dash2k8

dash2k8

Joined on May 13, 2010

Comments

Total: 1254, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

My question is "why?" Or maybe "why not?" It's nice to preserve history, it should be undertaken for every field and profession, but 100,000 analog cameras? If they cannot find that many users, will that not be a semi-wasted effort of time and resources? I'm willing to bet they can't find 100k users who will shoot regularly with film bodies. I understand passion, but IMO their target quantity is far too great.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2019 at 02:50 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

Giulio Severini: Well, I can turn 'Apple' into a verb. To be Apple'd means to have received a brainwash and become an Apple fan. It is pronounced like 'Idxxt'.

I'm an iPhone user and I don't think I'm brainwashed or an idiot, I just like the iPhone 8 more than my past Android models. That doesn't mean I worship i-everything, I can see that the newest iPhones are too expensive, which proves I still have a shred of sense. ;)

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2019 at 02:46 UTC
In reply to:

henryp: Based on the commercial I saw it seems that whether bokeh is used as a noun or verb, what Apple's done is confuse bokeh and depth-of-field.

I think DOF and bokeh (and big aperture) go hand in hand. You can't have shallow DOF without bokeh to some degree (depending on aperture).

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2019 at 02:44 UTC
In reply to:

Lord Powershoter: dpreview should really be thankful for Leica. They are such a small company compared to the rest but they provide them with a constant stream of quirky, discussion-inducing releases throughout the year.

To the detractors of Leica: They do, what they should be doing and what you would do as well: They play to their strengths. Leica camera is not Nikon, it's certainly not Sony and not even Olympus. They are a small outpost, alone in Europe with no network of camera industry around them.

For their size and what they are, they indeed are innovative compared to the rest of the pack. Their UI in their SL and TL line is innovative, as is the build of their bodies. Of course they are not going to invent a sensor, that beats Sony and they are not going to craft some computational photography magic that rivals Google. That's a ridiculous imagination.

They are experimenting and trying to find their way. It's quite exciting really.

@Constantin V, I agree with milkod2001 in that a pencil shouldn't cost 10x as much as another brand for very similar capabilities. Leica's gear is great, no question, but there's also no debate that the sticker price is not on par with the results. Of course that applies to all boutique items, but that doesn't mean it's not overpriced. If someone can afford it, great for him! Gotta enjoy life in each person's own way.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2019 at 03:07 UTC
In reply to:

dash2k8: Typo in the news. How embarrassing.

True dat. Still embarrassing, though. Not like it's a hard mistake to catch. :)

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2019 at 13:25 UTC

Typo in the news. How embarrassing.

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2018 at 10:08 UTC as 47th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

D Gold: 27 years ago I was a skeptic. Then I took a contract position on a NWS , (National Weather Service), modernization project called AWIPS. I spent 4.5 years in Boulder and working with the Environmental Research Lab and our beta site in Norman Oklahoma and met many dedicated PHD scientists.

One in particular was the SOC, (Science Operations Officer), at the beta site I worked at where we tested all the new systems. He had helped develop some of the global warming theories of that time and lived in the world of science when it came to climate and meteorology every day. His explanations over that time helped me understand 2 things.
1. Climate change is happening and is going to be a real problem for humanity on a global scale.
2. These scientists do not have a political agenda, though the GOP has one. I was republican at the time but I realized I was wrong.

FWIW,

This is a clear case of "not seeing what's staring you in the face." Presented by evidence from a real professional, ppl continue to persuade themselves that things must be what they believe it to be, not what's proven, and they make up a bunch of conjectures to support their beliefs. The number of natural disasters have been increasing at an alarming rate and people still think it's a propaganda-driven hoax? Go figure.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2018 at 01:17 UTC

It makes no sense whatsoever for anyone to complain "leave politics out of it!" In the current political climate, everyone is sensitive. To pretend otherwise is just not being honest with yourself. Everyone has an opinion, why lie? By saying that others should leave politics out, it merely means the opinion expressed was not to your liking. If the shooter effused about Trump, I'm sure the Republicans on this here board wouldn't mention anything about leaving politics out of it, while the Dems would probably light this board on fire. Bottomline: the photog interviewed has his opinion. Not everyone has to like it, but knock it off with the hypocrisy about no-politics.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2018 at 01:13 UTC as 101st comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Zvonimir Tosic: DPR, the smoke is getting in your eyes – stick to the gear reviews, stay out of politics.
What climate change has to do with the majority of fires which are man-made anyway? Does it mean climate change makes arsonists and idiots hotter in their heads more than usual? Since early 1980s, some 80% of the wildfires in the Adriatic areas were man-made. In the US, over 90% are man-made.
Many fires are acts of terrorism too. My family and I barely survived one, and it was an arson; ignited from a passing vehicle, in two places to maximise the damage during a strong wind.

@texdpl, Cali is one of the biggest economies in the world and plenty comfortable. Silicon Valley, Hollywood, Yosemite, Napa... I think we Californians like it just fine. Wouldn't you believe it, there are Republicans in this state, too.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2018 at 01:07 UTC
In reply to:

John Koch: It is not easy to find or track individual people or objects from 400' in the air using a wide-angle lens, and a phone-sized POV screen, even if you know approximately where to look. This is particularly true in forested or heavily built areas. Wind, limited battery life, and the constraints on control range posed by geography and interference are other handicaps. At night, the spotlight would draw attention to the drone, without illuminating anything unless very close. These facts clashes with many people's belief that consumer drones are fearsome tools for spying or a boon to search and rescue. Satellite photography is most reliable for wildfire tracking or any wide-range tracking. Life jackets, car mounts, or survival kits with GPS-cued transponders might be more useful for rescues. Lassie and Rin-tin-tin had an amazing knack for rescue. Fictions, perhaps. But demo videos for new gadgets also idealize the circumstances under which the acclaimed products are shown to work.

I hear what the OP is saying, but I find that THAT premises is overly picky. If there was a night S&R in a densely forested area, I don't know if even a real helicopter would be much use, much less a drone. Horses for courses, this drone was obviously designed with defined parameters. DJI hasn't gotten this far by producing stupid products so I choose to believe this product will have a market.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2018 at 02:21 UTC
In reply to:

dash2k8: Amazing that such tech exists. I'm thinking Hollywood might have something much more powerful in its secret lab. Are green screens starting to be phased out?

I guess I wasn't clear in my original statement. It's amazing that a PHONE could now do this.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2018 at 03:03 UTC

Amazing that such tech exists. I'm thinking Hollywood might have something much more powerful in its secret lab. Are green screens starting to be phased out?

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2018 at 23:56 UTC as 2nd comment | 2 replies

I'm hoping this shop can recover its lost items, but I think whoever willingly buys these stolen goods off the thieves won't care, they'll happily accept the discount at the cost of their conscience. Or the cameras might be sold off somewhere where the people won't know about the above listed serial numbers. Anyway, I wish Ffordes luck.

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2018 at 00:46 UTC as 57th comment

I thought that they would design this around the female body's curvatures, but alas it just takes pressure off the shoulders. If someone would come up with a strap that doesn't close out on the chest area (I really don't know how to say this without violating every PC protocol in today's very-PC world), it would really make a killing in the market.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2018 at 03:53 UTC as 26th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Blackdog68: $2k for the 8-16?? I just don't understand this lens. So, at list prices, you could buy an A7III with a 12-24 F4, and it would be smaller, lighter, and cost about the same ($3700 vs $3500) as an XT3 with the 8-16? And the Sony has IBIS?
I just don't understand what Fuji is doing now. They need to be cheaper and smaller than the equivalent FF in order to survive and compete. Do what Nikon seems to be doing with its S lenses: make them optically excellent, but slower with consideration for size. Even the 10-24 F4 is too big.

@Richard, as I said to another user, with Canikon going mirrorless, weight will soon be a non-issue between FF and crop, so it will no longer be a "choice" someone has to make. Maybe price, since FF will always figure to be more expensive than crop.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2018 at 22:52 UTC
In reply to:

dash2k8: This price makes it very attractive. I'm wondering how easy to assemble / portable the package is. If it's hard to move around, then it'll be stuck in the studio where there's already a ready setup. Still, I'll be looking into it.

That's not much help. I did see that. The question remains: how easy is it to pack? Sure, every manufacturer can boast that their products are easy to assemble, blah blah blah, but I think we've all been snakebit by overly optimistic / misleading marketing speak before, yes? Now, maybe you could actually BUY one and assemble it / break it down, then get back to me. THAT would be really helpful. See, that wasn't so hard. Maybe you'd give that a try instead of being snarky?

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2018 at 22:45 UTC

This price makes it very attractive. I'm wondering how easy to assemble / portable the package is. If it's hard to move around, then it'll be stuck in the studio where there's already a ready setup. Still, I'll be looking into it.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2018 at 00:14 UTC as 7th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Blackdog68: $2k for the 8-16?? I just don't understand this lens. So, at list prices, you could buy an A7III with a 12-24 F4, and it would be smaller, lighter, and cost about the same ($3700 vs $3500) as an XT3 with the 8-16? And the Sony has IBIS?
I just don't understand what Fuji is doing now. They need to be cheaper and smaller than the equivalent FF in order to survive and compete. Do what Nikon seems to be doing with its S lenses: make them optically excellent, but slower with consideration for size. Even the 10-24 F4 is too big.

@Calaverasgrande, so in summary, all crop has going for it is... weight? With all the major brands going FF mirrorless, that's no longer an issue. As others have readily pointed out, the DOF is easily corrected. If you can't nail focus with a modern camera, either the lens is back/forward focusing, or there's an error in technique. I can't drive an F1 car but I don't blame the vehicle for having too many horses under its hood.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2018 at 23:13 UTC
In reply to:

Blackdog68: $2k for the 8-16?? I just don't understand this lens. So, at list prices, you could buy an A7III with a 12-24 F4, and it would be smaller, lighter, and cost about the same ($3700 vs $3500) as an XT3 with the 8-16? And the Sony has IBIS?
I just don't understand what Fuji is doing now. They need to be cheaper and smaller than the equivalent FF in order to survive and compete. Do what Nikon seems to be doing with its S lenses: make them optically excellent, but slower with consideration for size. Even the 10-24 F4 is too big.

"over 90% of DPR's readership do not need FF"

But if given a choice for free, I think about the same percentage would opt for the more light that FF provides. Seriously, if someone was offered a D850 or a7iii kit, would he turn it down for a crop model instead? FF has advantages over crop, the only thing that crop has over FF is the longer reach. It's not an obsession, it's physics. One might not be able to tell if a pic is taken with FF or crop, but one who SHOOTS can definitely feel the difference in terms of greater freedom of operation.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2018 at 02:02 UTC
In reply to:

Scottelly: Wait a second here . . . $1,999 for an 8-16mm lens? They do know that the Sigma 8-16 is like $700, right?

https://www.adorama.com/sg816nk.html

I guess this new Fuji will "blow away" the Sigma then . . . or not sell.

I guess the issue here is "Is this 8-16 WORTH $2k?" Granted a fast lens is usually also a high-quality lens, but this price is really a bit of a shock.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2018 at 01:56 UTC
Total: 1254, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »