VENTURE-STAR

VENTURE-STAR

Joined on Jul 24, 2010

Comments

Total: 33, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: I don't doubt this is a superb camera and I wouldn't mind owning one. However, the price tag puts the instrument way out of my reach and carrying it around and using it in public places would be a liability from the point of theft and accidental damage.

The question is - would it actually improve my photography and the answer has to be no.

HowaboutRaw-

I'm not going to add anything more. I honestly have nothing against Leicas apart from the price!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 4, 2014 at 23:20 UTC
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: I don't doubt this is a superb camera and I wouldn't mind owning one. However, the price tag puts the instrument way out of my reach and carrying it around and using it in public places would be a liability from the point of theft and accidental damage.

The question is - would it actually improve my photography and the answer has to be no.

HowaboutRaw: I'm sure we'd both agree that a degree of common sense is essential if you want to visit many of the more interesting locations that lend themselves to good photography. My original point was simply that a camera like this is realistically outside my price range and I don't think that owning a digital Leica, - athough I have owned a couple of 35mm Leicas in the past, is worth considering. Nice as this camera undoubtedly is, it won't make me more creative and I would personally be very concerned about walking around many city areas in the US, Europe, or anywhere else with $8000 hanging around my neck and goodness knows how much more value stuff like lenses and maybe a second body in my bag. Not for me I'm afraid, even if the camera in question was half the quoted price!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 4, 2014 at 16:25 UTC
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: I don't doubt this is a superb camera and I wouldn't mind owning one. However, the price tag puts the instrument way out of my reach and carrying it around and using it in public places would be a liability from the point of theft and accidental damage.

The question is - would it actually improve my photography and the answer has to be no.

HowaboutRaw: That's okay, I've only been to Beverley Hills a couple of times. However I would mention that on my last visit to LA, the idiot at Alamo LAX gave me road directions which took me into the nearby Watts District. The place where I stopped to check my directions was the same place a German tourist had been robbed & blown away in his rental car the previous week. There are very dangerous places everywhere. You could easily run into serious trouble by visiting the Brixton area in South London if you wandered around with an expensive camera and a casual attitude.Maybe you've been lucky but there are very real dangers out there and I speak from experience. And BTW, if you ever visit somewhere like Jo-burg, the hotel staff will almost certainly warn you about showing jewellery, phones or cameras anywhere in public.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 4, 2014 at 00:35 UTC
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: I don't doubt this is a superb camera and I wouldn't mind owning one. However, the price tag puts the instrument way out of my reach and carrying it around and using it in public places would be a liability from the point of theft and accidental damage.

The question is - would it actually improve my photography and the answer has to be no.

HowaboutRaw - I don't live in Beverley Hills, so I don't see people routinely showing off in their status symbol sports cars. However, I would challenge anyone to walk around the streets of Johannesburg or Rio with a very expensive camera around their neck and no bodyguards.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2014 at 23:05 UTC

I hope they've taken a fresh look at correcting verticals, as this function was once pretty good, but became next to useless on recent versions.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2014 at 22:55 UTC as 2nd comment

On this basis, I must assume that any future pictures I take with my SLR using the self timer will belong to Nikon?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2014 at 22:47 UTC as 4th comment

I don't doubt this is a superb camera and I wouldn't mind owning one. However, the price tag puts the instrument way out of my reach and carrying it around and using it in public places would be a liability from the point of theft and accidental damage.

The question is - would it actually improve my photography and the answer has to be no.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2014 at 10:06 UTC as 6th comment | 12 replies
On A look at the Lomography Petzval 85mm F2.2 lens article (165 comments in total)

Everything indicates that this is a pretty awful, pointless piece of equipment that has little to offer anyone who is serious about taking pictures using a modern digital camera body. At £480, they are having a bit of a laugh I'd say!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 14, 2014 at 12:13 UTC as 8th comment | 3 replies

When putting something over the front of your Leica's lens, make sure you rub the back of the camera against a rough wooden worktop at the same time. Glad it's not my equipment!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 14, 2014 at 11:44 UTC as 10th comment

Excellent video. Before I started watching, the questions in my mind were lenses and reflection control. Both were well answered. I wonder what would happen in an emergency if you were carrying two substantial cameras in such a confined space? Would they get in the way of an ejection or escape?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2014 at 14:27 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lokio: Is this going to be an extra special review?

It might be if the control dial was properly indented, the lens had a more adequate focal length range, the camera felt better in your hands and the price was lower. A larger basic SLR can be had for far less money and it has many advantages. The Sony is for people with too much disposable income, who are more interested in flashy gear than photography.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 00:51 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lokio: Is this going to be an extra special review?

Yawn, no. It's just another veiled promotion for this quite nice, but somewhat flawed and seriously overpriced camera. Please move on DP review!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 16:49 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

DigiMatt: DPReview are you or will you be paid by Sony to promote this camera? Your Sony marketing machine seems to be in overdrive.

Digimatt, you have literally taken the words right out of my mouth and I have just come on to say exactly the same thing. Why is DP Review wasting so much time on this overpriced pocket camera? Do they have some kind of a hidden arrangement with Sony?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 2, 2014 at 18:44 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)

As a picture taking tool, it's not as good as several considerably cheaper DSLR cameras. It is also way too expensive. No doubt the new version has the same very annoying control wheel with no indents and the short zoom is ridiculous.

This camera really only has size going for it. For all you well-heeled photo equipment buyers who are more concerned with the appearance of gear than actually taking pictures,, enjoy! I think I'll pass.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2014 at 23:24 UTC as 440th comment | 10 replies
On Kodak reborn: A look at JK Imaging's 2014 lineup article (195 comments in total)

This might be an okay camera for some users depending on price, but it's unlikely to make any inroads against existing 4/3 products. As somebody else said, it's made by an obscure company and trades on a hollow name.

In reality, Kodak missed the boat about 15 years ago and they couldn't see the writing on the wall. They are virtually a deceased company who now belong to photographic history.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2014 at 19:51 UTC as 75th comment | 2 replies
On Hungarian law bans photos taken without consent article (321 comments in total)

In the UK, it's your right to take pictures of anything in a public place, including the police, celebs and children. However, common sense should tell you that in this paranoid age, it's never a good idea to specifically take pictures of other people's kids.

There are a couple of exceptions to taking pictures in UK public places such as certain birds and the police in some circumstances, where they can later prove you were engaged in an act of terrorism.

This is the way things should be in any country that passes as a democracy.

It should be the same in the USA, which used to be the land of the free, but things have changed for the worse in recent years, as Redred Photo points out and it's surprising that he's on this site when he so dislikes photography in public places. Most picture taking in public places is usually not for profit, but so what? Who gives a toss? I assume RR Photo is also against all forms of security surveillance and video monitoring?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 02:00 UTC as 60th comment | 5 replies
On Hungarian law bans photos taken without consent article (321 comments in total)

It's fairly clear from recent TV documentaries that Hungary is a backward country. Not only in financial trouble but also in the grip of fairly extreme right wing elements Why Hungary and for that matter Romania were ever invited to join the EU is a complete mystery and sadly, I can't see any good reason why anyone would want to visit these places, especially keen photographers. Perhaps it's not surprising that so many Eastern Europeans want to live in Western Europe?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 00:43 UTC as 64th comment | 1 reply
On Hungarian law bans photos taken without consent article (321 comments in total)

I suppose this law applies to various types of traffic cameras and all forms of video surveillance?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 18, 2014 at 19:17 UTC as 117th comment | 1 reply
On Nikon 1 V3: a quick summary article (597 comments in total)

It looks as if Nikon has actually produced a worthwhile non-SLR for once.

However, Nikon must offer a better (affordable) standard zoom as the 10-30mm is limited in range with a poor maximum aperture. The accessories seem rather overpriced. It remains to be seen what the build quality and reliablility of the V3 are like and the remarks by Jeff Keller about the control dials are a little off-putting.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 15:17 UTC as 124th comment | 1 reply
On Fujifilm UK X Signature service officially launched article (125 comments in total)

I'm sure this will dramatically improve the picture taking (or posing) experience for any Fujfilm X user who considers it important.

However, Fujifilm, you were doing okay without this nonsense, please don't lose the plot. A few of us still take your products seriously.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2014 at 23:42 UTC as 8th comment
Total: 33, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »