Caleido

Caleido

Joined on Apr 3, 2006

Comments

Total: 125, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Nikon issues service advisory on D600's dust issue article (240 comments in total)
In reply to:

bluevellet: I'm surprised dust is still a problem with DSLR's. Even more so with cameras at that high price range.

When you change lenses, eventually you get dust on your sensor. This will always be the case.

However, in this case the particles come from within the camera itself. I'm slightly disappointed in Nikon. But still, ordered my D600 yesterday.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 23, 2013 at 17:23 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1 review article (546 comments in total)
In reply to:

tmurph: Sony got to be congratulated for putting a full size sensor into a high-end compact camera.
Love to own one and I like the 35mm lens which in my opinion is a good choice for a camera to take with you on your travels.
Seems a great camera for street photography.

I think it is not a matter of technical knowhow, but more "would it not be too much of a compromise?''. Terrible battery-life, slow AF, no viewfinder (a must have for street photography, imo) and no interchangeable lens... I think it's hard to sell to a lot of people, even ignoring the very high end price.

But yes Sony won the prize for delivering the first small FF compact. Sony decided it was worth it - probaby more in terms of long term PR. But that doesn't mean it's getting the price for best or most innovative or complete camera.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 20, 2013 at 06:01 UTC
On HTC One: Is it the the ultimate camera phone? post (78 comments in total)
In reply to:

Maverick_: my second post on this. Why do we need 1080P on a 4.7" screen? What's the purpose except bragging right. I have a Samsung Galaxy Note II with 5.5" screen in brilliant 720P Superamoled and I wouldn't want my resolution to increase at all. It will only shrink down all content.

Keep 1080 for TVs and 720 for smartphones. Stop this madness!

I'm not a big fan of 1080p smartphones either. I see a 720p 4.3" screen as ideal, personally.
There is a point you stop seeing improvement in ppi. I believe that 4.7" and 1080p is way over that point. It is just wasting valuable battery and cpu cycles.

I agree, technology should be pushed forward, but I rather have a 4.3" 720p smartphone with a new technology battery that lasts 5 days than a 4.3" 1080p with mediocre colors/contrast that lasts 1 day.
When I get dark and cynical thoughts, I feel like they can't improve battery and just put sharper displays in smaller form factors to detract attention from where the real improvements should be.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 20, 2013 at 03:18 UTC
On Nikon D5200 added to our studio comparison database article (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

Caleido: If you bump up the default sharpness of the D5200 or sharpen in post processing, you get the exact same oversharpened look of the E-M5. At base ISO, because any higher ISO clearly shows the (albeit small) disadvantage of a smaller sensor.

A fine camera, the E-M5 and I have a m3/4 body myself.
But don't talk rubbish.

Where do I even remotely imply that sharpening images also improves colors? Please contain yourself in daftness when replying or don't reply at all.

Obviously, you can not only change the sharpness, but also completely fine tune contrast and colors if you shoot JPEG with the D5200. Like every other DSLR from the last decade.

I won't magically become identical to the E-M5, but you can come close.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2013 at 22:54 UTC
On Nikon D5200 added to our studio comparison database article (186 comments in total)

If you bump up the default sharpness of the D5200 or sharpen in post processing, you get the exact same oversharpened look of the E-M5. At base ISO, because any higher ISO clearly shows the (albeit small) disadvantage of a smaller sensor.

A fine camera, the E-M5 and I have a m3/4 body myself.
But don't talk rubbish.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2013 at 16:02 UTC as 5th comment | 3 replies

Since when is 3.5 a small aperture? The difference with 2.8 is not even a full stop. If you want the play with DOF, you're looking at the wrong lens.

So you want the exact same features as the 14-24mm or 16-35mm, but at a lower price? Are pigs flying today?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2013 at 18:57 UTC as 15th comment | 2 replies
On PT3C9213 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (2 comments in total)
In reply to:

semorg: major curvature issue

the barbed wire obviously bends that way

Direct link | Posted on Dec 5, 2012 at 15:58 UTC
In reply to:

Hugo808: Pentax Spotmatic. Quit while you're ahead.

Actually, my Contax RX was the best camera I ever had, best designed, superb handling, build and image quality. It even had an external battery pack for use in the cold. They thought of everything the photographer actually needs. Every DSLR I've had has seen a depressing drop in quality in every area. Sigh, I think we've all been had by clever marketing and gadget love.

Guess you haven't had a DSLR in the last 3 years.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 20, 2012 at 07:10 UTC
On Accessory Review: Nimbus Cloud Dome article (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

happypoppeye: Hahaha ...so many people here have no problem spending thousands and thousands of dollars on an accessory for their SLR and complain about DPR not reviewing them yet when someone with a different camera buys an accessory it's utterly ridiculous?

You mean, like, a pin sharp portrait lens or a backup camera for professional use?

Yeah, that's crazy impulsive behaviour, compared to this ingenious piece of equipment that doesn't make you look like a complete dork.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 5, 2012 at 01:05 UTC
On Accessory Review: Nimbus Cloud Dome article (105 comments in total)

Come on. This is down right ridiculous. The idea, the look, the results. Everything.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 4, 2012 at 23:13 UTC as 57th comment | 1 reply
On Quick Review: Apple iPhone 5 article (217 comments in total)
In reply to:

shahid11235: No offense, but it seems to me that DPreview has got severely obsessed with iPhone.

@Barney

Than why not include a range of direct competitors to the iPhone if you want to inform about the IQ? The S3? Nokia Pureview? Sony Xperia S? Amongst others.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2012 at 03:42 UTC
In reply to:

Craig Atkinson: 5 vs 5d3!
http://dcurt.is/iphone-5-vs-5d-mark-iii

Too bad the 5d3 image had a bad focus - clearly behind the sign.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2012 at 00:09 UTC

I like what I see. I see more resolution and about the same noise, if not less than the D700. The colors stay strong and real at high ISO.
I personally think and for my work, this is a better compromise than the D800 - which is not really a shining high ISO monster. I was slighty disappointed by the D800 images. You got tons of resolution, but on the other hand it showed a very processed look, noise showing up very early, albeit very thin. Which is no surprise of course. But these D600 images are very clean at low ISO.

I would like to buy it as a backup body to my D700. And give the movie feature a shot, would love to play with with 1.4 lenses. And use it when 24MP is needed (bigger prints etc...)

But I'm going to hold it out until the price comes down a bit.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 13, 2012 at 21:45 UTC as 42nd comment
On Nokia Lumia 920 promises PureView, but it’s no 808 article (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ryan_Valiente: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cimDfEIEiu0

I'm calling bullsh1t on the OIS ad.

That's pretty much impossible on a hand held phone. Heck even the OM-D can't manage that.

Well, they admitted it on there Nokia Conversations website.

"Note: The Lumia 920 pictures in this post were taken using prototype hardware and software, and then reduced dramatically in size. In addition, the OIS video, above, was not shot using the Lumia 920."

Shameful, but not illegal. Next!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 5, 2012 at 21:10 UTC
On Nokia Lumia 920 promises PureView, but it’s no 808 article (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ryan_Valiente: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cimDfEIEiu0

I'm calling bullsh1t on the OIS ad.

That's pretty much impossible on a hand held phone. Heck even the OM-D can't manage that.

@joe6pack
Why does the van have to be there? They don't have the money to shot two different scenes? Come on now...

And besides, it's al over the internet now. It's not the first company misleading in an ad, but someone was stupid enough to make it obvious.

Take a final look at this image:
i45.tinypic.com/244b5ud.jpg

Keeping the angle in mind, the space between the girl and the camera (very close), there is no way there is some guy on a bike around, filming and showing this particular scene. The guy in the van is filming and Nokia is pretending it is the guy on the bike.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 5, 2012 at 20:49 UTC
On Nokia Lumia 920 promises PureView, but it’s no 808 article (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ryan_Valiente: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cimDfEIEiu0

I'm calling bullsh1t on the OIS ad.

That's pretty much impossible on a hand held phone. Heck even the OM-D can't manage that.

I agree. So much fake in this video. OIS "on", but then filmed from a van instead of a bicycle.

OIS "on" in the dark street lights. But those images are clearly lit by strobes. Even those OIS-off images look fake!

Why didn't they even bother to edit out the van? So they are lame AND stupid.

And I really had great hopes for Nokia. Let's hope the camera (phone) doesn't disappoint in the real world.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 5, 2012 at 19:10 UTC
On Exhibition Review: 8x10 By Impossible article (85 comments in total)
In reply to:

nawknai: Finally, hipsters have a new type of film that they each discovered before his/her friends ever heard about it.

This is no more genuine than Instagram, so I don't see the point. Just use Instagram. This is just another example of the "bad is good" counter-culture hipsters trying to replicate a look and feel that existed in the past because of limited and imperfect processes and technology. Anything like this is going to be inauthentic anyway, as you're only getting these results by intentionally creating "bad technology". This is not a question of digital vs. film. This is more about film vs other film. In fact, compared to real Polaroid film, this is awful. It's like beta release of Polaroid film, before they perfected the recipe.

@ fmian
Did you even read the first words about the background story?

A small group of dedicated employees from a closed and striped Polaroid factory in The Netherlands are using what is left of the machinery and intellectual property (almost nothing) to create a NEW instant film from scratch. Only because of their love for instant film. And because they spend most of their life working with it.

How those veterans can be compared to teens using Instagram and wearing nerdy glasses and skinny pants is beyond my comprehension.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 4, 2012 at 00:34 UTC
On Exhibition Review: 8x10 By Impossible article (85 comments in total)
In reply to:

nawknai: Finally, hipsters have a new type of film that they each discovered before his/her friends ever heard about it.

This is no more genuine than Instagram, so I don't see the point. Just use Instagram. This is just another example of the "bad is good" counter-culture hipsters trying to replicate a look and feel that existed in the past because of limited and imperfect processes and technology. Anything like this is going to be inauthentic anyway, as you're only getting these results by intentionally creating "bad technology". This is not a question of digital vs. film. This is more about film vs other film. In fact, compared to real Polaroid film, this is awful. It's like beta release of Polaroid film, before they perfected the recipe.

When was the last time you and your friends created an chemical process to develop instant film from scratch with almost no means?

And claiming "they make it look bad, so they can be hipsters" is just even more stupid.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 3, 2012 at 03:30 UTC
In reply to:

robjons: Every Samsung product I have ever used has had stupidly illogical UI. That plus mediocre quality and their blatant rip off of other companies (Apple of course) is enough to never come near one of their products. Have some integrity, look elsewhere.

I guess very very few people share your opinion. This camera is equipped with the latest version of the most popular and most sold smartphone OS on the planet.
And don't get us started on your claim that Samsung copies everything. How you can shout about Samsung not being creative in a comment about a product that is the first of its kind, is completely ridiculous.

I guess companies suing others for having smartphones with round corners - even if everyone else already produced smartphones with round corners before that - has more integrity in your view?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 30, 2012 at 08:32 UTC
In reply to:

alexzn: To the a...holes posting snide comments about this: when was the last time you took a picture with your expensive gear that was half as good as those posted by Dan Chung? When was the last time you got half as many good pictures as are in that blog? Probably not in your whole lifetime. Losers...

Dan- Congratulations with a great image stream, you proved that gear is not a limitation when it is in good hands. Of course that goes poorly on a gadget frak site like DPR.

"Of course that goes poorly on a gadget frak site like DPR."

You do realize this article is about someone using gadgets to take a photo, just to show he can take photos with it, create a buzz and especially mention the brands he used?

The irony.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2012 at 15:32 UTC
Total: 125, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »