Pasha001

Pasha001

Lives in Russian Federation Russian Federation
Joined on Oct 21, 2006

Comments

Total: 59, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

jorepuusa: I have Fuji X10. I did not buy it to shoot white orbs. I bought it because of its superior ergonomics. The white orbs can be seen sometimes when a shot is taken. But one has to hunt the picture to find them and if You do not know what to look, You cannot see them at all.
I´m sure that 99% of people who write here do not have a Fuji, do not know what the orbs look and do not find them in a picture.
I admit that they are there BUT similar white orbs are produced by Canon G12, Nikon P7000, not to speak of cheaper point and shoots.
This " conversation" here shows the main problem among amateur photographers.
Most of them cannot shoot a proper picture and they know that they never will, anyways they want to stay in the crowd of photographers and the only way is to write miserable and laughable thoughts of technology.
That is the worst way of making photography go further.
All cams over 500€ produce pictures that cannot be separated from each other in web and very thinly as prints.

> I admit that they are there BUT similar white orbs are produced by Canon G12, Nikon P7000
This is not true. For example, X10 would significantly screw these shots but G12 and P7000 are OK:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/28073671@N05/5482796830/sizes/l/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/girolame/5675225540/sizes/l/in/photostream/

> I have Fuji X10. I did not buy it to shoot white orbs.
Alas, you'll have to.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 18, 2012 at 09:48 UTC
On Samsung US announces rugged and waterproof SD cards article (49 comments in total)
In reply to:

wlachan: About time. The fragile plastic body of SD is a major weakness. I had some working SD which had to be trashed just because the plastic bodies cracked beyond usable condition.

You may want to note that Samsung does not actually claim metal body but rather metal "design" which may easily mean usual plastic body encased in very thin metal. Or metal may be glued to the plastic. Just weasel words like "best-in-class" and "withstand the force of a 1.6 ton vehicle".

Direct link | Posted on Feb 18, 2012 at 08:10 UTC
On Lensbaby Edge 80 Quick Review article (75 comments in total)

Maybe I've missed something but isn't the lens body made of plastic? No wonder it is so cheap.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 15, 2012 at 11:00 UTC as 16th comment
On Lensbaby Edge 80 Quick Review article (75 comments in total)
In reply to:

roblarosa: Lensbaby = Overpriced crap.

Zebooka: you are feeding a troll.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 15, 2012 at 10:51 UTC
On Lensbaby Edge 80 Quick Review article (75 comments in total)
In reply to:

klopus: Anything that Lensbaby does can be easily and totally done much cheaper in post and with better quality if you use decent ordinary lens. And you don't have to toil manually in PS (though it isn't hard). There are many plugins that can simulate free form tilt/shift and selective focus. Heck, on iPhone and Android there are hordes of apps doing same thing.

The only Lensbaby advantage non reproduceable in post I see is to use movements to level architectural perspective which is main application of the classical T/S lens. Not sure if this even can be done reliably with Lensbabies since they lack precise controls and sharp end-to-end optics.

Not true. Tilt for "extending DOF" cannot be replaced with editing a single frame and focus stacking is certainly not 'easy'.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 15, 2012 at 10:48 UTC
On Fujifilm firmware attempts to fix X10 white discs article (264 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ernest M Aquilio: Just how impactful is the "white orb" effect in real world shooting? I am on the fence about this camera and cannot imagine that this can totally ruin a photo. Any examples of this that caused the photo to be totally unusable?

> Any examples of this that caused the photo to be totally unusable?
Any dark night city shot at ISO 100 on tripod if there are some bright light sources : http://fotkidepo.ru/?id=photo:734437
This is a shot after the firmware update (and not made by me).

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2012 at 10:57 UTC

I tried the Sony 500/8 at a short distance and in such a situation it loses contrast significantly so the "making the lens potentially interesting for chasing insects and the like" clause is not quite realistic, IMHO.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2012 at 10:25 UTC as 9th comment
In reply to:

D200_4me: I'm not sure I see the value of this lens. Manual focus, no zoom, F/6.3? I would rather have my stabilized 30-110mm (81-297 equiv) Nikon 1 lens :-) Just as compact and it's a zoom...and it's stabilized...and it's sharp....and it's only $250. No, I don't have a m4/3 camera anymore so I wouldn't have a need for this lens anyway. Even if I did have a still have a GH2, I can't find a good reason to buy something like this.

> You can check my 'work' online to see whether or not I'm an idiot
I have checked that 'work' and the answer is unfortunate for you.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2012 at 10:20 UTC
In reply to:

Peter Evans: I'm interested in this camera only as, well, a matter of interest. As someone who earns his living from photography and, as a career-long Nikon owner, I've already bought heavily into one system and so have no intention of taking up another.

What I would like to voice here, as several other already have, is my disappointment in the 'red-top journalism' English used by DPReview in this announcement. "Put a dent in your pocket" and "the amount you'll have to scrape together" are phrases we shouldn't be seeing on a respected site such as this. It's sufficient merely to state what the new price is expected to be and leave it at that.

Finally, and just my 2 centimes on the camera system itself, from what I've seen so far, it looks pretty good to me - ideal for those photographers who hanker after a Leica system but can ill afford the Leica prices.

Check the other comments - the article style quite fits the audience ;).

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 23:16 UTC
In reply to:

simon65: @Conrad567

"I can remember when a good quality film camera cost $2400"

Wow really? Please name that camera?

I recall the very high quality Nikon FM 2 selling for years at around £250 in the UK (around USD 500 at the time).

"You numb skulls will never except that quality craftsmanship has a price"

Come on, its going to mass produced in Japan/Thailand not carefully assembled by an artisan in a workshop somewhere in the Swiss Alps.

Ultimately the market will decide, but I'll wager that in these straightened times Fuji have got it wrong and pitched too high. There're fools. I would have gone in at a lower price to build market momentum, and establish share.

The camera market is in a state of flux and is up for grabs. There's absolutely no reason why Fuji can't be a major player, but not with pricing like this. They're being greedy and shortsighted.

simon65
> the FM 2 was built of Titanium
Yes, and it was listed for $1120. More than 15 years ago it was quite a sum.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 23:08 UTC
In reply to:

Jmmg: Also, why on earth Fuji now made a new series of high quality filters for X100, X pro 1 but the X10 users still struggle to find anything that mount on their X10...39 mm? 40 mm? 40.5 mm? ARe we being forgotten? You wanted our support but treated us like second class users and customers...

> ARe we being forgotten?
Who cares for point and shoot buyers? Get real.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 23:01 UTC
In reply to:

Valentinian: There is a saying about the generals: they prepare for the wars of the past, not for the next war.
What do the Leica M9 and all FF DSLR have in common? They both adapted (successfully) a technology of the past (mirror, optical range finder) to a new generation of cameras (that use SENSORS not FILM, for crying out loud).
What are Panasonic, Olympus etc. trying to do? They are working on the evolution of SENSOR cameras. That in a near future will see super oled EVF much better than optical, and very fast autofocus.
What are Nikon, Canon and Fuji doing with the DSLR and the X-pro1 ? they are missing the boat of the future camera system, which is oled and mirrorless !

> Only the lag factor is superior with an OVF.
Unfortunately it is the only thing that matters if you need to frame a shot quickly.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 22:55 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Farace: OUCH! Oh well, maybe in 10 years I'll pick one up used for about $900... if it turns out to be a good camera.

I guess it can't compare to SLRs in price / functionality... it is a purchase made in the heart, not the brain (like many things we buy)... rather any cost comparisons should be made against the Leica M9.

> Oh well, maybe in 10 years I'll pick one up used for about $900...
Oh, I really wish you will be able to save up the sum until then.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 22:46 UTC
In reply to:

Valentinian: There is a saying about the generals: they prepare for the wars of the past, not for the next war.
What do the Leica M9 and all FF DSLR have in common? They both adapted (successfully) a technology of the past (mirror, optical range finder) to a new generation of cameras (that use SENSORS not FILM, for crying out loud).
What are Panasonic, Olympus etc. trying to do? They are working on the evolution of SENSOR cameras. That in a near future will see super oled EVF much better than optical, and very fast autofocus.
What are Nikon, Canon and Fuji doing with the DSLR and the X-pro1 ? they are missing the boat of the future camera system, which is oled and mirrorless !

> That in a near future will see super oled EVF much better than optical
Yeah, we are seeing in "near future" large OLED TVs - and for how many years already?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 22:42 UTC
In reply to:

aliquis: A little too expensive I think. Why should it cost so much more than Samsungs or Sonys equivalents?

I kinda want it but not at an infinite price.

Price seem more appropriate for a FF camera.

I wonder what the other cameras in the series will cost. Also I hate the stupid "oh we'll cripple and ignore video"-ideas. But the "pros" seem to like it.

What do you mean "infinite price"?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 22:39 UTC
In reply to:

kevin camera: it's too bad that the price is not "mainstream" for this walk-around camera (i'm making this assumption because of the 18mm and 35mm lenses).

mind you a nex-7 + carl zeiss 24mm f1.8 will cost around the same price...

it's probably wrong to compare these cameras to a gf2, but gf2 kit costs about $300 and it's pretty good for a walkaround camera :)

It is probably wrong to compare these cameras to a Nokia N8 but :D...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 22:37 UTC
In reply to:

Damo83: The thing is it this camera is priced very highly. It's not going to have a problem selling as long as it serves up very high quality images. It's not a Leica or Leica killer. (It's not full frame and is not built by hand, nor is it a rangefinder). But people will expect that at USD $1700 it will deliver stunning results. It needs to otherwise, IMO, people will see no value in the extra investment.

> It's not full frame
M8 was not as well.

> is not built by hand
It is assembled by hand, naturally.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 22:31 UTC
In reply to:

Jmmg: Honestly, I won a Fujifilm F10 point and shoot many years ago and my wife and I still love its super CCD and how good a little camera could handle high ISO so well. many trips and parties later we still occasionally use it, then I purchased a Fujifilm F100fd and love that little bugger as well. Fuji's camera build quality was great then, both these P & S is used by my 2 young sons and was being dropped on rocky, sandy and wet surface many times and the little Fujis just kept on shooting. Then I upgraded them to the X10 as our family P & S and travel camera...what a big disappointment! Bad build quality issues--->dust inside lens in the first 2 cameras I got, then the 3rd one on/off lens switch stuck! then the famous"White Orbs" issue which Fuji still in denial and still has no "Fix" for it. I loved Fuji camera for many years and I WANTED to continue support them, but after seeing the problem people had with their X100 and my experience with the X10...X Pro1.....NO THANKS FUJI!

I have seen cr$p from Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus and Pentax. And from Panasonic. Should I quit photography at all?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 22:27 UTC
In reply to:

NL21458: I live in Holland we have the euro

2300 Dollar = € 1756 EURO (body)
599 Dollar = € 458 EURO (lens)

Total: € 2214

Way to much for me

X100 is in Holland 1243 dollar = 950 euro

> Way to much for me
Do you really think Fuji will lower the price for you if you write this? Nope.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 22:14 UTC
In reply to:

T3: Digital viewfinders will ultimately overtake optical viewfinders for the same reasons that digital photography overtook film photography: because it's better and more convenient. Some people don't believe it right now, in the same way that some film photographers didn't believe that digital would replace film. Just like the digital vs film discussions, people will need to realize that a digital viewfinder doesn't look *exactly* like an optical viewfinder, but that doesn't mean the digital viewfinder is worse. In fact, we'll see that digital viewfinders will have a lot of advantages over an optical viewfinder.

So just like digital vs film, the market and users will ultimately *choose* digital viewfinders over optical viewfinders because A) they're finally as good as optical viewfinders or better, and B) they offer advantages over optical viewfinders. Also, there will be some hold-outs who still prefer an old-school viewfinder, just like some people still shoot film.

Believe what exactly? You say "it's better and more convenient" while EVFs today are actually not and it is not a matter of faith. And there is nothing that hints at EVFs possible improvement in the future - either EVF is dim or energy consumption is too high. The situation is like that with in-camera flash - there is not and will never be any room for improvement.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 31, 2012 at 13:44 UTC
Total: 59, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »