Gregm61

Lives in United States Dallas, United States
Works as a Banking/Finance
Has a website at gmchappell.smugmug.com
Joined on Oct 24, 2005

Comments

Total: 158, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Hot mess: Remembering the Leica M8 (121 comments in total)

I actually like removing the baseplate to get at the battery and card. What used to be one of the most common/standard negatives on almost any digital camera review on this site? You could almost leave it in a blank review summary window and fill in around it with any model.... poor quality battery and/or card doors. There's nothing more solid than what Leica does with the M8 and subsequent models in putting them both where they are.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2017 at 14:16 UTC as 31st comment
On article FilmLab is a film negative scanning app for smartphones (112 comments in total)

Just what we need. A way to convert high quality 35mm film images into cheap quality iPhone pics. Last place this should be pushed is DPReview. I'd expect to see this in a cheap product magazine in the back of the airplane seat in front of me.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2017 at 21:17 UTC as 26th comment | 4 replies

But just think how much better this would have been had they used 6 Sony A9 cameras, LOL...

There, it had to be said. You know they were thinking it.

Link | Posted on May 3, 2017 at 11:49 UTC as 14th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

fatdeeman: So apparently the biggest criticism people can come up with for this camera is that DPR like it.

They don't just like it. They're having wet dreams about it. Any techno-geek should.

Link | Posted on May 2, 2017 at 16:02 UTC
On photo LIKE A FLAG in the Your City - Metal challenge (14 comments in total)

This is cool. Great catch seeing this.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 20:49 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On article CP+ 2017: Hands-on with new Voigtländer E-mount primes (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gregm61: The 35mm f1.4 in M mount is not all that particularly great.

I love how people use the word "character" when describing a lens, LOL...

My comments about how the 35/1.4 performs is when used on full-frame Leica M9 or M262, where it's a pretty darn weak performer. I'm sure it'd work just fine on my E-M1, but I wouldn't have much use for a manually focusing 35mm prime with a 70mm FOV.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 14:27 UTC
On article CP+ 2017: Hands-on with new Voigtländer E-mount primes (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

chetan crasta: Aren't all these lenses lacking autofocus? Why isn't such an important point mentioned here?

Because......that should be fairly obvious to anyone to looks at one?

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 12:28 UTC
On article CP+ 2017: Hands-on with new Voigtländer E-mount primes (117 comments in total)

The 35mm f1.4 in M mount is not all that particularly great.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 12:27 UTC as 18th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Gregm61: And still no one-click option for dealing with dust spots like a clone or spot removal tool.

The editor would do it, given the tools. Tried that and it's far from flawless, does not always work, but hey, it's a free program. I can elect to use it or not.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2017 at 11:45 UTC
In reply to:

afm: This software will not open on any of my Windows 10 computers. Got the previous version to work but only after a 120 second startup time! Am I missing something here?

I have a brand new Windows 10 machine and RT 5.0 works perfectly, and fast.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2017 at 11:28 UTC

And still no one-click option for dealing with dust spots like a clone or spot removal tool.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2017 at 02:48 UTC as 22nd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Under The Sun: For a x100t user like me I don't see any reason to upgrade. Yep there are great ergonomic updates like the joystick but the IQ is essentially the same. Now if Fuji had updated the lens thats a different story.

Aging lens? The lens is the same from one model to the next. It's the body that keeps changing. I think I'd just buy into a system where you can purchase the next body every couple of years and just buy the lens ONE time.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2017 at 13:19 UTC

How many times does one buy the same lens, over and over and over....?

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2017 at 13:16 UTC as 55th comment | 11 replies
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1640 comments in total)

Typical Canon non-DSLR entry. Suck you in and frustrate you to just buying one of their DSLR's.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2016 at 03:52 UTC as 71st comment | 2 replies
On article Next level: iPhone 7 Plus camera review (192 comments in total)

"Good enough for the masses too lazy to use a real camera", should be tops on the "Good for"...

Otherwise, it should do a great job recording the level number at the airport parking lot so I don't have to remember where I parked.....oh wait, my 6 already does that really well. Never mind....

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 15:30 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
On article Google Pixel tops DxOMark's Mobile rankings (116 comments in total)

So, it should take a VERY clear image if the level number at the parking garage to remind me when I return.....great....

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2016 at 19:35 UTC as 26th comment
In reply to:

Thomas Traub: this lense does not look sharp - or should I buy glasses?

Barney, that's the problem. The images look like you dragged yourself out of bed after 20 hours of travelling and shot the first 36 things you saw just to get images online to generate clicks on this site, then went back to bed, and that did no one any favors, especially the lens.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 12:12 UTC
In reply to:

Thomas Traub: this lense does not look sharp - or should I buy glasses?

Probably would just be better off waiting for a review done by someone who knows how to take good sample shots.

This looks like a classic example of someone looking to be the first to get something online, quality be damned.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2016 at 19:13 UTC
In reply to:

Carl Mucks: Now, ask yourself a simple question. How many people would buy a $1300 24-200mm f/8 lens for their FF cameras? That's right, the answer is 'close to zero'. Because the lens is too expensive, too slow for anything but a bright daylight, and offers no DOF control. Basically the pictures look pretty much like coming from a typical P&S camera. And that's the antithesis for FF shooters. Are m43 shooters content with P&S quality and the insane prices?

Of course, there will be those who will claim that that zoom offers great flexibility being that small and having such a huge zoom range. I find those arguments meaningless. Ask yourself, do you want more pictures or better pictures? I'd rather have one great picture than thousands of mediocre ones.

Bottom line, dump those slow zooms, get one, two, maybe three bright good quality primes and take fewer but better pictures.

Full frame freak idiot alert.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2016 at 18:53 UTC
In reply to:

ogl: It's 28-200/f8.0 equivalent for FF...F8.0...Hmmmm...

You guys just need to stick with full frame sensor cameras if all you can quote and talk about is equivalence. This is a smaller format. Olympus isn't going to make a full frame camera. This is an f4 lens, in this format. Lord, what a bunch of goofs.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 UTC
Total: 158, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »