NowHearThis

NowHearThis

Lives in United States United States
Works as a Enterprise Implementation Consultant
Joined on Aug 24, 2007
About me:

Future Considerations:
Speakers: (This was easy to decide on...)
Front:2 NHT Classic Three (When the 1.8s finally give out)
Rear: 2 NHT Classic Two
or
Klipsch Reference Series

Current Line Up:
Verve Subwoofer (Dual 10' & 200w amp)
Polk Audio T15 (2)
Polk Audio CS1 (for $60 this was just too good a deal to pass up on.)

Previous Audio Gear:
2-Infinity 42.5i in Custom center channel box wired in series (8 ohms) - still have, replaced w/CS1, will probably reuse these with the woofers from the 1.8's.
NHT 1.8 (2) (Midrange foam surrounds finally gave out - took 22yrs; 6.5" subs still work fine, and will be reused in a future project)

Current Camera Gear:
Olympus OM-D E-M10
Olympus 14-42 II R MSC

Previous Camera Gear:
Sony A65
Sony 18-135m f/3.5-5.6
Sony 85mm f/2.8
Sony HVL-F43AM

Sony NEX-7
Sony 18-200mm OSS
Sony 50mm F1.8 OSS
Sony HVL-F20AM

Canon T2i
Canon 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon 270EX

Nikon D40
Nikon 18-55 ED II
Nikon 55-200mm VR
Nikon 35mm F1.8
Nikon SB-400

Comments

Total: 177, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

maybe it's me but why can't Sony incorporate the camera strap loops into the body of the camera. They put them on the A3000, why not continue with that design?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 21:20 UTC as 35th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

kev2033: So, what about it not having image stabilization? I have a Nex7 (yes, I am a dinosuar) with the Zeiss 16-70 F4 but I didnt want to step up to the full frame Sony cameras because:

1. they are bigger and heavier than the Nex7 - they defeat the purpose of a small compact mirrorless camera!
2. they dont have a pop up flash - yeah, I know I can use high ISO and shoot in low light, but I sometimes want fill flash on a person, especially if they are back lit, without over exposing the background. Dont make me go buy a $350 flash, just another thing to carry around
3. Price - the full frames are significantly more money

So, for these reasons, I have held off on getting out of my Nex7, but with the AF advances of this camera and low light capability, I am really thinking on this one. I dont really care about a touch screen.

My two biggest complaints with this camera are:

1. no easy way to move around your AF point (no joystick)
2. no built in image stablization

"I dont really care about a touch screen.

My two biggest complaints with this camera are:

1. no easy way to move around your AF point (no joystick)"

You realize if the A6300 had a touchscreen it would solve your 1st complaint, right? Just Say'n.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 21:08 UTC
On article What's missing? Ming Thein on the state of mirrorless (751 comments in total)

Lesson from Simpsons episode 28.

We'll design it your way, give you everything you want...but you don't get to decide the price.
.
.
.
Which is probably why camera manufactures do it their way, make some products most people can afford, and still stay in business.

(a little tongue in cheek but y'all get my point)

Direct link | Posted on Nov 6, 2015 at 22:53 UTC as 98th comment
On article Light L16 packs 16 cameras into a single portable body (390 comments in total)

!@#$%^&*!! half my lenses have fingerprint smudges...says everyone who ends up owning/using this thing.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 21:07 UTC as 133rd comment | 1 reply

In other news, the new Google cars now won't take you to places other people have been. Now you can just sit at home on these forums looking at places you'd like to go and take pictures at rather than actually going there......

Stupidest effing product ever.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 11, 2015 at 14:55 UTC as 88th comment
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Olympus offers the EM10 MKII for about the same price. It has excellent built-in image stabilization, weather sealing, an EVF, 1080p @ 60 FPS video, 8.5 FPS burst mode, and a host of built in features that are extremely useful.

This Canon M3 wasn't exciting when it was first announced. Now it really just seems irrelevant.

I agree to some degree (rhyme not intentional). I'll be keeping my E-M10, but I like having more competition in the market. Plus I'm hoping that having the 11-22 forces Oly/Panasonic to make a lower cost 7-14.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2015 at 04:25 UTC

Alright I'll say it...

About freaking time! Albiet, late to party.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2015 at 04:23 UTC as 168th comment
In reply to:

tom1234567: Sensor does not do it for me could they not have used a 24meg aps-c sensor

And the price is far to high its only worth about £500 and that's stretching it

As usual with Sony you pay for the name,
Its a total rip off and as a video camera its very good but for photos

To much noise. IQ is just not there
Tom G

4. "Its a total rip off and as a video camera its very good but for photos To much noise. IQ is just not there"
Your opinion is not shared by most who have it's predecessor and you will likely be in the vast minority as well with regards to this camera. Yes other cameras can beat it in IQ, but few can offer this range, feature set, size/weight in a price anywhere near this. Now if it doesn't work for you that's fine. But stop with the lies.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2015 at 19:30 UTC
In reply to:

tom1234567: Sensor does not do it for me could they not have used a 24meg aps-c sensor

And the price is far to high its only worth about £500 and that's stretching it

As usual with Sony you pay for the name,
Its a total rip off and as a video camera its very good but for photos

To much noise. IQ is just not there
Tom G

1. "could they not have used a 24meg aps-c sensor"
Yes. BUT... you would get neither the zoom range nor would you likely get the fixed F2.8 aperture in that size body with any meaningful zoom. You see APS-C sensors are larger than 1" sensors and, because of that fact, would require larger lenses to cover the same focal length.
So in reality, No, Sony could not have used a 24MP APS-C sensor because no one would buy something that would likely be twice the size/weight and atleast twice the price.

2. " its only worth about £500 and that's stretching it"
You should really think carefully before posting silly statements like this. You have no idea how much any single part on that camera costs. You have never built a camera. You are just spouting off some drivel that is purely your opinion and trying to pass it off as factual.

3. "As usual with Sony you pay for the name"
I can say the same thing about Nikon, Canon, Leica, etc

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2015 at 19:24 UTC
On article Bang for the Buck: Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Review (693 comments in total)
In reply to:

vesa1tahti: Can't beat the Nikon D7200 (excl. size and weight).

@vesa1tahti
Lol. The D7200 is $1200 just for the body and $1500 with a lens. Different category, you think?!

BTW, you forgot a few other things:
IBIS
EVF (If you prefer it, I do)
Touchscreen
Tilt-Screen
Faster FPS (I don't need tracking, but I do need speed)
etc...
But you're are right about size and weight; that alone is enough for many.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 18:59 UTC
In reply to:

QuarryCat: but the quality of Olympus cameras is down to a basis level, Cameras look very quickly very used just from taking them out of the photo-bag or from the sweat on your fingers -
E-M5 was worse - E-M5II is even more worse and E-M1 is not really better...
I had them all for a year - not any longer.

the same but even worse with lenses, first they cut the sunshades out of the lens set and charged crazy extra prices - now all the lenses are not ZUIKO anymore, no famous Japan production - but China plastic

@ Martin

Agreed. I've really put my E-M10 through it's paces since I got it last year and it still looks brand new.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 8, 2015 at 16:31 UTC
In reply to:

Zoron: Good job Olympus! .....now if you want to kill DSLR.......24,35,50,85 AF F1.0 prime should really do it...DO ITTT

@caerolle

I think the F1.8s are a better balance. It lets you have small lenses that are faster than F2.8 zooms but not have the cost and size (and weight) disadvantages of F1.4 glass.

Now while I know the Panasonic 25/1.4 is only a little heavier than the Olympus 25/1.8, it still costs twice as much and isn't better wide open. Once you get away from the 50mm range it also seems like the cost and size differences between F1.8 and F1.4 glass become a bit more aparant too. Compare Nikon's 24/1.4 to their new 24/1.8, or 35/1.8s vs 35/1.4s, or anyones 85/1.8 vs their 1.4 counterparts.

Maybe newer computer modeling optics will help make faster glass more affordable. I'm just not seeing in wide and telephoto lenses yet. I don't even want to imagine how much an Olympus 12mm F1.4 would be...$1500 or more. Maybe?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 8, 2015 at 16:25 UTC
In reply to:

Zoron: Good job Olympus! .....now if you want to kill DSLR.......24,35,50,85 AF F1.0 prime should really do it...DO ITTT

@Caerolle

I agree that F1.0 AF lenses would likely be rather expensive. I'm perfectly happy with the 12/2, 17/1.8, 25/1.8, 45/1.8. None of them are too big an only the 12/2 is bit pricey (but I love it's results).

Direct link | Posted on Aug 7, 2015 at 19:04 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: Very low price! Should be a nice kit lens substitute.

I suspect that $249 price is a typo, but if it isn't it definitely a bargain!!

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2015 at 22:54 UTC
On article UPDATED: Canon PowerShot G3 X real-world samples posted (166 comments in total)
In reply to:

Skipper494: A poor imitation of the Pan FZ1000, more money and extra for a VF, I don't think so.

I used the phrase "For some" kind of loosely. This thing will likely sell very well. Sales people will know how to sell it to the masses just like they've done with the Rebels (which I personally can't stand). "Most" people aren't gear heads. I'd wager most people use smart phones for their photos (not that they should...). The G3X, while not perfect, and not my first choice for a 1" super zoom camera, will be compelling for the "most" people - just not as many on this forum.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2015 at 04:41 UTC
On article UPDATED: Canon PowerShot G3 X real-world samples posted (166 comments in total)
In reply to:

Steven Blackwood: I don't wish to be snarky but would it kil DPR to finally deep-six Flash? Many of us use mobile devices and Flash doesn't work. Yeah, yeah, it works on Android or at least some of them but Adobe is no longer developing for mobile. It's very laborious to click on pictures one at a time. hTML5, guys.

Don't quote me, I think I heard Puffin web browser works with Flash and iPhone/iPad; I was going to download it and check it out later.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2015 at 00:21 UTC
On article UPDATED: Canon PowerShot G3 X real-world samples posted (166 comments in total)
In reply to:

vermaden: 600mm and no EVF ...

>> "600mm and no EVF ..."

Did you just find that out??

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2015 at 00:05 UTC
On article UPDATED: Canon PowerShot G3 X real-world samples posted (166 comments in total)
In reply to:

Skipper494: A poor imitation of the Pan FZ1000, more money and extra for a VF, I don't think so.

Except that the FZ1000 offers 200mm less focal length and is bigger (by quite a bit). For some, having a camera that takes just as good of photos while offering 200mm more focal length will justify the extra cost. I paid $400 more for a lens once because if offered 2mm of extra range on the wide end; and it was worth it because of the pictures I got. Everyone's needs are different.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2015 at 00:02 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G3 X: What you need to know (608 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jennyhappy2: Oops! Looks like Canon GOOFED AGAIN!

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/canon_powershot_g3_x_review/conclusion/

Only a Recommended rating instead of the expected Highly Recommended:

"The Canon PowerShot G3 X is almost the perfect super-zoom camera for more experienced photographers, but the decision not to include a built-in viewfinder turns the G3 X into a near-miss..."

lesnumeriques.com
"Canon plays a good technical performance in a field where we did not expect, and gets ahead of its competitors by offering a compact (for a 25x zoom and such a sensor) with a sufficiently versatile lens for to take anywhere with you."

Pros:
• Good overall quality
• Rotating screen, tactile and very defined
• Effective AF Tracking
• Nice simple ergonomic interface
• Configurable dials
• Wi-Fi and NFC
• Powerful 25x Zoom
• Focus peaking also available on video
• Very good video quality

...and they gave it 5 out of 5 stars.

Now the G3X isn't perfect, just like everything else out there isn't perfect. I'm not going to buy one and I doubt you will too, but it's laughable how hell-bent you are on bashing this camera.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 18:21 UTC

Would have really liked them to have announced a 12-60mm lens too.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 04:45 UTC as 45th comment
Total: 177, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »