JRFlorendo

Joined on Oct 12, 2012

Comments

Total: 58, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

It's definitely price not to sell, good luck MS.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2016 at 16:44 UTC as 50th comment | 7 replies

Tammy 24-70 & 70-200 F2.8's for the price of this one Nikkor.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 20:36 UTC as 35th comment

BTW fanroids, Samsung's Galaxy Note 7 released a few weeks ago was LAPPED by Apple's YEAR old iPhone 6s in various speed test.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/08/23/iphone-blitzes-samsungs-new-note-7-in-speed-test/

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 20:03 UTC as 69th comment | 1 reply

Stop buying inferior cellphones so you don't sign up at dpreview to defend your brand that is consistently getting spanked by a 2GB of vram in most of speed test. If you can't beat'em.....join'em, jealousy will kill you.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2016 at 14:01 UTC as 131st comment
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (905 comments in total)

Wow.....Apple busy cherry picking Canon's tech, first the dual pixel, now the flickers.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 15:29 UTC as 66th comment | 2 replies
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2142 comments in total)

Wow....this guy said 5D4 is a major flap!

http://www.eoshd.com/2016/08/1-74x-crop-odyssey-canon-5d-mark-iv-officially-announced/

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 17:14 UTC as 298th comment | 5 replies

The noob disclaimer, we're "NOT pro sports photographers" ....Blah blah blah. What that practicality means, is that, they have no idea how to customize the complex AF system to fully take advantage of its potential that ONLY a Canon pro sport shooter have acquired from YEARS(not days) of field experience.

Despite that, they definitively concluded, "the Canon still can't match the Nikon's uncanny ability to track objects reliably and accurately as they progress across the frame while also coming toward or moving away from the camera."

Reviews between the two are coming in before DP, most including D5 users, have concluded X is still the superior pro sports camera due to its AF speed/in focus reliability and video. One reviewer suggest to take D5 at night indoor stadium venue, where lighting is flickering(off & on), 50%-30% of images will be dark. Canon wins at base iso(dr) and night venues(flicker mode), according to one reviewer.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2016 at 15:28 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Mikael Risedal: It seems that many people have difficulty to understand that D5 is optimised sport camera and to be able to take many images per second and therefore uses a different read out than the other Nikon cameras

For years, Mikael trolled Canon fanboys/girls, some probably died by now, some got band, thats how long he's been trolling Canon forum. I'm glad to see him finally eat his own s***, finger licking good Mikael!

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 07:39 UTC
In reply to:

KW Phua: This time copy Canon Dual-pixel AF.

Samsung will not call it "dual pixels" unless they are paying royalties to Canon. It's not like Samsung have not been found guilty copying Apple before, paying royalties is much cheaper than a lawsuit.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2016 at 15:37 UTC

I'm NOT entertaining Canon ML until Dual Pixel is part of the package!

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2016 at 21:44 UTC as 30th comment | 1 reply
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (615 comments in total)

According to Digital Camera World; "The sensor gets a modest resoltuion upgrade, from 18 megapixels to 20, but the real work here has gone on behind the scenes, with the NEW ON-CHIP A/D converter design and Dual Pixel CMOS AF technology for faster, smoother live view autofocus."

http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2016/02/02/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii-hands-on-review/

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 00:28 UTC as 44th comment | 5 replies
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (615 comments in total)

I am OUTPERFORMED by the legend at 16fps! Speed kills!

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 05:42 UTC as 123rd comment

I am OUTPERFORMED by the legend at 16fps! Speed kills!

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 05:40 UTC as 68th comment | 1 reply

So basically this camera is for static subject only, in due time, Sony will figure out the right algorithm setup combined with DSLR lag, that day is coming sooner than later. The question is, will Sony bulk it up(ergonomics) for pros to have a comfortable 6+ of shooting.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2015 at 14:25 UTC as 132nd comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

Mssimo: Canons nightmare day will soon be upon us. All DXO testing has been done, DXOmark rating inbound. Will it score better than DXO ONE camera at 85?. Any predictions for 1: Overall score 2: Portrait/Color Depth 3: Landscape/Dynamic Range and 4:Sports/Low-Light?

Here is my..
1: 85
2: 24.8
3: 11.9 Evs
4: 2676

Oops, double post by mistake!

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2015 at 16:46 UTC
In reply to:

Mssimo: Canons nightmare day will soon be upon us. All DXO testing has been done, DXOmark rating inbound. Will it score better than DXO ONE camera at 85?. Any predictions for 1: Overall score 2: Portrait/Color Depth 3: Landscape/Dynamic Range and 4:Sports/Low-Light?

Here is my..
1: 85
2: 24.8
3: 11.9 Evs
4: 2676

Score is TOO high, more like 80 is the limits of Canon's sensor tech, extremely disappointing for a HUGE($$$) company.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2015 at 16:41 UTC
In reply to:

Mssimo: Canons nightmare day will soon be upon us. All DXO testing has been done, DXOmark rating inbound. Will it score better than DXO ONE camera at 85?. Any predictions for 1: Overall score 2: Portrait/Color Depth 3: Landscape/Dynamic Range and 4:Sports/Low-Light?

Here is my..
1: 85
2: 24.8
3: 11.9 Evs
4: 2676

Score is TOO high, more like 80 is the limits of Canon's sensor tech, extremely disappointing for a HUGE($$$) company.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2015 at 16:22 UTC
On article Sources of noise part two: Electronic Noise (237 comments in total)

Just in case Canon gets slapped with a class action lawsuit with regards to selling defective product, Canon can always say "you knew our sensors sucked, why did you still buy it", sooo sad indeed!

Link | Posted on May 13, 2015 at 13:07 UTC as 75th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Pat Cullinan Jr: Hmmm... The Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S sells for $1800. That's $1600 less than the Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM.

What should I do?

Pins and needles, needles and pins.

What should you do?.......that's easy, Tamron is optically superior to the 14-24 nikkor, it's $600 cheaper, with VC and a more useful FL......oh and 5 yrs warranty. The 11-24 is in a league on its own.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2015 at 16:49 UTC
Total: 58, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »