Impulses

Lives in Puerto Rico Puerto Rico
Works as a student
Joined on Apr 7, 2013

Comments

Total: 957, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
On article Gear of the Year Part 4: Dale's pick - Samsung NX1 (409 comments in total)
In reply to:

Impulses: Han pulled the trigger first, just like Samsung when faced with an uncertain prospect!

Oh and Han didn't win, he got retcon'd by Lucas, i.e. succumbed to outside market forces. :p

Like I said tho, looking forward to the Samsung special editions or to seeing what Disney... Err, Nikon can do with them. ;)

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 17:19 UTC
On article Gear of the Year Part 4: Dale's pick - Samsung NX1 (409 comments in total)
In reply to:

Impulses: Han pulled the trigger first, just like Samsung when faced with an uncertain prospect!

Relax, I wasn't bashing Samsung, I genuinely hope all they've built and developed doesn't just vanish into thin air... It'd be a crying shame. However when they pull out of markets conspicuously and they let this kinda rampant speculation fester, there's invariably gonna be jokes.

Who knows, maybe the Nikon rumors pan out, maybe this time next year we're talking about the Revenge of the Korean. :p I always thought Samsung was something of a dark horse, the least amount of street cred but quite possibly the biggest marketing arm.

I thought they could've done what even Sony hasn't managed, in getting mirrorless into the limelight in the U.S., Samsung's marketing has moved mountains in other markets when they really set their mind to it... They did try to an extent, I've seen some pretty nice Samsung camera kiosks and displays in Best Buy...

That's more than I can say for pretty much every other mirrorless player. Sony's NEX booth still says NEX and has outdated models on display, or battery less models, and everyone else has a very minimal retail or big box presence.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 17:14 UTC
On article Gear of the Year Part 4: Dale's pick - Samsung NX1 (409 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: "Some people have suggested to that Samsung tried its luck in the camera market but never completely committed to it." -DPR

(USA) It's safe to say that Samsung's marketing and advertising departments weren't committed to it. Outside of DPR, most people don't even know that Samsung makes (or made) cameras.

Huge Samsung photography kiosks in many Best Buys beg to differ... That they weren't successful in reaching an audience is another story, it did seem like they tried tho, marketing wise. Not that they couldn't have done much more, I think all the mirrorless makers have done a terrible job of marketing their advantages, on balance, but Samsung at least seemed like they were trying.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 17:07 UTC
On article Gear of the Year Part 4: Dale's pick - Samsung NX1 (409 comments in total)

Han pulled the trigger first, just like Samsung when faced with an uncertain prospect!

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 15:35 UTC as 89th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

justmeMN: DPR hasn't reviewed it yet, but the Canon G9 X looks interesting. It's apparently the smallest 1" sensor camera on the market, and it doesn't cost a fortune. (It looks to be genuinely pocketable, which would be convenient for travel.)

Yeah, much slimmer than an RX100, I'd been waiting for someone to pare down the features on a 1" compact and sell it for less, rather than the constant upwards price creep of the RX series. G9x ticks a lot of boxes for me, $450 is still a little rich for something I'll use sparingly (having two M4/3 bodies, including a tiny GM1), but it's a good value regardless... I'm picking one up the second the price drops further to replace my Panasonic LF1.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 04:51 UTC
In reply to:

NAwlins Contrarian: With the exception of the Olympus, which is otherwise compromised for toughness, is there nothing to recommend that costs substantially less than $700? For many people, that's insane money for a fixed-lens travel camera. Some years back, in part based on DPReview's recommendation, I bought a Canon SX230 HS, mostly for my wife's everyday use. It was about $200 or $250, IIRC. It works well for her as a point-and-shoot, fits into many pockets (even in its Canon case), and had extensive manual controls when I want them (PASM, flash exposure compensation, manual focus, etc.). In short, it's a very satisfactory 'vacation camera' that rarely leaves me wishing for more. But maybe that sort of thing doesn't exist these days.

It exists, to an extent, but they're basically the same thing now as they were 3-5 years ago... That market had stagnated even before smartphones, which stuck the fork in it. The guide did recommend a Panasonic ZS, those should be <$350. If you don't need a large zoom, stretching the budget to a $450 G9x with a 1" sensor will yield a big leap in quality.

Anything under that is basically smartphone quality + zoom. Stuff like the Canon S series and Panasonic LF1 are slightly better and have brighter lenses, also <$350, but that's about it. I think it's a shame 1" sensors didn't become more commonplace before the P&S market got gutted so severely, it might've changed the market substantially.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 04:46 UTC
In reply to:

alffastar: The fact that 12-32 and 35-100 are updated means that GM7 will have IS!

Or that people with those lenses might like to use them on the GX8...

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2015 at 12:33 UTC
In reply to:

Nomoreheroes: Where is the firmware for my GX7?

Your GX7 doesn't have dual IS...

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2015 at 12:33 UTC
On article Inching forward? Canon PowerShot G5 X review posted (425 comments in total)
In reply to:

Richard Franiec: I'm not sure how many different versions of Canon Powershot cameras with previous generation of RX100 sensor would take to equal the appeal (and sales success) of RX100MkIV, a single Sony camera in the segment?

In my mind, the "revolution" in Canon compact cameras started and ended with Powershot S90/ S95, two possibly most desirable and best balanced designs at the time. The following iterations were just mundane, killed with introduction of RX100.

It is sad to see the former undisputable leader in such state of confusion and impotence.

" The whole assortment makes absolutely no sense at all, especially because all the various iterations are all within spit distance of 1000 bucks. "

Uh, isn't the G7x priced at less than half that? And isn't it also smaller than any RX model? I'd call that pretty unique, I've been wishing for years Sony would make a slimmer/cheaper RX100 instead of pawning off the outgoing models as the budget option.

That being said, I can see how the other two Canon models do less to vindicate themselves and their price point.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2015 at 19:57 UTC
In reply to:

Impulses: They ought to consider releasing the 90mm and maybe the 75mm in a MFT mount... I doubt there'd be much interest in the others given the faster native alternatives, but f2.4 primes at 150mm & 180mm EFLs would be pretty interesting for the right price... Basically pick up where the Sigma 60mm leaves off! Outside of Oly's 75mm f1.8 there isn't much else up until the upcoming 300mm f4.

The 75mm would have to be under $600 tho (preferable closer to $500), otherwise Oly's 75mm would eclipse it (it's often sold for $560 refurb IIRC).

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 16:15 UTC

They ought to consider releasing the 90mm and maybe the 75mm in a MFT mount... I doubt there'd be much interest in the others given the faster native alternatives, but f2.4 primes at 150mm & 180mm EFLs would be pretty interesting for the right price... Basically pick up where the Sigma 60mm leaves off! Outside of Oly's 75mm f1.8 there isn't much else up until the upcoming 300mm f4.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 16:11 UTC as 25th comment | 1 reply
On article Apple launches battery case for iPhone 6 & 6s (147 comments in total)
In reply to:

papa natas: Why is Apple always trailing on issues such as this one?
After I've bought my Iphone5 for my wife I went to Best Buy and bought a MOPHIE battery case (99$) Since they had none at the Apple Store..
It works wonderful!!

Anker makes some pretty good ones for half the price or less, Wirecutter's choice.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 05:25 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (560 comments in total)
In reply to:

AnitaBower: What is preventing me from buying a mirrorless is uncertainty about available light macro performance. The available macro lenses are at most 90mm. I would like a crop mirrorless with image stabilization and a 100mm macro lens.

Or maybe you'll focus stack to improve DoF... ;)

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 02:48 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (560 comments in total)
In reply to:

epx141: I will consider a mirrorless when it does not cost 4x the price of the equivalent DSLR and it mounts Nikon F lenses.

I dunno about other mirrorless systems, but M4/3 prices are pretty comparable to APS-C DSLR, and there's far more variety of lens choices and body styles. There's primes from $99-1,000 and from 16mm EFL thru 600 mm EFL, f2.8 zooms, super zooms, different zooms covering ranges from 14-600mm EFLs (soon 800), etc etc. Nikon F mount or Nikon 1 prices sound like a Nikon issue... Could probably use some more wide primes, maybe tilt shift or weather sealed ones, at least there's actually primes wider than 35mm.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 00:20 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (560 comments in total)
In reply to:

Serious Sam: I had three mirrorless before I brought my first Nikon. I don’t know about expensive model like A7Rii but I can guarantee you 100% that my D5500 focus faster and more accurate than my A6000 and X-T1. If you are just playing mirrorless is ok, just bot for people that is doing a job. DSLR is still the way to go.

Then there is the “system” cost issue. In Australia I can get a D610 +2 Tamron 2.8 zooms for just over 3.5K. Now try that with an A7, there is no 2.8 zooms and the primes cost an arm and leg. To compare this direct, A D610 + the three 1.8 primes will cost just under 3K AU$. Try that with an A7, You will have a body and a 1.8 lens then your budget is almost gone.

Finally noise performance, if we look at DPR studio test scene, on a equivalent priced model comparison, Nikon is doing way better even they often have the same or similar Sony sensor. Yes A7S and A7Sii is exceptional but apart from those two, the others are really so so in terms of high ISO performance.

Low light AF on the M4/3 bodies I've tried is excellent, hunting is exceedingly rare... /shrug I doubt the A7 line is too far behind in that regard but I've only played with them briefly. Their eye AF seems even more advanced than M4/3 and I'm already impressed with the latter's accuracy.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 00:09 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (560 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tungsten Nordstein: Article kind of skims on the cons a bit with more detail (bias?) provided on the mirror-less side.

DSLR:

Instant AF with dSLR is a big deal over the contrast detect of many a mirror-less. Not all mirror-less have phase-detect and I'm not yet convinced any feel as fast a dSLR.

Manual AF is much much nicer with dSLR, the focus-by-wire of a mirror-less does not feel good, accurate or fast as with dSLR, done through the OVF.

Optical finder. Aside from what the articles says about how it feels, see manual focus. Bracing camera against the head when shooting is also a good feel factor of dSLR.

Lenses. More of them. Many (most) with fast AF built-in. And, as stated above, *mechanical* accurate focus.

A reasonable dSLR with smaller APS-C sensor does not have to feel huge.

Never mind fast affordable 35 or 90mm... At least you can get approximations of those on crop body DSLR (might be a 38 or a 75 instead but it's *something*), try finding any fast prime wider than that tho, then check what's available on various mirrorless systems.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 00:04 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (560 comments in total)
In reply to:

Neez: "Furthermore, the need to constantly power a screen while shooting, combined with attempts to capitalize on the size benefits of mirrorless mean that battery life is much more limited on most mirrorless cameras - sometimes to a restrictive degree. "

This statement isn't correct because DSLR's have LCD screens that are on all the time as well. They don't suck down nearly as much juice as a mirrorless. LCD screens are known to be fairly efficient as long as backlighting is kept to a minimum, the LCD itself uses very little energy.

It's actually because the IMAGE SENSOR has to be on all the time, regardless of whether you're taking a shot or not, is why the battery life sucks on mirrorless cameras.

I own a sony a6000 and A7II, and have learned to just carry 3 spare batteries with me when i go out. But you are right, was never a concern on my canons.

Granted, event photographers who actually need more than 3 hrs of battery life may well find mirrorless battery to be an issue... Nothing that an extra grip or one battery swap per work session couldn't fix but I can see how it'd be an extra inconvenience. For the vast majority of people and uses tho, it's a vastly exaggerated issue, in part because of CIPA's poor way of measuring true battery life for a completely different class of hardware.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2015 at 23:58 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (560 comments in total)
In reply to:

Neez: "Furthermore, the need to constantly power a screen while shooting, combined with attempts to capitalize on the size benefits of mirrorless mean that battery life is much more limited on most mirrorless cameras - sometimes to a restrictive degree. "

This statement isn't correct because DSLR's have LCD screens that are on all the time as well. They don't suck down nearly as much juice as a mirrorless. LCD screens are known to be fairly efficient as long as backlighting is kept to a minimum, the LCD itself uses very little energy.

It's actually because the IMAGE SENSOR has to be on all the time, regardless of whether you're taking a shot or not, is why the battery life sucks on mirrorless cameras.

I own a sony a6000 and A7II, and have learned to just carry 3 spare batteries with me when i go out. But you are right, was never a concern on my canons.

" Maybe mirrorless ought to have a button for image preview on/off. If you're just monkeying around with menus/settings, why have the imager on? "

I'm not quite sure if the sensor feed remains on while you're in menus or playback... Still, any time you're composing the feed is live and that's where the real drain is. Battery life isn't really a big deal, the real problem is thinking about it in terms of shots taken, it doesn't make any sense with mirrorless.

I can get as many as 1,000 shots or as little a 20 off a mirrorless body rated by CIPA for ~350... It comes down to use time rather than shots taken, they should really add a second battery metric to reflect that. Generally you can get like 2-3 hours (more with larger bodies like a GH4) of actual active use time.

If you're not shooting non-stop those 2-3 hours will easily turn into 6-12 (provided you turn the thing off)... It's actual powered-on time that matters, DSLR users are accustomed to just leaving the camera powered on half the day but that's just never gonna work with mirrorless.

Gotta think about battery life more like a phone's or laptop's... You don't measure smartphone battery life in the number of emails it can send or pages it can load in one charge, you expect a rough estimate given a mixed workload, more without Wi-Fi, less with a dimmer display etc.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2015 at 23:54 UTC
In reply to:

Kamox: 8K video! The answer to the question no one asked!

I've recently bought an Olympus body and I'm still interested in where Panasonic is going with this. Their current 4K Photo implementation was intriguing but not quite tempting enough, got me, but it has great potential IMO. A global shutter might make it all moot but we've been promised that for years too so who knows what'll happen first...

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2015 at 21:10 UTC
Total: 957, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »