PIX 2015
acidic

acidic

Lives in United States San Francisco, CA, United States
Joined on Nov 23, 2003

Comments

Total: 204, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On The new Canon 35L II will be a thing of beauty article (213 comments in total)
In reply to:

acidic: It's a pro lens people, so it will be undoubtedly be purchased by CPS members who need such a lens.

But, to a larger extent, it will be purchased by rich people who keep their high end Canon bodies set to the 'green square' mode. Why? Because the salesperson told them that this lens is essential for high quality photography.

Kinda both. The CPS part is definitely true. It's why I used to get Canon pro lenses over others when I was a member.

The other part is kinda made up, part anectodal. Over the years, I've seen tourists at various attractions using high end gear set to the dummy mode. These include lenses like the Nikon 14-24, Canon 24-70, Canon 85/1.2, etc. For some odd reason, I am always the guy being asked to take a group photo for someone (I must look approachable, plus the fact that I was carrying a dSLR didn't hurt). And countless times it was a nice lens on a nice body set to auto mode. No lie.

Often times these tourists belong to the 'nouveau riche' class. I'm sure part of the reason for these purchases are nothing more than conspicuous consumption.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 1, 2015 at 01:37 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 II: What you need to know article (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

RedDog Steve: What I Need To Know - is if the lens mount has been improved at all from the binding scratchy tightness of the original ?

Nose oil also works to hide scratches on negative film when printing in a dark room. Strange but true. Oh wait, this is DIGITAL photography review, sorry folks, wrong website!

Direct link | Posted on Aug 31, 2015 at 23:55 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 II: What you need to know article (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

radissimo: As this camera does a lot things right lets concentrate on my TOP NEGATIVES :D

1) no new sensor
2) awkward on/off switch placement ( typical for few Oly bodies)
3) EVF in the middle (not as good for right eye shooter, but I guess good for minority)
4) poor grip (needing additional cost and bulk of the grip)

for me the 2) is most significant- I hold camera with my right hand, so I need left hand to switch it on?

If I spoiled a day for an Oly supporter, I am sincerely sorry :)

Umm, that's why radissimo said "my TOP NEGATIVES" and not yours or anyone else's.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 31, 2015 at 23:53 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 II: What you need to know article (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

1Dx4me: looks as big as my canon 1Dx DSLR, so why drop my fantastic DSLR and get this monster-what do i gain? this is the question all DSLR owners ask and stay right where they are, especially the professionals ;-)

The OMD series are nice because you are not burdened with having to lug around a large sensor, which arguably weighs much more than a m4/3 sensor.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 31, 2015 at 23:36 UTC
In reply to:

acidic: 1. Before digital cameras became affordable and fun (early 21st century), people didn't take many photos. Many of those who did opted to use really low end point and shoots, or even disposable cameras for their special events and travel.

2. Digital cameras became affordable and fun and cheap to own and operate, plus photos could be printed at home, or emailed to friends and family.

3. Just about every digicam and dslr had (and continues to have) a point and shoot (aka "dummy") mode.

4. Camera phones were horrible, and most didn't have internet connectivity and/or data plans, so people continued to use their digicams.

5. Smart phones are everywhere, with image quality that easily surpasses earlier digicams, with these added benefits:
(a) multi-function devices - people are carrying their phones regardless
(b) internet connectivity
(c) compact
(d) fun, app- and social-driven experience

6. People are taking more photos than ever before, most of which are from smart phones.

Summary:
If smart phones take photos that are good enough (far surpassing the image quality of the low-end point and shoot digicams people were accustomed to a few years ago), why bother with a dedicated digital camera?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 31, 2015 at 21:08 UTC

1. Before digital cameras became affordable and fun (early 21st century), people didn't take many photos. Many of those who did opted to use really low end point and shoots, or even disposable cameras for their special events and travel.

2. Digital cameras became affordable and fun and cheap to own and operate, plus photos could be printed at home, or emailed to friends and family.

3. Just about every digicam and dslr had (and continues to have) a point and shoot (aka "dummy") mode.

4. Camera phones were horrible, and most didn't have internet connectivity and/or data plans, so people continued to use their digicams.

5. Smart phones are everywhere, with image quality that easily surpasses earlier digicams, with these added benefits:
(a) multi-function devices - people are carrying their phones regardless
(b) internet connectivity
(c) compact
(d) fun, app- and social-driven experience

6. People are taking more photos than ever before, most of which are from smart phones.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 31, 2015 at 21:07 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
On The new Canon 35L II will be a thing of beauty article (213 comments in total)

It's a pro lens people, so it will be undoubtedly be purchased by CPS members who need such a lens.

But, to a larger extent, it will be purchased by rich people who keep their high end Canon bodies set to the 'green square' mode. Why? Because the salesperson told them that this lens is essential for high quality photography.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 31, 2015 at 20:41 UTC as 7th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

acidic: It would be nice if they tested low light AF with zooms, and not just primes, since zooms are undoubtedly used by the majority of photographers these days.

Perhaps such tests with f/2.8 or f/4 zooms were omitted because if they were included, dpreview would have to use a less exciting headline.

"Maybe people who buy $400 DSLRs use zooms most of the time. But if you buy a $1000+ body I think you should be wise enough to know that if you will be in extremely low light situations, or want very high IQ you will be using a fast prime."

This is simply laughable, well most of it anyways. The majority of mid to high end dSLR users I see have a zoom attached to their cameras. I bet most don't even own primes! Many photographers (including pros) will end up in low light situations without their primes, mainly because they come across "found" photo ops and weren't planning for it. Or it could just be a compromise to make everything else go smoother that day (e.g. weight constraints). As someone who used to shoot lots of events, often times in dimly lit environments, I would stick with the zoom if it got the job done, even if I had a prime or two in my bag.

There were others who left comments stating they wanted to see a test with zooms as well.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2015 at 06:30 UTC
In reply to:

acidic: It would be nice if they tested low light AF with zooms, and not just primes, since zooms are undoubtedly used by the majority of photographers these days.

Perhaps such tests with f/2.8 or f/4 zooms were omitted because if they were included, dpreview would have to use a less exciting headline.

"The only time I shoot zooms is for long telephoto reach where the added framing versatility is immensely useful, but for 95% of my shooting I shoot prime."
That's great. I still think it would've been nice to see results for zooms. But maybe that's just me.

"Many of the non-sports pros I speak to also ascribe to (1)"
I didn't realize dpreview is a site for professionals. I suspect in reality, the vast majority of visitors to this site are anything but.

"We found what we honestly thought was a really cool finding..."
Yes, very interesting. Just wanted to add what else I would've wanted to see in the article.

"Do you think it could be any/all of those?"
Yes, as well as other reasons. Headlines drive clicks, clicks attract advertisers, advertisers provide revenue. That's part of dpreview's business model (the other part is driving consumers to its parent company Amazon).

"Easy math."
Condescending much? I bet a good percentage of your readers don't even understand the math.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2015 at 06:23 UTC
On Lens Rentals Canada closes its doors article (178 comments in total)
In reply to:

acidic: Canada Post is a joke. US to Canada mail arrives faster than Canadian domestic. For Canadians close to the border who have time sensitive mail, it makes more sense for them to drive into the US and send their mail from a USPS post office. Go figure.

That's exactly right, Neez.
When Canada Post accepts domestic mail for delivery, it ends up taking way longer than when the US Postal service accepts mail to be sent to Canada. Though Canada Post still handles the delivery part of the latter scenario, it still arrives quicker than domestic Canadian mail.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 16:53 UTC
In reply to:

acidic: I still have an omd em5. Mk1. Any reason I should get the em10 mk2? The way I see it, I would be gaining WiFi and smaller body, but would be sacrificing weather sealing. Sound about right?

Thanks for the replies. I am also guessing that the 5 axis IBIS would be comparable between the EM5 mk1 and the EM10 mk2? Assuming I'd have to step up to the EM5 mk2 to see improvements?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 16:34 UTC

I still have an omd em5. Mk1. Any reason I should get the em10 mk2? The way I see it, I would be gaining WiFi and smaller body, but would be sacrificing weather sealing. Sound about right?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 07:40 UTC as 7th comment | 4 replies

It would be nice if they tested low light AF with zooms, and not just primes, since zooms are undoubtedly used by the majority of photographers these days.

Perhaps such tests with f/2.8 or f/4 zooms were omitted because if they were included, dpreview would have to use a less exciting headline.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 07:34 UTC as 42nd comment | 7 replies
On The travel photography of HDR guru Trey Ratcliff article (233 comments in total)
In reply to:

dash2k8: All commercial forms of photography today are heavily edited. That perfect skin on the perfect body of the perfect supermodel? The skin is fake, the body has extra fat removed, and areas unevenly lit are brightened. I think TR's HDR work is very realistic-looking, not the canned and automated results that come from Photomatix presets. If people are going to slam his work for being over-processed or fake, then they can just go to the mall and start blasting the huge ads everywhere. 99% "fake," all of them.

It's one thing to dislike the HDR style, it's another to outright slam it as garbage or crap or fake. By the same standard, Picasso couldn't paint worth a crap.

His earlier work, work that got him noticed and made him popular among photographers, was heavily processed. I think that was the appeal for many of his fans, the whole digital-fantasy-illustration look.

Go to his site, go back to 2007-ish, and you tell me with a straight face that his photos are very realistic looking. Lots of glowing silhouettes and wild colors. Realistic? I think not.

His more recent work is done with a much lighter touch, to a final look that I personally find much more appealing.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 9, 2015 at 23:31 UTC
On Lens Rentals Canada closes its doors article (178 comments in total)

Canada Post is a joke. US to Canada mail arrives faster than Canadian domestic. For Canadians close to the border who have time sensitive mail, it makes more sense for them to drive into the US and send their mail from a USPS post office. Go figure.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 22:29 UTC as 50th comment | 4 replies
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV First Impressions Review preview (1550 comments in total)
In reply to:

ludwik123: What about the fun factor?
It may give excellent final results but do people actually enjoy using it?
I handled the original RX100 in a store and hated the feel of it.

"A camera itself is not a toy I like to play with."

I think many on this site would tend to disagree.

Not everyone who likes photography is interested in only the end result. Many find the process itself (i.e. taking photos) to be a very enjoyable part of photography. And the camera, as a tool, can affect how much one enjoys the process.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 08:07 UTC

I think Dick Cheney should take Donald Trump on a hunting trip.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 21:15 UTC as 33rd comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

AshMills: Congrats DPR, some crappy photos on a dark day for the planet, as a handful of idiots condemned thousands of innocents to death, and awoke a whole new army of enemies.

I know, and to top it off, the photos are clearly not digital. These photos belong on the rival site APReview (Analog Photography Review).

Direct link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 21:13 UTC
On Flickr brings back Pro account option article (74 comments in total)
In reply to:

MeganV: The internet needs less photography-mediated-by-Marissa-Mayer and more photography-mediated-by-photographers.

I wish people weren't so intimidated by HTML <IMG> tags.

Because that's really what Flickr is, right--it's an HTML avoidance system. It lets you post photographs by learning to use Flickr instead of the <IMG> tag. It lets you share photographs with links to Flickr's domain rather than with links to *your* domain. It keeps your conversations and interactions within its walled community rather than within your e.mail box, on your messenger, or on *your* web site.

But basic HTML and <IMG> tags aren't hard! If you can use Flickr, you can whip up some tags.

True, web hosting isn't free. But you can get your own domain, comprehensive analytics, and unlimited storage for $5 - $8 / month with just about any provider you might choose. That's not much of a premium over this new Flickr "pro" arrangement.

Yes, Flickr is a crowd sourced site, full of user generated content, and that's how they make money. DP Review creates it's own content, but there is also a crowd sourced, user generated content aspect to it as well, and it helps them drive traffic to its bread and butter (advertisers). And guess what, MeganV? YOU are a participant.

It's called web 2.0, lol.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2015 at 22:30 UTC

Yes, because GoPro users are incapable of sticking their own GoPro mounts to their windshield.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2015 at 00:13 UTC as 27th comment
Total: 204, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »