QuarterToDoom

QuarterToDoom

Lives in Canada Surrey, Canada
Joined on Dec 8, 2009

Comments

Total: 127, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

QuarterToDoom: Wow its like a shark feeding frenzy and Canon and Nikon are the ones who are bleeding in water. I don't think there has ever been so much going on in the consumer camera equipment world like in the last 3 years.

I wasn’t referring to financials but to innovation. Look at Olympus, its camera division wasn't making anything for a long time and look at what m4/3 has lead too, a whole new push for innovation leaving with several companies biting at Canon and Nikon.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 8, 2014 at 16:41 UTC

Wow its like a shark feeding frenzy and Canon and Nikon are the ones who are bleeding in water. I don't think there has ever been so much going on in the consumer camera equipment world like in the last 3 years.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 8, 2014 at 03:19 UTC as 17th comment | 2 replies
On Apple applies for dual-sensor camera patent post (71 comments in total)

>Electronic device with two image sensors

>Unlike many other digital SLRs, the E-330 used a second sensor in the viewfinder chamber which was fed by splitting 20% of the light from the viewfinder. The advantage of this implementation is that the camera's autofocus and exposure systems are fully functional and there is no shutter lag

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2014 at 19:52 UTC as 9th comment
On Apple patents remote control for iPhone camera post (50 comments in total)

So they patented the Wii U gamepad?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 18:37 UTC as 26th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

QuarterToDoom: Even though I'm staying away from the Oly cameras atm since I hate anything Sony (ie the Sony sensor) you cant deny even if you're a m43 hater that Olympus and m43 is leading the charge to give consumers what they want and evolving camera technology at a very rapid pace. Just look how they evolved since the E330

By MrTaikitso (26 min ago)

Well I boycott lots of companies for their anti consumer actions. Yes that limits by choice but hey they don't get my money and I have fewer decision to make on choose a product. MY E5 should still last me for 10 more years, hell I replaced my 8 year old E1 with it.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 15, 2014 at 21:25 UTC

Even though I'm staying away from the Oly cameras atm since I hate anything Sony (ie the Sony sensor) you cant deny even if you're a m43 hater that Olympus and m43 is leading the charge to give consumers what they want and evolving camera technology at a very rapid pace. Just look how they evolved since the E330

Direct link | Posted on Mar 15, 2014 at 20:29 UTC as 23rd comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

itchhh: No bonus for the exec's this year :( This has gotta' hurt the P/L statement.

Overall you can just write if off as advertising cost since Sigma will probably get more sales now. Doesn't matter if they infringed, it the perception of big corporate bully beating up on small company.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 12, 2014 at 18:34 UTC
In reply to:

mrdancer: "As an optics manufacturer, we know that it isn’t as simple as saying 'a bigger sensor always delivers better image quality than a smaller sensor'. It's more complicated than that. It’s a combination of multiple factors including lens resolution, sensor and image processing. "

This is kind of a slap in the face to many of the trolls here!

By rpm40 (2 hours ago) For many people, things like size, handling, features, and so on actually do matter. I know it sounds crazy...

Here's a crazy thing. If Oly came up with an E1 bodied camera with updated lcd and sensor I'd be the first inline to get it. That thing is the cats ass in ergonomic and size wise (for me that is) Finger yoga districts me from taking in the scenery and finding that spot/angle/light that would look good on screen/photo.

So take your iso 120000 sensor and 4K video and give me some proper ergonomics.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2014 at 18:47 UTC
In reply to:

Matthewson: I really don't understand the push for mirrorless cameras. The latest installments from Olympus look like SLR's from the outside, with a "pentaprism" of sorts sitting on top. I'd vote down anything that adds cost, complexity, and battery draw. Peering at a tiny video of your scene serves only to separate the photographer further from his subject. The original OM line had reflex mirrors, and were compact. The only gripe I had back then, in the 80's, was the strap lugs dug into my palms. From the look of it, they're still putting those nasty strap lugs on their cameras.

Why bother with anything new or take a chance? As a consumer Oly doing whatever they want should have no baring on anything in your life.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2014 at 18:40 UTC

Well maybe the cameras are so good now its makes people skip a couple of generations until there's big improvement in the camera body.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2014 at 18:46 UTC as 128th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

GPW: >QuarterToDoom, Let me ask you and everyone on here a question. If you bought a camera and used 3rd party batteries and the batteries damaged the camera, who should be responsible(pay for) to have the camera fixed?

By GPW >QuarterToDoom, Let me ask you and everyone on here a question. If you bought a camera and used 3rd party batteries and the batteries damaged the camera, who should be responsible(pay for) to have the camera fixed?

Obviously the user would be but that's their choice to use what they want. If the manufacturer all of a sudden updates software to battle consumer choice then they'll pay in the end with loss of market share.

Simple fix give a user an option to set a flag that allows third party batteries, it then keeps a record of this flag in memory but voids the warranty if damaged is done by after market battery.

If the manufacturer was smart enough they'd allows licensing for official third party batteries/accessories. The amount of good will they would get out of this would probably overshadow the amount of profit they would lose from people not buying their batteries.

Happy customers are much easier to part with money.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2013 at 22:44 UTC

>By GPW (3 min ago) >> I agree with Nikon. 3rd party batteries might not be top quality and damage the camera. If I were Nikon I would include this in the warranty. Sorry folks

That's called FUD.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2013 at 21:23 UTC as 42nd comment
In reply to:

Kubicide: Nikon has every right to do this - so why the hate? Does everyone think the aftermarket folks really care about your camera or compatability, or bringing you some sort of "fair value"? No, they want your $$$. And as a manufacturer Nikon should do what they need to do to protect their product and support expenses.

No one knows for sure just how compatible or incompatible the aftermarket product is except for the engineers at Nikon and the other companies. This battery issue is just like the reverse engineered lenses. It's the old "buyer beware" thing. If you are out to save a buck then do it 'eyes wide open' and know that the aftermarket product may not work and the vendor just wants your money for their product. That's it. Nikon doesn't make any claim to state that their product is designed to work with anything coming out of any 'brand x' manufacturer.

>By Kubicide -- Nikon has every right to doNikon has every right to do this - so why the hate? Does everyone think the aftermarket folks really care about your camera or compatability

Last time I checked all of us OWN the equipment and if any company doesn't specify in release notes that third party equipment will stop functioning after the next firmware update its their fault and they are trying to limit what you can do with your own device.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2013 at 02:40 UTC
In reply to:

QuarterToDoom: For all of you who think Nikon is right, here's one for you. This goes beyond ridiculous.

I couldn't upload to the galleries for some reason (gave me errors) so had to upload it to my server.

http://192.99.1.212/polaroid-vs-nikon.jpg

>>By Andy Crowe (28 min ago) -- Show me 2 compact cameras that have as much in common as the Nikon and Polaroid do.

Well let me show you some rectangles with a lens attached to it

http://192.99.1.212/its-a-rectangle-with-a-lens.jpg

Direct link | Posted on Dec 7, 2013 at 23:27 UTC
In reply to:

QuarterToDoom: For all of you who think Nikon is right, here's one for you. This goes beyond ridiculous.

I couldn't upload to the galleries for some reason (gave me errors) so had to upload it to my server.

http://192.99.1.212/polaroid-vs-nikon.jpg

So what, they removed the logos/printing on the cameras to make them look the same to exaggerate the similarities They also blacked out the glass/lens front to confuse people Yah no agenda there.

You can do the same with any black/white/red compact camera and they'll look exactly the same.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 7, 2013 at 22:53 UTC
In reply to:

ET2: The Nikon lawsuit reminds me of Apple's "rectangle with rounded corners" crap.

The cameras (functionally, sensor, software, lenses, etc) have nothing in common.

>By Morris Sullivan (22 hours ago)

>"That's the camera my neighbor just bought, that he's happy with", or "That's the camera I saw advertised on TV"

That's ridiculous. They could have though the same about any of these cameras.

http://www.bassandbligh.com/store/images/uploads/cameras/Olympus/xz1_white_front%281%29.jpg

http://www.itechnews.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Pentax-Optio-P80-digital-camera-white.jpg

http://images.freshnessmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/leica_m8_white_edition_8-570x379.jpg

http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2013/05/01/10690937/Samsung_NX200_white_camera.jpg

http://www.red-onions.co.uk/image/cache/data/Samsung%20NX300%20White%20Camera%20Kit%20inc%2020-50mm%20+%2050-200mm%20Lenses%20__main-500x500.jpg

Direct link | Posted on Dec 7, 2013 at 20:45 UTC

For all of you who think Nikon is right, here's one for you. This goes beyond ridiculous.

I couldn't upload to the galleries for some reason (gave me errors) so had to upload it to my server.

http://192.99.1.212/polaroid-vs-nikon.jpg

Direct link | Posted on Dec 7, 2013 at 20:11 UTC as 9th comment | 13 replies
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: Good !
Victory in anti-counterfeiting.
It prevents the fake products spread out to the whole world.
An excellent decision from the court.

>>>>>By AbrasiveReducer (10 hours ago)
Imagine arguing that people went to buy a genuine Nikon and got a Sakar Polaroid by accident. Whoops! Well, this victory will put a stop to that.

Did you even read what you wrote? How the hell could you go to a store pickup a camera that says Polaroid on it and think you are buying a genuine Nikon?

Ok Ok ilts say someone buys it how stupid would you have to be to not notice Polaroid on the packaging?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 7, 2013 at 18:22 UTC
In reply to:

LiSkynden: Kind of sad from Nikon. Did they have more money and "won" the law suit or what?

Why because its white?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2013 at 20:56 UTC

Seriously in the next 20 years no one will be able to make anything if these Design Patent crap keeps being won.

How come you don't see car manufactures suing each other for look alike cars. Look at the photos below at least on the cameras the brand names stand right out.

http://photos.ecarlist.com/GT/HB/mb/1w/Lg/ac/ka/9w/ul/jQ/dQ_800.png

http://photos.fzautomotive.com/color_0640_032_png/8661/8661_cc0640_032_E4.png?404=default

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2013 at 20:52 UTC as 48th comment | 1 reply
Total: 127, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »