AFishEye

Joined on Dec 22, 2010

Comments

Total: 66, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On article Post-Photokina polls - Tell us what you think (196 comments in total)
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: I voted "full frame or nothing", though I don't really appreciate the implication of fanaticism that sentence contains. Having used 4/3 for years and dipped a toe or two in APS-C, and having a substancial experience with the real full frame (135 film), I believe full frame is the only way for digital to go. It's better at everything compared to smaller formats. As demand increases, chances are we'll see truly affordable full frame systems very soon.
Of course one could go over the top and vote for medium format, but are our computers up to handling such large files? Full frame is actually more sensible than it appears to 1", 4/3 and APS-C users - as long as one doesn't go bananas and buys 36 MP cameras.
Some months ago I had the chance to sort a Nikon Df. I fell in love even before holding it. It's such a capable camera! I wish people would look at it without prejudice.

@Princewolf
Here are some recent pearls (due to space limitations I will do it in two separate posts). There is much much more of that, just look for it:
Part 1:
Sep 19
“Dear Ricoh people: please give the Pentax brand the mercy shot. The brand formerly known as Asahi Pentax, which gave us spot metering, does not deserve being subjected to so much ridicule. Just call every camera "Ricoh". It's OK. Ricoh has a nice reputation for great cameras too. I'd rather never see a Pentax-branded camera again than see gold point and shoots (and DSLRs with LED lights on the handgrip) with an once prestigious name on it”
Sep 19
“Oh, latin... I'm so impressed!
Did you expect me to enter a serious debate with someone like you? What would it be like? Something childish like "I know more about cameras than you do?" "My sensor is bigger than yours?" Sorry if I disappoint you, but I'm not going to waste of time with someone like you. You're grotesque”

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 16:26 UTC
On article Post-Photokina polls - Tell us what you think (196 comments in total)
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: I voted "full frame or nothing", though I don't really appreciate the implication of fanaticism that sentence contains. Having used 4/3 for years and dipped a toe or two in APS-C, and having a substancial experience with the real full frame (135 film), I believe full frame is the only way for digital to go. It's better at everything compared to smaller formats. As demand increases, chances are we'll see truly affordable full frame systems very soon.
Of course one could go over the top and vote for medium format, but are our computers up to handling such large files? Full frame is actually more sensible than it appears to 1", 4/3 and APS-C users - as long as one doesn't go bananas and buys 36 MP cameras.
Some months ago I had the chance to sort a Nikon Df. I fell in love even before holding it. It's such a capable camera! I wish people would look at it without prejudice.

@Manuel
Still no proof that you are not violating copyright laws

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 16:25 UTC
On article Post-Photokina polls - Tell us what you think (196 comments in total)
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: I voted "full frame or nothing", though I don't really appreciate the implication of fanaticism that sentence contains. Having used 4/3 for years and dipped a toe or two in APS-C, and having a substancial experience with the real full frame (135 film), I believe full frame is the only way for digital to go. It's better at everything compared to smaller formats. As demand increases, chances are we'll see truly affordable full frame systems very soon.
Of course one could go over the top and vote for medium format, but are our computers up to handling such large files? Full frame is actually more sensible than it appears to 1", 4/3 and APS-C users - as long as one doesn't go bananas and buys 36 MP cameras.
Some months ago I had the chance to sort a Nikon Df. I fell in love even before holding it. It's such a capable camera! I wish people would look at it without prejudice.

@Princewolf
1. Maybe you want to look at the consistent style of this specific member prior to jumping to his defense. Belittling others and using abusive language is the hallmark of this specific member; as such, he is likely to attract the well-deserved comments he gets.
2. Potential copyright violation is not a minor issue. A search of "copyright free images of Kramer" or "royalty free images of Kramer" yielded nothing. I look forward to seeing the link to the copyright free version of his profile image.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 15:57 UTC
On article Post-Photokina polls - Tell us what you think (196 comments in total)
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: I voted "full frame or nothing", though I don't really appreciate the implication of fanaticism that sentence contains. Having used 4/3 for years and dipped a toe or two in APS-C, and having a substancial experience with the real full frame (135 film), I believe full frame is the only way for digital to go. It's better at everything compared to smaller formats. As demand increases, chances are we'll see truly affordable full frame systems very soon.
Of course one could go over the top and vote for medium format, but are our computers up to handling such large files? Full frame is actually more sensible than it appears to 1", 4/3 and APS-C users - as long as one doesn't go bananas and buys 36 MP cameras.
Some months ago I had the chance to sort a Nikon Df. I fell in love even before holding it. It's such a capable camera! I wish people would look at it without prejudice.

1. They are copyright free if you are Jerry Seinfeld or Larry David, last time I checked neither live in Portugal
2. My demo photos of illustrating the use of a specific mounting plate easily rival the masterpieces featured in your galleries.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 14:21 UTC
On article Post-Photokina polls - Tell us what you think (196 comments in total)
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: I voted "full frame or nothing", though I don't really appreciate the implication of fanaticism that sentence contains. Having used 4/3 for years and dipped a toe or two in APS-C, and having a substancial experience with the real full frame (135 film), I believe full frame is the only way for digital to go. It's better at everything compared to smaller formats. As demand increases, chances are we'll see truly affordable full frame systems very soon.
Of course one could go over the top and vote for medium format, but are our computers up to handling such large files? Full frame is actually more sensible than it appears to 1", 4/3 and APS-C users - as long as one doesn't go bananas and buys 36 MP cameras.
Some months ago I had the chance to sort a Nikon Df. I fell in love even before holding it. It's such a capable camera! I wish people would look at it without prejudice.

@ManuelVilardeMacedo
1. I pointed to the facts
A. most members hold a different opinion than yours regarding sensor size. There is no reason to assume that they are less knowledgable than you.
B. You make claims that can not be substantiated and you were not able to properly acknowledge any of my statements
2. Let me tell you what's not hilarious: a member on a photography forum whose profile picture is a blunt violation of copyright laws.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 13:55 UTC
On article Post-Photokina polls - Tell us what you think (196 comments in total)
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: I voted "full frame or nothing", though I don't really appreciate the implication of fanaticism that sentence contains. Having used 4/3 for years and dipped a toe or two in APS-C, and having a substancial experience with the real full frame (135 film), I believe full frame is the only way for digital to go. It's better at everything compared to smaller formats. As demand increases, chances are we'll see truly affordable full frame systems very soon.
Of course one could go over the top and vote for medium format, but are our computers up to handling such large files? Full frame is actually more sensible than it appears to 1", 4/3 and APS-C users - as long as one doesn't go bananas and buys 36 MP cameras.
Some months ago I had the chance to sort a Nikon Df. I fell in love even before holding it. It's such a capable camera! I wish people would look at it without prejudice.

@ManuelVilardeMacedo
1. I specifically pointed to APS-C prints. Many modern APS-C easily handle ISO 1600 and, on the flip side, quite a few modern FF are noisy at 6400. High ISO performance is a personal preference not a general must have.
2. I have no clue where the "equivalent aperture" fits in the discussion. I don't recall even remotely eluding to it.
3. You are entitled to whatever opinion you want to have; however, when it is biased and poorly substantiated it shouldn't come as a surprise that people will refute it.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 13:28 UTC
On article Post-Photokina polls - Tell us what you think (196 comments in total)
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: I voted "full frame or nothing", though I don't really appreciate the implication of fanaticism that sentence contains. Having used 4/3 for years and dipped a toe or two in APS-C, and having a substancial experience with the real full frame (135 film), I believe full frame is the only way for digital to go. It's better at everything compared to smaller formats. As demand increases, chances are we'll see truly affordable full frame systems very soon.
Of course one could go over the top and vote for medium format, but are our computers up to handling such large files? Full frame is actually more sensible than it appears to 1", 4/3 and APS-C users - as long as one doesn't go bananas and buys 36 MP cameras.
Some months ago I had the chance to sort a Nikon Df. I fell in love even before holding it. It's such a capable camera! I wish people would look at it without prejudice.

@PicOne
While your point is well taken, I think that bare minimum is fairly indicative of where people's comfort zone is. For some, the desirable sensor size may not even exist yet.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 13:14 UTC
On article Post-Photokina polls - Tell us what you think (196 comments in total)
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: I voted "full frame or nothing", though I don't really appreciate the implication of fanaticism that sentence contains. Having used 4/3 for years and dipped a toe or two in APS-C, and having a substancial experience with the real full frame (135 film), I believe full frame is the only way for digital to go. It's better at everything compared to smaller formats. As demand increases, chances are we'll see truly affordable full frame systems very soon.
Of course one could go over the top and vote for medium format, but are our computers up to handling such large files? Full frame is actually more sensible than it appears to 1", 4/3 and APS-C users - as long as one doesn't go bananas and buys 36 MP cameras.
Some months ago I had the chance to sort a Nikon Df. I fell in love even before holding it. It's such a capable camera! I wish people would look at it without prejudice.

1. It is obvious that most people don't share your view. It is absolutely not a surprise that the overwhelming majority see the 1"-APS-C as a desirable sensor size range. Do you actually print your work? If you would, you'd be amazed to see the quality of prints you can get from a modern APS-C up to the mid 20" print size. If you just view images on your computer monitor, I bet you that without EXIF and the ability to meaninglessly pixel peep, you'd routinely fail to tell a FF from a great 1" image taken in good available light conditions. In more challenging light conditions you'd fail to tell a FF from APS-C apart.

2. The only person with a prejudice is you. How can you make decisions and fall in love with a camera before even holding it and why is it inconceivable to you that a large brick with tons of knobs and no video capability is not everyone's cup of tea?

3. Why does 18MP on FF is great and 36MP is "going bananas"? Talking about prejudice.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 12:33 UTC
On article Behind the Shot: Spot the Shark (67 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stigg: wasted time and effort on a boring image. its still boring after all the play-by-play analysis and photoshopping. good or great images don't need much or any after-treatment. that's why i'm still using film.

@Stigg
A classy response from a classy person

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 18:46 UTC
On article Behind the Shot: Spot the Shark (67 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stigg: wasted time and effort on a boring image. its still boring after all the play-by-play analysis and photoshopping. good or great images don't need much or any after-treatment. that's why i'm still using film.

@Stigg
Everything pales in comparison to the amazing images in your galleries
http://www.dpreview.com/members/296810275/galleries
Are you giving any workshops?

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2014 at 02:35 UTC
On article Sony a5100 First Impressions Review (592 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zvonimir Tosic: In how many colours it comes? Just one? Two?
It hardy looks like a fashionable item — it only looks like a today's mirrorless camera. Perhaps Sony should make a small lens with some interesting finish that can appeal more to both worlds.
Leather grip would be a nice touch too. Also engraved logo, not painted logo; gosh, this looks too harsh.

@Zvonimir Tosic
An interesting comment, especially when it comes from a Ricoh/Pentax fanboy; a company that specializes in this kind of nonsense.
http://www.dpreview.com/files/p/E~articles/5755587632/Q-S1_solo_2.jpeg

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2014 at 13:16 UTC
On article Sony a5100 First Impressions Review (592 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kiril Karaatanasov: What is "Touch-enabled LCD"?

My A6000 is either broken or the model does not support touch screen operation.

Comment deleted

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2014 at 06:33 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review (891 comments in total)
In reply to:

h2k: I have only read the conclusion and i don't know this camera or its rivals from personal experience, but it seems there's a lot of solid advice here which is most helpful in the decision-making hassle regarding one's next camera.

Let me get it right: you read one paragraph of the review and you know nothing about the camera, yet you felt compelled to rush to inform us of how useful the info in this review is?
Thanks for your meaningful contribution!
P.S
It is a good review, you may want to consider reading it

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 23:38 UTC
On article Tamrac brand and assets acquired by Gura Gear (30 comments in total)
In reply to:

Funkyd3121: I have been using Lowepro since around 1985. Still using a former Medium Format bag to this day. I own 3 shoulder bags, 1 belt/fanny pack & then I bought 1 Vanguard Messenger bag in 2013 because of the size & color.

Thanks for the detailed historical shopping list.
Please make sure you keep us posted of your future purchases and don’t limit yourself just to camera gear.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2014 at 19:24 UTC
On article Panasonic FZ1000: Not just another superzoom... (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aroart: super awesome. Pani is dueling with sony and us as customers are the winners. Ive been waiting for this type of camera for 4 yrs. Sony almost had me with the rx10 but a bit pricy for crappy codec.

@roblarosa
my bad, should have responded after the first morning coffee, not before

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 14:43 UTC
On article Panasonic FZ1000: Not just another superzoom... (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aroart: super awesome. Pani is dueling with sony and us as customers are the winners. Ive been waiting for this type of camera for 4 yrs. Sony almost had me with the rx10 but a bit pricy for crappy codec.

@Aroart
If by dueling you refer to business partnership, then its Olympus not Panasonic that Sony is invested in.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-28/olympus-s-directors-approve-sony-tie-up-plan-official-says.html

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 14:28 UTC
On article Sony a6000 Review (905 comments in total)
In reply to:

luigibozi: I would like DPR to test and have it in the specs (for all cameras):
if using a quick release plate for a tripod allows the screen to freely tilt. I had a Sony RX100 (very good camera!) and when I visited a Sony store here in Toronto and looked at a Sony RX10 (that looks better in hand than in the images) I was surprised to see that when I attached a quick release plate (a small Gitzo) the tilting screen was obstructed. I wonder if this (I would like to keep my quick release plate on the bottom of my camera) is a designed "feature" that has some reason behind?!

@luigibozi
Thanks for the insight and enlightenment; DPR and camera manufacturers are on it and will report back to you promptly

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2014 at 00:13 UTC
On article Sony a6000 Review (905 comments in total)
In reply to:

luigibozi: I would like DPR to test and have it in the specs (for all cameras):
if using a quick release plate for a tripod allows the screen to freely tilt. I had a Sony RX100 (very good camera!) and when I visited a Sony store here in Toronto and looked at a Sony RX10 (that looks better in hand than in the images) I was surprised to see that when I attached a quick release plate (a small Gitzo) the tilting screen was obstructed. I wonder if this (I would like to keep my quick release plate on the bottom of my camera) is a designed "feature" that has some reason behind?!

@luigibozi
If I understand you correctly, you want camera manufacturers to make sure their body design works with the numerous types of plates out there, or do you just want them to check with you before they go to the drawing board to verify it works with plate you happen to own?
That's your definition of good design, seriously?
P.S
Yes, the RRS is Arca Swiss and not QR. I started with QR and moved to Arca Swiss once I realized that more custom designs are available for this kind of a plate. And, yes, they have a custom plate for a6000. This article reviewed the a6000 not the RX10

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2014 at 12:33 UTC
On article Sony a6000 Review (905 comments in total)
In reply to:

luigibozi: I would like DPR to test and have it in the specs (for all cameras):
if using a quick release plate for a tripod allows the screen to freely tilt. I had a Sony RX100 (very good camera!) and when I visited a Sony store here in Toronto and looked at a Sony RX10 (that looks better in hand than in the images) I was surprised to see that when I attached a quick release plate (a small Gitzo) the tilting screen was obstructed. I wonder if this (I would like to keep my quick release plate on the bottom of my camera) is a designed "feature" that has some reason behind?!

You cannot seriously expect a generic plate to be a perfect fit for every shape and size of a camera body.
There are custom plates that do not interfere with the screen swivel of the a6000.
RRS is just one example of such a plate.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2014 at 12:52 UTC
On article Sony a6000 Review (905 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jerry Fusselman: "While still respectable, the EVF on the a6000 is a step down from the one on the NEX-6. It's both smaller and lower resolution."

I have both of these cameras, and no one would prefer the NEX-6's EVF. Especially in low light, the a6000's EVF is far better to look at and far more useful. That, not just resolution, is the bottom line. Thus, the review's statement that the a6000's EVF is a step down is false. It is actually a big step up, when all aspects of using the EVF are considered.

@Vsbastosx
Don’t overthink it. I have both cameras and they are both fantastic!
In my opinion, in low light the NEX 6 still has a slight edge.
I bought the a6000 for the new AF system that I can use with the new 70-200 f4 and for the slightly better cropping ability when shooting wildlife with the 70-400 (or the 70-200).
For all other purposes, you will not see a huge difference in real life use.
It comes down to your shooting style and price point.
If you have the extra money, you’d be better off spending it on better lens (16-70 f4 or the 10-18 f4)

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 13:23 UTC
Total: 66, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »