goloby

Lives in Romania Constanta, Romania
Joined on Dec 13, 2008

Comments

Total: 40, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

goloby: Isn't it ironic that cameras like the one praised in this article will put this site out of business

Don't know were you live, but here, in Europe, even at the tourist attractions, you can go for days and not see a single dslr. Years ago everyone was carrying a dslr

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 13:11 UTC

Isn't it ironic that cameras like the one praised in this article will put this site out of business

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 03:55 UTC as 322nd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Frank_BR: "With the removal of the headphone jack, the iPhone 7 and 7 Plus have been made fully water resistant"

In fact, resistance to water has nothing to do with the presence or absence of the 3.5mm phone jack. It is really trivial to construct a sealed 3.5mm phone jack. With a sealed phone jack the water enters the connector hole but does not reach the electronic circuits, which is what matters.

Here is an example of a sealed 3.5 phone jack:
https://www.altex.com/Chassis-or-PC-Board-Mounted-35mm-Stereo-Jack-502JB-P154660.aspx

This connector costs only $0.62 each for quantities between 499 and 20,000 units. For millions of units, such as for the production of the iPhone 7, the price should be only a few cents of a dollar.

$0.62 multiplied by let's say 50 million iphones equals 31 million dollars more in apple's pockets. But it's actually more as they charge you more for the "new feature", new headphones and all those lightning to jack adaptors that will be lost. Plus you will have to buy new bluetooth headphones at least once a year as the batteries will die. Genius

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 03:51 UTC

Had a Fuji compact. Started loving photography. So I bought a Fuji bridge. Loved it even more but I wanted thin dof so I bought a Nikon D90. Amazing. Went on a shopping spree for lenses, flashes, loved every minute. But my bag was getting so heavy that it stayed more and more at home. So I bought a Fuji x-e1 and 2 lenses. Wow, loved it, happy again. But then reality hit as I started getting really annoyed with the slow af, crap flash and missed photos. So now I sold both the D90 and the x-e1 for peanuts and got ripped by eBay fees. Hoping that I would buy a Nikon D750 or another Fuji . After almost half a year I am still to buy another digital camera as dslr is just too big, mirrorless just to slow and unreliable. But, trough all these years one system has stuck with me, constantly delivering and challenging me to be a better photographer not a bigger spender. My film camera. My sweet Bronica. It's all I need, my Brony and my smartphone.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 21:20 UTC as 26th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

PeaceKeeper: $800?!?!

Those can't cost more than $50 to produce...

I'd say Casio's marketing department is doing something right. Doesn't say anything for the rest of the company, however.

Apple has 80% profit margin. That means that it costs them abt 10-15% of the price you pay to make that ithing. Add another 5% to marketing and there you go. In reality it costs them less than 10% if you factor in all the bonuses, rents and other expenses.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2015 at 05:48 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: So... anyone ever seen an actual Instax camera in the wild? In the store, sure. I've never once seen someone use one though, or even someone carrying one.

In London you can see several every day.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2015 at 12:29 UTC

I initially read $169 and thought, yeah, I might like that. But then saw better that it will be $1700... hahaha, come on, really? Something is wrong in this world, what will their profit margin be? 90%?
Not even if virgins manually polish the lenses until their fingers bleed is this worth $1700

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2015 at 01:02 UTC as 30th comment | 1 reply
On article Nikon D750 Review (2013 comments in total)
In reply to:

lima21: I will be purchasing the D750 within another six weeks and need to inquire if such will be safely available by that time. I also would like to inquire if my Nikon 18-200mm lens will work acceptably with the D750. I am upgrading from my antiquated D300.
Can I also get the opinion of purchasing the new model of the 80-400 and using such with the D750. Thanks!

The 18-200 is a DX(crop) lens. The D750 is a FX(full frame) camera. Although the lens mounts and autofocuses it will severely vignette. You will need another lens.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2015 at 02:45 UTC

Apple and Samsung's big increase is related to the flickr app that auto uploads all photos taken with the phone. So obviously there will be more photos auto-uploaded than manually uploaded.
And there is another thing, I use flickr, but rarely, posing a few pictures a year, so my cameras do not count much - mostly film, but somebody who uploads daily will have a greater weigh in the overall count. It does not mean that another person is using his/hers camera more, just that they upload more

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2015 at 10:30 UTC as 59th comment
On article Panasonic DMC-CM1 to go on sale in UK (153 comments in total)
In reply to:

DannyDoi: Some sample pics :

https://www.flickr.com/photos/raulblancojr/sets/72157649450505941/#

Amazing for a phone. Iso 1600 is cleaner than in my D90 and those 4 pointed stars are lovely. What's the longest exposure time you can get on it as this has always been very fast on all android phones?

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2014 at 13:31 UTC

I can see myself using only this and a medium format film camera.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2014 at 20:07 UTC as 98th comment
In reply to:

Tee1up: I have an Epson 4490 that i purchased exclusively for scanning my slide collection and it has been a nightmare. I cannot get a sharp scan out of the thing, Epson was no help. I am looking at these two but am sceptical.

Anyone out there recommend a good color slide scanner that doesn't break the bank?

if your slides are 35mm you will not get super sharp results from any flatbed

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2014 at 16:43 UTC
In reply to:

goloby: All I'm asking is for every hobbyist or professional photographer out there that has never tried film to give it a go. Get an old film camera, they are cheap. Most of your digital lenses will work. Buy a few rolls of Provia slide. Or some negative film, Portra, Ektar, Pro400h. Send them to a proper lab for dev and scan. You might be pleasantly surprised.
Or if you are into instagram and filters get some cheap film, kodacolor, superia200/400, colorplus 200, vista 200. See where all the hype comes from.
Are you a b&w buff? Then you have to try T-Max and Tri-x. There's no substitute.

I've heard somewhere that shooting film is like having the world's best photoshop artist working for you.
People just don't realize how easy it is to get very good results on film, especially on negative stock. All you need is a good lab.
On films like Portra and Pro400H you can underexpose by 2 stops or overexpose by 3-4 stops and you still get beautiful results. Now try that with any digital.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2014 at 01:37 UTC

All I'm asking is for every hobbyist or professional photographer out there that has never tried film to give it a go. Get an old film camera, they are cheap. Most of your digital lenses will work. Buy a few rolls of Provia slide. Or some negative film, Portra, Ektar, Pro400h. Send them to a proper lab for dev and scan. You might be pleasantly surprised.
Or if you are into instagram and filters get some cheap film, kodacolor, superia200/400, colorplus 200, vista 200. See where all the hype comes from.
Are you a b&w buff? Then you have to try T-Max and Tri-x. There's no substitute.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 19:34 UTC as 51st comment | 16 replies
In reply to:

GothtinPowers: So how do these compare to dedicated film scanners like the Nikon coolscans?

The coolscan 5000 and 9000 are way better than the old V700/750 in terms of sharpness and tonality. The V ED might still be better, but anything older I would avoid

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 19:26 UTC
In reply to:

RobertSigmund: The best method at the moment is copying the negative/slide with the digital camera. Brings better results than scanners and is faster. You need a macro lens of course, and a slide copier. I have the old minolta slide copy unit 1000 for the Minolta ring flash. Very good device.

Surely you haven't tried a proper scanner. Epson V700 is the bare minimum and it yelds better results that any digital camera. Not even thinking of Nikon 9000ED, Flextight X5, or a proper drum scanner.
You do get the resolution with a digital camera but you lose the only thing that film is better than digital, and that is color and tonality. Not to mention scratches.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 19:23 UTC
In reply to:

nitroman: Is the dMax of 4.0 good for scanning transparencies ?

I have the V700 and a dMax of 4 is more than enough for slides. Currenlty that's all I shoot. For negatives you could say it is enough, but if you want absolute quality 4.8 would be recomended. I think 4.8 is the max currenlty, on the now discontinued Nikon 5000 and 9000ED

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 19:18 UTC
In reply to:

goloby: or just get a fuji x-e2 + 18-55 + 23, cheaper, faster and, may I say, better looking

JackM, I had the same issue in the first days with my x-e1, then I turned nr to -2 and sharpness to -1 for the primes, for the zooms you can leave sharpness at 0. Remember, in weird Fuji engineers language 0 is not 0, it is actually medium. -2 is 0 or off

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2014 at 22:26 UTC

or just get a fuji x-e2 + 18-55 + 23, cheaper, faster and, may I say, better looking

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2014 at 15:16 UTC as 65th comment | 5 replies
On article Ricoh announces medium-format Pentax 645Z (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: I think it was supposed to be already mirroless, with a nice EVF, and its sensor 56 x 41.5mm, as it was the 645 film frame area. 33 x 44mm looks like what the APS format is to the 135 full-frame, a cropped sensor to cut their investment some slack. Not a true medium-medium. Just medium.

Dear ogl, you obviously have never experienced true 645, let alone 6x6, 6x7, 6x9

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 04:43 UTC
Total: 40, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »