Marty4650

Marty4650

Lives in United States NC, United States
Works as a Retired Industrial Engineer
Joined on May 20, 2005

Comments

Total: 1844, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Raist3d: “ The Yashica Y35 reminds me of those old DigitalRev videos where Kai and crew would purposely handicap themselves using inferior cameras like the Barbiecam for, well, no purpose at all.”

Are you ‘effing kidding me??!! What you mean no purpose at all. It’s right there in the video as told by Kai. It shows what photography skills are and make the counter to the point of being filled with obsession of tools over photography skills.

Those videos really are humbling. Kai would hand a photographer a really crappy camera, and they would create very good photos with it.

Makes me wonder why I can't do that with $10,000 worth of gear. Wait... I think I know why....

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 20:43 UTC

The only reason people are disappoined is because of the pre introduction hype.

This is just a toy. And it isn't even a very good toy. Just a very mediocre camera wearing a retro disguise. Sure, they give you a make believe film cartridge that changes the ISO and settings. I doubt many people can get excited about that.

It isn't "the next new thing" or some fantastic innovation. Whoever purchased the Yashica brand should be ashamed of themselves for overhyping this piece of junk and having the nerve to call it a camera.

If you crave retro, then buy a Fuji X100F, or maybe an Olympus Pen-F. Better yet, go to ebay and buy a Yashica Electro 35 GSN. You can get one for around $10. You don't even need to put film in it. Just carry it around as a fashion accessory to impress your hipster friends.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 20:40 UTC as 142nd comment | 3 replies
On article The price is right: Canon EOS Rebel T6 / 1300D Review (426 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Just a friendly warning to budget conscious DSLR buyers.... if you are on a very tight budget then you might be better off buying a high end fixed lens camera. Even if it is used, or an older model.

The whole point of interchangeable lenses is "buying more lenses" and most decent lenses cost more than this camera does. If your budget doesn't allow for additional lenses, then why do you need an ILC?

I think ILCs have been oversold. People who don't need them are buying them, and they may never need the ability to swap out lenses. Bottom line.... buy what you need, not what everyone else tells you to buy.

Both those cameras are pettty good options in that category. The number of user reviews tells you that Canon is much more popular where you live (and probably everywhere else too).

The Nikon has more resolution, faster continuious drive, a more powerful built in flash, a microphone port and is slightly smaller. The Canon has built in WIFI, generally cheaper lenses when you get past kit lenses, and what many say is a better jpeg engine.

The real decision you need to make is whether you want a system camera, and if you do then which system appeals to you most. And both systems are very good ones. It would make no sense to buy the cheapest one today then regret it tomorrow because it lacks something you want.

Bottom line.... you must select based on YOUR needs, YOUR wants, and YOUR budget, and no one else can tell you what those things are. Personally, I don't think you can go wrong with either one.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2017 at 11:07 UTC
On article Here's why your beloved film SLR is never going digital (285 comments in total)

Hey.... Here's an idea. Lets put a horse in a cow costume?

Surely, some one will want it, and pay dearly to have it.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 13:47 UTC as 95th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Marty4650: Everyone with a smartphone already owns a camera with a 1/3.2 inch sensor.

What a wasted opportunity! This really could have been something special, but instead we get a fixed lens compact that isn't as good as something sold for $39.95 by Vivitar, mounted on a blister card at Walmart.

Good points, Bob.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 00:52 UTC

You have to give Samyang credit for finding a need and filling it.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 20:14 UTC as 18th comment | 1 reply

Everyone with a smartphone already owns a camera with a 1/3.2 inch sensor.

What a wasted opportunity! This really could have been something special, but instead we get a fixed lens compact that isn't as good as something sold for $39.95 by Vivitar, mounted on a blister card at Walmart.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 19:02 UTC as 183rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

kristian2000: Just glad this shot was from a Canadian dump and not a US dump.

At least the bears in Canada have free medical care. There is a long waiting list, but it is free....

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2017 at 08:47 UTC
On article Live coverage of the Google Pixel 2 launch on DPReview (41 comments in total)
In reply to:

MrImprovement: Google has lost all trust from me, after their un-personing (deletion of all Google accounts including Gmail and Google photos) of people they don't politically agree with and their cooperation with other countries' security agencies.

Basically we are now going to go out into the world and give Google access to a huge machine learning corpus for free (our photos and the tags we use), that they will then figure out how to use to train their AI system.

Consider this as a not-very-hypothetical: in China, some new political movement creates their own flag/banner and starts protesting using this.

Google can now tag every time that flag is pictured or shows up in video, and uses facial recognition to figure out who is present at the protest - turning this info over to the Chinese government.

Sorry - unless I can firewall the Pixel2 away from Google's embrace ... simply not interested.

Absolutely right. I do understand it. Which is why I say selling ads it is a bigger motivator for Google than making perfect products for us.

If you ever read the fine print in the terms of service for GMail, Google Photos, etc, you will discover that we granted them permission to use our personal data in any way they want to.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 22:34 UTC
On article Live coverage of the Google Pixel 2 launch on DPReview (41 comments in total)
In reply to:

MrImprovement: Google has lost all trust from me, after their un-personing (deletion of all Google accounts including Gmail and Google photos) of people they don't politically agree with and their cooperation with other countries' security agencies.

Basically we are now going to go out into the world and give Google access to a huge machine learning corpus for free (our photos and the tags we use), that they will then figure out how to use to train their AI system.

Consider this as a not-very-hypothetical: in China, some new political movement creates their own flag/banner and starts protesting using this.

Google can now tag every time that flag is pictured or shows up in video, and uses facial recognition to figure out who is present at the protest - turning this info over to the Chinese government.

Sorry - unless I can firewall the Pixel2 away from Google's embrace ... simply not interested.

It is possible to some degree that Google collects data on you "in order to make smarter products" but it is much more likely that the main reason is so they can target advertising more effectively.

It would really be naive to assume otherwise.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 18:47 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: Not too long ago I found this Yashica T4 Super D selling at a Goodwill store for $2.00.

https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6126/5919586612_ef99c2dffb_b.jpg

I bought it, then listed it on ebay and got $300 for it.

@ capemineol... I actually have donated several thousands of dollars worth of goods to Goodwill Industries over the years. And then Goodwill resold the goods I donated to then at a nice profit.

But Goodwill did not donate this camera to me.

They put a price on it, and I bought it from them at the price they set. Admittedly, they priced it too low, but that doesn't entitle the to a share in the profit I made.

I have also bought quite a few cameras from them that were unsellable due to mechanical problems that were too expensive to repair. I took a loss on those, and never once asked them to share in my loss.

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

Not too long ago I found this Yashica T4 Super D selling at a Goodwill store for $2.00.

https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6126/5919586612_ef99c2dffb_b.jpg

I bought it, then listed it on ebay and got $300 for it.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2017 at 20:02 UTC as 35th comment | 8 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: Sigma SD1 (237 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michiel953: Edsel.

No but a few Mazdas had Wankel engines that operated on an entirely different design. Perhaps I should have said "Wankel Engined Mazda" instead?

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2017 at 15:57 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Sigma SD1 (237 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: I wonder whatever became of the six or seven Sigma SD1 cameras that were actually purchased by someone?

They might be prized by collectors. As important historical pieces.

Jozef..... you can make wonderful photos with ANY camera. Even with a smartphone camera. That isn't the point.

The point is this was a $10,000 camera (initially) that was routinely outperformed by cameras selling for less than one tenth that price at the time it was released. The fact that a few people acutally bought them makes for a really good story.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2017 at 15:53 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Sigma SD1 (237 comments in total)
In reply to:

veroman: This uninformed and unjustly brief Throwback Review begs the question, "Why was the SD1 even selected for this segment?"

The SD1, like nearly all Foveon-based cameras, draws criticism like flies to fly paper. It's so very easy to criticize, isn't it. But for low-ISO shooters who use fast, quality lenses and who have mastered the craft of taking a picture, the benefits of the Foveon sensor (even going back to the SD9) far, far outweigh what the Foveons can't do or don't do very well.

There is NO Bayer-based 35mm format camera that can deliver the image quality of the SD1 (and current Foveons) when shooting base ISO to ISO 200. Simply removing the AA filter from a Bayer camera does not a Foveon make. Yes, in less skilled hands the Foveons can be, and often are, problematic, especially if one thinks the camera should do all the work.

Read the reviews on Luminous Landscape and on ReidReviews if you want to know what the SD1 is truly capable of. This Throwback Review is a joke.

I think the SD1 was selected for Throwback Thursday because it is an interesting and unique camera. I doubt that very many were sold, especially at the initial $9,700 price, but it sure makes a good story.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2017 at 14:59 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Sigma SD1 (237 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michiel953: Edsel.

A Yugo priced like a Ferrari!

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2017 at 14:19 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Sigma SD1 (237 comments in total)

I wonder whatever became of the six or seven Sigma SD1 cameras that were actually purchased by someone?

They might be prized by collectors. As important historical pieces.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2017 at 14:17 UTC as 52nd comment | 9 replies

The Alexa looked a little better.

But not $77,000 better.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2017 at 23:54 UTC as 46th comment | 2 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: the Canon PowerShot G1 (157 comments in total)

"Throwback Thursday" is one of my favorite recurring features on Dpreview.

And that is probably because I am a throwback kind of guy...

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2017 at 22:27 UTC as 49th comment
In reply to:

Marty4650: This whole concept is pure nonsense.

When it comes to business, talent counts most. No one buys inferior photos because the photographer happens to be a white male. It just doesn't work that way in the real world. If all the best photographers were Eskimos, then they would get all the work.

Yes.... the Eskimo photographers would "get more than their fair share." And only because they had the best photos.

I am amazed that anyone can be so vapid as to suggest racial quotas for hiring professional photographers.

Has anyone noticed there is no similar website for heart surgeons? Does anyone really care about the ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation of a surgeon or would we rather find the best surgeon available?

Does anyone really care that the NBA and NFL under-represents white men? Or would we rather have the best athletes on the field?

When talent counts, no one cares about race and color. When talent doesn't matter, then you can play the diversity games you want.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2017 at 18:43 UTC
Total: 1844, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »