zinedi

Joined on Oct 16, 2012

Comments

Total: 113, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Just Posted: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF6 hands-on preview (83 comments in total)

Another viewfinderless pack of ...nese electronics.Demonstration of viewfinderlessness. Be happy Fuji, blindness is infectious and not protected by copyright. The bigger is the pile of similar electronic packs, the more briliant shines your idea of photographic camera.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2013 at 06:29 UTC as 13th comment | 5 replies
On article Pentax offers K-30 in a variety of colors and finishes (118 comments in total)

And what about playful water gun discretely installed in the lens? Wouldn't it be a fun?

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2013 at 07:04 UTC as 44th comment

For me this the first mirrorless camera worth the bucks. X100 was a pubescent child, but did me a lot of pleasure too. The IQ is excellent, top-class member, useless effort is to compare it with microscope, when there are many other factors for sex-appeal of every PHOTOGRAPHIC camera.
In fact - it is incomparable untill there is another competitor that will be able to produce similar hybrid OVF/EVF viewfinder mirorrless digital range-finder.
Competitors' mirrorless cameras are mostly blind viewfinderless and slow optic Wifi/Hifi/Eyefi gadgets. But Fuji is dedicated to photographers' needs and desires. Thanks to Fuji.

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2013 at 10:10 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply

201 Kdot EVF and "Artistic shooting effects".
In other words : "Blind camera with potted art for ambitions blind shooters"

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2013 at 09:39 UTC as 34th comment

Do these PC/Wi-fi/Hi-fi-cameras have Ctrl+Alt+Del functionality :-) ?
Definitely good toy, but not for photographers.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2013 at 08:16 UTC as 36th comment
In reply to:

zinedi: My feeling of Canon for several last years is this : Canon is still cooking soup of the soup of the soup of the duck. And the more weak is the soup the more expensive it is. Shame to Canon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasreddin

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2013 at 17:15 UTC

My feeling of Canon for several last years is this : Canon is still cooking soup of the soup of the soup of the duck. And the more weak is the soup the more expensive it is. Shame to Canon.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2013 at 09:01 UTC as 75th comment

My feeling of Canon for several last years is this : Canon is still cooking soup of the soup of the soup of the duck. And the more weak is the soup the more expensive it is. Shame to Canon.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2013 at 08:42 UTC as 39th comment | 2 replies
On article Fujifilm X100S Real-world Samples (205 comments in total)

Great camera - not only for IQ equalizing the FF quality in compact size, but also for handling comfort - Fuji is listening to PHOTOGRAPHERS not consumers - and classic range-finder style. Looking forward to hold my copy.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2013 at 08:15 UTC as 43rd comment | 4 replies

Again and again - no built-in viewfinder - no camera. Be happy Fuji - competition is still blind. Competition still sleeping.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2013 at 19:23 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

zinedi: It was predictable. No viewfinder - no camera.

to sarkozy > The image quality is what Bayer sensor (only) is. Definitely not better than X-Trans. But - what would even the best looking and powerful car be without a steering wheel? Some marketing gurus of some companies still try to persuade photographers, that viewfinder is unnecessary - because it is advantageous for them - but it is vain effort - because it is not advantageous for photographers.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2013 at 13:21 UTC

It was predictable. No viewfinder - no camera.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2013 at 10:17 UTC as 74th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

zinedi: Why this slooow expensive dummy again? Wouldn't it be better to make a true piece of glass for fair price? But Sony is obviously not capable - good optics is out of reach of their apprehension.

Even if Zeiss makes good lens "for Sony", which I doubt, I never buy it, because there is no good PHOTOGRAPHIC body of Sony so that it would not be waste of money to put it on.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2013 at 11:14 UTC

Why this slooow expensive dummy again? Wouldn't it be better to make a true piece of glass for fair price? But Sony is obviously not capable - good optics is out of reach of their apprehension.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2013 at 07:40 UTC as 54th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

T3: People seem to be ignoring the significance of the built-in Wifi and GPS. Sure, narrow-minded photographers will ignore anything that doesn't specifically impact picture-taking. But we're living in a new age now, and not everyone is so narrow in their perspective of what a camera can and should be able to do. Most cameras are already more capable in the picture-taking department than most of their users ever will be. Things like Wifi and GPS acknowledge that we now live in a very web-connected and location-intelligent world, and these things are very important in today's new world...at least for those of us who are smart enough to embrace what these new features allow us to do. But alas, there will still be people who will say "if it doesn't help me take better pictures, it's a pointless junk feature!" Then they'll go back to pixel peeping details and differences in IQ that no one will ever notice anyway.

And I also think that Wi-fi and GPS are dispensable in DSLR by contrast to mobile phone. I think that mobile phone is a field unlimitid for electronic features, but DSLR should be a field unlimited for best optical, photographic and image perfection features. All toy-features extra mean extra money for nothing - only for amazing marketng list of data - to confuse narrow people.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2013 at 11:30 UTC
In reply to:

T3: People seem to be ignoring the significance of the built-in Wifi and GPS. Sure, narrow-minded photographers will ignore anything that doesn't specifically impact picture-taking. But we're living in a new age now, and not everyone is so narrow in their perspective of what a camera can and should be able to do. Most cameras are already more capable in the picture-taking department than most of their users ever will be. Things like Wifi and GPS acknowledge that we now live in a very web-connected and location-intelligent world, and these things are very important in today's new world...at least for those of us who are smart enough to embrace what these new features allow us to do. But alas, there will still be people who will say "if it doesn't help me take better pictures, it's a pointless junk feature!" Then they'll go back to pixel peeping details and differences in IQ that no one will ever notice anyway.

The other thinking of who is "narrow-minded" man: You speak in favour of consumerism and wastage, of fashion and style dictated by commercial interest, of very shallow perception of world and things - why not to have it when it is here? In fact - this thinking is OLD WORLD thinking not the new one. Not all things do the same service for everybody. In my opinion the more narrow minded is he who must have things because he is said that it is a "must have" and that it is a question of being "in". Such man is a slave of the other's commercial intentions. Better and wider thinking is - to buy things when I really have reason to have them, not because some (or many) my neighbours have them (and they discard them to garbage before they apprehend them to replace them by another "must"). Too many things - too little freedom of thinking and creating and living with the things I already have.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2013 at 11:18 UTC
On article Just Posted: Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Review (164 comments in total)

Another "giant leap for mankind" in conquering cyber-space! The software "art" filter TOY CAMERA got its own hardwarization! You can, Canon! (I am not so rich to buy these cheap plastic things, so I have to turn the "art" filter on to simulate this IQ - if I really want).

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2013 at 07:50 UTC as 21st comment
On article Just Posted: Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Review (164 comments in total)

I tell it open: Canon recycles cheap electronic garbage coming from the previous millennium. To disguise this fact Canon raise one parameter to absurd value to get a record echo. Once upon a time - I loved you Canon.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2013 at 09:08 UTC as 27th comment
On article Just Posted: Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Review (164 comments in total)
In reply to:

jmv76: I bought the SX50 because my daughter allready got the SX40 and I was surprised by IQ, its excellent zoom, its impressive stabilization (but with some difficulties to keep the subject in the viewfinder at full zoom) good exposition, nice colours... and particularly the ease of obtaining nice pictures compared to my Pentax K-x...
And The SX50 is equal or superior to the SX40 in all domains.
See previous post !
Jean-Marc
From Normandy
See my moon shot in my gallery ; in this case I used a tripod !

Some people shouldn't neglect periodic visits at their occulist.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2013 at 08:03 UTC
On article Just Posted: Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Review (164 comments in total)
In reply to:

zinedi: Ridiculous zoom with ridiculous speed 3.4 - 6.5,
ridiculous EVF - 202.000 coloured fuzzy spots,
ridiculous tiny sensor crammed with 12 million hopelessly squeezed pixels trying to catch a one foton,
ridiculous massive force of software necessary to fabricate from this hardware mess some digestible image,
ridiculous plastic fuzzy pictures good to watch on the mobile phone display.

Victory of Vanity Fair over good reason, victory of marketing races over science and technology.

".. where more pixels has meant more noise. In every other case it means less noise."
I am not interested in numbers (whether they mean zoom reach or noise level) without direct and relevant feed-back to image quality. All these new "less noisy" tiny sensors (and "corrected" lenses too) are examples of the victory of software over hardware, money over technology (software is allways cheaper than good hardware). The result of these sw-made "noise-free" images is detail-free plasticky virtual reality.

The term "quite acceptable" (it means whatever one wants to imagine) is a victory of diplomacy and emptiness over the raw reality.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2013 at 11:26 UTC
Total: 113, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »