locke_fc

locke_fc

Lives in Spain Spain
Joined on Apr 14, 2009

Comments

Total: 163, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Video preview of the Canon Powershot G7 X article (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

zorgon: It's hard to believe that they can make a lens that small, with that zoom range and aperture. On paper at least it looks better than the Sony RX100III and Panasonic LX100 but I get the feeling that something has to give. I guess we'll have to wait and see what the image quality is like.

People take pictures in bright light with their smartphones every day. Lack of a VF of any sort has never been a problem. If you say it's a personal preference, ok,but it's not a must for everyone.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 11:59 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G7 X First Impressions Review preview (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kirk Tuck: No EVF? DOA.

For some others, maybe ;)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 21:32 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G7 X First Impressions Review preview (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kirk Tuck: No EVF? DOA.

For some, maybe.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 20:07 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G7 X First Impressions Review preview (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tripeiro: Had Canon put an EVF they would have had a very interesting product (and it has been a while). But of course they had to disappoint and launch a product that although interesting, still feels half baked. Canikon being Canikon.

Disagree. It would be bigger with an EVF, and right now pocketability is one of the, if not the, biggest advantages of the G7X over the LX100, along with the longer zoom lens and tilting screen. A larger body, even with an EVF, with a 1" sensor would be pointless.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 20:03 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1602 comments in total)
In reply to:

locke_fc: Not really interested in the camera, but no wifi caught my attention.

It's 2014. At what point will camera makers decide it is no longer acceptable to release a flagship camera with something as simple, but highly useful, as wifi??

So yeah, no good reason NOT to include wifi in a high-end camera.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 19:37 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1602 comments in total)

Not really interested in the camera, but no wifi caught my attention.

It's 2014. At what point will camera makers decide it is no longer acceptable to release a flagship camera with something as simple, but highly useful, as wifi??

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 14:24 UTC as 318th comment | 11 replies
On Canon PowerShot G7 X First Impressions Review preview (398 comments in total)

Unless there's a big differemce in IQ (which looks unlikely), I'm going to be SO torn between this one and the LX100...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 13:47 UTC as 93rd comment
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 First Impressions Review preview (988 comments in total)

Impressive specs indeed, although I'm not too crazy about the short zoom. Somethning like 100mm would have been much more practical for a compact.

However, I'm more disppointed in the size. I know, it's a m43 sensor in a body with external controls AND a VF, but still... too large (particularly, thick) to be anywhere near pocketable.

I'll defnitely wait for reviews as this is a really exciting camera, but right now, I'm slighlty more interested in the G7X, with its much smaller body, longer zoom, tilting screen and integrated flash (I truly hate those tiny clip-on flashes).

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 13:44 UTC as 229th comment
On Zeiss introduces 'no distortion' Otus 1.4/85mm article (336 comments in total)

Too heavy, far too expensive. Not for me!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 9, 2014 at 05:45 UTC as 81st comment
On Opinion: Do we really need the Fuji X30? article (304 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jogger: We basically don't need any dedicated compact camera that doesnt have a large sensor, isnt a superzoom, or isnt ruggedised. Flagship phones are already using 1/2.3 sensor and some have even larger.

I still agree with the other points Jogger made.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2014 at 22:55 UTC
On Opinion: Do we really need the Fuji X30? article (304 comments in total)

I read the piece, and before even reading any of the comments I thought that this reads like something straight out, or heavily inspired by, Fuji's marketing department
I'm not saying it is, but maybe writers should consider what the stuff they write may sound like, and maybe put their arguments forward in a different manner. Just saying.

Oh, and my personal take? No, we don't 'need' the X-30 and it adds far too little for a camera coming almost two years after its predecessor. At the very least an upgraded sensor, or a smaller size, or something more substantial than this.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2014 at 22:52 UTC as 65th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

RickBuddy: Pretty sad day when a photographer attempts to convert a photo taken by a monkey to his own copyright.

"No! I'm really as good as that monkey!'

Right about there, the guy's lost.

Pretty sad day when a photographer buys the equipment, travels thousands of miles to get to some monkey, sets the equipment up so that the monkey can get some meaningful results with it, PP the images, distributes them and yet he's denied copyright.

Moronic.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 22, 2014 at 05:43 UTC
In reply to:

b craw: I was really hoping we were not going to revisit this monkey business upon ruling. But alas...

Sorry for those that are speaking opinions relating to fairness or some abstract spirit of fairness that should exist in this whole matter. Truth is, all laws are subject to degrees of interpretation, but the interpretive latitude was quite narrow in this case - outcome quite predictable. Defining moment of creation " selfie" resided in the activity of a natural force (animal) therefore copyright can not be held by photographer despite preparation, editing, or distribution. Animal cannot hold copyright, therefore no copyright of these images. Period. And, contrary to some opinion, this ruling should not make vulnerable copyrights granted to photographers setting wildlife photo traps. That action is entirely different, involving much more distinct authorship/production by the photographer.

Well, that is the US Office's interpretation. But it's wrong.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 22, 2014 at 05:39 UTC

It's ridiculous, ffs. Wikimedia and the US Copyright office are taking a most cynical stance.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 22, 2014 at 05:37 UTC as 106th comment | 2 replies

Interesting project.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 05:36 UTC as 10th comment
On Ricoh expands Q series with Pentax Q-S1 article (360 comments in total)
In reply to:

locke_fc: Sorry, but a 1/1.7" sensor is no longer acceptable. Might as well use your smartphone instead.

Felix E Klee - Of course it's an opinion. Unless you happen to be so anally retentive as to take it literally.

If you're going to sleep better at night thinking that I have a different opinion to yours because of my "deep lack of technical understanding", go ahead. I have no time for people who think that anyone who doesn't agree with them have to be ill-informed idiots..

Direct link | Posted on Aug 7, 2014 at 13:42 UTC
On Ricoh expands Q series with Pentax Q-S1 article (360 comments in total)
In reply to:

locke_fc: Sorry, but a 1/1.7" sensor is no longer acceptable. Might as well use your smartphone instead.

Raist3d - It's not silly, as far as I'm concerned it is unacceptable and hardly better than a smartphone. Again, MY opinion, nobody has to agree.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2014 at 23:10 UTC
On Ricoh expands Q series with Pentax Q-S1 article (360 comments in total)
In reply to:

locke_fc: Sorry, but a 1/1.7" sensor is no longer acceptable. Might as well use your smartphone instead.

Jacob - sassy, but nothing else.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2014 at 23:08 UTC
On Ricoh expands Q series with Pentax Q-S1 article (360 comments in total)
In reply to:

locke_fc: Sorry, but a 1/1.7" sensor is no longer acceptable. Might as well use your smartphone instead.

Like I said, you guys go out and buy it. It's not for me!

This is dpr's final verdict on the Q7:

"The Pentax Q7 does well in everyday shooting, delivering image quality that's generally as good as the best enthusiast compacts. However, it under delivers for the entry-level ILC class in terms of resolution and high ISO performance. Though we had few serious complaints about its performance, it's hard to recommend among so many excellent fixed and interchangeable lens cameras that cost about the same."

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2014 at 04:57 UTC
On Ricoh expands Q series with Pentax Q-S1 article (360 comments in total)
In reply to:

locke_fc: Sorry, but a 1/1.7" sensor is no longer acceptable. Might as well use your smartphone instead.

Of course, there's the lenses that go with the puny sensor. IQ is still almost as good/bad as you can get with a decent smartphone, or a few dozen compact cameras costing half as much.

Seriously, I don't have an issue with those who like this and are willing to pay for it, but to me, in this day and age, it's unacceptable. And yes, I can be categorical because I speak for myself ;)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2014 at 16:52 UTC
Total: 163, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »