 |
Paulo Ferreira
Lives in
Manchester, UK, Portugal
Works as a
Photographer - Musician - Mathematician - Engineer
Has a website at
www.pauloferreira.co.uk
Joined on
Aug 31, 2003
About me:
View
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
Ridiculous if not illegal by trading standards. The amount of data going back and forth is going to be beyond comprehension. The idea that to use editing software you have to be online and give Adobe full access to every single step of your work is... well illegal!! There are serious privacy issues with this "new" "vision". It is just another "Instagram" type of idea. Back off!
What a waste of time... and space. Until the day he triggers (literally) an epileptic fit in one of the subjects and gets sued to oblivion.
$47,000/61=$770 per picture! Cheap! Either the Beatles are not what they were or the photos are not what they should.
Ethics is a very tired word and in journalism is bordering exhaustion.Why should photography and photographers be exempt of having their own Lance Armstrongs? Or Piers Morgan with fake photos in the Mirror about soldiers abusive behaviour in Iraq? As in the cyclist, the fault resides originally on a desire to win at any cost and be hailed as the best in your "profession". For that you need people/public and these are always, without exception gullible, joining in the universal acclaim as they are part and parcel of it, part of the dream. Lance is now (in)famous... Piers was sacked. I wonder what will happen to Paolo? Probably nothing.
Any Sigma Merrill camera should have made the cut
Who took these samples? Awful, poor light, focusing, framing auto ISO? auto everything? That landscape taken from above with the 16-35 is shameful! You could not have found worse subjects, colours, settings... or maybe I'm wrong and you will still surprise me. Literally shown in a "bad light"
Lunar or... lunacy?
Once again dpreview has missed a simple test on Foveon sensors and kept on talking about "false" detail on and on and on... frankly missing the point.
Take a photo of your chart with a good lens preferably the 50mm f1.4
Expose correctly... the one you showed is at least 1/2 under ex
Correct levels on SPP only
Output on "double" to TIFF
See how much "false" detail you are able to capture on the 60MP image ABOVE 4000 LPH... around 4500 LPH maybe if your chart would go that far...
Thanks
at last....
"used properly" has the same value applied to "vaseline on lens" (to emphasise privacy) or "forgot to remove lens cap" (for that special solar eclipse!) Waste of bandwidth!
100 RAWS at 10fps... Wow? Wow? We are no longer talking about Photography here.
"You press the button, we do the rest" can now be used for toilet flush advertising... down the pan!
Nikon J1 and V1 in "specialist"? This makes dpreview ranking "not so special" apart their "special" relationship with you know what 2 brands. Had Canon made a mirrorless camera, any camera, (where is it by the way Canon) it would also be "special" too!
Paulo Ferreira: They sold their sensor's business? What´s left then? A couple of expired Kodachrome 25 on their chilling cabinet?
There's a "step-sister" company in Japan called FujiFILM. Read the writing on the wall please...
They sold their sensor's business? What´s left then? A couple of expired Kodachrome 25 on their chilling cabinet?
Andrei Todea: It's a lie!
Sigma did NOT announce this and DPReview knows this very well. They tried to fake it and instead of using a link from the official Sigma website (which of course doesn't mention anything about this stupidity and they never did) they used and obscure website to fake this announcement.
Shame on you, DPReview!
Well you should! You are mentioning yet another "third party" source. Pick up the phone and give a call to Sigma Deutschland tomorrow +49180 590908585 or anywhere on this page http://www.sigma-foto.de/kontakt/kontaktinfos.html Start doing some journalism instead of cheap gossip and let us know once for all if this is genuine (and where it can be bought). Then we can all laugh apart from the ones with "exquisite" taste. If not don't forget to issue a retraction with an apology to Sigma AND your readers. Else how can we ever believe in any of your news?
Andrei Todea: It's a lie!
Sigma did NOT announce this and DPReview knows this very well. They tried to fake it and instead of using a link from the official Sigma website (which of course doesn't mention anything about this stupidity and they never did) they used and obscure website to fake this announcement.
Shame on you, DPReview!
Yes! As I said quite a few times here, shame on you Dpreview!!! Gutter "journalism"!
Faisalee: Sigma Succeeded in one thing for sure... Getting the most number of comments EVER on a DPR news ;-)
Sigma has no input (or output) whatsoever in this "news". It is just a bad sketch of the BBC1 program "Would I Lie to You?"
Paulo Ferreira: This is a really disingenueous and almost malicious news. Dpreview is just passing on some hear say from a German site called Photo Scala that is selling a casing for a Sigma SD1. There is no comment whatsoever on Sigma Germany site about this http://www.sigma-foto.de/ !!! I am pretty sure that there are really aesthetically discussable and expensive "pimp my" image capturing gadgets (A Swarowsky iphone???) from third party companies that were never mentioned here. Shame on you dpreview!!!
No @HowaboutRAW! you are missing the point completely. Dpreview related news as fact qualified or not without checking its source. That is not journalism! It is gossip, hearsay. It is biased because it is about the SD1 and they willingly jumped into the "joke" on a day that is too far from 1st April. Any other camera and they would have kept quiet! More... they would have checked their sources. So... shame on you dpreview, again!
Paulo Ferreira: This is a really disingenueous and almost malicious news. Dpreview is just passing on some hear say from a German site called Photo Scala that is selling a casing for a Sigma SD1. There is no comment whatsoever on Sigma Germany site about this http://www.sigma-foto.de/ !!! I am pretty sure that there are really aesthetically discussable and expensive "pimp my" image capturing gadgets (A Swarowsky iphone???) from third party companies that were never mentioned here. Shame on you dpreview!!!
To @HowaboutRAW. Still biased and not sloppy. Dpreview could not omit a link that DOES NOT EXIST!!!. For Christ sake stop talking about links that DO NOT EXIST!!! The Sigma "announcement" is nowhere to be found!! So... it is still biased and malicious!. Shame on you Dpreview... again!!! and that review of LL?? Don't get me started!