Joined on Feb 13, 2015


Total: 694, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Paul_B Midlands UK: what an ugly clunker, I could not get past the name 'Rebel' to look at such a monstrosity (Leica owner, lol.)

They fill it, but I wouldn't call that a fit.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2020 at 01:52 UTC
In reply to:

yuyucheu: anyone know IBIS means?

In Body Image Stabilization

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2020 at 08:00 UTC
In reply to:

Paul_B Midlands UK: what an ugly clunker, I could not get past the name 'Rebel' to look at such a monstrosity (Leica owner, lol.)

I never liked the shape of Canon DSLRs, and not just the Rebels. I liked many of their compacts, but their DSLRs always looked constipated to me. To a Leica user, I imagine that they must look like a tumor.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2020 at 07:56 UTC
On article Nikon interview: "We’re at a transitional stage" (496 comments in total)
In reply to:

taikong: If we look back to see why 35mm film format replaced 6x6 in the last century, what we should have learnt is that size matters. Mirrorless design reduces size of camera body but not lenses. Instead we have seen sizes of lenses continuously growing. Unfortunately only Fujifilm got that. Others remain committed to developing a shouldn't be restricted format, 35mm. Why 35mm but not 6x4.5 or even 6x6, if you think size of sensor matters? If camera manufacturers don't put APSC as pivot of camera design like Fujifilm doing, we will be seeing more big heavy lenses mounted to tiny camera bodies and APSC camera systems will not be optimised for demanding users. I would like to point out that compromise between sensor size and image quality should not be kept at 35mm but a smaller one. We are not restricted to that as film is gone for photography.

"Mirrorless design reduces size of camera body but not lenses."

Size of lenses can be significantly reduced too. There were various Fuji/Panasonic/Olympus/Samsung lenses that were smaller than anything that had been made for SLRs of similar formats.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2020 at 07:51 UTC
On article Hands-on with Olympus' tiny 12-45mm F4 Pro lens (199 comments in total)
In reply to:

allari: 12-45mm focal range f/4 and 70mm long (at its shortest setting). How can you call that "tiny"?!

After handling another system, all MFT gear will seem tiny.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2020 at 07:43 UTC
In reply to:

Gredgory: Those of us who use cameras with a Foveon sensor are aware of the pluses and minuses associated with the cameras; there is no need to reprise all of the comments that have been made over the recent past.

Mr. Yamaki has been honest and forthcoming in his statements. The technical challenges associated with the development of the new full frame Foveon camera must be daunting. One must wonder if the effort to develop the new camera will, on the basis of sales, be worth the considerable investment. In this time of contracting sales of digital cameras difficult corporate decisions become even more important to the survival of a company. Indeed, one might also wonder about sales of the new FP model.

True, but on the other hand I have little sympathy for Sigma. Their introduction of a Foveon camera predated any mirrorless system. And yet, unlike Fuji, which later followed their X100 with a full system, Sigma just let their mirrorless concept stagnate.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2020 at 07:34 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-S1H review (573 comments in total)

"When talking about stills, we usually say that large sensor cameras have a benefit over smaller sensor cameras. "

Oh, come on. Some years ago, dpreview made an effort to publish articles and videos explaining equivalence, only to get back to statements like this?

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2020 at 06:50 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Richard Hopkins: It's worse than it looks. Smartphones have not only killed camera sales, they've destroyed the value of photography. Where's the magic when anyone can do it, and everybody does? Smartphones have made it cheap (effectively free), unbelievably easy, and ubiquitous.

Photographers used to be cool, professionals could earn a good living, and cameras were aspirational possessions. Now we're more nerdy old geeks than cool, professionals are out of work, and nobody needs a clunking great camera that's a PITA to use when their smartphone does more of what they want anyway.

IMHO only a few niche areas will remain, where smartphones and their users will find things difficult. Those subjects and techniques that require expensive additional equipment, extra skills, and dedicated time and effort. Such as sport (long lenses), wildlife (expensive long lenses, time, fieldcraft), studio work (lighting gear).

FWIW, I've just invested several £k in Godox battery-powered flash kit :)

In my view, smartphones will force manufacturers to focus on serious users instead of churning out cameras with kit lenses for people that can't figure out how to use them properly. So it's a win-win situation. Now, if they want my money, they need to provide me with the product I want, or else I can do well enough just with my smartphone, thank you very much.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2020 at 06:42 UTC
In reply to:

Volkan007: Good photography is about the eye and the brain not about camera itself. So the person who has a good photo eye, can make photo with any type of camera (DSLR, mirrorless or smartphone)...
Enhanced cameras will survive for specific purposes...

You can even draw or paint, if you can add a good hand to that good eye.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2020 at 06:38 UTC
In reply to:

DiveDeputy: Good. I hope it gets a lot worse. They've been crapping all over my life for a decade or more. There are too many players in the game, all contributiing to the fiction they'd like us to believe is reality. I'd like to see some majors fold and a whole new paradigm take over this industry.

It will get worse, but don't expect anyone to fold soon. There are still enough buyers and there is no new paradigm.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2020 at 06:36 UTC

What dramatic decline? Performance has declined as expected. The largest decline in number of units happened during 2012-2013 and the decline in shipments value is just a bit steeper now, but not by so much as to call it dramatic.

There are two factors at play here: people that stopped buying cameras because they have no use for them and those that stopped buying cameras because their old camera still works fine.

And the market will shrink further. At best, it will reach bottom 2 years for now, but it may fall further than that.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2020 at 06:35 UTC as 3rd comment

LOL. This is priceless comeuppance! Don MacAskill drove away paying customers and now he's begging for them to come back. For what? To support a dying platform? If your business model is not sustainable, change it. Stop asking people with less than 1GB of data to pay as much as those with 5TB.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2020 at 00:42 UTC as 19th comment
In reply to:

Miron09: Olympus 75mm is certainly better

The Olympus 75mm is an excellent lens, but it's not comparable to this one. I understand the beginner mistake though.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2019 at 21:05 UTC
In reply to:

GoodKnight: This camera looks pretty sweet. I have never even seen a real one but it is so small and honestly looking at the DPR gallery the images are way better than I would have thought. To my eye even better than the Fuji XT3. Don’t shoot me just my own opinion.

"Equivalent lens are just as small/big."

But often, equivalent lenses just don't exist. What's the Fuji equivalent to the Olympus 75/1.8? It would have to be something like a 100/2.2? lens - would that even be smaller and lighter than the Olympus? Doesn't matter until it's going to actually be produced.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2019 at 21:00 UTC
On article Sony FE 600mm F4 GM OSS sample gallery (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

Duncan M: How come these images all lackluster and have such bad color fidelity?

The two lenses are very needed in the Sony portfolio, but with these shots its hardly convincing for those that need these long lenses.

The samples are for those that use such lenses and know what to look for in them. For everyone else, it doesn't matter anyway - what are they going to do - write a negative comment?

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2019 at 18:53 UTC
In reply to:

bwana4swahili: $13,000 for 600mm!? When there are so many great refractors for a fraction of this prices... How is it that lenses are so much more expensive than an APO telescope??

Resolution and bokeh.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2019 at 18:41 UTC

Retractable vs non-retractable lens should have been one comparison criterion. There are some strong preferences regarding this aspect that can decide the choice faster than all others.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2019 at 23:18 UTC as 76th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

miles green: There is always someone spreading a "good" word for Pentax. Such nonsense. This time the question was legal, so they even had issue a statement. New lenses are the DFA * 50/1.4 and the DA* 11-18/2.8, announced and brought to market this year.

If you like OVFs, it's probably the safest bet in the long run.

K won't disappear. Pentax will become a kind of Leica for DSLRs, but with less prestige.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2019 at 18:00 UTC
In reply to:

TedsEclipse: After using an optical viewfinder for 33 years I am done.

The K5 is more compact with better ergonomics than most good apsc mirrorless cameras - all Pentax had to do was put an evf in it or just about any other model since (the K01 was a cruel joke).

In a recent interview Ricoh/pentax said they will focus on dslr rather than mirrorless and, more to the point, they think people will come back from mirrorless to dslr. Sure and some people that switched to digital from film went back to film but that's a tiny tiny tiny fraction. Knowing exactly what you got while the viewfinder is still at your eye is priceless. The manual focus aids on mirrorless are priceless.

So I sold most of my pentax gear a few days ago. I think the comments about people coming back to dslrs was the single biggest motivator - the only reason they would say that is because they actually beleive it. I still have a few of my favorite lenses, like a ka and f 50mm1.7, just in case.

Yeah, Pentax were always too attached to their own history instead of worrying about their future. I'm not sure how they managed to transfer that attitude even as the brand changed hands, but they did it. I hoped Ricoh would have revitalized the brand, but it looks like the brand comes with its own supply of KoolAid.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2019 at 17:58 UTC
On article Olympus E-M1X vs Nikon D5: shooting tennis (650 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): One of the core sentences:

"the limited brightness and contrast of the EVF means what you see in your EVF eye never quite agrees with what you see with your real-world-viewing eye"

Thank you.

Oh no, not this argument again. As if the reason I use the viewfinder is to look at the world, not to take photos.

Link | Posted on May 1, 2019 at 20:50 UTC
Total: 694, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »