jj74e

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Nov 23, 2010

Comments

Total: 225, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Article:4886827527 (250 comments in total)
In reply to:

jj74e: Is anyone else not that excited?

I mean, the site looks great- similar to other tech sites but a bit cleaner.

However, given the rate of reviews- the meat of dpreview's content- I'm not sure dpreview can provide enough content to keep readers interested.

When a new review comes out, it's great. But for the other weeks, I scarcely check dpr. Now there's an entirely new section and lens reviews? I'm not so sure..

Well, honestly, I'd be OK if the reviews were less thorough if it meant more reviews.

But I just meant, given the rate of new content now on just this site, I'm in doubt of whether or not DPR has the manpower to produce enough content for lens reviews and this new site. But I guess they hired more people...?

Posted on Oct 10, 2012 at 06:55 UTC
On Article:4886827527 (250 comments in total)

Is anyone else not that excited?

I mean, the site looks great- similar to other tech sites but a bit cleaner.

However, given the rate of reviews- the meat of dpreview's content- I'm not sure dpreview can provide enough content to keep readers interested.

When a new review comes out, it's great. But for the other weeks, I scarcely check dpr. Now there's an entirely new section and lens reviews? I'm not so sure..

Posted on Oct 10, 2012 at 03:48 UTC as 67th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

kewlguy: Samsung... they know how to make a gadget with a pile of features... but that's it, just gadget. My Galaxy Note with its yellowish display and bad ergonomics is a proof to that...LOL

....so why'd you buy one...troll.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2012 at 04:33 UTC
In reply to:

micksh6: For Samsung it's just a way to sell $300 camera for $500+. For customers it's a ripoff.
Samsung WB850F costs $300. IMO it's overpriced already and probably is a tough sell.

So, they change display and CPU, add broadband chip (which together would add something like $50 BOM) and give to wireless carrier such as AT&T.
AT&T will probably sell it for around $200 and will subsidize Samsung another $350 (equals contract early termination fee).

Customers will pay $200 + $30 * 24 contract months = $920 over 2 years contract. Or more if they exceed monthly bandwidth allowance (16MP images are large).

A proper connected camera should not require adding another data plan. It should be able to tether to cellphone with bluetooth and Wi-Fi. Just like tablets and laptops do - allow to reuse existing cellphone data plan.

Unfortunately, many don't know how to connect laptop or tablet to cellphone without paying extra for tethering. Or, maybe people don't count monthly bills.

I mean, plenty of people are willing to pay for an extra data plan for their tablets. You can't really add data plans to the cost of a camera; if people want to pay for it, they'll pay for it.

The WB850F is cheaper than other travel-zoom compacts in the same market sector; it's not really overpriced in comparison to other companies' cameras.

It can still share files via Wi-fi direct, so you don't necessarily need to pay for a data fee as long as Samsung decides to sell the camera in conventional stores and not just through carriers, just like their tablets and stuff.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2012 at 04:32 UTC
On article Coming soon: Lens Reviews to return to dpreview.com (272 comments in total)

"legendary in-depth reviews"

lol. not that i'm saying dpreview's reviews aren't good. but legendary? eh...

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2012 at 20:33 UTC as 78th comment | 2 replies

smartcam sound like a cheap plastic toy you give to your kid.

it doesn't flow the same way smartphone does, partially because of the actual sound, partially because it wasn't a true product innovation and it was more of a necessary step to keep the market alive.

also, not sure on this, but hasn't samsung been calling their wifi enabled cameras smart cameras already? another score against that name?

camera...phone....wireless...just call it the cameroneless.

derp

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2012 at 04:07 UTC as 45th comment

the ability to "sticky" threads would be useful so people too lazy to use the search function won't post a thread about subject matter that has been discussed in depth many a time before

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2012 at 14:55 UTC as 163rd comment
On article Canon announces EOS C100 professional video camera (99 comments in total)

mmm $8000....right in my budget...that was meant for my college education? food? car? bills? uh...

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2012 at 16:55 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply

derp watch apple try to start patent wars with camera companies now. "Hey, you can't have a rectangular touchscreen!"

Although honestly Android is a little too similar to iOS. Obviously there are many differences, but it's clear where the inspiration comes from. Microsoft at least did something distinctly original.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2012 at 01:40 UTC as 54th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Retzius: Cool. So, in an instant, Nikon's new android camera that lacks a phone instantly becomes obsolete, before it even hit the market.

Well Nikon's take will probably be a cheaper, budget type option.

As far as market share, I would say Nikon's compacts have been crapping out lately; moreover, Samsung definitely has much bigger market share in connectivity options and its brand name itself resounds with consumers toward more connectivity style electronics, while Nikon is known more as a conventional camera company.

I'm pretty sure Samsung will be the leader in this new hybrid compact market, if anything because of their brand name and already connected products, particularly their smartphones and TVs.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2012 at 01:37 UTC

ahh dang whichever company started making tilt screens popular (i think it was sony).

tilt screens seem kind of like a really bad middle ground. most, if not all, don't tilt enough to be particularly useful, but they're still thicker than regular screens. especially on a non-pocketable camera like this, what difference does a few mm make to accommodate a fully articulating screen that actually offers some more usability. it's not like it's going to be the difference between it fitting in your jeans or not.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2012 at 21:55 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies

well the merge of phone and compacts is finally happening this year.

too bad they still will have to rely on being at a wireless hotspot, will have much worse battery life than most phones (140 shots on this one? I don't know how that translates to call time, but I'm guessing your camera won't last very long if you're shooting, editing, downloading and playing games on it).

Honestly, I don't think going Android is the answer. It's nice to see companies finally doing something to try to revive the compact market (instead of perpetually adding on more crappy scene modes and zoom), but honestly, people have their phones on them all the time now. You don't need the whole Android market on your camera. You just need to develop a UI that offers customization, connectivity, and photo-centric abilities. Why don't camera companies develop these themselves?

Make the camera more personal, more open, and quick-edit capable/fun; don't try to make it a clunkycell

But at least Google is happy ;)

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2012 at 05:09 UTC as 98th comment | 3 replies

wow, translucent mirrors, now clear pixels. now sony just needs to invent clear lenses for their e-mount ;)

Link | Posted on Aug 20, 2012 at 20:51 UTC as 14th comment | 1 reply

so....basically the hybrid af system does nothing and is just a marketing point (for single shot, non-continuous AF anyway)

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2012 at 19:52 UTC as 72nd comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

jj74e: I'm shocked that Eric Kim has made it to dpreview. I don't think he is particularly impressive and have no idea how he is so famous.

However, I think people are being overly critical about him. While I don't think his photographic work merits his popularity, people here are criticizing him for sharing ideas that have already been said before or posting photos that aren't particularly good, but what's wrong with that?

A lot of people here aren't that familiar with blogging. But in case you didn't know, ideas are freeform, flexible and transferable. Blogging is all about sharing, and as long as you cite your sources, it's great that there's a whole community of people sharing what they seen, read, heard, experienced, etc

Eric Kim is not a great photographer; maybe he's not even that great a writer. But he's a blogger, someone who's confident, supplies regular material, and shares bits of what he does.

Maybe he's not great, but perhaps his well-done sharing is enough to be famous.

Again, I'm not supporting Eric Kim, nor am I trying to defame him. I do not like his work nor his blogging. I am just explaining that to be a great blogger (or video blogger on YouTube for example), you don't necessarily need to have the best work. You just need consistent material, healthy confidence, a good supply of ideas and direction with what you want to share, and not be terrible. Just the art of sharing- sometimes just being who you are and not being afraid to do it publicly is enough to get people to like you.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2012 at 04:22 UTC

I'm shocked that Eric Kim has made it to dpreview. I don't think he is particularly impressive and have no idea how he is so famous.

However, I think people are being overly critical about him. While I don't think his photographic work merits his popularity, people here are criticizing him for sharing ideas that have already been said before or posting photos that aren't particularly good, but what's wrong with that?

A lot of people here aren't that familiar with blogging. But in case you didn't know, ideas are freeform, flexible and transferable. Blogging is all about sharing, and as long as you cite your sources, it's great that there's a whole community of people sharing what they seen, read, heard, experienced, etc

Eric Kim is not a great photographer; maybe he's not even that great a writer. But he's a blogger, someone who's confident, supplies regular material, and shares bits of what he does.

Maybe he's not great, but perhaps his well-done sharing is enough to be famous.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2012 at 04:18 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

justmeMN: A Silver Award for "Fairly aggressive noise reduction starts blurring detail at lower ISOs and mixes with high levels of chroma noise at higher sensitivities"? That's too generous.

"A Silver Award for "Fairly aggressive noise reduction starts blurring detail at lower ISOs and mixes with high levels of chroma noise at higher sensitivities"? That's too generous."

That's too limited a scope to look from.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2012 at 04:02 UTC
On article Gariz leather half-case for Sony RX100 (49 comments in total)
In reply to:

WilliamJ: I'm fed up with pointless gadgets. I mean it ! When I first came on Dpreview, it was really interesting and totally photo oriented. Nowadays, there are very few news and on the two or three new topics a day, about half of it is about gadgets. Yet there are hundreds of that sort of leather or leather-like case; who cares of this one, who cares of others too ?

I'd prefer to read more reviews about flashes, filters, deflectors, printers, tripods, photo-calibrated video screens or really inovative "little" accessories like the ones produced by Blackrapid (cf: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_oil ) that makes our shooting reactions faster, safer and easier.

Is it too difficult to be more substantial ?

I think dpreview is trying to widen their audience appeal by including more modern applications of photography in the news posts....but maybe they're stretching themselves too thin. I come mostly for the top notch reviews and the forums. I never really came to dpreview for tech updates. A little content organization would help since right now it feels like dpreview is kind of all over the place without presenting anything substantial (besides the reviews).

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2012 at 22:24 UTC
On article Gariz leather half-case for Sony RX100 (49 comments in total)
In reply to:

skytripper: Very stylish, but not nearly protective enough to be useful. A functional case needs to protect the camera from scuffs and scrapes when it is in a bag full of other stuff. Otherwise, it's useless except perhaps as a fashion statement.

were half cases ever meant to be protective?

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2012 at 22:13 UTC

I wonder if the photographer will note when he used MF or AF

But anyway, the shots should still be decent considering the skill of the user. I'd be less interested in seeing his photos (from a camera-capability standpoint, not from a regular Olympics fan's viewpoint) and more interested in seeing a commentary and the differences and changes he had to make in order to accommodate shooting with the G5.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2012 at 22:30 UTC as 68th comment
Total: 225, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »