wkay: is dpreview ever going to stop its obsession on toys and social networking? serious photography obviously does not fit into their business model.
Somehow I agree that I didn't get all that excited about Optics Pro 7.5.5, seems almost like a random thing to cover given the general lack of coverage - firmware particularly seems very hit and miss, some updates getting reported, others not...
Andrew Booth: The 2.7k mode sound interesting.
I guess this gives enough latitude around the image to allow shake reduction in post processing - and still wind up with 1080!
You always have a reference in any sensible film, and shake reduction just smoothes the movement of those reference points.
There's no bug report button, but you have one here relating to bottom-posting:
ck3: Sorry for being negative but:
I wish you had used the redesign to address the "flat-view-user-replying-in-the-middle-of-a-thread-problem" by offering two choices under each post in flat view: "reply to thread" and "reply to this message".
Bummer there is no "ignore thread" function. Threads by ignored users aren't even pushed to the bottom of the page anymore.
Also: If a camera manufacturer did implement a function in their camera the way you implemented the "filter discussions without images"-function, you'd roast them alive in your reviews. I don't want to filter out threads without images, I want to filter out "my latest image" threads.
Why not implement a function that a user creating a thread can specify whether it's a technical thread or a picture post and then offer us to filter accordingly?
BTW: Did the feedback in the previous comments section result in any changes?
Seconding the last question.
What, so there ISN'T a way to see all posts in a structured way?
fooddudeone: Yeah... defo the best firmware.. just as big a deal as back in the day when Canon gave the 5D2 manual exposure for video. Now us video heads can use any MF lens!
I also wrote them a new short message:
"Thank you for giving us IBIS for adapted lenses in Video-mode.
In the future, can you please give us a firmware update with the following; in order to make this THE best HDSLR video-camera on the market And the ONLY with IBIS?
~ 24p: Every single other HDSLR has this option. Might as well give the OMD this options as it's also the only HDSLR with IBIS.
~ Higher video bitrates: Even though the OMD is the only HDSLR with a fantastic IBIS, at the same time it has the least amount of video-bitrate out of any other HDSLR. 30-50mbps would be perfect.
But... it's not an SLR at all?!
GURL: Missing feature ?
Example: I just read The Nikon D600 Preview and wondered if it was possible to suggest a useful test* but did not find any way to reach R Butler.
What I mean is a "suggestion to DPReview" feature that could be restricted to subjects (like reviews) being launched by a staff member. It would not be answered by the DPR staff nor viewed by other participants and should not be available to new forum members to avoid spam.
Some kind of "one way email", like a bottle in the sea...___
*: for this camera a studio samples shot using an APS-C lens rather than a FF lens would be useful for comparison.
I believe there is a private message system. Are you saying you want the comment to be anonymous?
elai: Please make flat view the default vs threaded view. It's a lot faster to read all the information on the tread vs. clicking on each message one by one. It's how almost all forums on the web work now-a-days. I know you can set it as default in your user account, but for everyone who doesn't have a user account or doesn't feel like logging in, it's annoying.
Many people also miss/don't understand the flat view button and leave the forms out of frustration with slowness of the threaded view.
The new threaded view will have all info on one page as I understand.
Cameron R Hood: One thing you could do that would INSTANTLY improve your forums is to remove the childish blocking of other camera forums...it's simply infantile.
Sincerely,Cameronforum user since you started
What you clearly haven't addressed is how to allow legitimate users to place legitimate links.
mosc: "Simple answer: 33 million messages in threaded format"
You're not the first forum to deal with this issue. Apply some logic and flatten those threads! You're a decade behind the times and the forums are gruelingly difficult to use because of it. It's not OK, you can't just throw some paint on top of it. The structure itself is what makes finding anything a pain in the ass.
I don't use your forums, guess why?
@mosc: I build forum software, natch.
I've seen you block links to other forums who will happily link to you. For obvious reasons, I presumably cannot name the forum (I'll refer back to Cameron's comment about infantility), but if you think there's a good explanation, please do entertain us.
Edward Sargent: Bookmarks, allow for a way for the user to label the bookmark as to the reason they made the bookmark, it will speed up the search through the book marks.
If you're going to allow bookmarks at all, I suggest doing it across the site, for articles, reviews, galleries, individual photos, everything. One framework.
pauldnyc: I've loved dpreview for years now but have always had trouble with the white on black design making my eyes hurt after a few minutes. Recently started using a Safari extension called QuickStyle which lets you easily, permanently, change the CSS for any site you visit. 3 or 4 small edits and this site looks awesome (for me)
Rock on DPR!
And for Firefox, there is Stylish. This also actually solves the whole threaded vs. flat debate. If you don't like threaded and don't want to log in to set a preference (the obvious solution), just suppress the threading with CSS.
shaocaholica: The underlying threaded scheme is just annoying. Every modern forum I follow using these 2 rules:
1)If there is no quote then you are replying to the person who posted right before you or in general to the OP.2)If there is a quote then you are replying to the quoted person.
No more confusion, simpler scheming, easier to read with less clicking.
I don't understand what your problem is. Surely it's super easy to set a user-based preference for either the threaded or flat scheme. Sounds better than forcing your world view on other people?
That's exactly what I said, too. Kudos.
Objection. Keep them threaded please. Offer flattened view as an option. Otherwise, why bother with a forum? A mailing list would do fine, putting us TWO decades behind the times, Mr. mosc.
x-vision: +1000 on removing the thumbs-down/bad-karma button.
Dislike. Thumbs down seems like a good way to sink posts simply giving or perpetuating false information. The only alternative I see is implementing a flag for this, but that then requires moderating, which it sounds like nobody is willing to do at the required 10/24/7 level (10 is for 10 minute maximum response time).
Pes Lhipchepiw: 1) I wish your normal site comments had a dislike button as you're planning for the forum.
2) WYSIWYG, to me, is a gimmick that encourages trolly behaviour. Mileage may vary.
3) Inspiration seems to have come from Yahoo Answers and StackOverflow - just saying. I understand that you probably couldn't just use the StackOverflow platform as it might not fit around your legacy content.
4) Inclusion of folksonomy is good - following amazon here.
5) Needs clarifying what a question is as users will not necessarily read this article to understand that it allows selecting a best answer, whereas a thread is presumably without this feature.
6) "View the answer" - very good.
7) Making stuff larger - no thank you, I use a laptop! You're giving me scroll disease.
8) User rating needs an opt-out for privacy.
9) Filtering out "competitor content" remains ridiculous, sorry! Major #FAIL #NEEDSCHANGING
10) Proper threaded view is a good move, wasn't enjoying the permanent clickery to bring up post texts.
BaldCol: Some one has already mentioned this, but I think it would be better to rename the dislike button. Dislike is too negative for those occasions where a post is simply irrelevant or repeating earlier information.
Nitpicking. Irrelevant AND repeating earlier information.