply to:

sebastian huvenaars: The Rebel name gets weirder each incarnation... Agains what this camera is rebelling exactly? Progress?

Yes, moderninity.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 20:58 UTC
On Canon EOS Rebel T6i Review preview (287 comments in total)
In reply to:

oselimg: Once again the self righteous gear lovers are in the business wishing Canon vanished from the face of the earth. First of all camera buying people aren't aware that you exist. Secondly if canon or Nikon were go out of business you would pay double the amount of what you pay your favourite camera. Thirdly EF lenses would double in value so you lose again. Be careful what you wish for.

Smitty: "A camera and two lenses for $500! That one!"

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 20:58 UTC
On Canon EOS Rebel T6i Review preview (287 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zeisschen: No AF microadjustment is a big deal! Why make a high resolution 24MP camera when one can't even take properly focussed pictures?

The whole AF accuracy is big problem of the DSLR technology. It's simply not state of the art anymore...

Mmmm, if you shoot at the narrow apertures of the cheap kit lens, it prolly doesnt make much difference. Especially if you are just going to post it online anyhow.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 20:56 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1023 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photomonkey: The real miracle that Sony put all these features into one body instead of dribbling them out over a period of years.

Chris: True, I *was* forgetting about the IBIS! Mostly what I was thinking about were the sensor-based improvements, such as the increased AF abilities, and the backside illumination. I guess we will find out how the a7RII does at high ISO, but hopefully far better than the a7, which was awful, hardly better than a top APS-C sensor. Though maybe that got better with the a7II, I don't know. After they said it was the same sensor (and I think the same processor), I didn't even look further.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 20:44 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1023 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photomonkey: The real miracle that Sony put all these features into one body instead of dribbling them out over a period of years.

The do seem to be heading the way of product differentiation, though. They didn't really improve the a7II much, jsut changed the body. If you want most of the new features of the a7RII, it seems you have to get the 42MP sensor, too.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 16:07 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1023 comments in total)
In reply to:

brumd: OK, I am not in the market for this camera. After recently purchasing a Nikon Df, I don't have enough internal organs left to afford this one. But, I do understand why many people are so excited about it, and it is going to be very interesting to follow the next years how Sony's At system is going to mature.

But, am I the only one with this idea?

Just because camera developments in Canikons have steadied down a bit, it makes it a bit easier to spend a few thousand on a camera body, in the knowledge that at least for the next few years you'll be shooting with a device that delivers top IQ.

With these stormy developments of Sony, I am less likely to spend the sum of cash, just because I have the idea that in a year from now the model is seriously outclassed by the next 'achieving-the-impossible' camera.

If a Df fits your idea of what a camera should be, you wouldn't be in the market for an a7RII anyhow. It is like the opposite of a Df.

You certainly don't have to worry about a Df getting lapped, either, since it purposely was slated way behind in the first place.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 00:05 UTC

Personally, I wish we still used the term 'EVIL'...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 20:54 UTC as 118th comment
In reply to:

ChrisH37: Aside from the EVF which I now simply couldn't live without, there is one important but rarely mentioned benefit of mirrorless that DSLRs have no practical way of emulating...autofocus accuracy.

It's near impossible to take an out of focus shot of a static subject with a mirrorless camera as long as you are vaguely competent. I've used most mirrorless systems and their accuracy is staggering. Micro adjustments, back/front focusing are all things of the past. It's lovely not having that nagging doubt that my lens seems to be a few points out.

This is the number one thing I like about mirrorless--on-sensor AF while using the viewfinder. Being able to use magnified manual focus in the viewfinder is right there, too. And the size and weight are a benefit too. as is the IBIS appearing in more MILCs. You will likely never see that in a Canon or Nikon.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 19:39 UTC
In reply to:

Wesley Byrne: Nice bike! And good article too; I agree.

Gee, Richard, I could say the same about me and my photography gear, lol.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 18:57 UTC
On Canon EOS Rebel T6s Review preview (432 comments in total)
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: Most people who will buy this camera will likely use it with the kit lenses, 18-135, 18-55 or 55-250mm, but strangely, all the sample pics are taken with primes or the expensive Sigma 16-35mm lens. So most people won't get the quality of pics shown in this review.

And strangely, when DPR reviews let's say, an Olympus E-M10, the samples contains plenty of pics taken with the kit lens.

Very strange and not fair to future Canon kit lens owners.

Prossi: That is pretty ironic, considering DPR is constantly accused of being anti-Canon, lol.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2015 at 13:09 UTC
On Canon EOS Rebel T6s Review preview (432 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boissez: Yikes! Continuous AF is slower than live-view AF. What's the point of getting this over a mirrorless?

Maybe in their market research, Canon realized that most of the target market for these cameras are used to taking pictures off a screen held out in front of them.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 16, 2015 at 14:07 UTC
On Canon EOS Rebel T6s Review preview (432 comments in total)
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: Most people who will buy this camera will likely use it with the kit lenses, 18-135, 18-55 or 55-250mm, but strangely, all the sample pics are taken with primes or the expensive Sigma 16-35mm lens. So most people won't get the quality of pics shown in this review.

And strangely, when DPR reviews let's say, an Olympus E-M10, the samples contains plenty of pics taken with the kit lens.

Very strange and not fair to future Canon kit lens owners.

They probably have the Canon lenses lying around from previous reviews or to test Canon bodies, or maybe someone's personal lens. I don't think anyone at DPR is much of a fan of m4/3, so not too likely to have good m4/3 lenses around. Just a guess.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 16, 2015 at 14:04 UTC

Well, this explains a lot.

Poor Barney, born 60 years too late. Or 80?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2015 at 00:33 UTC as 61st comment
In reply to:

Jim Salvas: The problem with the price is that this is a fully depreciable product. If you just bought the lens, it would likely cost at least $3500, but it would depreciate very, very slowly, if at all. Here, you're getting an almost-free camera body, but it will drag down the value of that lens every year until the combo is virtually worthless.

A lens bought with an M8 body is still worth almost full price and maybe even more. The body is worth only a quarter of its original price. The whole Q will depreciate at body rates.

Maybe Leica will come up with a way to cut the lens off and put it on a Q-2.

Maybe they cold make the lens removable and installable on a new body. Sort of like the prize at the bottom of a box of cereal.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2015 at 00:30 UTC
On Das ist Güt: Hands-on with the Leica Q article (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

Caerolle: Gee, it looks just like a Fuji X-E!

Wow, what do you know, a video button right on top...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 02:57 UTC
On Das ist Güt: Hands-on with the Leica Q article (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

Caerolle: Gee, it looks just like a Fuji X-E!

Funny, reading the First Impressions for fun, it has face detect, and just like smartphones, a touch-focus-and-shoot mode! I guess someone will be cancelling his pre-order!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 02:53 UTC
On Das ist Güt: Hands-on with the Leica Q article (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

Caerolle: Gee, it looks just like a Fuji X-E!

capture: Apparently have more money that senses of humor, lol. It is just so ugly I had to comment on it. The pretentious replies are funny, though. As is something as useful as a tilt screen is consumery, but of course a touchscreen or EVF isn't. Or that having a tilt screen implies consumer and scenes modes and such just because 'serious' cameras have not had those. Newsflash, they didn't have (and don't have) touchscreens or wifi or EVFs, either, but this has all those. Of course, since it has them, then they are appropriate. Pretty circular.

Well, at least it doesn't have video! Because of course serious, purist photographers would *never* use that (I don't either, but I don't feel that having it on a camera makes it more of a 'toy' or something). If Leica made commercials, I guess they would be like the Viagra-ish ones Nikon made for the Df.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 02:49 UTC
On Das ist Güt: Hands-on with the Leica Q article (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

Caerolle: Gee, it looks just like a Fuji X-E!

It was actually a joke, Fuji tried to make the X-E look like a Leica to sell cameras, and now Leica has made a camera that looks very similar to the ugly X-E, a box with a barrel stuck to the front.

And apparently $4000+ doesn't even get you a flipscreen, lol.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 21:43 UTC
Total: 237, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »