Photomonkey

Lives in United States CA, United States
Works as a Photographer
Joined on Oct 28, 2002

Comments

Total: 931, showing: 221 – 240
« First‹ Previous1011121314Next ›Last »
On article Hands on with the Hasselblad H6D 50c/100c (267 comments in total)

Lokks like a solid upgrade with a competitive price at this level of the market.
I am thinking it will be a hit in rental.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2016 at 16:39 UTC as 66th comment
In reply to:

The Davinator: Or, just get the Pentax 645Z

The Pentax is a brilliant camera but I would love the Hasselblad for the leaf shutter lenses.

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2016 at 00:18 UTC
In reply to:

Photomonkey: So you pay extra to get a complicated mechanism that gives you an EVF.

Trying to please everyone is probably not he best strategy.

I see you can't read too well.
I noted that it will cost a lot to add this feature to add an EVF. As for looking natural, I think what you are saying in your labored way is that you get to see an OVF.
Whee! Pay more to add a feature you seem to dislike.
Yes, a unique product that is a kludge as manufacturers will migrate toward the lower cost alternative.
I have been using OVFs since before you were probably born and EVFs have significant advantages over the OVF.
If you like OVFs, fine. But suggesting this dog's dinner will be a good thing is a bit of a stretch.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2016 at 03:18 UTC

So you pay extra to get a complicated mechanism that gives you an EVF.

Trying to please everyone is probably not he best strategy.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2016 at 22:13 UTC as 76th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

the-bunker: Very nice - but it's too heavy. If I had to carry that weight, then I'd choose FF

I use a variety of zooms and primes in FF for my work and the flexibility I have in my current 25-400 in my FZ-1000 is a revelation. I am far more productive in the job than carrying around two FF DSLRs with two different zooms to acheive what I can get in one compact camera. If 1kg is too much then the problem is certainly not solved by going FF.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 18:54 UTC
In reply to:

Androole: Holy moly.

Wow, Sony really doesn't want to settle for 2nd in this category. Finally a worthwhile retort to the FZ1000 and then some.

Of course, that's serious pocket change. But for most people, it's all they'd ever need.

A good chance we will see a drop in street price. Especially if Panasonic responds.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 15:54 UTC
In reply to:

the-bunker: Very nice - but it's too heavy. If I had to carry that weight, then I'd choose FF

The D600 gives you a shorter FL range and no 4K. All you get is FF and the one trick pony of shallow DOF.
Unless you have used the 1 inch cameras you are unaware of the excellent IQ they deliver.
But then again the hobbyists just enjoy peering at files at 400%.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 15:53 UTC
In reply to:

Beckler8: This is so expensive I'd probly rather have the a6300 w/lens because I rarely need 24x zoom, so it's more of a specialist's camera. But more importantly the video quality I see on RX10ii youtube samples has none of the a7 type wide dynamic range look to it, whereas 6300 has more of it. It looks a bit too much like cheap home video.

The appeal for hobbyists is a single camera/lens solution.4K video is on most people's lists.

The more serious videographer could do a lot with this camera. Post processing of video is not a skill many posses. Thus a good camera can be thwarted by amateurish PP. The FF video one sees often is an exercise to show off shallow DOF thus leading to the fascination with those cameras. A good videographer will make an iPhone look magical. This camera makes it easier to bring home good footage for allow price.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 15:47 UTC

Yay! We're number 5!

Wait while I restructure my fanboy narratives.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 06:05 UTC as 124th comment

Idaho has its charms but judging from his photographs he is transfixed by snow.

Trust me, it does not get better. :/

Using SF as a comparison for affordability is not helpful. Everything looks cheaper than SF.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2016 at 15:37 UTC as 21st comment | 3 replies
On article Fujifilm X-Pro2 firmware update 1.01 now available (76 comments in total)
In reply to:

kierenlon: I wish companies would step away from this rush to release flawed products on the expectations the users are beta testers and they can patch it later.

Fuji is probably the most obvious example but can't be singles out. All the brands are doing it - nikon, canon, olympus, adobe etc.

Test, test some more, then have an alpha, beta, release candidate, release. Sick of release often, fix later attitude

I think most companies are under a lot of pressure to ship product, not perfect.
Fuji at least can be relied on to continually find more performance through FW upgrades whereas others largely ignore an introduced product.

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2016 at 14:05 UTC
On article Leica Q In-depth Review (1165 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike Oo: The JPEG of the girl in the lounge is far better than the author's RAW conversion. People always chant RAW, RAW, RAW but in the end most people have no clue how to colour correct an image.

Which image are you looking at? There is a girl dancing with someone but none that is a girl alone as far as I can see.
Every conversion from RAW that I see looks better than the JPEGs.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2016 at 18:57 UTC
On article Sony a6300 gallery updated with Raw conversions (137 comments in total)
In reply to:

clicstudio: Is it me or the jpgs look better than the raws? Still both look pretty bad to me.

@virgil1612, I am referring to the two hotel images at the beginning shot at dusk. The one converted from RAW is clearly sharper and better rendered than the JPEG. Use the loupe feature and look at the detail in the palm fronds.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2016 at 20:26 UTC
On article Sony a6300 gallery updated with Raw conversions (137 comments in total)
In reply to:

ManInTime: Dont think i have ever seen such an average cameras being pushed and pushed again and again to the main page for no good reason. some heavy marketing job is being done here.

Well at least it isn't like the car magazines that blather on about BMW, Mercedes, Porsche and Ferrari ad nauseum.
This camera is not an average camera, it is an enthusiast camera but not at the top of the price heap.
I would be sad if we had to read endless pap about Phase One and Hasselblad.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2016 at 20:24 UTC
On article Sony a6300 gallery updated with Raw conversions (137 comments in total)
In reply to:

clicstudio: Is it me or the jpgs look better than the raws? Still both look pretty bad to me.

In the photo you mention, the JPEG is mushy with noise reduction issues. And still darker and more contrasty to boot.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2016 at 04:12 UTC
On article Sony a6300 gallery updated with Raw conversions (137 comments in total)
In reply to:

clicstudio: Is it me or the jpgs look better than the raws? Still both look pretty bad to me.

Its you. The JPGs are desaturated, dark and excessively contrasty in comparison to the RAWs.
Not radically different but enough that a side by side shows the RAWs to be subjectively better.
And that is the real issue: subjectively. For me, the RAWS beat the JPGs but apparently many prefer what they are used to in color and contrast.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2016 at 01:04 UTC
On article Great Eight: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 review (542 comments in total)
In reply to:

RGWR: Why do they keep ruining good cameras by letting them grow bigger over the years. GX7 was perfect in that respect. This one isn't.

I'll trade you my GX-7 for your GX-8. ;)

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2016 at 16:28 UTC
In reply to:

PKDanny: CRAZY PRICE!!!

A Fuji FrontierRA-4 printer was $205,000 and it only went as large as 10"x15".

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 05:25 UTC
In reply to:

PKDanny: CRAZY PRICE!!!

Like ProfHanD said, the price is very competitive for the class. In 1995 I paid nearly $10,000 for a 36" Encad with a RIP. Quality was fair but when I switched to HP then Epson the difference was night and day.
The HP was wonderful and was 42" for about $7000 IIRC. The Epson 9800 was $5995 and I picked up a 7800 for $2500.
Theses are production printers and make economic sense for someone generating a lot of output for money.
As such they, are very fairly priced. I actually am still surprised there is that much of a market remaining for such low cost LF printers.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2016 at 11:49 UTC
On article Visual appetite: Eric Wolfinger's food photography (12 comments in total)

Great video that shows that success is not instantaneous but is a rewarding journey.
Great to see something about inspiration instead of gear.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2016 at 15:21 UTC as 9th comment
Total: 931, showing: 221 – 240
« First‹ Previous1011121314Next ›Last »