dengx

Lives in Poland Poland
Joined on Apr 16, 2011

Comments

Total: 76, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

bluevellet: No pureview no sell

Looking at the webpage it says Main camera sensor: 10 MP, PureView (which is just a marketing name anyway).

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2014 at 08:07 UTC
On article HTC introduces One M8 for Windows Phone (22 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: Who cares about Windows for phones?? Learn from Nokia's mistake.

I do.
I absolutely love the live tiles and how smooth the OS feels.

Link | Posted on Aug 20, 2014 at 06:39 UTC
In reply to:

photogeek: Too bad most of their lenses have noisy, slow motors and are worthless for fast moving subjects. FWIW, I ended up going with MFT after trying both X-T1 and E-M1 side by side. E-M1 is just much better made and all their lenses (at least all I have tried) have ultrasonic motors. The only real flaw that I could see in Oly lineup is their 17mm f/1.8 lens, which, while not that bad in absolute terms, is not that good either, and worse than their f/2.8 zoom.

All the LM zooms feature linear motors.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2014 at 15:26 UTC
In reply to:

forpetessake: Fuji is moving swiftly to become the most respected lens manufacturer in the world: a combination of high quality, affordable price, and compact designs is hard to beat.

Fujinon is already one of the most respected lens manufacturers.
They just produce lenses that are not for the typical consumer (broadcast lenses, satellite optics, medium format lenses for its GX cameras, Hasselblad H series, X-Pan and so on).

Fujifilm X-series is like a playing with toys for them.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 20:09 UTC
On article Pictures emerge showing widely-leaked Fujfilm 'X-T1' (371 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: Anyone think this will match the OM M1 or Panasonic GH3 for AF? I doubt it. Nice-looking though.

It won't, smaller sensors will be always faster even it means fractions of a second.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 23:26 UTC
On article Pictures emerge showing widely-leaked Fujfilm 'X-T1' (371 comments in total)
In reply to:

12345ccr: notice it says 18-55mm on the lens barrel? Could it possibly be APS-C?

It is APS-C to which Fujifilm is devoted to.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 23:24 UTC
On article Fujifilm teases upcoming SLR-style X system camera (890 comments in total)
In reply to:

pancromat: FUJIFILM should consider rebranding. i mean "FILM". looks even more embarrassing when written on the front like here.

Seriously? Embarrassing?

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2014 at 10:00 UTC
In reply to:

Emacs23: Same size as Canon 85/f1.8 and slightly smaller than equivalent Nikon. About the same low light performance (FF vs APS-C), more than twice expensive (three times more expensive than Canon). And the performance will be worse than those full framers, because to be better it should be better than Otus 55 (which is about on par with Nikon 85/1.8G at equivalent apertures mounted on D600, Otus mounted on Nikon D7100).

@Emacs23
I don't think that anyone cares really.
Either you have one of the systems and buy the lens for it or have both and chose cheaper/better performing/lighter one based on preferences.
No need to feel insecure you know.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2014 at 10:18 UTC
On article Fujifilm announces XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS wideangle zoom (172 comments in total)

Three low dispersion elements (or four looking at the picture on their site) and four aspherical.
Quite shocking. It better be the best UWA ever.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2013 at 10:47 UTC as 19th comment
In reply to:

Marty4650: Lets not go overboard with praise here.

Essentially, Fuji made a smart business decision by trying very hard to fix a defective product that their customers paid $1200 for. And they have done a good job of fixing that product.

All of these firmware fixes are genuinely appreciated by their customers, simply because very few companies today think that far forward. Once they have your money the transaction is considered complete. They usually feel they owe you nothing more.

We can commend Fuji for doing the right thing, but just remember it was their flawed product that made these firmware fixes necessary. These problems weren't caused by a tsunami or earthquake. They were caused by poor design and engineering.

This wasn't an act of generosity but a business necessity going forward. It's not shocking that one smart company would fix a defective product... the shocking thing is that so many other companies won't.

So adding a focus peaking is suddenly a fix?

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2013 at 08:45 UTC
On article Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS review (151 comments in total)
In reply to:

Asylum Photo: Using ACR instead of Iridient or Capture One makes the images look softer than they actually are. YMMV depending on raw converter, and I think it's important to talk about that when reviewing Fuji X lenses.

@CFynn
there are plenty:
http://vkphotoblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/lightroom-44-acr74-vs-capture-one.html

http://vkphotoblog.blogspot.com/2013/07/dcraw-919.html

http://vkphotoblog.blogspot.com/2013/08/iridient-developer-22-quick-comparison.html

and the site that can't be posted on dpr because it's moderated. there was a comparision of 7 RAW converters for X-Trans + OOC.

DPR:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1550547764/adobes-fujifilm-x-trans-sensor-processing-tested

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1550547764/adobes-fujifilm-x-trans-sensor-processing-tested/2

Same goes for Bayer of course, ACR is just a middle of the pack fro me when it comes to demosaicing.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2013 at 19:52 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100S Review (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: At base ISO I really couldn't see how this camera had any better image quality than the Olympus OMD. If you stick the excellent Panasonic 20mm F1.7 lens on the Olympus or the upcoming Panasonic GX7 you would have the same image quality(or Better) for about the same price.

The biggest difference is that you could also then have an interchangeable lens camera. I don't think that the X100S is a bad camera. I just think that the fixed lens compact category offers no benefit over an interchangeable lens compact camera.

Of course not but your final point was that the fixed lens camera offers no benefit over an ilc which is simply not true for some cases.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2013 at 18:42 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100S Review (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

JackM: I own the X100S and a Canon 5D3. The X100S has all but replaced my 5D3 for family outings and candids. It's a wonderful camera with wonderful IQ. If you understand the need for an aperture ring and a shutter speed dial, and being your own judge of exposure, you understand this camera. If you don't, you don't. The only other manufacturer who understands this market segment is Leica. The Gold Award is well deserved.

For you it's not important to have an aperture ring, for many it is.
Many people have chosen the Fujifilm systems just because there are physical dials and buttons they can use as opposed to some competition.

These are different products for different people.

World is a wonderful thing with its diversity :)

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2013 at 18:18 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100S Review (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: At base ISO I really couldn't see how this camera had any better image quality than the Olympus OMD. If you stick the excellent Panasonic 20mm F1.7 lens on the Olympus or the upcoming Panasonic GX7 you would have the same image quality(or Better) for about the same price.

The biggest difference is that you could also then have an interchangeable lens camera. I don't think that the X100S is a bad camera. I just think that the fixed lens compact category offers no benefit over an interchangeable lens compact camera.

Does the EM-5 or GX7 sync the flash up to 1/2000s?

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2013 at 13:48 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100S Review (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

sgoldswo: It's comic the number of people on here who haven't used the camera who are slating it. But then this is the internet... A well deserved result for a great camera with amazing image quality.

You absolutely need to post it a few more times and send Barney a few more emails. People immediately will stop using Fujifilm cameras or start producing crappy images with them.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2013 at 23:34 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100S Review (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

sgoldswo: It's comic the number of people on here who haven't used the camera who are slating it. But then this is the internet... A well deserved result for a great camera with amazing image quality.

And that's exactly why people use it with great results.
Seriously.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2013 at 23:12 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100S Review (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

schaki: Not a word on the conclusion page about the detail-smudging and that have probably been the major complain among the owners of the X100 which bought the X100S as well or looked close at sample images.

We've heard that all before.
But the truth is that ACR does a vey good job, but not at its standard settings. And to be honest I can't see anyone using only the default RAW output of any RAW converter because it just doesn't make any sense.

Moreover C1 and Aperture are as much as industry standard as ACR, and only ACR default output looks bland.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2013 at 23:07 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100S Review (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

maurotandoi: the hype of these x-trans ...seems going to end after this review

too many cons, too many doubts and too many negative Opionons

81% score?...canon eos 100d 78%?

gold award?..silver imho is correct

There is absolutely nothing stopping you from making your own review website and giving it silver award by yourself.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2013 at 17:37 UTC
Total: 76, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »