nick101

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Joined on Feb 20, 2010

Comments

Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 First Impressions (549 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fujica: Funny to see how DPReview tries to mislead its readers with the provided feature table.

Flash - Most professionals prefer a clip-on or external flash above anything built in.

4K Duration - Read well 'Sony A6500 TEMPERATURE dependent UP TO 29.59 min/sec. So the question is how fast will the temperature sensor kick in. Can as well be after 10 minutes of use.

USB Charging Power = YES for the X-T2. Just plug it in and it will recharge your camera.

Battery Duration 350 to 310 => this most often means its more often 310 then 350 shots.

Not mentioning its fastest mechanical shutter speed. You can only guess why. The A6500 and A6300 do not go over 1/4000th the X-T2 goes up to 1/8000th

The Flash Sync speed is another one that DPReview carefully does not mention as its only 1/180 for the A6500 against 1/250 for the X-T2.

Very misleading table you put up mr DPreview.

The most capable camera is the X-T2 over the A6500 sorry to say so for all those who love their Sony.

So you've posted a bunch of opinions, without evidence to support them and, on that basis, accuse DPReview of "trying to mislead its readers"

Have you never come across the idea that different people might have different opinions about something? Or the idea that opinions are not facts?

"Most professionals prefer ..."
"Can as well eb after 10 minutes ..."
"more often 310 than 350..."

Simple, unadorned speculation.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 09:38 UTC
In reply to:

nick101: Fascinating how many people here think that the only reason a photo of a black boy can win is because of "political correctness".

And then add to that those who think that the only reason a photo that they personally don't like can win is through cronyism or secret deals.

Hmm.

Examples: TRK, OlyPent (both in "Most Popular"), fishywishy (here and in the forum thread).

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2016 at 16:55 UTC

Fascinating how many people here think that the only reason a photo of a black boy can win is because of "political correctness".

And then add to that those who think that the only reason a photo that they personally don't like can win is through cronyism or secret deals.

Hmm.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2016 at 16:45 UTC as 41st comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Sir Corey of Deane: Obviously another slow news day.

Photography site posts news item about major photography competition. Site visitor complains. Discuss.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2016 at 16:38 UTC
In reply to:

fishy wishy: I expect the London National Portrait Gallery was deeply disappointed there was no photograph of Syrian migrants to put in this first place. After all, it would have garnered far more publicity, asserted their political credentials, and almost certainly would have been far more photographically interesting. A few facial creases here and there, torn clothing, anxious expression, heartstrings in sight... Instead we have a school portrait day photo with extra lighting - sad.

You're absolutely determined to complain that this was all about PC. It's apparently beyond your comprehension that some people might actually prefer this photograph to the others in the competition. That's what's sad.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2016 at 16:37 UTC
In reply to:

Jaythomasni: First Koreans....now Chinese cheap immitations wil cannibalize Japanese and other high quality products and brands...Its Chinese decade ahead...
USA is full of Chinese crap ...televisions,,and all electronic...Panasonic,,,and other Japanese brands are out...
most likely cash rich Chinese companies will buy Japanese experts and assets to make it their own...
Sharp is already sold.
next big news in 5 years will be Canon brand sold to Chinese chong ying
company..now head quartered in Shanghai...canon japan gone exinct....
lot of Kodak stories to follow

@0MitchAG Nor am I

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 08:46 UTC
In reply to:

Jaythomasni: First Koreans....now Chinese cheap immitations wil cannibalize Japanese and other high quality products and brands...Its Chinese decade ahead...
USA is full of Chinese crap ...televisions,,and all electronic...Panasonic,,,and other Japanese brands are out...
most likely cash rich Chinese companies will buy Japanese experts and assets to make it their own...
Sharp is already sold.
next big news in 5 years will be Canon brand sold to Chinese chong ying
company..now head quartered in Shanghai...canon japan gone exinct....
lot of Kodak stories to follow

"...Japanese and other high quality products and brands..."

Ha! Some of us are old enough to remember when it was "Japanese crap" copying and displacing "high quality US and European brands".

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 06:20 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2175 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wildbegonia: At this level of performance and price, what is a tilting LCD good for? The least or basic standard feature this camera should have is FULLY ARTICULATED LCD.

Ha! And over in the M43 community, everyone's complaining that the newest E-M5 and E-M1 models have gone from tilting to fully articulated :-)

If your shooting style demands articulated, then this is an issue. I like tilting for street/candid but I prefer articulated for other purposes (video mainly).

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2016 at 19:17 UTC
On article Video: Canon EOS 7D versus leaf-cutter ants (48 comments in total)

When will DPReview get around to including the leafcutter ants in their test process? In fact, why hasn't it happened before now? Money changing hands to protect the reputation of Canikon, I suppose

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 17:42 UTC as 6th comment | 4 replies
On article Mosh pits and sunsets: Shooting with the Panasonic GX85 (147 comments in total)
In reply to:

puffo25: Hi all, I still very confused if better to get a GX85 or an Oly Pen-F, especially if video is NOT interesting to me.
According also to the camera compare site (http://cameradecision.com/compare/Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GX85-vs-Olympus-PEN-F), the 2 cameras are very similar. Better price for GX85 but for shutter speed, EVF, shutter speed, point of focus and so on, Pen-F is superior. Plus you get the Art filters:-)
Anyone can make a final personal decision?

Personally: don't care about Art filters; if I want to get "creative" I'll do it in post. If you're only interested in stills, the Oly will probably give you nicer JPEGs.

Other than that, the main factor should be how the camera handles for you personally. I find Pannys easier than Olys; YMMV

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2016 at 13:21 UTC

"Bag becomes quite cumbersome with both a 15" laptop and DSLR + lenses"

I don't see how any shoulder bag with a 15" laptop plus dSLR plus lenses would be anything but cumbersome.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2016 at 07:23 UTC as 42nd comment
In reply to:

Advent1sam: The best mirrorless for fast action is the Fuji xpro-2 according to mirrorlessons
http://www.mirrorlessons.com/2016/04/06/fujifilm-100-400mm-review/
You can also use the ovf much like a red-dot sight
http://www.mirrorlessons.com/2016/03/30/fuji-x-pro2-ovf-birds-in-flight/
Unlike the a6300 the fuji also supports uhs-ii sd has a deeper buffer and quicker refresh/write with the faster card, has better overall iq and is weather sealed, it also has a very nice native 100-400 lens for the system, unlike Sony.

Yes, the best way to find out how well the Sony compares to a dSLR is to compare it to another mirrorless.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 14:56 UTC
In reply to:

Siobhan A: Hey DPR, there is now a 7D mark ii.
Maybe you've read about it.

The Canon 7D came about almost 7 years ago! LOL!

btw, looks like the A6300 again fell short of the NX1 (with last FW update) which is also old and not even made anymore. It will be interesting to see if the new NX1 hacking project will vault the NX1 even farther ahead.

So you didn't read the part where they wanted to use something with the same 8fps frame rate as the Sony?

Pity

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 14:54 UTC
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: The article is only about focus. The writer just continuously harps on the fact that the AF doesn’t work in the manner that he is accustomed to. I understand that Sony has an uphill battle converting Canikon users. However, there are so many other aspects that are important for sports shooting than just AF capabilities.

For example the low light capabilities are critical in this type of scenario especially when the photographer tended to use ISO 12,800 as often as possible. Those ISO 12K shots actually looked decent but I can’t help wondering why he didn’t use ISO 1600 and 1/250 instead? Some of the high ISO images were stationary portrait type shots.

Overall I get the impression that the writer of this article went into it thinking that the Sony couldn’t AF like he was accustomed to and he set out to prove that point no matter what it took. He proved his point but it really left me wondering whether he truly explored all of this camera’s capabilities for shooting action sports.

So a pro sports photographer assesses it for pro sports shooting and you tell him he's done it wrong? The guy gets paid on results, not to be a guinea pig for the wonderful new world of mirrorless FF

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2015 at 14:25 UTC
In reply to:

NZ Scott: Cool photo!

Given that Dpreview is primarily a gear site, it seems odd that this story does not mention the photographer's camera gear. Personally, I would like to have known what he was using.

I suspect that the photographer used a non-Sony camera/lens combination, and Dpreview has deliberately kept the brand out of the story to pander to Sony's wishes.

This is not good journalism.

It's so characteristic of DPReview that an item about a great, award-winning image should immediately become a gear debate

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2015 at 10:26 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV Review (1571 comments in total)
In reply to:

nick101: I'm struck by the issue of the number of features vs the user interface for managing them. I wish some manufacturers (Sony aren't alone) would recognise that adding to the list of features and options doesn't add value unless we can use them effectively.

It's a shame that such a capable device is sucj a challenge to handle

I agree that firmware, and a menu structure review, could fix this. But I'm not optimisitc - judging by the fact that this has been a problem through many model iterations, and with sveral manufacturers, I just don't think that it's consider a priority.

I hope I'm wrong.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2015 at 14:43 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV Review (1571 comments in total)

I'm struck by the issue of the number of features vs the user interface for managing them. I wish some manufacturers (Sony aren't alone) would recognise that adding to the list of features and options doesn't add value unless we can use them effectively.

It's a shame that such a capable device is sucj a challenge to handle

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2015 at 10:44 UTC as 115th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

nick101: Ok to take pics for private use? Fine.

Need a licence for commercial use? Fine (-ish)

The issue to me is whether posting to social media is commercial or not. If I post one of my snaps of a London river trip to Facebook, as I am likely to do), am I OK?

I can't accept the idea that it'll be forbidden but not enforced as any kind of protection - that's just ludicrous (who passes laws starting with the notion that they won't enforce them?)

We need clarity and that should come from those proposing this - they're making the change, so they're responsible for explains the effects

Sorry if my point 2 wasn't clear. It was that even the proponents of the legislation don't seem to be clear about its effects. One says you'll need a licence forscoial media posts; another says you won't; a third says that you will but it won't be enforced.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2015 at 10:08 UTC
In reply to:

nick101: Ok to take pics for private use? Fine.

Need a licence for commercial use? Fine (-ish)

The issue to me is whether posting to social media is commercial or not. If I post one of my snaps of a London river trip to Facebook, as I am likely to do), am I OK?

I can't accept the idea that it'll be forbidden but not enforced as any kind of protection - that's just ludicrous (who passes laws starting with the notion that they won't enforce them?)

We need clarity and that should come from those proposing this - they're making the change, so they're responsible for explains the effects

@nixda
Your response is typical of the kind of confusion I'm commenting on.

1. Giving Facebook "rights to commercially exploit" is *not* equivalent to "you lose all rights to ...". Posting a picture to Facebook does *not* prevent me from exploiting the image myself.

2. *An* interpretation of the proposed legislation is that, *because* Facebook may choose to use my image for some commercial purpose, I need a licence to post it to Facebook. But what is the *actual* situation.

3. You say the proposed legislation "may restrict you to upload..." - I'm entitlled to *know* whether what I'm about to do is permitted or not permitted. Unless, of course, we're happy to revert to those days in which "that which is not expressly permitted is forbidden"

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2015 at 10:44 UTC

Ok to take pics for private use? Fine.

Need a licence for commercial use? Fine (-ish)

The issue to me is whether posting to social media is commercial or not. If I post one of my snaps of a London river trip to Facebook, as I am likely to do), am I OK?

I can't accept the idea that it'll be forbidden but not enforced as any kind of protection - that's just ludicrous (who passes laws starting with the notion that they won't enforce them?)

We need clarity and that should come from those proposing this - they're making the change, so they're responsible for explains the effects

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2015 at 18:32 UTC as 64th comment | 6 replies
Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »