pocoloco

Lives in Netherlands Amsterdam, Netherlands
Works as a IT Dude
Joined on May 3, 2005

Comments

Total: 100, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

I feel they can do better. Get rid of the lens. it's really distracting when you need to focus it or change the aperture. That's not what real photography is about.

Just put a pin-hole in the black box... should be a way better camera...

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 09:51 UTC as 147th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

pocoloco: If the iPhone had a microsd slot... this would be obsolete...

... the iPhone remains a toy instead of a powerfull tool... a pity

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2016 at 19:39 UTC

If the iPhone had a microsd slot... this would be obsolete...

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2016 at 20:10 UTC as 2nd comment | 3 replies

After seven years of apathy they now need to asses the market to see which lenses are needed? Omg. Nikon DX is really dead.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2016 at 20:39 UTC as 33rd comment | 1 reply

I am not sure there is a need for a 30mm f1.4 for mft, I do believe people would like to have seen the 50-100mm in mft format! That is a pitty.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 08:34 UTC as 51st comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Jon Stern: Strange how the press release text doesn't mention Micro Four Thirds. While followers of Olympus digital cameras and the digital Pens, in particular, would know this, it's almost as if they are trying to avoid talking about the sensor size.

I am just saying, that it would be cool if it were possible to stay away from the sensor discussion. Nobody wants to know about the cpu in the iPhone, because you just know the iPhone works great and will perform just fine ( or at least Apple has convinced you to believe that ). It would be great if Oly/Pana could sell camera's like that.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2016 at 21:29 UTC
In reply to:

Jon Stern: Strange how the press release text doesn't mention Micro Four Thirds. While followers of Olympus digital cameras and the digital Pens, in particular, would know this, it's almost as if they are trying to avoid talking about the sensor size.

Apple does not talk specs... It talks about an experience, lifestyle and markets its products that way. It might be a good step if Oly went that way! To me, sensor size is not important... important is the camera experience and IQ... and let's be honest... for 99% of the shooters the m43 camera's have more then great IQ.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2016 at 08:02 UTC
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: We've been shouting for years for a waterproof large sensor compact and the first firm to come out with one is... Leica? Oh, the irony. I just hope this will drive other manufacturers to make one with a more affordable price. APSC would be wonderful but a 1" sensor could be enough.

Nikon has a waterproof camera in their one series! A waterproof interchangable lens system camera.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 11:39 UTC
On article Here at last: Nikon announces D500 (1175 comments in total)

Damn... Still no D400!

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 22:09 UTC as 229th comment | 1 reply
On article Olympus shows gains in first half financials (139 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike99999: I sold all my Olympus gear this year. The image quality is just not there, no matter what the hype says.

No problem to create wal filling prints from my Olympus gear. Done it with the Nikon D200, so no problem for the higher resolution Olympus cams as well

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2015 at 12:43 UTC
In reply to:

WestSeattleDan: Looks like the Nikon 1 series 32mm 1.2 lens at $800
is a way better deal than this 4/3 lens at $400.

?

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2015 at 10:16 UTC
In reply to:

Pat Cullinan Jr: Is the RX100 IV a mere selling-point horse?

Is it worth the $150 uplift?

MK3 probably just as boring... taking photographs (with any camera)... now that is exciting!

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 07:02 UTC
In reply to:

nerd2: So they just dissuaded people from buying their top camera+top lens combo which weighs MORE than equivalent DSLR setup. Awesome marketing :D

Good luck shooting your f5.6 at f2.8. Would be great if you provided us with these images.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2015 at 10:41 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Petersen: Just marketing BS if a DSLR shooter wants to travel lighter just add one of the latest affordable Nikons or Canons, way lighter than what they show in the mocumentury. There are plenty of lighter lenses to uses and you still can use all their good big stuff.

Top glass m43 is a lot smaller then top 35mm glass, cheaper m43 glass is a lot smaller then cheaper 35mm glass... simple fact of life.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2015 at 18:50 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 offers 4K video (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

pocoloco: If it just had image stabilazition...

Not interested in video.... Isn't stabiilalalazation usefull for video as well?

Link | Posted on May 19, 2015 at 05:44 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 offers 4K video (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

pocoloco: If it just had image stabilazition...

My point exactly!

Link | Posted on May 18, 2015 at 16:57 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 offers 4K video (131 comments in total)

If it just had image stabilazition...

Link | Posted on May 18, 2015 at 15:47 UTC as 28th comment | 12 replies
On article Hands-on with new Olympus PRO 8mm and 7-14mm lenses (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

StefanD: About " the new 7-14mm wideangle zoom (on the left in this picture) is considerable smaller and lighter than full-frame equivalents":

Compared to the Canon 16-35 F4, it isn't that much lighter or smaller:
Weight: 534 g. vs 615 g.
Diameter: 79 mm. vs 82.6 mm.
Length: 106 mm. vs 112.8 mm.
(a 7-14 2.8 on m43 is comparable to a 14-28 5.6 on FF)

Although I would love to see lenses that are much lighter and smaller than my full lframe Canon lenses, I don't see it happen yet...

Try to shoot at f2.8 with your f4 ff lens... hmmm... you can't? Maybe because it is not equivalent.... Oh.... and the equivalent ff lens is... yep.... probably twice as large, heavy and pricey.

But hey... You don't wanna hear that. So... just have fun shooting at f2.8 with your f4 ff lenses.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 22:15 UTC
On article Hands-on with new Olympus PRO 8mm and 7-14mm lenses (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

StefanD: About " the new 7-14mm wideangle zoom (on the left in this picture) is considerable smaller and lighter than full-frame equivalents":

Compared to the Canon 16-35 F4, it isn't that much lighter or smaller:
Weight: 534 g. vs 615 g.
Diameter: 79 mm. vs 82.6 mm.
Length: 106 mm. vs 112.8 mm.
(a 7-14 2.8 on m43 is comparable to a 14-28 5.6 on FF)

Although I would love to see lenses that are much lighter and smaller than my full lframe Canon lenses, I don't see it happen yet...

It's equivalent is an f2.8 FF sister lens... not an f4...

Link | Posted on May 12, 2015 at 10:03 UTC
On photo Vernon Falls, Yosemity in the Waterfall(s) - vertical landscape - no people challenge (2 comments in total)

I knew something was off when I typed that title :)

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2015 at 23:03 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 100, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »