Cameron R Hood

Lives in Burkina Faso Burkina Faso
Joined on Mar 26, 2005

Comments

Total: 158, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Pentax K-3 Mark III initial review (882 comments in total)

Who cares what you think? Aren’t you going to trash it because they don’t advertise on the site? Remember what you did to the 645D?

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2021 at 19:32 UTC as 61st comment | 5 replies
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1551 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cameron R Hood: From the website that sat on Pentax's highest ever test result for almost two years till one of their advertisers matched/beat it (or did they?) And we're supposed to believe you now?

DxO did the test - this site said NOTHING. They've been Pentax Poo-pooers since the film days. OFTEN ignore new cameras/lenses/announcements, or bury them immediately.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2018 at 17:41 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1551 comments in total)

From the website that sat on Pentax's highest ever test result for almost two years till one of their advertisers matched/beat it (or did they?) And we're supposed to believe you now?

Link | Posted on May 7, 2018 at 17:34 UTC as 258th comment | 9 replies
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1551 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): The good news is that this should be an easy firmware fix, since all they really have to do is go back to what they were doing in the K-1. If that happens, would DPR consider revising their rating?

Not till Pentax spends some advertising bucks here.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2018 at 17:31 UTC

I'm holding to for the F2.8 'Pro' version....I know I know, a classic.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2018 at 18:37 UTC as 41st comment | 1 reply

Some cool gadgetry, but design-wise, it's a pale imitation of the Moshi Arcus backpack...which is much cooler, IMHO...https://www.moshi.com/arcus#10

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 18:31 UTC as 47th comment
In reply to:

Tazz93: That sucks for Pentax... they would have been #1 by a long way, for 3+ years. And let's be honest, even with all the negative talk about their methods, that site sells cameras and phones for manufacturers.

Queue the conspiracy theories... that are possibly warranted.

They are...

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 18:56 UTC

Two years later...some kind of conspiracy...it took Hasselblad two years and $3,000.00 more to get one extra point...Pentax just can't get a break from the review industry...maybe they need to think about bribes...

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 18:56 UTC as 13th comment | 5 replies

...with prices so high there's not enough space in this column to print it.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2017 at 20:25 UTC as 15th comment
On article First samples: Leica Thambar-M 90mm F2.2 (222 comments in total)
In reply to:

WillWeaverRVA: If I wanted results like this, I'd smear Vaseline on the front element of my 90mm Tamron.

...you can also get 98% of it it in Lightroom by turning the clarity down, adding a bit of blur and perhaps a bit of overexposure. Or just shoot it on a $15.00 pawn shop lens...

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 18:56 UTC
In reply to:

test2: I've been a Leica devotee for the past three years (going from R to M to S). I find the default "house style" of Leica very pleasing, in ways that Zeiss (my previous devotion) and other brands don't quite replicate and DXOmark-like tests don't show.

But I'll freely admit that this product is absurd, along with Leica's various special editions and collector's items.

But if these are what Leica need to come up with to remain financially viable, and if there (as appears the case) are filthy rich people willing to spend their money on them, so be it. I certainly wouldn't. I buy only pre-owned Leica products and at heavy discounts.

I don't think Dpreview needs to editorialize like this though.

It's about the same, actually. But it costs $6,495.00 more...

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 16:59 UTC
On article First samples: Leica Thambar-M 90mm F2.2 (222 comments in total)

Buy a $35 lens in a pawn shop, spend $5 on a tub of vaseline, send the rest to needy children around the world. What a waste of money.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 16:58 UTC as 36th comment | 4 replies

With that tape hiding something on the 11-18, are we FINALLY going to see my 20+ year old idea of a DIGITAL hyperlocal scale on a zoom? Please, Pentax, say it is so, and you can send the royalty cheques to...

Go, APSC! Yay, Pentax! To all you whiners, shut up and go away.

Cheers,
Cameron
Pentax fanboy since the PZ1-P

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2017 at 18:40 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

ogl: Very slow development

I think the 645 got in the way...and the K1 and DFA lenses...

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2017 at 18:35 UTC
In reply to:

vesa1tahti: Pentax? Still alive?

Nope...Pentax is doomed...DOOMED!!!

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2017 at 18:33 UTC
In reply to:

Benjamin Kanarek: Very nice Tamron & Tokina re-badged lenses. Should be really good then.

Nope...

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2017 at 18:32 UTC
In reply to:

test2: I've been a Leica devotee for the past three years (going from R to M to S). I find the default "house style" of Leica very pleasing, in ways that Zeiss (my previous devotion) and other brands don't quite replicate and DXOmark-like tests don't show.

But I'll freely admit that this product is absurd, along with Leica's various special editions and collector's items.

But if these are what Leica need to come up with to remain financially viable, and if there (as appears the case) are filthy rich people willing to spend their money on them, so be it. I certainly wouldn't. I buy only pre-owned Leica products and at heavy discounts.

I don't think Dpreview needs to editorialize like this though.

Some people just have too much money to spend on themselves. At this point it becomes both obscene and amoral.

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2017 at 18:31 UTC

Pardon me....101....https://petapixel.com/2017/10/11/pentax-645z-got-crazy-dxomark-score-101-back-2015/

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 19:03 UTC as 66th comment

That would be the same 102 score awarded a Pentax 645 two years ago that was disallowed for some inexplicable reason...they're tied, but at three or four times the price.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 19:01 UTC as 67th comment
In reply to:

henrikbengtsson: So it scored 101 yet somehow the tests weren't complete. Ironic to hear that explanation from DXO. It actually sums it up quite nicely.

If anyone here is a serious wine-enthusiast or sommelier, DXO is Robert Parker.

I always thought those wine ratings were just done by somebody's brother-in-law...EVERYTHING gets 90+...

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 19:11 UTC
Total: 158, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »