SammyToronto

SammyToronto

Joined on Dec 17, 2011

Comments

Total: 69, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On DPReview recommends: Best smartphone cameras post (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

BattleBrat: NO NOTE 4!?! Multiple blind tests make it the winner! I don't know why you would omit it!!!!

They wrote it to comment on the phones they did test, and I found it useful to that extent. They can revise their rankings if/when they test the Note 4 (and the Samsung S6, LG G4, etc.)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 31, 2015 at 00:48 UTC
On DPReview recommends: Best smartphone cameras post (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

BattleBrat: NO NOTE 4!?! Multiple blind tests make it the winner! I don't know why you would omit it!!!!

I think they only included the smartphones they tested and they haven't tested the Note 4 yet.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 30, 2015 at 17:51 UTC
On Sony Xperia Z3 camera review post (152 comments in total)
In reply to:

sebastian huvenaars: I knew about red eye correction, but nose reduction?! ;)

It's a new, useful feature to be used for people with abnormally large noses.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 20:28 UTC

They had a facility dedicated to design those abominations? I thought they bought after market grips off ebay, stuck them, along with the Hasselblad badge, on the Sonys and called it a day.

I want some of what the Hasselblad genius who made the Sony deal is having.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2014 at 05:51 UTC as 157th comment
In reply to:

SammyToronto: I can see this camera replacing all my current m4/3 gear (3 bodies and 5 lenses), which would make its price not seem that expensive (not that I'd pay the launch price for it, mind you). It has a fixed lens, but that lens is plenty fast enough and covers a zoom range I take 99% of my photos at. I'm currently waiting to try it and see how it feels in my hands and of course, for the reviews, the reviews, but it's a very promising camera indeed.

@pkosewski You're still not getting it. And whether I keep one or 5 bodies and replace them with the LX100, it works for me and my needs and it's really none of your business. If you want to keep hoarding equipment, knock yourself out.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2014 at 03:11 UTC
In reply to:

SammyToronto: I can see this camera replacing all my current m4/3 gear (3 bodies and 5 lenses), which would make its price not seem that expensive (not that I'd pay the launch price for it, mind you). It has a fixed lens, but that lens is plenty fast enough and covers a zoom range I take 99% of my photos at. I'm currently waiting to try it and see how it feels in my hands and of course, for the reviews, the reviews, but it's a very promising camera indeed.

@mosc, the only touch screen camera I have is the e-pl5 and, while convenient, whether or not it's offered is not a showstopper for me.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 1, 2014 at 20:54 UTC
In reply to:

SammyToronto: I can see this camera replacing all my current m4/3 gear (3 bodies and 5 lenses), which would make its price not seem that expensive (not that I'd pay the launch price for it, mind you). It has a fixed lens, but that lens is plenty fast enough and covers a zoom range I take 99% of my photos at. I'm currently waiting to try it and see how it feels in my hands and of course, for the reviews, the reviews, but it's a very promising camera indeed.

@pkosewki, I have an even better idea; do exactly as what I initially said. Since, as I said, the LX100 will cover 99% of my photography needs, it would make no sense to keep m4/3 equipment in a drawer collecting dust. You didn't understand what I was getting at; it's not about selling just enough m4/3 gear to cover the price of a new LX100.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 1, 2014 at 20:52 UTC

I can see this camera replacing all my current m4/3 gear (3 bodies and 5 lenses), which would make its price not seem that expensive (not that I'd pay the launch price for it, mind you). It has a fixed lens, but that lens is plenty fast enough and covers a zoom range I take 99% of my photos at. I'm currently waiting to try it and see how it feels in my hands and of course, for the reviews, the reviews, but it's a very promising camera indeed.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 1, 2014 at 19:31 UTC as 163rd comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

OneMoreComment: Those two Samsung have the wrong logo on their back .....

You mean those two HTCs...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 15:29 UTC
On Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review preview (2251 comments in total)

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but this thing doesn't look beautiful to me. It may be built like a tank, but it looks like the average Sony/Samsung mirrorless camera and less attractive than the average Fuji/Olympus mirrorless camera.

Now, I'm not talking about performance, status, heritage or any of that, but purely on the aesthetic level this Leica underwhelms.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2014 at 00:47 UTC as 71st comment | 5 replies
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (647 comments in total)

Put the Sony RX sensor in this Nikon, take the grip and EVF off the kit (not everyone needs a grip/EVF) and bring the price down to the $700 range and it can be a contender. As it is, it's a very tough sell (unless bright light focus speed is your number one priority) with all the excellent competitors available with better image quality and at markedly lower prices.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2014 at 02:41 UTC as 59th comment | 2 replies
On Sony drops list price of Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 article (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

SammyToronto: Typical example of a company charging an exorbitant price for a camera not based on merit, but because they can. They were one of a kind in the market, so, to Sony, that meant ripping off their customers is fair game. Thank God for Panasonic, and competition in general!

Wow, didn't know my comment would unleash that much rabid fanboy vitriol, lol! To all, freaking CHILL! And the logic that you can't criticise this blatant price gouging by Sony since no one put a gun to your head is beyond ludicrous. Yes, it's a free market, but when a company's greed reaches risible proportions, it deserves the ridicule it'll be getting, no matter how much foaming at the mouth its rabid fanboys do!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 5, 2014 at 23:52 UTC
On Sony drops list price of Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 article (201 comments in total)

Typical example of a company charging an exorbitant price for a camera not based on merit, but because they can. They were one of a kind in the market, so, to Sony, that meant ripping off their customers is fair game. Thank God for Panasonic, and competition in general!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 21:54 UTC as 45th comment | 9 replies

Wow, just wow! Some of the best, most creative and/or most charming portraits I've seen in a long time.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2014 at 23:32 UTC as 52nd comment

Who is that for? Even the Kardashians, who are the poster family for conspicuous consumption, would find it ludicrously expensive.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 02:32 UTC as 46th comment
In reply to:

utomo99: Samsung need to optimize all the code (for phone and tablet) so it can be faster and smoother.
Many people complain the UI make slow.
Also Samsung need to update the OS to kit kat for galaxy tab 3 family, S4 and other

You mean in terms of camera performance or you prefered the previous release (i.e. Jelly Bean) period?

Direct link | Posted on May 13, 2014 at 02:37 UTC

Thanks for a most informative review Lars. It confirmed my decision that the Samsung S4 Mini is the best phone for my needs, producing sharp, contrasty images, indoors (with flash) and out, that are perfect for sharing with friends on social media and for displaying on computer screens. The Sony's camera may be superior in rendering high ISO fine details (for a cellphone, that is), but its superiority mainly shows when printing large prints, which is something I never do with cellphone pics. In fact, I find the one area that the Samsung won, i.e. flash pics, more useful since it impacts the picture quality regardless of size or usage. This is especially important since most of cellphone pics (in my case anyway) are taken indoors.

It would've been great if you included a quick video quality comparison since most cellphone users probably take as many videos as pics, but thanks all the same!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2014 at 19:08 UTC as 8th comment
On Samsung NX mini First Impressions Review preview (559 comments in total)
In reply to:

Digitall: Up to now, 5 users have had this camera supposedly already sold :)

You know you're an early adopter when you buy (and sell!) the product even before it's commercially released :)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 18:04 UTC
In reply to:

BPD7: dumb question but is this a fixed 2.2 aperture?

On cell phones, aperture usually is fixed.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 18, 2014 at 02:25 UTC
In reply to:

SammyToronto: While you're reviewing oldish phones, is there any chance for an S4 Mini review? I've read reviews for it on other sites, but being that your reviews focus on camera performance, which is probably the main criterion I consider before buying a phone, they have more weight imo, especially since DXO haven't reviewed it either!

Well, that's great, and timely, news :) Looking forward to reading your findings in that comparison.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 21:01 UTC
Total: 69, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »