Matt

Matt

Lives in Canada Canada
Works as a -
Joined on Jul 8, 2002

Comments

Total: 25, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1634 comments in total)
In reply to:

peevee1: "Their wishes have finally been granted - and in a big way"

You mean "in even bigger size"? Because it is approximately same sht otherwise. :)

hahaha. Yeah but its not the same.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 05:41 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1634 comments in total)
In reply to:

AJC Photography: Biggest disappointment = NO SWIVEL SCREEN.

With that disappointment having properly registered, I'm gobsmacked that it also does NOT have Wi-Fi built in. Instead GPS (which rather than Wi-F- would be the obvious 'plug-in' accessory IMHO).

Why is there no model higher than 70D with a fully articulating screen? I'd take APS-C, APS-H (that wish has sailed), or FULL FRAME (in either 6D, 5D MkIII or 1DX).

I just want the optioin of 'merging' my 60D/70D with older 1D MkIIN in one body ... and a 7D or 5D without swivel screen will just not do. If you don't want to fold it out ... then DON'T! use it. Simples.

"Why is there no model higher than 70D with a fully articulating screen?"

Because those models are targeted at different people who dont want a swivel screen as they dnot need it for their shooting. For everybody else, there is the 70D

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 01:52 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1634 comments in total)
In reply to:

sir_bazz: Where's the Direct Print button?

Deal breaker right there.

You meant the "Upload selfie to facebook button" ? Sorely missing ...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 01:50 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1634 comments in total)
In reply to:

miles green: Dpr, shouldn't you throw the Pentax K3 in the comparison table together with the 7D classic and the Nikon 7100?

The K3 seems to only have 4 Mp over the 7DII and is worse in all other areas. What am I missing?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 01:46 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1634 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donnie G: I'm surprised at the number of armchair camera designers here who are so upset with Canon for not turning its excellent pro-grade, deliberately built for action photography, APS-C camera into just another consumer grade, jack of all trades, wannabe pro pretender. Meanwhile, the real camera designers and engineers at Canon will again be laughing all the way to the bank as the EOS 7DII proves once again to be the only true professional level APS-C interchangeable lens camera system in existence, today, tomorrow, and into the foreseeable future. :)

:crickets:

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 01:45 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1634 comments in total)
In reply to:

Potemkin_Photo: Canon just needs to slash the entry price in 1/2.

my head is hurting

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 01:41 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (1634 comments in total)

WHAT IS THIS USELESS CAMERA FOR??????

I would only buy this if it had a swivel touch screen and WiFi so that I can take selfies at dinner and beam them onto facebook right away! And I dont want to have a 70D that does all that! I want the 7DII so that I have a pro camera to take pro selfies!

And why does it have to be so big and heavy and expensive? Why dont they just make it smaller and lighter, make it full frame, 50 MP, 15 fps and of course it better not cost over $999.

Canon? Are you listening???? MAKE THIS CAMERA NAO!!!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 01:39 UTC as 149th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

nycgazelle: Jesus Christ People! I can't believe all the stupid complainers about this. 9.99 is two cups of coffee a month. Life is expensive...THIS most certainly isn't. I like it because for the first time in years..I did buy photoshop at full pop once...I can have current versions and not pirate it. I feel great about giving Adobe 10 bucks a month because its an amount I don't even think about when it auto deducts. This prevents everyone who couldn't plop down X amount of dollars at once for the software to pay a modest fee and feel good about themselves and enjoy a tremendously awesome product.

@NetMage. TIFF?

The main issue is that once people sign up for the "cheap" deal and adobe has moved enough people onto their subscription only deal, they will raise the price as much as they want

Direct link | Posted on Jun 21, 2014 at 07:17 UTC
In reply to:

nycgazelle: Jesus Christ People! I can't believe all the stupid complainers about this. 9.99 is two cups of coffee a month. Life is expensive...THIS most certainly isn't. I like it because for the first time in years..I did buy photoshop at full pop once...I can have current versions and not pirate it. I feel great about giving Adobe 10 bucks a month because its an amount I don't even think about when it auto deducts. This prevents everyone who couldn't plop down X amount of dollars at once for the software to pay a modest fee and feel good about themselves and enjoy a tremendously awesome product.

How long do you think it will stay 9.99 for?

And what will happen once the majority of people has their photos in their propriety systems?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2014 at 17:52 UTC
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThomasSwitzerland: I am still a loyal customer of Nikon. But this uninspiring D4s confirms my move. Step by step I get rid of those old world huge cameras. They seem to me like dinosaurs from the past.

I do not want to bash because I believe in Nikon’s excellent sensors’ computer code and ergonomics. I also had the Canon FF cameras with L-lenses. I sold them at very good prices some time ago. I questioned more and more to hike in the mountains with those “tons” of black cases with a huge backpack limiting moves and fun.

Now I still got the D5200 – pros will smile – and mirrorless; and wait for the next generation of cellphone/integrated cameras to migrate to. It’s like with the stock markets. Buy early and sell into the last waves.

In a couple of years, no one can imagine that we took photos with those huge, heavy, and strange looking cameras.

Sometimes it is decision point to liberate. Less load is more joy. More joy and dedication produce better pictures.

I dont know if those cameras were meant for the guy who walks around with it all day .... For that they make tiny DSLR and mirrorless.

Things like D4s will probably be rather used at sporting events where their size and weight isnt really an issue. Esp. when on a tripod or monopod with a large 300mm + lens ...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2014 at 16:15 UTC
On Nikon Df Review preview (1611 comments in total)
In reply to:

Matt: Who are those people who cant do "pure" photography unless some modern controls are stripped away from their camere?

"Oh noz, I cant take good photos because my camera offers all those features that I dont want to use but must use!"

give me a break. If someone is such an accomplished photogrpaher that the pure thought of modern controls ruins their photos, then either give it up or put your D800 rig in M and MF or whatever else.

The ultimate idiocy is the use of a cable release instead of a wireless remote shutter release. if someone is so stuck in the past that they must use a cable remote release and by doing so risk vibrating their camera slightly instead of a RF or IR remote release that would assure the camera isnt shaking then its pretty clear that the retro camera is just a fad to show of that they are some photo master because they dont use any modern gizmos that would distract their superior artistic skills. Those people should give it up

@Samuel:

Why would I attach a cable to my camera risking to jerk or vibrate it just for the sake of "Hey look at me, I am so retro and artistic!".

To give up technological benefits just to look retro-hip seems a bit silly to me ...

Its dirt cheap? Great but if you cant foot $20 for an RF remote, maybe buying that cool retro camera was a poor choice to begin with ....
A RF remote is small and weighs also almost nothing. If you can lug around a retro hip camera and a tripod (and I am sure we not be using carbon as thats not retro and would take away our artistic skills ;) ) than an RF remote will do
great it uses no batteries, but your camera does anyways and batteries in IR remotes last years, so thats hardly a concern.
it doesnt need fixing until you bugger up the threads or kink it ...
You know if you must screw a cable release in your retro styled camera to take really artistic pictures, then great. Whatever helps.
For my part I will use all features that help me taking photos.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2013 at 16:57 UTC
On Nikon Df Review preview (1611 comments in total)

Who are those people who cant do "pure" photography unless some modern controls are stripped away from their camere?

"Oh noz, I cant take good photos because my camera offers all those features that I dont want to use but must use!"

give me a break. If someone is such an accomplished photogrpaher that the pure thought of modern controls ruins their photos, then either give it up or put your D800 rig in M and MF or whatever else.

The ultimate idiocy is the use of a cable release instead of a wireless remote shutter release. if someone is so stuck in the past that they must use a cable remote release and by doing so risk vibrating their camera slightly instead of a RF or IR remote release that would assure the camera isnt shaking then its pretty clear that the retro camera is just a fad to show of that they are some photo master because they dont use any modern gizmos that would distract their superior artistic skills. Those people should give it up

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2013 at 15:25 UTC as 255th comment | 4 replies
On Canon EOS 70D review gains test scene samples article (78 comments in total)

Can you guys do AF tests with moving subjects? Honestly the differences in static image quality between todays top cameras seem so small that its alsmot not worth pages of review anyways.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 13, 2013 at 00:35 UTC as 8th comment | 3 replies

"That price will never change"

yeah sure. LOL

Direct link | Posted on Sep 5, 2013 at 01:24 UTC as 211th comment
On Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Review preview (333 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: I would have been keen to learn about AF consistency using the new 70D's dual pixel live view AF.

@sandy b

I seem to believe that if I ran a review site I would get the camera wherever I have to so that I can have a review first and collect the revenue through web traffic. If I dont get it delivered by Canon, I will go out and buy it as it pretty much wont cost me anything anyways.

But thats just me

Direct link | Posted on Sep 3, 2013 at 06:15 UTC
On Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Review preview (333 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: I would have been keen to learn about AF consistency using the new 70D's dual pixel live view AF.

@Adrien. I dont want a 70D But if the #1 camera review website can not get in the #1 new camera from the #1 camera manufacturer after it IS IN THE STORES, then someone is not doing their job right.

You can buy the 70D in the stores .... If they dont have one then its incompetence

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2013 at 22:06 UTC
On Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Review preview (333 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: I would have been keen to learn about AF consistency using the new 70D's dual pixel live view AF.

@ Andy, preview? great but other have REVIEWS out.

You cant get a 70D? Are you for real? Maybe fire the person in charge of procuring products and get someone who can either get it straight from the manufacturer or can get his ass in a store and BUY it!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2013 at 18:44 UTC
On Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Review preview (333 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: I would have been keen to learn about AF consistency using the new 70D's dual pixel live view AF.

Are you kidding?

People are buying them in the stores and using them. How can you not have one and have started a review?

Other sites will be lightyears ahead of you

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2013 at 15:52 UTC
In reply to:

dannyboy5400: Even if Adobe reverses course on this, TRUST is broken and I will never trust them again. I hope competitors jump on this the way Adobe was all over the Final Cut Pro debacle. I am back on FCX now that it is fixed.

I dont think adobe cares and I believe for large commercial customers the leasing model is actually a benefit.

It is not likely that adobe gives a rat's ass about a few lost purchases from hobby photographers or small professionals

Direct link | Posted on May 9, 2013 at 04:44 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Suggest to DPReview what I suggested and let's answer the real question: Of all the users who currently own a legal license to Adobe CS or PS software, will you ever purchase an Adobe product using the CC pricing scheme? Instead of hiding the true results of this decisions in some vague expressions of unhappiness let's see how our feelings are going to hit Adobe's pocket book. A simple yes or no and we'll see how people really feel about this nonsense. If our pocketbooks are going to do the talking, let's give Adobe a little preview. My bet is everyone who dislikes the move is a "no" (95% as of now) and everyone else is the 5% saying "cool with me." Go eat a bag of human male reproductive organs, Adobe (the word I was going for there was what one might use as shorthand for Richard).

Yes I own a legal copy of PS and NO I would NEVER pay for some subscription BS.

It is not even about the money, it is about the hassles that come with that "rental" software.

Direct link | Posted on May 9, 2013 at 04:41 UTC
Total: 25, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »