paulski66

paulski66

Lives in United States IN, United States
Joined on Apr 9, 2010

Comments

Total: 71, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

noflashplease: It looks like the marketing department decided on the ISO settings? The D500 doesn't advance the stage of the art, just the current state of hyperbole. There's nothing usable about "ISO 3,280,000," although it looks impressive on a spec sheet or as part of a nonsensical press release.

Nikon had to do something to justify a $2,000 APS-C body, after all.

The D5 is a $2,000 APS-C body?

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2016 at 17:56 UTC

Canon rings in the New Year...well, er, the year 2011, at least.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 21:50 UTC as 43rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

kewlguy: seriously DPR, no other lenses worth reviewing more?

I wonder if the DPR staffers have a pre-publication meeting prior to releasing any articles in which they go over the myriad inane comments they can expect to receive, just to brace themselves for the whining and complaining.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2016 at 15:04 UTC
In reply to:

shademaster: I don't see why one would put a 1.5kg 50-100 1.8 on an APS-C camera when they could put a 1.5kg 70-200 2.8 (more reach, same effective aperture) on a FF camera. The FF sensor will have better noise/DR at Base ISO all things being equal.

Why doesn't sigma bring back the 50-150 2.8 APS-C lens? I'd rather have a reasonable size/weight option rather than f/1.8. For event-type stuff, f/1.8 on is too narrow even on APS-C (only one face in focus). For non-event stuff, just go with a prime.

I don't think most people make the FF/APS-C decision based on lens offerings from 3rd parties.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 16:55 UTC
In reply to:

Me too.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 16:26 UTC
In reply to:

blakevanderbilt: I'm getting really tired of your sh*t Sigma, where's the real lenses that people want? Where's the real lenses that people use? We've been asking for a 24-70, a 70-200, an 85mm, a 90 or 105 or 135 for ages now, literally ages.The last proper lens you've released was June 2015? How long do you want to milk that sh*t?

What an odd rant.

Nikon makes many of these lenses already. Sigma already has many of these lenses, too. If you don't like Sigma's offerings, go buy from another manufacturer.

And June 2015 wasn't really all that long ago.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 16:26 UTC
On article The long, difficult road to Pentax full-frame (616 comments in total)
In reply to:

tinetz: I have a Sony mobile phone. It is not even a year old, but there have been to "successors" to it in the meantime, which make it again "better" and bring cutting edge technology.
I think this is all right for this consumer items, still, this leaves a bitter taste in regard to an hoped reliability and also the trust of the company in their products and raises doubts for long time support.
I see for staff highly appreciating cutting edge cameras, the newest, even better than the half year model, with more electronics and a new slightly faster processor and now the ultimate evf, finally catching up in delay etc...which will be outdated in at least a year, take this for granted.
That's fine, but am I just have the impression I might not be the only one who reads between the lines of this K-1 announcement: solid, balanced, lasting. It's unusual these days, nevertheless much appreciated by me, even when obviously not by all, which is also fine.

Maybe you need to upgrade...

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2016 at 16:44 UTC
On article Worth the wait? A look inside the Pentax K-1 (649 comments in total)

Is it too early to start complaining that DPReview hasn't posted their K-1 review yet?

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2016 at 15:10 UTC as 115th comment | 4 replies
On article Here at last: Nikon announces D500 (1175 comments in total)

There's a typo in the specs of the "kit" lens; I believe it is a 2.8-4 lens, not 3.5-5.6.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 21:27 UTC as 258th comment
In reply to:

2L84alibi: I find the D750 to be very capable my images prove this out as I apply my limited skill set. Just like I prefer bourbon over rum, to each his own.

I prefer my bourbon straight, or vary occasionally on the rocks. Never tried it over rum before...

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 19:27 UTC
In reply to:

Steve Balcombe: If only Canon would understand that this is exactly the right spec for the 6D Mark II. I bet it's not what we get though.

There's really not that much distinguishing the d750 from the d810; in many ways, it is closer to the d610 than it is the d810. For example, it has the enthusiast control layout of the d610 (and d7200/7100/7000/90/80 line, as well). Yes, it has some enhancements, but I would say it's a small step up from a d610, released, many people think, to give Nikon a chance to "reboot" their entry-level FX line-up and escape the stigma of the d600 oil/sensor issue.

Not to say there's anything wrong with the d750; I have one, I love it. But it's not in a class above the d610; they're very similar cameras, with the d750 sporting a few enhancements that, for some, can be quite significant.

EDIT: And I'm not really trying to "slot" the d750 in according the Canon line-up. I pay very little attention to what Canon's doing, and find their camera line-up/naming scheme even more confusing than Nikon's.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 12:33 UTC
In reply to:

String: Nice to see Nikon get something right, its been a while.

You haven't been paying attention...

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 16:12 UTC
In reply to:

Steve Balcombe: If only Canon would understand that this is exactly the right spec for the 6D Mark II. I bet it's not what we get though.

^ d600 and d750 are more-or-less in the same class.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 16:11 UTC
On Connect post Amazon reveals thinner Fire HD tablets (66 comments in total)
In reply to:

007peter: Love the Low Price, but hate the Low-Resolution 1280x800 on 10.1" screen (149dpi). I was hoping a 10.1" HDX with 2560x1440 resolution

The low resolution on both the 8" and the 10" is a deal-breaker imo. Very unfortunate...I'd much rather have an 8" with the ppi of the current 8.9 HDX, but at the cost of the new 10."

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2015 at 20:28 UTC
On article Amazon reveals thinner Fire HD tablets (66 comments in total)
In reply to:

007peter: Love the Low Price, but hate the Low-Resolution 1280x800 on 10.1" screen (149dpi). I was hoping a 10.1" HDX with 2560x1440 resolution

The low resolution on both the 8" and the 10" is a deal-breaker imo. Very unfortunate...I'd much rather have an 8" with the ppi of the current 8.9 HDX, but at the cost of the new 10."

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2015 at 20:28 UTC

Silly, overpriced photography gear. Can you mount a Lecia to it? If so, it might sell.

Link | Posted on May 3, 2015 at 13:29 UTC as 80th comment | 1 reply
On article Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II (533 comments in total)

Where's the d810 review? That camera has been out for a year now, and here we're getting hands-on previews for just-announced, not-even-released cameras.

Outrageous...

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 01:05 UTC as 102nd comment | 5 replies

Well, there you go...proof that Hasselblad haven't cornered the market on stupid.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2015 at 23:35 UTC as 12th comment
On article Lensbaby introduces Velvet 56mm f/1.6 (167 comments in total)

Silly LensBaby. If they'd have charged $1700 for it, all of the Nikon kids would've raved about its "rendering" and proclaimed it the best lens ever!

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2015 at 22:26 UTC as 43rd comment
On article Nikon D5500 Review (392 comments in total)
In reply to:

zakaria: OR getting the pentax ks2 which has weather sealed body and af motor!!plus IS!!

lol at Pentax. Are they still in business?

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2015 at 14:02 UTC
Total: 71, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »