NomadMark

NomadMark

Lives in Canada Newfoundland, Canada
Works as a Accountant
Joined on Aug 30, 2012

Comments

Total: 36, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

MikeRan: So many semiconductor manufacturing experts here.

Funny that you are all looking at these absolute figures alone to determine profitability, or who "profited more".

Looking at the two articles, and those two metrics alone, you would think Canon was more profitable/desirable. But the size of the operation matters - how much money investors have sunk into capital costs.

Look at return on equity. Canon's Q3 2019 ROE was 4.27%, Nikons was 9.9%.

Gross and operating income is definitely one metric for sales health, but net income and ROE are more critical for establishing overall "profitability".

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2020 at 17:54 UTC
In reply to:

Canon Rumors: The Canon EOS 6D Mark II gets no love. #Pity

Do none of you get sarcasm?

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2020 at 15:34 UTC
In reply to:

panchorancho: What an idiot. It would of been cheaper to just wear the camera and lens around their neck!

Clearly. It also would have been cheaper for him to purchase a seat on the flight for his camera and buckle it in ;)

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2017 at 17:01 UTC
In reply to:

p5freak: I do like Tamron a lot, but this one is overpriced and overweight. Its 700g, thats twice as much as Nikons 85mm f1.8, which is 350g. And it costs a lot more than the Nikon.

I think the 70-200's are an exception as they are large as is, though you are on to something.
I would look at something like the Canon 35mm primes, is vs non-is. Or the 100 macro vs the 100L. The IS counterparts are close to 1.5x the weight of the non.

Take into account also the aperture. Bigger aperture means bigger elements, which weigh more. Now we are talking 85 1.8. I would think the added element and hardware to stabilize would be heavier than in the previous examples.

But I might just be blowing smoke. All speculation, but logical none the less. In a larger prime lens, one can expect a couple hundred grams to be added at a minimum.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2016 at 14:06 UTC
In reply to:

p5freak: I do like Tamron a lot, but this one is overpriced and overweight. Its 700g, thats twice as much as Nikons 85mm f1.8, which is 350g. And it costs a lot more than the Nikon.

Hello. One is stabilized and one isn't!!

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2016 at 03:43 UTC

Pay twice as much for a Sony, and you're lucky to get such upgrades. Like winning the lotto. Unless it's low hanging fruit...good luck. I'm very jealous when companies like Fugi and Canon (7D for example) get such great updates 2-3 years after release. Very customer centric.

My RX1R could have used some more auto ISO settings...people begged for them. And the thing cost $3000. Not one update on that. My A7R would love an uncompressed raw update...tough luck, says Sony!

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2016 at 22:56 UTC as 39th comment | 13 replies
On article Hands on with Sony's a6300 and G Master lenses (289 comments in total)
In reply to:

davidbindle: My question is.... just as the Sony A7R2 can now quickly AF with the latest Metabones adapter w (most/many) Canon lenses... is the a6300 going to work as well (or better? - or worse) than the A7R2 with this adapter? This could change the game for me as I can afford the the a6300 whereas I can not afford the a7r2 and I have quite a bit invested in Canon lenses.

What about the A7ii.
It too has fast focus with canon lenses.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2016 at 13:28 UTC
In reply to:

Tom Holly: I wouldn't buy another after my a7r. The shutter shake issue and sonys response to it convinced me it's not the camera company for me.

Sony leave early adopters and first gen product owners high and dry.
Same experience here. A7R and former RX1R onwer. People complain about issues like comoression, and the issues flows through to the second gen products and then get fix via firmware....but only for second gen. And there are other small improvements thar could be made via firmware that never were. Leaves a very sour taste in ones mouth, for sure.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 16:57 UTC
On article Sony issues firmware 1.10 for Alpha 7 II (59 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cheng Bao: Actually, all three mentioned improvement are same thing: improvement over video
1. when half-pressing the shutter,
2. in 'Focus Magnifier' mode,
3. during movie recording

and SAR just posted a pretty good comparison for video IS before and after

Both 1 and 2 help lock af while focusing for still images, no?

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 14:14 UTC
On article Fujifilm announces 1.4x teleconverter for X100/X100S (128 comments in total)
In reply to:

AV Janus: I thought the TC was already out. Fuji is s l o w in this regard.
Now X100(s) needs a 2.2x or 2.5x TC and a wide one so that you can have a body small bag, one body and 3 TCs for 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm small f2.0 kit.

Ummm...just buy lenses? People don't buy fixed lens caeras only to buy half a dozen converters, that are never going to be as good a full lens. Buy an ILC and be done with it.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2014 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

Seagull67: Just buy a Fujifilm XE1 - good lenses now and more to come, and a great inbuilt EVF. Light & very easy to take anywhere - I do all day every day. Why pay so much more for this still limited Sony? Fujifilm have it nailed already with so much more usability for less outlay.

It's noticable enough when shooting close up mug shots, I can tell you that for sure. I've own a NEX 7 with a gaffle of lenses and RX1, and I can tell the difference.

To each their own. I like the x100s, too. It IS a beautiful camera.

I enjoy the ISO performance of the RX1 more than any other feature.

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2013 at 13:41 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: There is very little point in confining yourself to an expensive fixed lens camera and limited functionality just to gain the marginal advantage FF provides over a 1.5x crop sensor.

Marginal?
There is a pretty large gap with respect to DOF control and OOF background blur between the two. High ISO in the RX1 is significantly better than most 1.5x crops as well. The Fuji cameras might some close until aruond 1600. My RX1 can make some pretty clean files at 6400 that no 1.5x crop can touch.

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2013 at 12:15 UTC
In reply to:

Seagull67: Just buy a Fujifilm XE1 - good lenses now and more to come, and a great inbuilt EVF. Light & very easy to take anywhere - I do all day every day. Why pay so much more for this still limited Sony? Fujifilm have it nailed already with so much more usability for less outlay.

Perhaos people want a camera with better high iso performance, and more control of DOF, than the XE1 can offer? And perhaps 35mm is a focal length some people find very useful.

I like the XE1 a lot. I shot with it a fair bit. But when I wanted a second small camera in my kit, the RX! could not be beat.

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2013 at 11:46 UTC
In reply to:

hiro_pro: great idea but for the price i wonder if i could find a used Leica...

What, an m9?
m9 sensor is junk compared to this one.
Lower noise in iso 3200 with the RX1, vs iso 800 with the m9.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2013 at 23:15 UTC
In reply to:

LJohnK2: I just can't understand the price, especially when you add in an EVF.......what is the target market ?

Nice camera ......but where I come from 3 k will get you two Oly Em-5 & 12-50mm kits .

Oly Em-5 IQ does not even compete wrt iq, where I come from.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2013 at 17:35 UTC
On article Sony reveals AA-filter-less Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R (66 comments in total)
In reply to:

Valterj: Too expensive for my taste!

Who buys this camera?

LOL. Cute. But even I have to work my tail off and make sacrifices to afford such a toy. But I do enjoy it enough that I can justify it to myself. It was actually my 30th b-day gift to myself.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2013 at 17:32 UTC
In reply to:

birdbrain: Forgetting the size aspect for the moment, the sort of money this camera is going for I would get a Canon 5D3. Having used the 5D3 for a while now and seen what the real world results that one can get, then I can live with its size and with carrying it around.

This really needs to be a whole lot cheaper, or are Sony the new Leica? :)

Personally, I have a 5D2. To me, the 5D3 doesn't add a lot of value to my kit. I'll pass and wait for Canon to release something to rival the resolution of the D800.

Meanwhile, I bought the RX1 after owning a NEX7 for some time and enjoying the size. And, I love it. The RX1 raw files are smashing.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2013 at 16:26 UTC
On article Sony reveals AA-filter-less Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R (66 comments in total)

I agree with a below poster. New firmware for the current RX1 would be greatly appreciated. Do something for the cruddy AF please!!

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2013 at 16:21 UTC as 17th comment
On article Sony reveals AA-filter-less Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R (66 comments in total)
In reply to:

Valterj: Too expensive for my taste!

Who buys this camera?

I did, and I love it.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2013 at 16:17 UTC

What a pile of rubbish.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2013 at 00:29 UTC as 135th comment
Total: 36, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »