Lives in United States United States
Joined on Dec 16, 2009


Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

JaimeA: Wrong color, not sharp, this and that! Complaints.
My friend Tom (absolutely top images) explained it to me. You pestering fellows are probably using Microsoft Windows and the cheapest, not color balanced, uncalibrated displays or monitors. Use an Apple computer, or better, the Thunderbolt display for a true photographic experience. It will open a wonderland for you. Additionally you will get the truth. The Sony colors are the best there are to our eyes.
If you love photography do yourself a favor; use your brains and buy yourself a quality computer. Think of it as an essential part of your photo system and as important as the best camera or lenses you have. It will be a revelation.

Mac or Windows has nothing to do with the quality of the display

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 15:48 UTC
On Canon announces 16-35mm F4L and 10-18mm F4.5-5.6 lenses article (367 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aroart: Wow, is Canon so clueless. Why buy a 10-18 f4.5-5.6 when you can get a Tokina 11-16 2.8... Is it that hard to make it a 2.8....

I knew someone who got a bit sticker shocked when she found out how much it'd cost to get an UWA- this 10-18 should fit the bill

Direct link | Posted on May 13, 2014 at 19:34 UTC
On A travel-sized large-format 4x5 camera? article (219 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lukino: There is no lens, or film holder, or a shutter, or a "real" viewfinder (good luck using a open finder for wide angle).
So you basically pay 150$ for a plastic cone?

And a helicoid focusing mount - (albeit, a shitty plastic one) Schneider's focus mounts were $400 themselves

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2014 at 15:10 UTC
On A travel-sized large-format 4x5 camera? article (219 comments in total)
In reply to:

JamieTux: Can you still get quickload anywhere?

Sadly, no

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2014 at 15:08 UTC
In reply to:

Tobber: NIKON, just give me an affordable 28 or 30mm equivalent f2,8 prime lens with image stabilisation!

After so much years DX is around it's just absurd a wider angle sibling to the 35mm f1,8 never got released...

I think at this point, it's cheaper to get a D600 and FF lenses (screw drive) than getting an APS-C camera and limited yourself to AF-S lenses/lenses that don't exist

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 13:24 UTC
In reply to:

Ben O Connor: YEEEEEEEEE....

NOW I CAN ATTACH MY 200 € WORTH 45MM F 1.8 PLASTIC LENS TO MY 15.000 $ (According to CAMERA !!!!!!

How hard, is to produce a camcorder, which can take 1080 (forget about 4K) video, stereo voice recording, and interhcgable lens under 1K (I mean price !!!!)

There are excellent cameras from various makers, already a semi pro cam from BlackMagic... So where is my everyday use camcordern whcih does not boils the sensor, does not ruin my cams shutter life...come on guys !

This is not a camcorder, per se
This is more like the Sony F65
The mount is just a way to get a lens on the camera, there are no more implications than that.
m4/3 is a great choice, there's adapters for EVERYTHING from PL mount to C mount

Direct link | Posted on Apr 10, 2014 at 12:51 UTC

Does the 70-300 range on CX really make that much sense?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 16:21 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)

They should really do a video centric 1" sensor model with a c mount adapter
The Aptina sensor can do 4k, according to rumors
The size is Super 16
Give us a blackmagic pocket camera competitor

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 13:59 UTC as 159th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

FoolyCooly: Is it just me or does this cost 2x more than it should? The 35mm f1.8 DX is just $200...this doesn't look 3x more expensive.

Wide angles cost more than normal lenses?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 7, 2014 at 18:15 UTC

It's a commonly whored out, complex lens, that's probably gonna end up in a rough environment. I'd expect more failures than, say and 18-55 3.5-5.6

It's like how statistically unsafe the C130 airplane is. Duh, that's the plane you use to fly in and out of remote jungles, deserts, etc

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 20:10 UTC as 40th comment
On 5 Reasons why I haven't used my DSLR for months article (591 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bill Donnell: 35mm portraits at arms length, showing such an example and saying it is ideal is ridiculous. Take a look at the picture of the lady again. Look at her huge head on such a small body? Was she born deformed or was it caused by the distortion of a short focal length lens? I'll bet on the lens, but I'll give you the benefit of a doubt. Maybe she was a dwarf.

I agree that portraits can be taken with any focal length, but arms lengths with a 35mm equivalent is not flattering with most people. 35mm is awesome for environmental shots (full body in a setting)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 2, 2013 at 14:22 UTC

Not everyone cares about paper thin DOF. I'm just glad to watch MFT turn into a real, system with a complete line of lenses

Direct link | Posted on Aug 2, 2013 at 14:16 UTC as 19th comment | 12 replies

I'm surprised Nikon doesn't try and market the Nikon 1 system as a 16mm cinema system. The 35 1.2 would be an awesome on a Arri 16, no?
Also, not everyone cares about insane shallow DOF

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 21:07 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Asylum Photo: The most damning thing is the photographer taking a picture instead of trying to save a life. I don't buy the whole "I popped my flash to slow the train down" bit. Maybe this is why I could never be a photojournalist. Given the choice between stepping into the scene and doing good, vs capturing the scene, I'd choose the former every time.

The dude was pushed...

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2012 at 22:20 UTC
In reply to:

Phileas Fogg: If you DON'T LIKE Leica's then understand nobody is forcing you to buy one.

Sheesh this incessant bellyaching about what Leica does and how much their cameras cost is pathetic.

Most whiners here have never shot a Leica in their whiny little lives!

No one is arguing that concept isn't a good one. Plenty of rangefinder lovers out there.

One does expect that a camera released in 2012 has a someone modern sensor. (Yes, don't fix what isn't broke, but when cameras that cost 1/5 the price have more advanced sensors, it leaves buyers feeling like theyre on the short end of the stick)

Also, why do the buttons make it hard for you to shoot the way you like?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 19, 2012 at 14:24 UTC
In reply to:

123Mike: + Canon lovers finally get to enjoy AF during video, which was a complete deal breaker for any family video needs.
+ People invested in Canon accessories do not have to look at jumping ship to Sony anymore, which was up to now the only brand that offered decent AF during video
+ Continued access to Canon's most excellent lenses.
+ choose between contrast and phaseshift detect focusing for photos.

- Only 30 fps video
- Only 5 fps photos
- Still side ways flip out screen.
- No in body stabilization, need expensive lenses.
? however - video uses digital stabilization ?

Sony offers:

+ 60 fps video
+ 10, some 12 fps photos
+ Better flip out screen.
+ In camera stabilization (video does a very effective digital stabilization).
+ In camera high quality panorama.
+ Hand hand high quality twilight/night multi photo combining.
+ ISO boost by combining multiple shots taken at 10 fps.
- slight light loss due to pentamirror mechanism.

It's a moving mirror, 5FPS is fine, this IS a Rebel...
I LIKE the side flip out screen. Right hand on the grip, left hand to rotate screen as I raise the camera, easier to use on a tripod.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 8, 2012 at 16:32 UTC
In reply to:

GarageBoy: I can't tell if half the comments here are sarcastic or ignorant

Cine glass is probably the premier glass out there. The microcontrast, the tonality, the overall rendition. Absolutely stunning.

Ah yes, Cooke

Don't forget Kinoptik either (do they still make lenses? they have a functional website, but not sure if its the same lenses theyve been making since forever)

I wanna see a Master Prime slapped on a NEX just for kicks and giggles

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2012 at 15:18 UTC

I can't tell if half the comments here are sarcastic or ignorant

Cine glass is probably the premier glass out there. The microcontrast, the tonality, the overall rendition. Absolutely stunning.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2012 at 17:17 UTC as 6th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: Ahh what a cute tiny little sensor. Yawn.

MF users:: Aww cute little 24x36 sensor....

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2012 at 15:15 UTC
In reply to:

dsm6: I might get crucified here for saying this, but the body and design is not doing anything for me. There is really some great technology here, but why create a camera that isn't a SLR to look exactly like a 30 year old SLR. I understand the desire to evoke nostalgia, and a 'retro' feel, but it's about time for some fresh design input in this industry. The technology and mechanics of taking pictures has progressed much in the last 5 decades, so why design cameras around ergonomics for antique film based SLRs?

There must be a balance somewhere between the extremes of the Nikon/Canon cold war of releasing the newest iteration of their panzer tank line every few months, and the ultramodern Pentax K-01.

I'm also over the poser retro fad...
The Fuji X100 already looked like a cheap 1970s RF camera (which happens to sell for $1300)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2012 at 15:14 UTC
Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »