lol101

Lives in France France
Joined on Nov 23, 2006

Comments

Total: 144, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Top 10 sample galleries of the year #1: the Nikon D850 (83 comments in total)
In reply to:

BackToTheBasics: Where are all the Canons :p

Probably busy getting sold...

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2017 at 12:42 UTC
In reply to:

lightandaprayer: While this is a unique image in and of itself, these kinds of wedding photos have become just another cliche of the genre.

Everything in photography is cliché....

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 20:27 UTC

I really hate smartphones!

;-)

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2017 at 14:22 UTC as 35th comment | 1 reply
On article Leica Thambar-M 90mm F2.2 sample gallery (214 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bashir Lunat: Thambar is a tech feat. A correctly corrected uncorrected lens.

In other words: perfect imperfection!

:-)

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 16:41 UTC
On article Canon EF-M 22mm F2 STM sample gallery (176 comments in total)
In reply to:

tkbslc: Still waiting for the companion 53mm F2.

So am I... And quite a few others I would guess...

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 19:16 UTC
In reply to:

jhinkey: Decreased operating costs - mostly likely the big layoffs they had a while back finally having an effect.

That's one strategy a company sometimes has to take: develop a new product, which can take years, get it into production, then layoff a lot of employees to trim back down, especially if the next new product won't be out for a while. Do they have a head count vs. quarter buried in there somewhere?

It's funny you should distort what I said into "lifetime employment"... Where did I mention that? For the record I work in a very competitive engineering field... And I have already changed jobs a few times.
Are Google and Facebook regularly laying off people to "straighten the books"? I don't think they do but I might be wrong...

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 19:14 UTC
In reply to:

jhinkey: Decreased operating costs - mostly likely the big layoffs they had a while back finally having an effect.

That's one strategy a company sometimes has to take: develop a new product, which can take years, get it into production, then layoff a lot of employees to trim back down, especially if the next new product won't be out for a while. Do they have a head count vs. quarter buried in there somewhere?

Silicon Valley is a microcosm (I spent a few years down there at Stanford). You are right in everything you point out... And so am I... Most if these companies have a very short lifespan.
The ones who stay in business generally have a different perspective on work.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2017 at 20:44 UTC
In reply to:

jhinkey: Decreased operating costs - mostly likely the big layoffs they had a while back finally having an effect.

That's one strategy a company sometimes has to take: develop a new product, which can take years, get it into production, then layoff a lot of employees to trim back down, especially if the next new product won't be out for a while. Do they have a head count vs. quarter buried in there somewhere?

Would you give your best for a company knowing that, once you will have contributed to get them the product and results they want, you will be rewarded by a lay-off?
I won 't.
Companies going this route will inevitably die because their employees will just check in to get a paycheck and then move on to the next.
Ultimately their products will fall into mediocrity because their own employees will not care.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2017 at 16:41 UTC
In reply to:

jhinkey: Decreased operating costs - mostly likely the big layoffs they had a while back finally having an effect.

That's one strategy a company sometimes has to take: develop a new product, which can take years, get it into production, then layoff a lot of employees to trim back down, especially if the next new product won't be out for a while. Do they have a head count vs. quarter buried in there somewhere?

And a wise strategy for potential employees of such companies would be : never work for them.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2017 at 09:03 UTC
In reply to:

taktak91: I would seriously consider this camera if they halved the price.

@HowaboutRaw, define "much better"...

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 10:50 UTC

Great! Another solution looking for a problem...

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2017 at 16:14 UTC as 70th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS M100 review (776 comments in total)
In reply to:

celipessoa1971: When one has a full frame one does not want a APSC.

That's a pretty powerful statement...

Let me just ponder it for a while while I look at my 6D, M5 and LX100 placed next to each other on my table...

I seem to remember that I had something in mind when I bought them but now I'm all confused... I think it had something to do with geometry but I can't quite figure it out now...

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2017 at 16:11 UTC
In reply to:

User0127324968: Would like to see 15-35 f4, 24-70 f4 and 70-200 f4 for pentax full frame.
Lack of this kind of lenses for Pentax is a disaster.

By the way they already have the 55* f1.4!
And the neeeeext summer 50* f1.4.

I think NASA have to give the Mars project to this company!!!

Tired of being a Pentaxian, unfortunately.

@veato The point of asking for f4 lenses apparently went over your head... Think price/compactness/quality compromise.

Or just look at the f4 L zooms from Canon to give you an idea.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2017 at 09:08 UTC
In reply to:

turretless: Oh, Pentax! It appears like they're still around. Who could have thought...

@Najinsky I don't think Penatx (Ricoh) is in to win any race... maybe they don't need to.
Just turning a profit can be good enough for a company.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 21:06 UTC
In reply to:

User0127324968: Would like to see 15-35 f4, 24-70 f4 and 70-200 f4 for pentax full frame.
Lack of this kind of lenses for Pentax is a disaster.

By the way they already have the 55* f1.4!
And the neeeeext summer 50* f1.4.

I think NASA have to give the Mars project to this company!!!

Tired of being a Pentaxian, unfortunately.

Indeed.
24-105f4L and 70-200f4L made me switch from Pentax to Canon quite some time ago... that and the sub-par AF.
Still looking at what Pentax (Ricoh) is doing though... one day, I just might be a Pentaxian again... :-)

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 21:05 UTC
In reply to:

vesa1tahti: Pentax? Still alive?

Yes, the rumors of Pentax's death have been premature for a long long time now... and will continue to be!

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 21:02 UTC
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: A loser is a loser. Whatever how innovative they are, they are still the loser!
Only the strong one can dominate the market.

Hopefully you're not in management nor marketing...

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 12:46 UTC
On article Meet the Canon PowerShot G1 X III (327 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: I am wondering why so many people say it is expensive. Maybe there are too many poor people now. For only $1300, I can get the smallest and lightest APSC zoom camera in the world; if I don't buy it, buy what? $1300 is just 1/2 the price of an air ticket!

If you think $1300 is pocket change, good for you.

And yes, there are definitely too many poor people nowadays...

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 06:35 UTC
In reply to:

LiangMing: If the Canon's lens is f1.8-f2.8 like the Sony RX100, the additional $300 may be worthy. Wait, no 4K video?

@Mike Agreed, I was just pointing to the size a 15-45 f1.8-2.8 designed to cover APS C would be...

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 20:52 UTC
In reply to:

LiangMing: If the Canon's lens is f1.8-f2.8 like the Sony RX100, the additional $300 may be worthy. Wait, no 4K video?

Did the difference in sensor size escape you?

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 19:16 UTC
Total: 144, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »