nikoj

nikoj

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jan 21, 2009
About me:

Comments

Total: 16, showing: 1 – 16
In reply to:

ravduc: It will take just a few days and they will be sold. This is not the first time that Nikon produces a special edition camera. They have been doing this for decades. Nothing wrong with that. If you don't like it, just don't buy it.

Yah, if they made only 100 copies

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 02:03 UTC

Who'd buy this? Looks atrociously gaudy

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 02:01 UTC as 115th comment

FF equivalent 85mm converter would have been more exciting/useful IMHO

Direct link | Posted on Feb 14, 2014 at 06:08 UTC as 69th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

pca7070: Average height (M/F):
North Korea: 158cm/150cm
South Korea: 174cm/161cm

So?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2013 at 00:51 UTC

The only thing this camera (coolpix a)has over the X100 or XE-1 with 18mm F2 is "pocketability".. How much do/can we want to stuff more crap in our pockets? I, for one don't have any more room after my wallet, cellphone, keys, and change. I have no problem toting a little larger, but a light camera in a small messenger type of bag - much more comfortable than stuffing another device/thing in my pocket.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 7, 2013 at 01:33 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
On Nikon posts sample images and video from Coolpix A article (50 comments in total)

I'd much rather opt for EX-1 with 18mm f2, or 100Xs; both which could be had for $200 more. I don't care so much that this camera is "pocketable" - but that maybe most important for some... I don't like my pockets weighed down with yet another device - in addition to my cell phone. How much stuff does one really care to carry in their pockets anyway?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2013 at 22:32 UTC as 14th comment
On Preview:nikon-coolpix-a (442 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thomas Kachadurian: I love this trend, but DPR hit it on the head. $1,100 is too much for an f2.8 lens. The x100 with a f2 lens and viewfinder is the same price. They're smokin' something at Nikon.

I agree, I'd much rather pony up another $200 for the Fuji and get built in hybrid vf, f2 lens and much more attractive retro look imo. Nikon needs to produce a much cooler coolpix that offers something truly unique to get this much money for a compact camera from me. I just don't get Nikon, not getting it.

Posted on Mar 5, 2013 at 19:53 UTC
On Just posted: Fujifilm X-E1 Review article (527 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Cameras can be rated by objective measures (like AF speed and accuracy, Dynamic Range, ISO capability, lines of resolution, etc.) but there will always be a subjective element involved. We sometimes fall in love with a camera, and when we do that we tend to overlook the flaws and emphasize the good things.

I remember around six years ago Phil Askey reviewed the Leica M8. He found numerous flaws with it, and objectively rated it as "recommended" which was just about the LOWEST rating Dpreview was using at that time. Despite this, he loved using the camera, so he immediately went out and bought one with his own money. And it certainly wasn't a cheap camera to buy.

I think something like that has happened here. The Fuji X-E1 is a very nice camera that produces really great image quality. It is exceptionally well built, there are some very nice lenses for it, and despite all the stated flaws, it is probably a joy to use.

Hence... the Gold Award. I call it emotional grade inflation.

Agree, there has to be some reserve in the reviews for the whole experience of the camera, not just the clinical facts

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2013 at 16:19 UTC
On Olympus m.Zuiko 17mm F1.8 first impressions and samples article (255 comments in total)
In reply to:

Erik Johansen: Paint it black Oly, please.

They will, for $200 more!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2013 at 23:43 UTC
On Hands-on with the AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR article (258 comments in total)
In reply to:

HiRez: I'm liking everything about this lens so far. Biggest issue for me will be the bokeh quality. Can this be a serious portrait lens in the way that the 70-200 f/2.8 is?

As far as bokeh quality, I've searched for some sample images of the Canon's F4, and have liked what I came up with. My guess is that the Nikon will be as good or better. If you already have the 70-200 2.8, you can shoot it at f4 to get an idea too. I am very tempted, for the weight, size and MFD.. My only hesitation to trade the 70-200vr2 for this is how well this lens takes TC's compared to 2.8. Can't justify picking this one up to add to the 2.8

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2012 at 21:35 UTC
On Hands-on with the AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR article (258 comments in total)

Weather sealed? Metal or polycarbonate barrel?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2012 at 18:53 UTC as 66th comment | 4 replies
On DSC_3930 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (4 comments in total)

Looks very much like d700 at ISP 6400

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 05:06 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply
On DSC_34-3838 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

You can see the umbrella in the catch light in his eyes.

Direct link | Posted on May 9, 2012 at 19:14 UTC as 1st comment
On Korean Azalea in the Floral Emblem of your region challenge (2 comments in total)

is this really an azalea? looks to me like a lilly.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2011 at 22:28 UTC as 2nd comment
On This BUTTS for you in the A look is worth a thousand words challenge (1 comment in total)

this picture would have worked a lot better if the butt was in focus and the back ground blurred IMHO

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2011 at 21:35 UTC as 1st comment
On Create your own articles - public beta launched today article (144 comments in total)

Great opportunity to start your own mansurovs, ishootshows, kenrockwell, etc .com.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 1, 2011 at 02:19 UTC as 10th comment
Total: 16, showing: 1 – 16