hiplnsdrftr

Lives in United States nyc, NY, United States
Works as a photographer
Joined on Jan 2, 2007
About me:

photographer, NYC

Comments

Total: 65, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

filmrescue: I can get the no viewfinder but if you're skipping the viewfinder then at least have a flip screen. Pretty boring offering from Nikon here.

Flip screen would just make it bigger and clunky. If you want a flip screen theres plenty of other choices.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2013 at 15:00 UTC
In reply to:

camerosity: No EVF? No thanks. Once again, Nikon is introducing a camera that is overpriced by about 30%. If this had an EVF I'd definitely consider it. But the main reason I love my X100 is for the hybrid viewfinder. And image quality is outstanding. Sorry Nikon, try again.

Viewfinders are not necessary for such a small camera. And you would just like you were pressing a pack of cigarettes up to your eye.

Obviously, Nikon's goal was to make a very small camera... they succeeded wonderfully.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2013 at 14:59 UTC

Thank god for this camera... maybe it will force Canon to get serious?

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2013 at 15:42 UTC as 35th comment
On article Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1 review (546 comments in total)
In reply to:

Princess Leia: Canon is falling behind this market. Nikon high end compact is in the works and Sony is way ahead with Rx1.

Sony protects their dSLR sales by pricing the RX1 at a premium... Canon protects their dSLR sales by releasing a purposely crippled mediocre EOS-M.

Almost all my cameras are Canon. I wish there was a serious offering from Canon. Like you say, they are falling behind.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2013 at 19:49 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1 review (546 comments in total)

Upon handling one in B&H, yeah, it feels amazing. Messing around with it only convinced me that it's rock solid.

Definitely not quite compact. No getting around that.

The price, yes, it's expensive. Keep in mind, in 2000 a Contax T3 with a fixed 35mm lens was about $1,000 and you still had to buy film and pay for processing. My guess is that the price works out to be comprable in the long run, depending on how much you shoot.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2013 at 17:50 UTC as 71st comment | 1 reply

So, I'm gonna be kinda contrarian and say that this is one of the few P&S designs that makes any sense. At least it's an attempt to evolve and stay relevant.

This N tries to offer something different than the thousands of identical P&S cameras offered by all camera brands. I'm actually shocked that the usually quite conservative Canon put this out.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2013 at 22:32 UTC as 8th comment
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1 preview extended (280 comments in total)
In reply to:

futile32: Question about old compact Film 35mm cameras. I remember when I was a little lad, my dad had a 35mm Olympus Film Camera. I think it was part of the Mju series.

The pictures were always pretty awesome, but I remember the lens being tiny, it made me think alot about today's lens size discussions revolving around APS-C (on the NEX) and FF (on this RX1). Was the old Mju lens just not as fast (aperture) or were they a lower class of Quality?

I guess I'm curious how they pulled off nice images back then with such a small package (perhaps it was just a time before pixel peeping).

I have read statements that digital sensors require that the light hitting it needs to be fairly perpendicular, whereas light can hit film at a more severe angle and still properly expose it, thus the much smaller lenses.

So while the 35mm lens on the FF film Contax T3 is tiny, the 35mm lens on the FF digital RX1 is quite huge by comparison.

Keep in mind, this is what I read on the internet...

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2012 at 20:54 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1 preview extended (280 comments in total)
In reply to:

zinedi: Tell me why some manufacturers are competing in biggest/smallest item horse-race? Max. Mpix number (with IQ trade-off), smallest design (with handling trade-off), etc. Why they simply don't listen to our needs, wishes?
Fuji is trying and showing the way - thank you Fuji, Sony - you are wrong - my opinion only.

There are plenty of big cameras to chose from already. The RX1 is about having compact quality.

I love my 1DS3 but not always so keen on carrying it around.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2012 at 15:33 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1 preview extended (280 comments in total)

I am a professional photographer that has been begging for almost exactly this kind of camera...

The RX1 appears to be an awesome accomplishment. I love the simplicity and focus in it's design. I am relieved that Sony resisted any temptation to include a flip screen. Furthermore, I am fine with the lack of a viewfinder. Honestly, I have used enough digital P&S cameras over the last 7 years that I am just as comfortable shooting with a screen as I am a viewfinder. The inclusion of a pop up flash makes this camera nearly perfect. (I can't believe Canon left it out of the EOS-M!)

Not so sure about the price though. Probably worth it, but to many other things I can get for my $2,800.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2012 at 15:30 UTC as 61st comment | 5 replies
On article Hands-on with Nikon V2 (455 comments in total)

Here are the specs compared to GX1, NEX7 and EOS-M...

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=nikon_v2&products=panasonic_dmcgx1&products=sony_nex7&products=canon_eosm

The only thing that stands out is the 15 fps. And I guess the fact that it has a viewfinder unlike the Panasonic or the Canon.

Considering the much smaller sensor, the Nikon is not significantly more compact than any of the others.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2012 at 13:44 UTC as 86th comment | 3 replies
On article Hands-on with Nikon V2 (455 comments in total)

Here it is compared to NEX7-

http://camerasize.com/compare/#392,33

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2012 at 13:08 UTC as 89th comment | 1 reply
On article Hands-on with Nikon V2 (455 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ulfric M Douglas: "...We didn't have competitive mirrorless cameras nearby to compare it to directly..."
Oh ... surely not. Someone must've had a NEX or a Pen ... but no.

That really reassures me, Dpreview doesn't have any cameras on hand.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2012 at 13:03 UTC

This is really good news for Panasonic, Olympus, Sony, etc.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 16:04 UTC as 112th comment

I am a firm believer that many cameras available today are purposely "crippled" in an effort to ensure near future upgrades.

So despite the features we desire... don't hold your breath.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2012 at 16:35 UTC as 141st comment | 1 reply

The concept is really good. The point is that there are obviously other camera formats than what is currently available. I really believe many popular cameras sell well simply because there are so few alternatives or consumers simply don't know any better.

I would really like to see a mirrorless compact with similar features and build quality to a Canon 1Dx. Regardless of price.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2012 at 15:45 UTC as 143rd comment
On article Canon EOS-1D X overview (379 comments in total)

So the dpReview "preview" is now a year old. 38 cameras have been fully reviewed since then. Most of which are mediocre "me too" cameras that many more people will purchase than the Canon 1Dx. (So kinda understandable I guess?)

In any case, it would be nice to read an official DPR review before dropping my $7,000 at B&H.

I know what the review will conclude. But at this point in time, by the time the review will be out it will be old news. Not the best way to stay relevant as a review site in the digital age.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2012 at 20:27 UTC as 61st comment
On article Canon EOS M hands-on preview (564 comments in total)

This is essentially the camera I've been lusting after for years... only Canon left out a flash, which renders it useless for my needs.

The great thing about this camera is its size, adding the external flash destroys that attribute. Including a flash would have made it only slightly larger I would guess, but much more versatile.

I'm impressed with the size and design of this camera, unfortunately the lack of flash forces me to stick with my GF1 or buy something else, maybe the Fujifilm XE1.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2012 at 14:00 UTC as 69th comment
On article Just Posted: Fujifilm X-E1 hands-on preview (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: The camera size is too big.
Looks nothing special when compared with NEX7.
Good but not outstanding.

I really, really planned on buying the Vex-7... until I handled one.
And then there was the lack of any compact black lens.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2012 at 18:15 UTC

In 27 years of buying cameras this is the first camera I have ever pre-ordered. Looks awesome.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2012 at 13:55 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

harrisoncac: Why this instead of NEX-7?

For one, I hate flip screens. The only lens that I considered for the NEX7, the 16mm is silver metal colored, looks horrible mounted to the all black NEX7.

NEX7 has some performance and size advantages, but not enough compared to this Fujifilm XE1.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2012 at 13:53 UTC
Total: 65, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »