GodSpeaks

GodSpeaks

Lives in Thailand Bangkok, Thailand
Works as a Retired
Joined on Sep 6, 2002
About me:

Livin' la Vida Loca

Comments

Total: 247, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

zerlings: 2 refinements would make this camera the perfect camera (maybe Mk4) for me:

1) 24-100mm
2) touchscreen

T3: No need to go so over the top with your reply.
Strange as it may seem, not everything works well for everybody. Given what smartphones can do, touch is probably the easiest interface to implement, especially given the scarcity of real estate. But if you have large fingers, it can be problematic to use efficiently.
I also do not think touch is the best way to go on cameras or computers. Currently touch is not very well implemented, even on smartphones.
But to each their own. YMMV.

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2014 at 03:01 UTC
In reply to:

mrtaufik: People keep talking that Sony's colors is the worst, is there ANY evidence to prove it? Almost every camera made by Sony or Canon or Nikon or Olympus provide feature to set-up the colors so they will match with almost any taste of their users. Then WHY people always talking about color of one camera is better than the other?

garyP: I have never had such problems, so maybe you are doing something wrong. Maybe try a different (better?) raw converter.

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2014 at 02:49 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

b craw: Directed at the many members who provide conscienciously developed opinions, informed by knowledge and experience - thank you. I learn alot from this, you. And DPR, you do a fine job in much the same manner.

As for the sizable subset of members who insist on endlessly pecking at the same small nut, relentless in their denial of the latitudes of subjective appeal, function, etc., I'm at a loss. An even more baffling subset to the subset are those individuals who perhaps own a camera, and are not without some knowledge, but seem like they may have suspended all personal photography until such a time when a camera is produced that is so perfect in every way that it may make any creative effort on their part redundant.

Personally, I think the LCDs on the back of cameras are already way too large. I would be in favor of a smaller LCD to accomodate the push/pull EVF in place of the popup.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 10:56 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

zerlings: 2 refinements would make this camera the perfect camera (maybe Mk4) for me:

1) 24-100mm
2) touchscreen

Yes, I own 2 cameras with touchscreen.
On both cameras, I have the touchscreen turned OFF.

I also have touchscreens on my smartphones, and to be honest, I cannot say I am very impressed, even less impressed when I try to use the camera.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 10:49 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

Raist3d: Here's an idea Sony. Make the RX100 Pro (or whatever you want to call it). It would be an interchangeable lens camera with 3 fast primes - a 28mm F2.0, a 50mm F1.4 and a 100mm F1.8. Maybe 18mm and 140mm options later.

Don't make it a super blown up new lens system, just key primes and maybe one good zoom and done. Put a nice grip area.

Oh and a new sensor variant with phase detect AF.

I think Sony has already bitten off more than it can chew with the E, A and now FE mount lenses. Adding yet another mount would NOT be a good idea.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 07:27 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

zerlings: 2 refinements would make this camera the perfect camera (maybe Mk4) for me:

1) 24-100mm
2) touchscreen

Yes to the 24-100mm f2 lens
But a huge NO to the touchscreen.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 07:25 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

b craw: Directed at the many members who provide conscienciously developed opinions, informed by knowledge and experience - thank you. I learn alot from this, you. And DPR, you do a fine job in much the same manner.

As for the sizable subset of members who insist on endlessly pecking at the same small nut, relentless in their denial of the latitudes of subjective appeal, function, etc., I'm at a loss. An even more baffling subset to the subset are those individuals who perhaps own a camera, and are not without some knowledge, but seem like they may have suspended all personal photography until such a time when a camera is produced that is so perfect in every way that it may make any creative effort on their part redundant.

I am at a loss as to why it pops up at all.
Why not just pull back to activate and push back in to deactivate?

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 07:17 UTC
In reply to:

mrtaufik: People keep talking that Sony's colors is the worst, is there ANY evidence to prove it? Almost every camera made by Sony or Canon or Nikon or Olympus provide feature to set-up the colors so they will match with almost any taste of their users. Then WHY people always talking about color of one camera is better than the other?

Shoot raw and color rendering is no longer an issue.
I also own the Sony A850, and I get wonderful color out of it. But again, I shoot raw and use CaptureOne to convert.

Direct link | Posted on May 17, 2014 at 03:58 UTC

Now that they have added a builtin EVF, I just might buy this camera. However, I will wait untill next year once the prices drops as I certainly do not need a new camera right now.

Direct link | Posted on May 17, 2014 at 03:56 UTC as 11th comment
On Is it true? New service detects processed photos article (88 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marky boy: who cares.... really....we like what we like, regardless of how, what and where. We can tie ourselves up in knots about post processing, however, it is no different to darkroom skills of old......

The raw file is as close as we come to a digital negative.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 05:40 UTC
On Is it true? New service detects processed photos article (88 comments in total)

So, I load a raw file into photoshop, process the heck out of it and then generate a high quality jpg?
Pass or fail?

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 05:38 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
On 'City of Samba': Rio Carnival in tilt-shift article (48 comments in total)

Watched it. Wow, absolutely horrible. The tilt/shift thing was just sooooo annoying, that it actually ruined what could have been two excellent time lapse films.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 29, 2014 at 08:14 UTC as 8th comment
On A travel-sized large-format 4x5 camera? article (219 comments in total)

This 'might' have been interesting back in the days of film (ie: last Century), but today?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2014 at 08:50 UTC as 38th comment | 7 replies
On Hands on with the Pentax 645Z article (661 comments in total)
In reply to:

MPA1: It certainly makes the Leica S2P look like a dubious choice!!

Leica lenses!!!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 23:41 UTC
On Ricoh announces medium-format Pentax 645Z article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ayoh: Pretty impressive. It is much better specified on all accounts than its rivals and costs less than 1/3 the price. Why would anyone buy a $30k Hasselblad or PhaseOne?

Well, if you have $30000 to sink into a medium format system... go for it. But not many can justify that sort of expenditure for 'hobby' use.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 23:36 UTC
On Ricoh announces medium-format Pentax 645Z article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tower: It is great news for user. All MF should not to pay more then 10K.

But the lenses will get you every time.

Unless, of course, all you ever buy is the 75mm.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 23:28 UTC
On Ricoh announces medium-format Pentax 645Z article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: I think it was supposed to be already mirroless, with a nice EVF, and its sensor 56 x 41.5mm, as it was the 645 film frame area. 33 x 44mm looks like what the APS format is to the 135 full-frame, a cropped sensor to cut their investment some slack. Not a true medium-medium. Just medium.

44x33 is actually rather small to be truely called medium format.
The MFD back I owned a few years ago was 48x36mm. 2x a FF sensor, and even that was a crop on a true 645 film size.

I would suggest this be called Super35, but unfortunately, that name is already taken. But you sure do get the Super price. :-P

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 23:23 UTC
On Ricoh announces medium-format Pentax 645Z article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

qwertyasdf: The issue is...not about the absolute size of the sensor.
it's the fact that it's called a 645, but without a 645 sensor.

It's like naming a 8-cylinder engine Model V12.

645, in the film ear refered to a 120 negative that had the size of 6cm x 4.5 cm... hence 645.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 23:14 UTC
On Ricoh announces medium-format Pentax 645Z article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: And to think that Nikon D3X cost $8000 a few years ago...

Yes, and a D800 costs $3000 TODAY.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 23:12 UTC
On Ricoh announces medium-format Pentax 645Z article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

completelyrandomstuff: This is going to be a great deal. Tell me if I am wrong, but this seems to be a lot less than you pay for Hasselblad lenses, or the camera itself.

$8500 for the body is actually a very good price, but unless you buy only one lens, you can easily expect to pay between 6 and 10000 dollars additional for lenses, pushing the total price into the $15-20000 range.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 01:46 UTC
Total: 247, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »