maxz

maxz

Lives in United States washington, DC, United States
Works as a design/photography
Joined on Jan 23, 2004

Comments

Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

Maybe the guy was concerned that someone can use the GPS tag in the original cell phone photo to locate them, a photo of the cell phone photo can surely obscure that (and the condition of the car of course).

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2017 at 19:59 UTC as 112th comment
In reply to:

Biowizard: This obsession with so-called "full-frame" would be laughable, if not so sad. Throughout the history of photography, there have been MANY different frame sizes, from 10x8" (and larger) down to tiny Minox spy cameras. Why does a legacy format, the one the Leitz had the brainwave of introducing, to allow the use of early cinema film in a camera, retain some "magical" sense of the only "real" size?!

Why not settle on a new format altogether - say 50mm circular (or at least octagonal), from which you could "pluck" either a landscape or portrait "full frame" image, without having to hold your camera on its side? Or a square one bigger than "full frame" allows?

Don't tell me its so photographers can use their 20-year-old film lenses! Who the heck does that?!

FORGET "full frame", make cameras the size you need for any given job. And for mine, 4/3rds does fine. When I want bigger, I'll get a Hassy.

Brian

Ditto with Clayton1985. The 'I'll get a hassy' thinking is more laughable than anything I've read today.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 16:09 UTC
In reply to:

citrate: Full-frame is the right way to go. Focus your R&D and marketing resource on full-frame bodies and lenses.
The market for smaller-size sensor cameras, especially at the entry level, has been taken over by smart phones, and there is no coming back.
Canon's strategy of releasing 6-7 APSC bodies per year is outdated and shortsighted.

APS-C won't go away, the sensor cost way less than FF version, and some people simply don't need ultra wide but can always use some 'reach'.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 16:00 UTC
On article Nikon D850 First Impressions Review (1004 comments in total)
In reply to:

Slapstick Noir: I'm looking at the prices of both D850(3.3k) and 5DIV(3.5k) here, at the amazon links DP provides, and then I look at the features and sensor performance of the two... and a very serious question arises:
Who, in their right mind, would ever pick the mark IV over the D850? For what possible reason? What am I missing here: better IQ; better AF(wanna bet?); deeper buffer; better battery life; no AA filter; xqd slot; tilting screen?
Why pay more for less?

It's a no brainer if someone starts afresh. Canon has the balls to price 5D4 $3.5k (it's really a $2-2.5k camera) because they believe most users can't afford a switch.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 19:58 UTC
In reply to:

daddyo: These clowns obviously have no respect for others, for laws, or for anything other than their own interests. Hopefully they have been told that any repeat type of offense will result in major fines and prison time.
Western society had better get back to enforcing laws, and quit treating law breakers like spoiled children (even though that's what they are). Most of our laws are reasonable for the protection of society and the environment -- ignoring the appropriate enforcement of laws is unreasonable and very unwise.

The little punishment is truly a joke. Now some rich kids can plank down 20 grand of their parents money and say let's go and carve our names on those rainbow color surfaces since now we know the price (and it's dirt cheap for something that takes tens of thousands of years to form)

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2017 at 22:54 UTC
In reply to:

dr.noise: Would you please stop using clickbait headings for the completely useless news, DP.

It's all about headline and click baits nowadays, ALL Apps do exactly the same with a handful exceptions. Flashlight and Compass apps want users' contact info and text messages, dumb people simply click OK without even reading the fine prints. Yet this one gets headline because it's written by a Chinese company.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 18:31 UTC
On article Venus Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D sample gallery (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

WillWeaverRVA: The IQ from this lens is startlingly good. This might be the ultimate budget wide-angle for landscapes and architecture.

This lens solved a few key issues: distortion, large aperture, filter attachment, and even shift. The hood is very nicely designed so that shift movements are made possible, while Canon Nikon and Sigma ultra-wides all used built-in hoods that will vignette immediately if you attempt to shift them via a shift adapter. I was hoping that those few challenges would be answered by the Sigma art, but it didn't happen. Laowa truly designed their stuff from a photographer's point of view.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 15:42 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1383 comments in total)
In reply to:

kpaddler: Is it me or others see it too? The image quality scores about 70% for jpg (80% raw). And this camera still scores an 85. You must have really really liked the buttons, straps, packaging, and general fumbling-ability of the camera.

Check out the comparison chart against Nikon D500. The Olys can take external flashes while the Nikon can't. That killer feature alone is well worth the price!

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 15:02 UTC
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (275 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: Minor differences in image quality but huge differences in prices. The Sigma is the all round winner.

@Barbu you're definitely correct. I downloaded the samples (as well as other samples of 11-24 elsewhere). The heavy distortion and vignetting really make the Canon a 13-14mm zoom instead of 11mm. The Sigma's 'irregular distortion' is vastly exaggerated IMHO, in order to justify Canon's pricetag.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 14:52 UTC
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (275 comments in total)
In reply to:

melgross: The compare mode is odd. It lets us compare a number of lenses which really are too different, but the Canon, which it's compared to in the review, isn't one of them.

Well the choice of words made the article sound like the Sigma is actually a real threat to the Canon, especially at half the price.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 01:12 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1181 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eric3456: I am sure this is a great camera. But how come close down the F1.4 G Master lens to F4 and shoot at ISO6400? I am interested to know how the system performs with the lenses wide open. After all Sony is charging premium prices for the large aperture and gorgeous bokeh.

F1.4 is too much of a challenge for action shots. Not many pros can nail it even with an SLR. It's more commonly used for posed shots. F4 gives you a lot more tolerance.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2016 at 16:45 UTC
In reply to:

thubten: Why does an adapter cost as much as a lens?

Obviously Nikon adapter is harder to design than Canon since Nikon lenses (pre-E) require both electronic and mechanical control. There's a lot of R&D put into it. $370 is pocket change for people who need to use pro Nikon glass on Sony bodies. The four PC-E lenses alone total nearly $10k.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2016 at 02:03 UTC
In reply to:

razadaz: I keep hearing people complain that they would rather have an APS-C camera. Personally if I am going to take along the weight and bulk of a professional APS-C camera I feel I might as well take a full frame, e.g. Canon 7D vs 5D. As such I increasingly find I either take along a full frame DSLR or if weight/size is an issue the OMD. To me APS-C is starting to be neither one thing or the other. There are some excellent APS-C entry level cameras, but the camera in discussion here is the pro model.

All format are compromises. You either sacrifice wallet or image quality or portability etc. It really comes down to your photographic interests and needs. APS-C has the advantage of using FF lenses with extended reach, meaning you will likely get finer details from an APS-C camera than an FF camera mated to the longest lens you can afford. All the pro features on E-M1 II can be incorporated into an APS-C camera, and the APS still has larger sensor area.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 17:24 UTC
In reply to:

KLinLA: This article comes across too strongly as a sales pitch, rather than an impartial comparison

Is there a way you can make it not sound like a sales pitch when you compare a strong newer model to an older one?

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 17:12 UTC
In reply to:

madeinlisboa: The fact that it has Selfie as part of the name makes me automatically avoid it. If you want to ruin a product call it selfie

If they can pull it off this thing has a lot of potentials in many fields. It's possible that called it selfie on purpose to avoid too much heat. Think all the blood sucking regulators who can't wait to ban stuff like this. 'Terrorist may use it' and many cool ideas not civilians get killed.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 15:21 UTC
In reply to:

Nick Brundle - Photography: £15.000 for winning with this? Come on!
We're the judges blind?
I mean this can't possibly be the best image that was submitted........

Just when you thought the coffee shop window was uber creative, now this. Makes me wonder maybe there's an agenda behind these.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 20:04 UTC
In reply to:

armandino: Might no be as sharp, but I still prefer the more dreamy and less contrasty look of the Canon 85/1.2

Just apply some vasoline to the front element of a sharp lens and you can get as dreamy and low contrast as you want (i'm not kidding). Alternatively you can do that in Photoshop too.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2016 at 22:01 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

entoman: After reading this, I'm starting to change my mind about entry level Pentaxes. I'd have no hesitation about recommending this camera to first-time DSLR purchasers, rather than the Nikon and Canon equivalents, which have inferior specifications and lower build quality. My only reservation would be that if the purchaser was likely to get REALLY serious about photography at a later date, the Nikon and Canon systems allow a far greater choice of native and third party lenses and accessories.

Entoman/miles green I agree that brand loyalty matters. Then the former 'third-party' lens makers are getting so good they are making products that even major brands haven't come up with. Mix-matching of body and lens will only grow. Meanwhile the 'legacy' lenses weren't designed and optimized for high pixel-density sensors. IMHO Pentax needs to look forward and get in the game as much as possible. Just like Sony has been developing the Alpha mount products parallel with E mount, Pentax could do the same and keep the K mount alive as well. A mirrorless mount that accepts K mount lenses as well as other brands via adapters will surely be welcomed by serious users, and boost the sales of Pentax lenses. Whether they have the resources to do a new mount (and a new set of lenses) is a different story though.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 03:56 UTC
On article Shaking up the market: Pentax K-70 Review (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

entoman: After reading this, I'm starting to change my mind about entry level Pentaxes. I'd have no hesitation about recommending this camera to first-time DSLR purchasers, rather than the Nikon and Canon equivalents, which have inferior specifications and lower build quality. My only reservation would be that if the purchaser was likely to get REALLY serious about photography at a later date, the Nikon and Canon systems allow a far greater choice of native and third party lenses and accessories.

That's why Pentax should follow Sony's strategy and come up with a new mount system that accepts most brands (including Pentax's own K lenses) via adapters. Just the pixel-shift feature alone will sell it like hot cakes. The K mount's exit pupil distance is too great that no other brand lenses can be used via adapters. This inevitably keeps serious buyers away.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2016 at 20:30 UTC
In reply to:

Nobby2016: i pray to god they actually get jail time....

we have to send a strong message to such jerks.

people get sued for thousands of dollars for downloading ONE stupid MP3 file.

such vandals need a lesson.

it can´t be that the industry is protected but the nature is not, because there is no lobby behind it.

Totally agreed. National park vandals are simply selfish and retarded, especially in this case those few did it for money. A little punishment (say five years in jail and $80,000 fine) will hopefully teach them a lesson or two.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2016 at 14:02 UTC
Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »