Gesture

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jun 21, 2009

Comments

Total: 1921, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On article 2017 Buying Guides: Best cameras for any budget (34 comments in total)

We need more Holiday Buying Guides. Processed to taste.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 08:57 UTC as 4th comment
On article 2017 Buying Guides: Best compacts, drones and phones (13 comments in total)
In reply to:

G1Houston: Missing here are cameras that can be used under water, which is an unique category of cameras that are great for family vacation. Top cameras in this category includes Nikon AW300 and Olympus TG-5, and this is really where compact camera still has a niche.

Barney. Tough cameras, GoPros and other adventure cameras, 360, etc. is one of the growth areas. All the OEMs should spend some time on YouTube and see what exciting photo stuff that travellers; vloggers; adventurers are doing and the cameras they use and need.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 00:55 UTC

Yes. Let's just colorize this profound image:
https://www.dpreview.com/challenges/Entry.aspx?ID=1049605

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2017 at 16:15 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply

Some great ideas. Good size battery. Corner viewfinder-remember the days! Does have that Fisher-Price look to it. Surprised.

Who would have thought Leica could produce so many new models in the digital era. Prowess of modern manufacturing and sub-assembly outsourcing.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2017 at 16:13 UTC as 62nd comment
In reply to:

Stephen McDonald: In many cases, the photographers who took these shots, intended them to be in B&W. So their wishes are violated by this alteration. However, those who promote the use of B&W as a superior art form, seem to forget that the world and the scenes of these photos, were in color.

Personally, I rarely bother to look at B&W photos or movies, as they don't interest me. When I see them, I think that it's a shame they were deliberately diminished, unless of course, they were taken before color film was available. In that case, who would know whether the photographers would have used color or not? Probably, in most cases, they would have.

As a small boy and later, as a teenager, I saw a wonderful movie, "The Enchanted Forest", released in 1945 and shot in beautiful color, using the Cinecolor process. But in later years, all copies of the film became degraded and lost their color. Watching the scenes, shot partly in the Muir Woods in California, in B&W, was a poor substitute for the original.

You need to see black and white cinematography at its finest.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 19:41 UTC

Photography has never been completely about reality. It is a translation and abstraction of what the world presents us. But there has always been a core or portion of photography that is about accepting "what we could capture at the time", as well as the accidental.

This book is an affirmation of recent trends, all the filters, AI manipulation, etc.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 19:39 UTC as 106th comment

The whole idea is that RF photography invites the world in versus "targeting" it with SLR. And in a traditional sense, most always quieter, less intrusive. Yes, long lens on one hand or macro on the other need SLR. Otherwise, RF wins hands down.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 17:33 UTC as 124th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Zoom Zoom Zoom: Well, let me put it this way regarding so many people bashing this camera's price:

I am a Sony FF shooter & am not buying this camera myself. THIS SAID, comparing this camera's overall features, design & performance to something like a Sony a9, I gotta admit it is VERY CLOSE and for less than 1/2 the price. And equally, outside the body itself, there is also GREAT glass available for m43.

So is this an expensive camera? Well yeah it's not cheap. But comparing it to lots of competitors that charge more & offer less, or others that offer a little more & will snatch you double, I think this is for sure a GREAT camera and great overall package. I am not a Panasonic or m43 fanboy, quite the opposite.. but facts, features and value are to be appreciated no matter where they come from. And from what I see here, I humbly feel this camera plays almost all the right tunes without the need for the cost of a front-row concert ticket.

I like what I see here.. there is lots to see & lots to like.

Olympus and Panasonic have stayed the course, remarkably refined the M43 platform and, as you mention, there is a strong set of lenses for the cameras. There was never to be another M43 optical finder DSLR from Olympus, but it did its best to develop some compatibility to the older, well-regarded lenses.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 20:02 UTC

Great to see Panasonic serious about photography and videography!

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 17:04 UTC as 89th comment

Now, which is South America's largest economy?

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2017 at 01:39 UTC as 99th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS M100 review (791 comments in total)

Thanks, Carey, for reviewing-to taste! Some of the Samsung NX models had the same appeal, including the superb cost/value NX1000.

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2017 at 21:45 UTC as 77th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS M100 review (791 comments in total)

Sell as body only? $450 with kit lens more than enough. Benefits of modern manufacturing and R&D has already been amortized.

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2017 at 17:12 UTC as 103rd comment
On article Canon EF-M 22mm F2 STM sample gallery (176 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Again the "lack of lenses" thing...

People continuously fail to understand that, contrary to other brands who push mirrorless as a primary line (...sometimes, even the only ILC offer, bar medium format...) Canon's EOS line serve 2 specific purposes that complement each other.

1. Entry level ILC format for casual users (there's a reason why all those women appear in the adds, casually getting M-cameras out of purses).

2. A complementary piece of the a much larger, full-encompassing EOS system.

Under these 2 perspectives, the current lens offer is quite rational.

Soon, a third vector will be introduced and THEN you can complain about whatever you might need and they fail to offer.

Meanwhile, if your needs encompass a full array of lenses for a mirrorless, look elsewhere.

There are excellent offers out there.

Lifestyle camera. But it is inching towards enthusiast/advanced amateur.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 17:55 UTC
In reply to:

Woodyz: All I want is a reasonably priced digital rangefinder. It doesn't even need to be an ILC... fixed 40mm or whatever is fine.

I hope these new Chinese camera companies can get that ball rolling.

Cosina - Mr. K - could have done this years ago. I'm pretty sure the Epson RD was built on the same Cosina body as so many other cameras, including the Cosina (Voigtlander) Bessas thathad/have such outstanding RFs.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2017 at 01:19 UTC

Good to hear and glad to see the enthusiastic response in the comments. This can be a high-tech Wild West era for cameras, as many subcontractors have been "learning" the technology that goes into the top branded stuff.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2017 at 01:17 UTC as 26th comment

WOW.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 18:40 UTC as 20th comment

What is reality?
Photography has always been a fiction, but ...

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 17:48 UTC as 58th comment

Neat camera!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 03:16 UTC as 40th comment
In reply to:

George Zip: Not everyone are camera geeks, they could not care less about the image quality improvements over their phones. You could have a good compact camera that eats a phone for IQ and that also takes a sim and can post directly to social media and most people are not going to care. Why, because they are not camera geeks, and are happy with the convenience and decent quality image from a phone.

Actually, it seems like there are smartphones known for being better photographically (iPhone, Google Pixel, some LG models, etc.) and they sell for premium prices.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 21:23 UTC
In reply to:

Raymond Cho: If 95% of users rather have their smartphones that leaves a small market that they can tap into. Of that 5% many perhaps the smaller lot is high end compacts, I would think at least half of the 5% are into system camears (mirrorless, dSLRs etc). Even on a website like this I gather maybe most of us here are into system cameras than high end compacts.

All types of users enjoy materialistic goods. Digital has been with us since 2004 when the $1,000US body price barrier was broken. So we've had 13-14yrs of quite accessible digital technology. Some have also tried it, didn't like it, sold it off or stored it away due to the low price. Maybe not once but twice.

Often people that I know ask me about camera equipment to buy. You seen them once or twice with it and then you don't. Many don't enjoy photography but just to take photographs of friends and family and kids and their food. A few might want something under 1lbs, 12x zoom, 1" sensor but that's not gonna happen soon.

How many "everyday" folks really have a family camera anymore?

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 21:14 UTC
Total: 1921, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »