tamras29

Joined on Nov 20, 2011

Comments

Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

RStyga: I wish they could make this a F2.8-4 and without much difference in volume. :-)

Why not f1.4/2?
Because it would be the size of a microwave!!

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 07:42 UTC
On article Heavy lifting: Leica S (Type 007) sample gallery (197 comments in total)
In reply to:

tamras29: IMO, it's not really about image quality at all at this point in the market or value for money. It's like watches - I wear an Omega because I can afford an Omega. A Citizen, Tissot, or Davosa tells the time just as well as my Omega for a third of the price and some of them are beautifully designed. I can not afford a Rolex, an IWC, or a Patek Philippe, at 3 times the price which are also lovely watches but tell the time no better that a $50 Casio quartz!

Sorry, I can see how you may read it that way. What I meant is I wear an Omega as it's all I can afford, and I can't afford a Patek Philippe. In the same way I have a Fuji X-E2 because I can't afford a Leica M.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2015 at 08:18 UTC
On article Heavy lifting: Leica S (Type 007) sample gallery (197 comments in total)

IMO, it's not really about image quality at all at this point in the market or value for money. It's like watches - I wear an Omega because I can afford an Omega. A Citizen, Tissot, or Davosa tells the time just as well as my Omega for a third of the price and some of them are beautifully designed. I can not afford a Rolex, an IWC, or a Patek Philippe, at 3 times the price which are also lovely watches but tell the time no better that a $50 Casio quartz!

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2015 at 09:57 UTC as 23rd comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

JEROME NOLAS: Good interview. Few times I was thinking about Olympus camera but I need a built in flash!!! Why so many Olympus cameras don't have it?

In 40 years of photography, I have never felt the need of a built in flash. With very usable ISO's at 6400 now, there is really very little reason for it. The add on flash that comes with the EM5 I have neatly slips in the pocket if I think I may need it, and is better than any built in flash they could add IMO.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2014 at 09:39 UTC
On article Miggo Strap and Grip review (86 comments in total)

Is this a joke?

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2014 at 09:03 UTC as 41st comment
On article CP+ 2014: Fujifilm stand report (30 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cal22: I like the line of lenses, especially the primes the high aperture and the handling of which are meant to be reminiscent of great moments in the history of photography. Most likely we'll see a 16mm to be added in the months to come.

Unfortunately, the rangefinder style camera is not to my liking, it's too inconvenient for a left-eye photographer. And since there's no EVF attachable to an M1 or A1 I'm still standing on the sidelines.

I didn't think I would ever say this, but after 40 years of traditional photography, but I find without thinking, I'm using the viewfinder less and less, and the rear LCD more and more. I love using my iphone to take pictures as it's with me all the time, and wouldn't dream of it needing a viewfinder. Just my opinion!

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2014 at 13:01 UTC
On article Fujifilm teases upcoming SLR-style X system camera (910 comments in total)

Can't wait. Love my x100 but will have to make do with my trusty OMD for the next year when I'll pick one up for £500 on Ebay!

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2014 at 17:18 UTC as 145th comment
On a photo in the Fujifilm X-A1 Samples Gallery sample gallery (1 comment in total)

Certainly wouldn't buy either body or lens on the strength of this image. Black too dark, look at the women's legs, contrast too high, not at all sharp where it should be. Could do better?

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2013 at 15:34 UTC as 1st comment
On photo DSCF3262 in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Certainly wouldn't buy either body or lens on the strength of this image. Black too dark, look at the women's legs, contrast too high, not at all sharp where it should be. Could do better?

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2013 at 15:34 UTC as 1st comment

I was on the verge of selling my x100 to pay for an Olympus 17mm f1.8 for my OMD. I'm glad I waited, manual focussing is superb, just what I wanted! now it's for keeps. Pity they couldn't manage to squeeze in a "Q" button. Not sure the purpose of 0.2 seconds faster to start up, quick SU mode was fine for me, but many thanks to Fuji. Well done.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:24 UTC as 101st comment | 1 reply
On article Ricoh announces HZ15 Europe-only compact superzoom (58 comments in total)

Personally, I'm still sticking to my 6 year old GX100. IMO Ricoh have yet to produce a model that would tempt me to replace it as my pocket DSLR replacement. 16mp on such a tiny sensor - what nonsense!

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2013 at 08:39 UTC as 17th comment

Personally, I'll wait 3 months for the upgrade with a with a "super powerful" BIONZ2 30MP processor sensor and a 50x zoom :-)
Why oh why Sony? It just makes you look so silly to the enthusiast photographer IMO

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2013 at 10:57 UTC as 42nd comment | 1 reply
On Challenge:7959 (30 comments in total)

Any chance of an extension time wise on this one? It,s rather time consuming only being able to shoot 2 or 3 shots a night, and another few days would be great to experiment, and we have only 6 entries so far.

Posted on Feb 15, 2013 at 23:12 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On Challenge:7404 (16 comments in total)

The use of external optical filters or optical converters is not allowed.

Fair enough, so can I assume that covers "internal" Art filters too?

Posted on Oct 17, 2012 at 14:48 UTC as 3rd comment

Unless you are buying now, I wouldn't give the price too much thought. It's a Sony, so give it 18 months and they will be $1000 on Ebay! I'll wait.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2012 at 10:39 UTC as 142nd comment | 3 replies
On Challenge:7070 (11 comments in total)
In reply to:

tamras29: My entry was just withdrawn because;

"Photo must not have been taken in a zoo or similarly enclosed space."

It was taken at London Zoo, I replied with details of the animal with a link to the Zoo website, and also another image of the same animal 10 minutes earlier, and quite clearly in a cage.

Now the challenge is full. Perhaps a question about more details of the image would have been a nicer way of handling the objection someone had?

I suppose I should be flattered the image appeared to be good enough to have been taken on safari. I wish it had!

Yes - Hard for me, but not for you. I am dyslexic unfortunately and if I don't have someone with me at the time, words do unfortunately move around. Thanks Danack for you kind input.

Posted on Aug 3, 2012 at 11:10 UTC
On Challenge:7070 (11 comments in total)

My entry was just withdrawn because;

"Photo must not have been taken in a zoo or similarly enclosed space."

It was taken at London Zoo, I replied with details of the animal with a link to the Zoo website, and also another image of the same animal 10 minutes earlier, and quite clearly in a cage.

Now the challenge is full. Perhaps a question about more details of the image would have been a nicer way of handling the objection someone had?

I suppose I should be flattered the image appeared to be good enough to have been taken on safari. I wish it had!

Posted on Aug 3, 2012 at 08:53 UTC as 3rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Valentinian: I don't have a 14mm prime lens... Will I buy this Schneider Kreuznach 14mm f2.0 ?
Unfortunately no, because it will cost four times more than the Panasonic 14 mm f2.5 .
Will I buy the Panasonic 14mm ?
No, because I read on Lenstip.com that it has "monstrous distortion, huge vignetting.... (and) ...the image quality on the edge of the frame could have been better"
Too bad nobody is making a 14mm/ f2.8 of decent quality at an affordable price.

With respect, you may be spending too much time reading, and not enough time taking pictures. The Panny 14mm is a little cracker, and is on my E-P3 most of the time. CA is well acceptable, vignetting totally disappears just one stop off full aperture, and IQ is superb. Go for it, and at the price you can pick them up for on Ebay, around GBP £120 is a no brainer. Enjoy.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2012 at 08:56 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M5 low light high ISO sample series (283 comments in total)

Some years back, when I upgraded from a Canon 40D to a mark 1 5D, the very best improvement was that I could shoot at ISO 1600 without having to unduly worry about noise. Since that time, and in my move to m4/3, that has not been an option, being paranoid about going over ISO400. If as it appears, this sensor will perhaps give me the flexibility of the old FF sensor. As one of the 95% who do mostly shoot in normal lighting, I am looking forward to my E-M5

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2012 at 12:27 UTC as 39th comment
In reply to:

rfstudio: Why isnt any of this company learn tht people needs better sensor rather than stupid long zoom with a quarter finger nail sensor ?????

Do you really think anyone buying a 40x zoom has any idea what a sensor even is? They are the type I imagine who buy 4 x 4's to take the kids to school, and wear Rolex watches to impress, and would buy the Leica equivalent if they were told it's better.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2012 at 22:15 UTC
Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »