Alex Permit

Alex Permit

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Sep 12, 2002
About me:

Currently own:

Nikon D3s 14-24mm f/2.8G, 24-70 f/2.8G, 24-70mm f/2.8G, 70-200 f/2.8 VR2

Sony nex 5, 6, 7, SEL1018 10-18mm, 50mm, 55-210mm F4.5-6.3, Zeiss 12mm f/2.8

Leica 28mm f/2.8 ASPH

Voigtlander Nokton Aspherical 35mm f/1.2

Fuji x100, x100s

Canon 10D, Canon 20D, 16-35 f2.8L, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.2L, 70-200 f2.8L IS, 24-70 f2.8L, 28-135 f3.5 IS

Panasonic GF1, GH1, Panasonic 20mm f1.7, 14-45, 7-14, 14-140, 45-200

Panasonic ZS3, TZ5, Minolta A2, Minolta Xg, Canon s400

Epson 3880, Artisan 810, Canon MP970, HP D7560, HP 8450, HP L7680

Comments

Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On High-end full frame roundup (2014) article (523 comments in total)
In reply to:

zakk9: Isn't it a bit strange to call it "High-end full frame roundup" and include the low-end D610, 6D and A7 but not the high end 1DX and D4s?

1DX and D4s were deemed too "high-end" for this category.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2014 at 23:29 UTC
On High-end full frame roundup (2014) article (523 comments in total)
In reply to:

RolliPoli: Sony: A great manufacturer of transistor radios..... and CMOS sensors for companies that build cameras.

There's a good chance that Nikon is making the steppers Sony is using to create the sensors that Nikon is buying.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2014 at 20:26 UTC
On High-end full frame roundup (2014) article (523 comments in total)
In reply to:

RolliPoli: Sony: A great manufacturer of transistor radios..... and CMOS sensors for companies that build cameras.

This may be boring, but Nikon is essentially a camera company. 75% of its revenues come from its imaging division. It also makes industrial steppers and scanners (18%) and high precision measuring devices (5%)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2014 at 18:05 UTC
On High-end full frame roundup (2014) article (523 comments in total)

Strange to include the RX1R, a great compact fixed lens camera, in a roundup named "Heavy Hitters: high-end full frame roundup". While it is "full frame", it is not, nor does it pretend to be, a "heavy hitter".

Stranger still to exclude the D4S and 1DX because "they're aimed at working photojournalists and sports photographers." Its like excluding the Klitschko brothers from list of heavyweight boxing contenders because they're too tall.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2014 at 15:52 UTC as 48th comment | 15 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (293 comments in total)
In reply to:

NAwlins Contrarian: Just when DPReview was getting good at giving us charts with equivalents, I think this one falls down, especially when comparing the GM5 and the RX100 Mk. III.

The review notes the GM5's "tiny viewfinder", but the specifications say it has 0.92x magnification, which sounds large. Presumably reconciling these statements requires adjusting for sensor size, and the GM5's viewfinder has 0.46x-'equivalent to 35mm / full frame' viewfinder magnification. The RX100 III specs list the magnification as 0.59x, which I suspect is already an 'equivalent' figure.

And of course, it's fine to say the GM5 has a larger sensor than the RX100 Mk. III, but with the GM5's compact kit lens, the real comparison is the GM5's equivalent of 24-64mm f/7-11 with the RX100 Mk. III's equivalent of 24-70mm f/4.9-7.6. So when adjusting for both sensor size and aperture, the effective light-gathering puts the RX100 Mk. III 1 stop brighter at the wide end and a little more than 1 stop brighter at the long end.

Higher equivalent amplication leads to greater noise. The advantage of a larger sensor is offset by the higher equivalent amplification needed.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 13:33 UTC
On Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) article (300 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joseph Mama: What the heck?? No mention AT ALL of Sony's offerings? The A5000, new A5100, A6000, and upcoming rumored A7000? Sony has great deals out right now on these cameras and kits.
Ditto with Samsung and their NX offerings.

The a5100 and a6000 are both listed in the midrange list

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7802516432/mid-range-mirrorless-camera-roundup

Direct link | Posted on Dec 1, 2014 at 19:18 UTC
In reply to:

Pritzl: Like a bad movie, the reruns keep coming...

I agree. This isn't just a bad sequel like Hannibal, follow-up to Silence of the Lambs. This is one of those long, bad franchises. Franchises like Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street, or Saw.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 26, 2014 at 20:42 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (2709 comments in total)
In reply to:

topstuff: To me, it looks like something from the last decade.

I know its got killer AF and the BIF guys will love it, but to anyone who doesn't need the sports/BIF AF capability, its just a big heavy brick with average IQ, IMHO.

ALOT of us buy cameras to shoot our kids playing soccer, basketball, or just running around. We appreciate ultra fast AND reliable autofocus. Sales figures imply there are a lot of us.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2014 at 20:16 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Permit: Why even bother opening a design facility in Italy if you end up with such monstrosities? It's an insult to the fine tradition of Italian design.

Pinin Farina must be turning in his grave.

Thanks, I did not realize that. As an American, I've associated "Italian" design with the likes of Ferrari, Bulgari, Armani, and Alessi. I guess every culture, though, has a "range" of taste.

For every Miles Davis, there is at least one Justin Timberlake.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2014 at 13:18 UTC

Why even bother opening a design facility in Italy if you end up with such monstrosities? It's an insult to the fine tradition of Italian design.

Pinin Farina must be turning in his grave.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2014 at 04:12 UTC as 49th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Marty4650: Lets be honest. The design engineers didn't pull the plug on this project. They LOVE their silly designs. It was the accountants who finally had enough of losing money on this venture.

It might seem impossible to lose money when you take a $800 camera, dress it up in a clown suit, then sell it for $6-$8,000 or so. But somehow they managed to lose money, because if they were making money on this, the design center would still be in full operation. And working overtime to meet demand!

Its impossible to lose money if you actually sell it. I'm guessing the market for a camera dressed in a clown suit was a big, flat, zero.

I don't know where they found the design engineers who created these monstrosities. I've never seen Italians design something so hideous.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2014 at 20:49 UTC
On First Hasselblad in space goes to auction next month article (84 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ellis Vener: This is possibly the Hasselblad 500C camera Gordon Cooper purchased at George Lange Camera in Houston.

Makes you wonder, if its not the camera schirra purchased (the website is vague on that point), then the camera on sale is not the first hassy in space.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 2, 2014 at 23:26 UTC
On First Hasselblad in space goes to auction next month article (84 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ellis Vener: This is possibly the Hasselblad 500C camera Gordon Cooper purchased at George Lange Camera in Houston.

according to the website, Wally Schirra bought the camera at a Houston camera shop. Cooper used a Hasselblad [possibly the same body, absolutely the same Zeiss lens] on the next Mercury mission, MA-9.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 1, 2014 at 01:23 UTC
In reply to:

bmcdad: Its like saying AT&T will restart production of Rotary Phones... Art does not require a time machine. You can't reminisce evolution to a halt.

Rotary phones work fine on FIOS. you can buy or make your own adapters for other services.

Not that I'd want to.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2014 at 01:59 UTC
On Photokina 2014: Hands-on with the Fujifilm X100T article (91 comments in total)
In reply to:

spontaneousservices: so why do some people actually prefer a camera without flip screen? Don't they appreciate the extra possibilities?

so why do some people actually prefer a camera without a viewfinder? Don't they appreciate the extra possibilities?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 02:05 UTC
In reply to:

EricCul: A woman gets on a bus with her baby. The bus driver says: "That's the ugliest baby that I've ever seen. Ugh!"

The woman goes to the rear of the bus and sits down, fuming. She says to a man next to her: "The driver just insulted me!"

The man says: "You go right up there and tell him off – go ahead, I'll hold your monkey for you."

It's a classic from Flip Wilson.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O_6vhgSAhuI

Direct link | Posted on Aug 8, 2014 at 04:03 UTC
In reply to:

brycesteiner: It's only a matter of time....

Kodak should reinvent itself, though I think it's too late.

Kodak did its best to reinvent themselves. Unfortunately, it's best just wasn't good enough. And that's the typical story. For every Apple, there are a dozen RIM's. Sometimes, the cards just aren't there.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2014 at 04:39 UTC
In reply to:

DigiMatt: About motion picture camera negative films, which this news concerns:

Today's movie films are excellent, and make beautiful motion pictures. The gold standard remains Kodak Vision 3 motion picture films. They are scanned immediately after processing and the rest of the workflow all the way to the finished movie on your screen is digital. The reality is that everyone who doesn't shoot on film tries to make digital look like it was shot on film. If that is the goal then why not shoot on film in the first place?

Great observation. I assume they don't shoot film because its more expensive.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2014 at 04:24 UTC

Its a bit pricey for what it is. They are clearly milking their great brand reputation built from true photographers workhorses like the HV, Stellar, and of course the crown jewel Lunar.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2014 at 18:12 UTC as 42nd comment
In reply to:

Reality Check: As interesting as this sounds (especially to those of the recent digital age, and some Sony engineers apparently) this is just OLD technology/concept revisited...
We tried this back in the film days (in concept) for the very same reasons - smaller/simpler/cheaper lenses with better performance across the image frame, etc..
What was determined back then (as is being 'discovered' today) is the very limited beneficial uses provided. Wide angle lenses, due the intrinsic field curvature of the elements used in their design, are almost the only area of benefit. Just about anything longer than ~50mm would itself have to be -redesigned- in order to project effectively, which would of course exponentially consume any cost savings of simpler/cheaper wide angle lenses.
Sony has provided theoretical information to suggest greater sensor performance, noting signal noise reduction etc, but nothing that could not be accomplished by putting R&D towards 'fewer' 'larger' and 'better' photosites..

Right on the money. I'd add that it made more sense 100 years ago then it does today. Bending film is easy. Bending silicon is not.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 11, 2014 at 03:48 UTC
Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »