twenty200

twenty200

Lives in United States Portland, OR, United States
Has a website at http://twenty200.com
Joined on Dec 2, 2009

Comments

Total: 16, showing: 1 – 16
On Tamrac launches rugged-looking photo messenger bags article (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

twenty200: I own a Tamrac bag and am mostly happy with it. They make great bags... but look at that clip. It's the worst I've ever seen on any bag. That weird almost triangle shape is way to easy to mis-align when trying to close the bag. It's really terrible. I assumed the horrible clip would be the first thing they'd change, but there it is, years later, on new bags. I have no idea what the people at Tamrac are thinking. I like their bags a lot, but that clip is really terrible.

@EricoftheNorth: The one handed operation is precisely why this clip is so bad. I own an older Tamrac bag with a different clip, and it's a breeze to open one handed. I also own a Tamrac bag with this clip, and the shape makes it needlessly difficult to use while on the go. It's too easy to struggle to close, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if someone were to break the thing. It's poorly designed.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2014 at 02:56 UTC
On Tamrac launches rugged-looking photo messenger bags article (105 comments in total)

I own a Tamrac bag and am mostly happy with it. They make great bags... but look at that clip. It's the worst I've ever seen on any bag. That weird almost triangle shape is way to easy to mis-align when trying to close the bag. It's really terrible. I assumed the horrible clip would be the first thing they'd change, but there it is, years later, on new bags. I have no idea what the people at Tamrac are thinking. I like their bags a lot, but that clip is really terrible.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2014 at 21:09 UTC as 17th comment | 3 replies
On Sony Alpha SLT-A99 preview (326 comments in total)
In reply to:

twenty200: I own an A77. Until you've shot your style of photography with an A77 or A99, you simply have no idea how much of a positive impact this kind of viewfinder will have. The first time I went out shooting with my A77, I couldn't stop saying "Wow." Not because I was dazzled by the technology. I was wowed by the immense usability. An EVF gives you so much more control over the camera than you've ever known before. It's a lot like the leap from film to digital all over again in that it's even more instant feedback. I can't justify buying an A99, but if I could, I'd have already done it. I'm not a Sony guy, but I'm definitely sticking with Sony unless somebody else creates an even better EVF. For me, it's the killer feature I can't do without. I thought it would be a gimmick. It turned out to be the most photographer friendly feature I could have ever imagined.

A quick click to my galleries here show that's not the sort of photography I shoot. Advancements in technology aren't for everyone. Enjoy your OVF. And I'll enjoy the benefits of my EVF.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 13, 2012 at 16:45 UTC
On Sony Alpha SLT-A99 preview (326 comments in total)

I own an A77. Until you've shot your style of photography with an A77 or A99, you simply have no idea how much of a positive impact this kind of viewfinder will have. The first time I went out shooting with my A77, I couldn't stop saying "Wow." Not because I was dazzled by the technology. I was wowed by the immense usability. An EVF gives you so much more control over the camera than you've ever known before. It's a lot like the leap from film to digital all over again in that it's even more instant feedback. I can't justify buying an A99, but if I could, I'd have already done it. I'm not a Sony guy, but I'm definitely sticking with Sony unless somebody else creates an even better EVF. For me, it's the killer feature I can't do without. I thought it would be a gimmick. It turned out to be the most photographer friendly feature I could have ever imagined.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 13, 2012 at 07:08 UTC as 56th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

zos xavius: I gotta admit it. Maybe a sony fanboy can clue me in. Why pick slt over dslr? Most of us want an ovf. I've used evfs and even when the refresh rate keeps up they feel slow. Also most evfs only give you what was shot during burst, making leading a moving target almost impossible. With a mirror it at least gives you a glimpse of the next frame. Then there is the 20% light loss. That's huge. Also there is the fact that fine details are lost at roughly 5-10%. This combined with an aa filter an bayer array doesn't really help image quality does it? Also does dust just collect on the mirror? At least my camera shakes dust from the sensor. I still have to clean every few months, but it helps a lot. I mean I change lenses all the time in outside conditions. Usually I have little choice. If there was just a mirror there it would be a mess. My mirror is a mess as it is and my focusing screen looks pretty awful, but my sensor is pretty clean. That says a lot. Mirror boxes get filthy. I saw shots with the mirror pulled and they were clearly sharper, and the article was written by a sony fan, so it doesn't seem like he wanted to fake it to smear sony. It just has so many drawbacks. The only thing it gains for all the compromises is phase detection. Surely you could implement phase detection a bit more gracefully. What gets me is that it still uses a mirror but has no ovf. That just seems kind of...well...odd.... Someone tell me what I'm missing. It seems like slt is the future for sony in the dslr space. I would much rather see them do more cameras like the a900. I'm no sony fan, I'm just trying to get why they would bet so much on a design that offers few advantages over a traditional dslr. Are they that convinced that evf is superior or that's what they think the market wants? I shoot pentax and the k-01 as odd as it is, makes more sense than slt. Isn't that funny? A k-01 with an evf would be superior to this except that it wouldn't have phase detection, but contrast detection is catching up fast. Look at the olympus om-d or the panny g3. They are just poor at panning with moving objects. To me that's a software problem. Cdaf will certainly pass pdaf by in the long run. So if you ask me in 5 years this whole system will seem kind of pointless. Am I wrong? I'm not trolling or anything. I've read a lot about slt to try to understand why anyone would find it superior. Maybe I'm just too much of a traditionalist. I like innovation, but only when it comes with real benefits.

I'm not a fanboy, by the way. I was just as skeptical as you are, but I got a chance to play with an a77 for a while because the camera shop I was at was dead at the time, and they had two of them in stock (this was last October when it was just starting to arrive at shops in the U.S.)

You really have to shoot with an SLT (a good one! Not an entry level model) to understand the difference between a viewfinder that shows a reflection of what's coming in your lens, and a viewfinder that shows what the sensor is receiving.

An electronic viewfinder on a film camera would be ridiculous. But an electronic viewfinder on a digital camera makes a LOT of sense. I've owned an a77 since last fall and I'm still blown away by what this kind of viewfinder can help me do.

Photography is about the photographer. An electronic viewfinder gives the photographer so much more (and so much faster) feedback. As I said, it's a much better workflow.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 04:43 UTC
In reply to:

zos xavius: I gotta admit it. Maybe a sony fanboy can clue me in. Why pick slt over dslr? Most of us want an ovf. I've used evfs and even when the refresh rate keeps up they feel slow. Also most evfs only give you what was shot during burst, making leading a moving target almost impossible. With a mirror it at least gives you a glimpse of the next frame. Then there is the 20% light loss. That's huge. Also there is the fact that fine details are lost at roughly 5-10%. This combined with an aa filter an bayer array doesn't really help image quality does it? Also does dust just collect on the mirror? At least my camera shakes dust from the sensor. I still have to clean every few months, but it helps a lot. I mean I change lenses all the time in outside conditions. Usually I have little choice. If there was just a mirror there it would be a mess. My mirror is a mess as it is and my focusing screen looks pretty awful, but my sensor is pretty clean. That says a lot. Mirror boxes get filthy. I saw shots with the mirror pulled and they were clearly sharper, and the article was written by a sony fan, so it doesn't seem like he wanted to fake it to smear sony. It just has so many drawbacks. The only thing it gains for all the compromises is phase detection. Surely you could implement phase detection a bit more gracefully. What gets me is that it still uses a mirror but has no ovf. That just seems kind of...well...odd.... Someone tell me what I'm missing. It seems like slt is the future for sony in the dslr space. I would much rather see them do more cameras like the a900. I'm no sony fan, I'm just trying to get why they would bet so much on a design that offers few advantages over a traditional dslr. Are they that convinced that evf is superior or that's what they think the market wants? I shoot pentax and the k-01 as odd as it is, makes more sense than slt. Isn't that funny? A k-01 with an evf would be superior to this except that it wouldn't have phase detection, but contrast detection is catching up fast. Look at the olympus om-d or the panny g3. They are just poor at panning with moving objects. To me that's a software problem. Cdaf will certainly pass pdaf by in the long run. So if you ask me in 5 years this whole system will seem kind of pointless. Am I wrong? I'm not trolling or anything. I've read a lot about slt to try to understand why anyone would find it superior. Maybe I'm just too much of a traditionalist. I like innovation, but only when it comes with real benefits.

Here's why shooting with an SLT can be amazing. A DSLR viewfinder shows you what your lens sees. With an SLT, you're seeing what the sensor sees. It's a different way of working but it makes more sense. EXAMPLE: Let's say you want to boost ISO. Does your DSLR viewfinder get brighter? Of course not. But the electronic viewfinder in an SLT does, just as your shot would, because you're seeing it as the sensor sees it (just like the sensor would capture it). This comes in handy in so many ways. Here's something else an SLT can do: Let's say you're taking a group portrait. You can set your viewfinder up to give you a 2 second review after each shot IN THE VIEWFINDER. So, the moment you take the shot, you see it in the viewfinder while you're still holding the camera at your eye. Did somebody blink? You'll see it while you're still set up to take the shot again, so... take it again before anybody moves! It's a better workflow. I switched from a D7000 to an a77 and I love it.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 04:32 UTC
On Pentax reveals K lens roadmap for 2012 and 2013 article (101 comments in total)

If I were to buy a mirrorless, I'd buy a Sony. But I'd lust for this. I never imagined myself becoming a fan of Sony, but their NEX cameras are really impressive (and their a77 SLT is the most photographer friendly camera I've ever used).

...But this? This Pentax is sexy.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2012 at 20:34 UTC as 25th comment | 3 replies
On Disposable Hipstamatic - iOS App Review article (38 comments in total)

This app is garbage. The fact that you're reviewing it here really makes me question your level of expertise in regard to mobile photography. I mean, really now. Out of the thousands of photography apps, many of which are stellar, you choose to review THIS?

The original Hipstamatic app is surprisingly impressive. This app is garbage. It's nothing more than an attempt at clever marketing in order to make an easy buck, and they got hammered for it from many of their fans when it was released, so much so that they had to quickly rework the pricing scheme due to the backlash.

I love dpreview, but your expertise in mobile photography is lacking to the point where it's embarrassing. It's obvious to anyone who shoots with an iPhone.

4 stars for this app. Yikes.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2012 at 20:24 UTC as 12th comment | 2 replies
On King Camera v2.5 - iOS App Review article (33 comments in total)

This is not a very good camera replacement app. It's ok at best. Camera+ has been around longer and has improved far more than this app. I assume King Camera got a review here because they got in touch and sought a review? Otherwise, I can't imagine why anyone would pick this app over its competitors.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 7, 2012 at 07:44 UTC as 16th comment | 2 replies
On Just Posted: In-depth Sony SLT-A77 review article (225 comments in total)
In reply to:

Helena777: If this cam would put "Canon" or "Nikon" in a plate in this (remember, weather-proof) magalloy body ¿Would it be a Gold recommended cam? ;-)

I would be very happy if I could spend 1.800 euros to buy an A77, with "all" that ISO noise included :D

Exactly. If Canon or Nikon had made this camera, people would be falling over each other in a rush to heap praise on it. I'll be the first to admit, when the a33 and a55 came out, I was a doubter.

I do wish I could use my Nikkor lenses with my new a77, but you can't have everything.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 27, 2011 at 01:57 UTC
On Just Posted: In-depth Sony SLT-A77 review article (225 comments in total)
In reply to:

barri: HORRIBLE NOISE...
While the A77 seems largely a great camera, I am very disappointed about the sensor. What the heck was Sony thinking? 16 MP would have been more than enough. The high ISO noise on the A77 looks pretty horrible to me.
Wanted to buy the Nex-7 for my GF, but now I am not so sure any more about this sensor. Might better get the Nex-5n.

I also hope that next year's A99 is not going to have more MP than the A900. Otherwise I will not upgrade to it.

I've only been shooting with mine for a day, but my first impressions are pretty shocking (to me). The noise isn't an issue at all, especially considering that I never print or even scale to 100%. And the EVF exceeds my hopes and expectations. I can't believe I'm becoming a Sony guy... but... wow. I'm in love. I will say, the camera isn't exactly attractive, at least when compared to my soon to be sold Nikon. And Sony lenses are nowhere near as attractive looking as Nikons (except for the new E mount lenses. Those look slick, aesthetically). But, really... if THAT's my complaint?

To be fair, I'm only a hundred shots in so far... but wow. I'm really enjoying this camera. Actually, that's a lie. I'm LOVING this camera.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 27, 2011 at 01:51 UTC
On Just Posted: In-depth Sony SLT-A77 review article (225 comments in total)

I've only had an evening with an a77, but in my opinion, the vast majority of reviews - including this one - are missing the big picture.

The specs and features are about what the camera is able to do. fps, iso, etc. Of course that stuff matters. But the real story here is what an electronic viewfinder in a camera of this caliber enables a photographer to do. These new Sonys are the biggest change in cameras since the dawn of digital SLRs. Change exposure compensation and you literally SEE the change as your viewfinder becomes brighter or darker. You can set up the viewfinder to automatically review the shot you just took, in the viewfinder. No need for chimping on the monitor (though you can do that too if you like). Want a level? You can have one laid over what you're seeing in the viewfinder.

The value of the a77's electronic viewfinder cannot be overstated.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2011 at 20:57 UTC as 31st comment
On DSC_0043 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (20 comments in total)

I guess Green Eggs And Ham just became Blue Eggs And Toast.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2011 at 17:45 UTC as 4th comment
On Mobile imaging apps - an overview article (32 comments in total)
In reply to:

Falxon: Guys, what's with ALL of the headline apps being iPhone apps? The article starts out mentioning Android, then goes on to pretty much be an Apple love-fest.

To make matters worse, the Android apps you do list below each category are not even linked to the Android Market, while all Apple apps are faithfully linked.

With Android outnumbering Apple users, I would hope for much better balanced coverage, or at least, call it an article for Apple users only.

I also agree that Android users deserve their own article, specifically highlighting the best of their apps.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2011 at 23:31 UTC
On Mobile imaging apps - an overview article (32 comments in total)
In reply to:

Falxon: Guys, what's with ALL of the headline apps being iPhone apps? The article starts out mentioning Android, then goes on to pretty much be an Apple love-fest.

To make matters worse, the Android apps you do list below each category are not even linked to the Android Market, while all Apple apps are faithfully linked.

With Android outnumbering Apple users, I would hope for much better balanced coverage, or at least, call it an article for Apple users only.

I'm pretty shocked to see Camera Plus Pro instead of the real Camera+ app listed here. That's nutty. It seems as if dpreview went out of their way to not feature the best apps. Cameramatic instead of Hipstamatic? That's nutty too. Cameramatic has potential, but it's one of the many 2nd tier apps. It's certainly not better than Hipstamatic, and its dramatically lower userbase is proof of that. And Iris Photo Suite as the best editor? Nutty!!! LoMob is fun, but there's no way that's the best in its class.

Seriously. Why did dpreview make an effort to avoid best in class apps? So odd.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2011 at 23:30 UTC
On Mobile imaging apps - an overview article (32 comments in total)
In reply to:

Falxon: Guys, what's with ALL of the headline apps being iPhone apps? The article starts out mentioning Android, then goes on to pretty much be an Apple love-fest.

To make matters worse, the Android apps you do list below each category are not even linked to the Android Market, while all Apple apps are faithfully linked.

With Android outnumbering Apple users, I would hope for much better balanced coverage, or at least, call it an article for Apple users only.

The real problem Android faces is cash for developers. The reason there are so many better apps for the iPhone instead of Android has nothing to do with fanboyism or even the quality of the hardware or mobile OS. It's all about cash. Developers make more money from iPhone apps because, unless an iPhone is jailbroken, the only way to get apps is from the app store. This means app piracy is minimal at best. I honestly don't know anybody who buys Android apps. People download and swap them as if they're mp3s.

If Google can find a way to lock down Android apps within the Android Market as the only way to get them, Android will see an explosion of better apps (and upset customers who were used to pirating most of their apps).

In the end, it's all about cash. Developers will always flock to where they can make the most money.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2011 at 23:23 UTC
Total: 16, showing: 1 – 16