adhall

adhall

Lives in Australia Brisbane, Australia
Works as a Engineer
Joined on Mar 21, 2010

Comments

Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Here at last: Nikon announces D500 (1172 comments in total)

WOW!!!!!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 22:29 UTC as 217th comment

ok, so I'm not sure why this photo has a special article, but Tony does have some nice landscapes on his website.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 11, 2015 at 20:58 UTC as 72nd comment

Would be great if Affinity also made a Lightroom replacement. But hey, one step at a time...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 11, 2015 at 04:51 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply

Photoshop is now officially way overpriced...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 11, 2015 at 04:41 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

acassino: I think this ad campaign is stupid and offensive.

Me? I don't care. But it's obvious why some people feel a little be offended. Even if its only slightly...

Direct link | Posted on May 27, 2015 at 20:13 UTC
In reply to:

acassino: I think this ad campaign is stupid and offensive.

It's offensive because it implies that anyone who uses a 'heavy' camera is a deformed idiot.

Direct link | Posted on May 27, 2015 at 13:34 UTC
In reply to:

justmeMN: The guy with the long arm didn't get that way from using a DSLR, he's a proctologist.

Oh, now I see where Olympus are coming from... now let me see; what camera would a proctologist need? Small and light would be a definite plus... smaller lenses... Internal focus... control via remote app... yep the Oly is the perfect camera for a proctologist.

Direct link | Posted on May 27, 2015 at 13:19 UTC
In reply to:

adhall: So here’s the ridiculous thing. Buying a camera because it’s small and light is like buying a car because it has a radio antenna. Yes, I enjoy listening to the radio, but that’s not why I buy a car.
The reason you buy a camera is to take photos. I’ve never looked at a print and thought, gee, that must have been taken with a small and light camera.

Ad campaigns like these miss the whole point of photography. Remind me not to by an Olympus...

Fair enough, I'll go with that comparison... and it's certainly not true that everyone who drives a big car is deformed and looks like an idiot...

Direct link | Posted on May 23, 2015 at 11:33 UTC
In reply to:

Wubslin: Unfunny, tired and stupid. If you don't like carrying heavy things, try not buying them.

n3eg, that was not the point of the video at all. In fact, it tried to portray anyone who uses a DSLR as a deformed, goofball nerd.
The point Wubslin is trying to make is that you should buy the camera that suits you best. And Wubslin is right.

For a lot of people (including many of the best photographers in the world), the DSLR is still the best option. If MFT is right for you; go for it...

Direct link | Posted on May 23, 2015 at 01:30 UTC

So here’s the ridiculous thing. Buying a camera because it’s small and light is like buying a car because it has a radio antenna. Yes, I enjoy listening to the radio, but that’s not why I buy a car.
The reason you buy a camera is to take photos. I’ve never looked at a print and thought, gee, that must have been taken with a small and light camera.

Ad campaigns like these miss the whole point of photography. Remind me not to by an Olympus...

Direct link | Posted on May 22, 2015 at 20:06 UTC as 31st comment | 6 replies

This is the most stupid campaign I've seen for a long time...

Direct link | Posted on May 22, 2015 at 11:58 UTC as 39th comment

Subscription arrangements are definitely unpopular and it seems Adobe is going that way. I suspect a combination of Capture One and Affinity Photo may well replace Lightroom and Photoshop for many photographers.

I'll definitely be trying it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 04:25 UTC as 76th comment
In reply to:

adhall: For those interested in what the lens is capable of, I'd suggest you head over to the fujifilm website. Examples there are MUCH better...
As many others have noted, this set of photos don't do this lens any justice.

Hi Badi, to be honest, I'd rather see some carefully crafted images that show where the lens shines than see a set that is bound to disappoint. Also, the fuji site does have one taken at 55mm and f/3.2...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 19, 2015 at 09:03 UTC
In reply to:

adhall: For those interested in what the lens is capable of, I'd suggest you head over to the fujifilm website. Examples there are MUCH better...
As many others have noted, this set of photos don't do this lens any justice.

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujinon_lens_xf16_55mmf28_r_lm_wr/sample_images/

Direct link | Posted on Feb 19, 2015 at 06:10 UTC

For those interested in what the lens is capable of, I'd suggest you head over to the fujifilm website. Examples there are MUCH better...
As many others have noted, this set of photos don't do this lens any justice.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 19, 2015 at 06:10 UTC as 5th comment | 5 replies

I was hoping it would have nicer bokeh.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 17, 2015 at 21:01 UTC as 31st comment
On article Go wide! Hands-on with Canon's 11-24mm F4 L (229 comments in total)

ok, I have Nikon gear and have been eyeing the 14-24 for a while. But how good is this?!? Serious Canon envy at the moment...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2015 at 09:56 UTC as 53rd comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

adhall: Would have been nice to also make it equivalent to the Canon/Nikon 24-70s i.e. make it ~f/2.0...

Yes. it would be a comparable price to the current generation of Canikon 24-70 lenses. This is the kind of lens that professionals are looking for and this is the price professionals currently pay for such a lens... The point of f/2.0 is that it gets much closer to the DOF (and light gathering capability) of the equivalent FF f/2.8 lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 30, 2015 at 08:45 UTC
In reply to:

adhall: Would have been nice to also make it equivalent to the Canon/Nikon 24-70s i.e. make it ~f/2.0...

no thanks

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2015 at 07:27 UTC
In reply to:

adhall: Would have been nice to also make it equivalent to the Canon/Nikon 24-70s i.e. make it ~f/2.0...

It wouldn’t need to be huge. There’s no reason it should be any bigger than the existing Canon 24-70 f/2.8 for instance; definitely not huge.
All of the points above considered, I’d still prefer this lens to be f/2.0 rather than an f/2.8. I’m sure there are many others in the same boat as me…

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2015 at 06:07 UTC
Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »