StephenSPhotog

StephenSPhotog

Joined on Jun 22, 2011

Comments

Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On Rare Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM goes on sale in UK article (218 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boss of Sony: Canon SX50 HS has a 1200mm lens, and only costs about $500. It also has better image quality than this £99,000 one, and is much lighter.

We know that's you Ken Rockwell.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 18, 2014 at 15:55 UTC
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: Or you could do the D800e and the 80-400VR and be a lot sharper for half the price :^)

Cheaper? Yes.

Sharper? Doubt it.

Direct link | Posted on May 15, 2013 at 13:51 UTC
On Canon EOS 100D/Rebel SL1 Hands-on Preview preview (353 comments in total)
In reply to:

veroman: In the top view, it bears a striking resemblance to the Pentax K-01 "brick", whose design did not at all garner favorable reviews.

So here's Canon's version of the "brick," but more than likely its very-similar design will not be panned to the extreme that the Pentax K-01 was.

Go figure.

The Brick was panned because it was 3 times the size it needed to be because it didn't have a mirror. This is a full featured DSLR not a interchangeable lens camera.

Your comparison is invalid.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2013 at 12:52 UTC
In reply to:

Jun2: $17,899.95, wow

Man, just imagine if Canon had announced a $18k lens...

It's ok for Nikon but Canon, don't you dare.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2013 at 13:56 UTC
In reply to:

The A-Team: Glad I can get the Canon 17-40L (wider, longer, and faster, better built) for the same price :)

Wait! 12mp is only good enough for the Web?! Damn.

Someone needs to tell all those people still using the Nikon D3s and other older pro level cameras!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2013 at 13:54 UTC
In reply to:

StephenSPhotog: I'd love to see more companies move some of their variable aperture lenses from 3.5-5.6 to the 2.8-4 territory.

3.5-5.6s aren't always cheap lenses that beginners buy, there are other 5.6s out there. And some beginners aren't looking to get the cheapest thing.

Also it'd be nice for some more upgrade options for those beginners other than super zooms or pro level constant aperture zooms.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2013 at 22:08 UTC
In reply to:

StephenSPhotog: I'd love to see more companies move some of their variable aperture lenses from 3.5-5.6 to the 2.8-4 territory.

No. I'd pay more for it.

Why would you guess that?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2013 at 16:45 UTC

I'd love to see more companies move some of their variable aperture lenses from 3.5-5.6 to the 2.8-4 territory.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2013 at 17:15 UTC as 13th comment | 4 replies
On Metabones adds autofocus to Canon-NEX adapter article (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

sproketholes: Why the Hell would anyone want to use Canon EF glass anyway?

Because it is awesome?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2012 at 18:36 UTC
On Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM preview article (149 comments in total)

I'm not confused by the existence of this lens, but it is oddly expensive.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 6, 2012 at 22:11 UTC as 30th comment
In reply to:

ClearGlass: Making the switch over to Canon is becoming more appealing with every new product release. Nikon has completely lost its way. It's sad to see a company previously known for their quality, and for correctly reading the market, to fall so far down the ladder, very sad indeed.

Yes. Canon has a 70-200mm f4L IS. The IS version is on amazon right now for $1099 and the non-IS version is $675.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2012 at 13:57 UTC
On 11 Cool Photography-Related Kickstarter Projects article (48 comments in total)

The Quickdraw is EXACTLY the kind of thing that I have been needing!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2012 at 02:07 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies
On Just Posted: Canon EOS 650D / EOS Rebel T4i review article (232 comments in total)
In reply to:

jdrx2012: Canon has re-purposed their 18mp sensor so many times it is getting worse! Also, gotta say, I continue to hate on the 1.6 multiplier. Canon models, below the 5D series and 7D, stinks, plain and simple.

The 7D hardly stinks.

And do you prefer the massive difference of Nikon's 1.5x crop? Yeah, that is a huge deal buddy

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2012 at 12:59 UTC
On Canon releases promised Firmware v2.0.0 for EOS 7D article (104 comments in total)
In reply to:

bigdaddave: Have you been asleep dpreview, it's been out for ages

Or just a day. Whatever.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 7, 2012 at 19:19 UTC

Think what you would like about this camera. But I have a simple prediction. Canon will sell 14 katrillion of them.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 21:21 UTC as 146th comment | 2 replies
On Canon significantly improves EOS 7D with firmware v2 article (296 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lee Jay: So, Canon removes video crop modes from the Rebel series with the T4i and fails to add it to the 7D via this firmware update. This is one of the two main reasons I never bought a 7D in the first place and the fact that they removed it from the new Rebel and not included it on the 5DIII may indicate they have dropped this highly-useful feature. Disappointing and ridiculous. I guess I'll keep my money.

Our new knowledge of you not owning a 7D and why really enhances the conversation here. Thank you.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2012 at 13:56 UTC
In reply to:

nutraman: dpreview editors - a very minor error on page 28, which states:

"As you can see above, instances of moiré in the D800E are also present - to an admittedly lesser degree - in the D800."

the cameras should be switched:
As you can see above, instances of moiré in the D800 are also present - to an admittedly lesser degree - in the D800E.

No, they said it right. You have it backwards. Moire is worse on the D800E

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 14:26 UTC
In reply to:

Bernd M: There is something I don't understand: Why the pancake has only F2.8? It seems development is going backwards. 20 years ago I used a Zuiko 40mm F2.0 pancake. For the last 3 years I used a Hexanon 40mm F1.8, that I adapted on my Olympus 4/3 camera. I changed it for the Zuiko 40mm F1,4 from the PenF series for my m4/3 Panasonic. All this lenses were made 20-30 years ago, and they are small and very good. Where's the progress, I'm asking.

Canon releases a 40mm f2.8 pancake for $200. Some people can really complain about anything can't they?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 8, 2012 at 14:04 UTC
In reply to:

Liviu Namolovan: micahmedia wrote: "Excuse me, I'm a stills photographer, and this product isn't aimed at me. Every product should be aimed at me. I'm the most important thing in the world, and unless you recognize that, I'm going to whine every chance I get, on every photography forum on the internet."
I do not like this flood of video-products subjects on a photography site.
STILLS IS NOT VIDEO.And sadly, this is only the begining...The rise of the video imbecility confiscating still photography gear and forums.
The good part is that this abnormal trend will, eventually, go to an end.
Please do not get this wrong! I'm 100% ok to have video gear for the video fans. But I felt somehow betrayed by this trend to promote video in detriment of still photography- AND ALL THIS NONSENSE IN A STILL CAMERA!!!
Ken Rockwell is calling the fans of this mercantile-greedy trend "VIDIOTS".I'm wandering: how can someone do video and stills with the same camera at the same time at a wedding ceremony for instance?!

Are you aware that you quoted Ken Rockwell? Just making sure.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2012 at 19:25 UTC
In reply to:

bigdaddave: Canon doing video with stills cameras is just yuck.

I don't know why I keep posting. I don't care.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2012 at 15:45 UTC
Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »