papillon_65

papillon_65

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Has a website at http://bit.ly/1K1oqkv
Joined on Oct 8, 2007

Comments

Total: 109, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Miggo wants to 'DSLR your iPhone' with the Pictar grip (134 comments in total)

I have a few devices which have the lens and controls completely integrated, I call them "cameras".

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 15:33 UTC as 55th comment | 1 reply
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (342 comments in total)

Fuji should have stuck with the bayer sensor in the original X100, I still have that camera and love it, not a lot needed to bring it up to date and I'm not interested in X trans, a 28mm version with a 16mp sensor would be ideal.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 12:34 UTC as 18th comment | 2 replies
On article Swirly bokeh: Lensbaby announces Twist 60 lens (118 comments in total)
In reply to:

papillon_65: Damn, another creative choice that I don't have to buy, I think I'll criticise it endlessly for a while....

I'm sure they'd be interested in your business plan in which the company thrives by selling stuff for nothing, I'm certain many people would be, count me in.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2016 at 18:39 UTC
On article Swirly bokeh: Lensbaby announces Twist 60 lens (118 comments in total)

Damn, another creative choice that I don't have to buy, I think I'll criticise it endlessly for a while....

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2016 at 14:38 UTC as 34th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

papillon_65: It might be nicely made but it isn't very robust, my took a short fall in a bag, that I've done many times with plenty of lenses and it didn't come out too well. It still worked but became stiff and squeaked, I got rid of it in the end.

Well I suspect the metal barrel got damaged, though I couldn't visibly see where. All the lenses I had dropped previously had been polycarbonate, which doesn't dent. You can blame me if you like but forewarned is forearmed, they don't do well in a drop test ;-)

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2016 at 19:50 UTC
In reply to:

papillon_65: It might be nicely made but it isn't very robust, my took a short fall in a bag, that I've done many times with plenty of lenses and it didn't come out too well. It still worked but became stiff and squeaked, I got rid of it in the end.

Sure, but my experience tells me it's unusual for a lens to malfunction in this kind of fall, I guess my luck ran out. I suspect the type of construction had something to do with it.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2016 at 19:38 UTC
In reply to:

papillon_65: It might be nicely made but it isn't very robust, my took a short fall in a bag, that I've done many times with plenty of lenses and it didn't come out too well. It still worked but became stiff and squeaked, I got rid of it in the end.

It wasn't extended, it was closed, I've done it many times, this was the first lens that suffered this kind of issue.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2016 at 19:10 UTC

It might be nicely made but it isn't very robust, my took a short fall in a bag, that I've done many times with plenty of lenses and it didn't come out too well. It still worked but became stiff and squeaked, I got rid of it in the end.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2016 at 18:15 UTC as 27th comment | 9 replies
On article CP+ 2016: Hands-on with new Panasonic lenses and ZS100 (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jefftan: 210 gram is too heavy for a MFT slow lens
$500 is too expensive, fair price is at most $300

@digifan I was referring to some general comments, the MTF charts look pretty good to me, I think some people may be in for a surprise.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2016 at 13:32 UTC
On article CP+ 2016: Hands-on with new Panasonic lenses and ZS100 (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jefftan: 210 gram is too heavy for a MFT slow lens
$500 is too expensive, fair price is at most $300

I love how everyone is judging the 12-60mm before we even know how it performs, I wish I had those magic powers.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2016 at 12:35 UTC

It's a Sigma, it's simple, it's quirky, it's different, normal camera users need not apply.....

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 19:44 UTC as 165th comment
On article Worth the wait? A look inside the Pentax K-1 (649 comments in total)
In reply to:

papillon_65: That's a camera you could use to knock a fence post in, good effort Pentax, disappointed you didn't include an "awkward child" or "obese shopper" filter though, maybe next time.

@Yanko - thanks, I'm too old to be a hipster, more of a rebel without a pause, I have a Swiss army knife for bottles, it's safer that way and when I'm feeling "arty" I always shoot without a lens, it's the only way to go, and significantly cheaper.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2016 at 14:49 UTC
On article Worth the wait? A look inside the Pentax K-1 (649 comments in total)
In reply to:

papillon_65: That's a camera you could use to knock a fence post in, good effort Pentax, disappointed you didn't include an "awkward child" or "obese shopper" filter though, maybe next time.

You'll be delighted to know the new lenses include a bottle opener on the filter thread.....

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2016 at 14:16 UTC
On article Worth the wait? A look inside the Pentax K-1 (649 comments in total)

That's a camera you could use to knock a fence post in, good effort Pentax, disappointed you didn't include an "awkward child" or "obese shopper" filter though, maybe next time.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2016 at 13:52 UTC as 129th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

Alex Sarbu: DPReview, please remove those pictures; your gallery software is making them look much softer than they were on pentax.com.
This article became a Pentax-bashing fest because of it.

They're terrible in every respect.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2016 at 07:08 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Sarbu: DPReview, please remove those pictures; your gallery software is making them look much softer than they were on pentax.com.
This article became a Pentax-bashing fest because of it.

Seriously, I'd be disappointed if that came from my Smartphone lol, it's garbage, even at that tiny size.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2016 at 16:55 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Sarbu: DPReview, please remove those pictures; your gallery software is making them look much softer than they were on pentax.com.
This article became a Pentax-bashing fest because of it.

I refer you to my original comment, neither meet the definition of "sharp", one's just a bit less of a blurry mess than the other.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2016 at 16:38 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Sarbu: DPReview, please remove those pictures; your gallery software is making them look much softer than they were on pentax.com.
This article became a Pentax-bashing fest because of it.

I looked at the "originals" and they're the same size, and if you can't make pictures sharp at this size then there's something seriously wrong about them.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2016 at 15:54 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Sarbu: DPReview, please remove those pictures; your gallery software is making them look much softer than they were on pentax.com.
This article became a Pentax-bashing fest because of it.

Sharper as in taken with vaseline on the lens rather than through a coke bottle?

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2016 at 15:15 UTC

Who made the lens? coke?

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2016 at 15:09 UTC as 52nd comment | 3 replies
Total: 109, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »