Malikknows

Malikknows

Joined on Jan 14, 2012

Comments

Total: 41, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Steve in GA: Looking through the comments here, I'm struck by depth of the depth of the vitriol. Apparently, few of the commenters saw these pictures and simply paused to remember that awful day and the 3,000 people that died.

Unfortunate.

Well, uninformed left wingers seem to predominate here, photomonkey. No matter. Read this in a paper today:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/26/us-troop-withdrawal-let-islamic-state-enter-iraq-m/

Surely you must be open to the possibility that your narrative -- created by a left-wing, Obama worshiping press -- is flawed.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 11:55 UTC
In reply to:

Steve in GA: Looking through the comments here, I'm struck by depth of the depth of the vitriol. Apparently, few of the commenters saw these pictures and simply paused to remember that awful day and the 3,000 people that died.

Unfortunate.

Wrong again. A small amount of troops could have secured Iraq's borders and given time for their democracy to take root. Fact is, no one in the security establishment can criticize Obama publicly because it will mean professional death for them. Everyone who worked Iraq knows the truth.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2015 at 19:46 UTC
In reply to:

Steve in GA: Looking through the comments here, I'm struck by depth of the depth of the vitriol. Apparently, few of the commenters saw these pictures and simply paused to remember that awful day and the 3,000 people that died.

Unfortunate.

Well, no, photomonkey. Iraq was won. Obama gave that victory away and created a vacuum for today's ISIS. None of what is happening now was inevitable.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2015 at 17:03 UTC
In reply to:

raztec: Guys at dpreview: please, seriously, is this news worthy? What did you expect, these guys to be dressed in full armour?

I have never seen a more banal post in my life.

I tend to agree, but on the other hand it presents an interesting challenge to photographers: How to make images of leaders at banal desks and in boring modern conference rooms reflect the urgency and import of the events to which they are reacting? Very hard to do.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2015 at 21:11 UTC
In reply to:

Steve in GA: Looking through the comments here, I'm struck by depth of the depth of the vitriol. Apparently, few of the commenters saw these pictures and simply paused to remember that awful day and the 3,000 people that died.

Unfortunate.

I tend to agree with you Roger, then I see people blaming Reagan and Bush with nothing to say about Clinton. First WTC bombing was on Clinton's watch. He should have taken the threat more seriously. Overall, though, this was the result of a bipartisan failure of government, IMHO.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2015 at 21:05 UTC
In reply to:

nawknai: I'm a huge fan of bags, and own lots of them. I don't mean camera bags, but all bags. I'm a guy, and I'm not overly trendy otherwise, but I like bag design.

With that declared, I'll say this about "messenger" bags: The flaps are usually a issue for camera bags because they prevent you from reaching your camera quickly. That, and flaps on some bags are too long. If you include a flap, it needs to be shorter.

I understand that a flap is generally regarded as being more weather resistant than simply using a zipper, but I'd personally rather have a zipper anyway. I know people don't like them because plastic zippers feel cheap, while metal zippers may scratch your gear. However, a waterproof zip may work for some people.

Personally, I don't have a camera bag anymore. My X100 sits in its hard-case, and I wear it across the shoulder. Same goes for my X-Pro1, and if I bring another lens, I keep it in whichever man-bag I'm carrying.

EDIT: The Roma has a good accessible opening!

I feel the same way about flaps. I did, though, get a bag with a flap that also has a zipper on the top allowing for access to the bag while the flap is snapped shut. Surprised more bags do not have this feature. Check this out:
http://www.blackhawk.com/Products/Bags-Packs-Tactical-Nylon/Bags-Packs/Bags/Courier-Bag.aspx
It's a military style bag so I understand it may not be for everyone.

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2015 at 13:08 UTC
In reply to:

cangyroo: Music Credit?

Imho, I didn't care much for the music. I didn't think it matched the photos. Horses for courses.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 21, 2015 at 13:33 UTC
On Video: DPReview panel at CreativeLive's Gear Day 2015 article (28 comments in total)

Excellent discussion. Reasonable people talking reasonably!

One quibble: On my version the audio didn't match the video. Lips moving at a different rate than the audio.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2015 at 13:39 UTC as 16th comment | 3 replies

Hey, I've got it on my screen saver and it cost me nothing!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 11, 2014 at 20:52 UTC as 171st comment
On Leica M9 users report sensor corrosion issue article (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

boarderphreak: Always fun to watch the Leica bashers crawl out of the woodwork. Because you know, this has *never* happened to any other manufacturer. Sh*t happens. The real test is how the respective company deals with it. And deal with it they will (check back tomorrow).

I'm by no means a Leica basher, but I think their 3 year limitation and complex formula is merely a way of keeping their losses low. They need to learn from Nikon here and just suck it up and offer much longer protection for their products. It is reasonable to expect this given the prices they charge.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2014 at 16:08 UTC
On Leica M9 users report sensor corrosion issue article (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

Calvin Chann: Guess I need to check my M9 and Monochrom.

I hope that Leica takes a responsible position on this matter. To replace the sensor with another one which is exactly the same is only deferring the problem for those replacements until a time where the time from purchase will be so long, it'll cost a lot.

The Leica brand is known for longevity of it's equipment. Could this be the death knell leading to questioning of its premium pricing. After all, if the body you buy now will cost a fortune to maintain over the years, why are we paying such a premium for it in the first place?

Is this why they've just released a new film body?

You raise the key point. If there is no quality advantage to Leica then a powerful justification for their prices is lost. I like their cameras and philosophy of photography a great deal, but that won't be of much use if the expense of using their products becomes too large.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2014 at 15:48 UTC

Can't get enough of these types of stories. Wished others at the time and earlier had also documented the historical sites. Too bad the camera wasn't invented earlier!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 15, 2014 at 11:13 UTC as 6th comment
On A second glance: two takes on the Leica X article (400 comments in total)
In reply to:

jefenniejr: Thanks dpreview for publishing these reviews. Too many reviews on the interweb are thinly veiled fanboy regurgitation of extended lists of specifications. Real world use by real people gives a much needed perspective. I suspected this camera was a miss for Leica in reading the "spec-reviews" , but these gents really nailed it. Thanks for striving for more objective journalism.

I don't think that is a bad question, jefenniejr, but it is not the only question. "Do you enjoy using your camera?" is also a good question. Leicaphiles seem to value this question considerably. I don't own a Leica (can't afford one) but I do appreciate the simplicity and sometimes wish my 5Diii was less of a computer.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 11, 2014 at 16:06 UTC

For those who care about such things, they indeed look beautiful. Lovely.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 1, 2014 at 20:49 UTC as 79th comment
On First Hasselblad in space goes to auction next month article (84 comments in total)
In reply to:

bigdaddave: The camera is genuine but I doubt the lens is, the black Planars didn't arrive until much later, they were all silver back then

AndreaV's link to the auction site settles the lens question, imho. The photo with the astronauts holding what looks like a straight-out-of-the-box camera pretty much settles the question.

Very informative. Thanks.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 30, 2014 at 14:05 UTC
On First Hasselblad in space goes to auction next month article (84 comments in total)
In reply to:

bigdaddave: The camera is genuine but I doubt the lens is, the black Planars didn't arrive until much later, they were all silver back then

The caption on photo 9 reads, in part, "plus the original metal facing was repainted black to minimize reflections."

Perhaps this is a hint that black was specified.

Good question and I'd bet there is an interesting backstory here.

Very much enjoy these history stories featuring the artifacts of photography.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 30, 2014 at 13:43 UTC

Love these history posts!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 29, 2014 at 18:35 UTC as 17th comment
In reply to:

backayonder: You keep telling me my Olympus XZ1 is dying because you all have smartphones well thank god I still have my heavy cumbersome DSLR and 70-200mm lens

Thank you, Lee Jay. Very interesting -- and helpful.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2014 at 14:00 UTC
In reply to:

Jefftan: unfortunate that tough camera is still stuck in 2009, is t it really that difficult to at least put in waterproof for all these premium compact?

even with no zoom or limited zoom will be popular I bet
I have been waiting literally for years

I agree, Jefftan, that tough cameras offer something that it is worth pursuing. I've got a Sony TX10 I put in my pocket whenever I anticipate getting wet. Let's hope these cameras get better, and IMHO, lose the weird styling.

The problem, though, is all the folks who try to use them for serious underwater photography and ruin them or are disappointed by the results. I think a bright line on true weather sealing versus waterproofing, would be useful. Yes, tkbslc, true waterproofing is very, very hard to do.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2014 at 13:53 UTC
In reply to:

whtchocla7e: The point-and-shoots are alive and well.

The Nex 3/5, the small m4/3 cams from Oly and Panny, the Nikon 1, the Q from Pentax, the premium compacts from various manufacturers?

They're all point-and-shoots in disguise. They sell in mass quantities, the majority of the buyers never purchase an additional lenses or accessories.

Your casual photographer may now have a more capable camera with interchangeable lenses (and they may not even know it!) but the point-and-shoot mentality does not change.

The definition of a point-and-shoot should be more dynamic to reflect the current state of the (lower end) camera market.

Yes, DMiller hits the bright line here. A true P&S can only be used as a P&S and has minimal manual controls (just like a phone!). Because more sophisticated cameras have a P&S mode, doesn't make them a P&S.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2014 at 13:48 UTC
Total: 41, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »