marabunta

Joined on Mar 16, 2016

Comments

Total: 55, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

I wish that there were an off-the-shelf monitor that could amplify the on-camera monitor. This is not really it unless you use your camera as a camcorder. There are lots of 5 and 7 inch monitors with LUT tables and other color correction tech, but they would be a bit much for me. The cheap ones have 300 nits, but the beauty of ATOMOS is that it makes screens with 1500 nits (not this one), usable in direct sunlight. I have a vision impairment so even a smartphone like my LG V20 with 500 nits would be inadequate. Samsung released several Galaxy cameras like the NX1, the only company innovative and daring enough to break out of the 3 and 3.2" camera screens with a 4.7" lcd and apparently nobody cared because it did not seem to translate into sales.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2022 at 01:31 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

OremLK: What I'd really like to see someone make is a regular 16:9 monitor that's around 35-37 inches. I have a big 42 inch 4k monitor on my desk and it's just a little bit too big to comfortably use sitting at normal viewing distance. Around 36 inches would be perfect.

I know you can get ultrawide monitors that size but I have no interest in that form factor.

In any case, having such a large screen really does help you see the details and take full advantage of 4k resolution.

In the 20aughts, you could buy lcd tv sets in 37". That was back when cold cathode fluorescent tubes were still used as backlights. There were even a few manufacturers who released 37" plasma sets. The resolutions were 480P and 768P in the y-asis. The sun set on that screen size a long time ago. Some 39" sizes are still available as 40" at 1080P, but are possibly a downgrade for photography.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2020 at 12:19 UTC

As far as the laggy AF is concerned, Sony has been developing it since 2014. Nikon is the new kid on the block in ML FF cameras. It'll get there soon enough, but it should charge less than $3K and 2K to hook people into it's ecosystem. The money should be in the lenses, not the camera backs. Those can be replaced every five years especially if photography is your bread and butter.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2020 at 20:02 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

Suntan: $400 for a hand grip. Four. hundred. dollars.

Yeah! Right?

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2020 at 19:54 UTC

I wonder how much the price drop will be for the first generation Nikon ML FF cameras. I bought a Sony A7ii, to pair with a 9mm super wide angle lens from Laowa. I wanted one of the Nikons, but none were near the $700 price for the Sony. It'll get the job done, but I wanted to buy into the Nikon family, cuz the onscreen interface is less convoluted, but I couldn't afford it's price of admission.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2020 at 19:53 UTC as 9th comment
On article Hands-on with the the Canon PowerShot Zoom (124 comments in total)

This would make a great tool for the visually impaired if made with a 2x to 16x range. You don't need more for staring at a white board in a class room. or perhaps a 16x and click to 32x for reading a street sign from a diagonal corner, all with extra short focus. The camera may or may not be necessary. I have a drawer full of broken analog monoculars that are not fixable. Those things are built like crap. I bought a Samsung HZ35W yrs ago to use as an electronic monocular for it's 15x lens, but the lcd is slow to turn on and is not very practical on a bright, sunny day. This device with the specs. I gave would be more practical.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2020 at 15:16 UTC as 40th comment
In reply to:

marabunta: No mm equivalents in 35mm. No degrees fov arch for ultra wide angle wide angle or tele, For a stills-photography article this is unacceptable. C'mon, Samsung! Really? I feel that DPReview needs to set standards for phone companies who wish to announce it's products on DPR. Either state these specs. or get your post withheld until you do.

i didn't realize that I typed the same complaint twice: about the mms and FoV °s.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2020 at 21:47 UTC

At least Jeff Peterman bothered to give a 13mm, 26mm and 130mm estimate for lenses. I don't understand why smartphone companies bother to post articles in camera-centric websites like this one without the most basic specs. of interest to most photography enthusiasts: no mm lens equivalents and no FoV equivalents, Ie: 75°-135°.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2020 at 21:38 UTC as 1st comment

Wow! So many naysayers here. The condemnation is almost universal. I think that Funleader went wrong in pricing. If it were $80.00, maybe people wouldn't be so put off. This lens would be good for casual street photography where people won't be so apprehensive at the sight of a full frame camera and lens pointed at them. Their reaction would be more akin to having an µ43 or 1/2.3" sensor camera pointed at them: perhaps even imperceptible.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2020 at 15:51 UTC as 17th comment

No mm equivalents in 35mm. No degrees fov arch for ultra wide angle wide angle or tele, For a stills-photography article this is unacceptable. C'mon, Samsung! Really? I feel that DPReview needs to set standards for phone companies who wish to announce it's products on DPR. Either state these specs. or get your post withheld until you do.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2020 at 16:05 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply

If you buy this as a fashion statement, it is a fail right out of the gate. What the heck is a Pixii? No Rolex logo. You don't even get a little red dot. What the heck? If you are not out to impress people who are not worth impressing, what is the purpose of it? If no brand recognition, add some gold accents or swarovski crystals so that it is more noticeable.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2020 at 20:33 UTC as 72nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

tvgc: The Canadian dealers are listing the XC 35mm @ 260.00+TAX. The XF 35mm @ 500+TAX. Both equivalent to the US Canadian dollar exchange rate.

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm about the exchange rate. It sounded like he was referring more to Afghanis from 20 yrs. ago, although that was 45,000 Afghanis to the US$ so more extreme.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2020 at 20:49 UTC

The XF price point is what prevents me from going to Fujifilm. I wish they had a XC version of the Fujifilm XF 8-16mm F2.8 R LM WR lens. I can't justify 2K for a hobby. I don't need weather sealing as you won't see me at the edge of a smoldering volcano in Iceland during a heavy ice fog. I like landscape and architectural photography. I carry on with a Panasonic DMC-M1, a dainty Pentax Q-S1 with respective ultra wide angle lenses, and if I don't have either, my LG V20 phone with a 130 degree FOV. C'mon Fuji. Give us hobbyists an XC ultra wde. The XC 35 is a good sign of Fuji broadening it's base of users.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2020 at 20:36 UTC as 20th comment | 11 replies
On article DPReview TV: 2019 New Year's Resolutions (254 comments in total)

OK. So, is it a given that Pentax is dead? It's not even on the list. One New Year's resolution would be the return of Pentax with product.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2019 at 09:26 UTC as 41st comment | 4 replies
On article CP+ 2019: Panasonic shows 10-25mm F1.7 mockup (178 comments in total)
In reply to:

S Yu: Sounds like a 20-50/3.3 in FF is much more useful, going faster isn't gonna get the DR back.

That's because there is none. Its full frame snobbery. It's like saying that my $4,000 Thorens turntable is better than your $100 Crosley turntable. That's how I understood the "mediocre" label above until vscd defined what he/she meant with the term, which I'm glad he/she clarified further down. However, it does seem ridiculous when Olympus with µ43 and Fujifilm with APS-C, both have cameras that are priced to compete with lower-end Full Frame equipment despite the much smaller sensors.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2019 at 02:43 UTC
In reply to:

ikan154: "find X" sounds like a mathematical problem to me... (@ o @)

The tripleX phone: where part of your purchase price incluldes a ton of preloaded XXX films and easy access to those sites. It'll make you long airport layovers more bearable, although you might spend too much time in the bathroom.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2018 at 03:41 UTC
On article Video: Diving into the demise of Kodak (224 comments in total)

Agfa was mentioned, but no one mentioned Konica. It's DNA continues to exist in Sony. No camera company purchased Kodak, so it's DNA is nowhere to be seen except perhaps in patents.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2018 at 22:14 UTC as 64th comment
On article Sony announces Cyber-shot RX100 VI with 24-200mm zoom (740 comments in total)

Oh boy! That Sony a5100 with an E 16mm pancake lens competes pretty well in weight and APSC sensor and $350 price (body) to the RX100.6, although not pocketable. I guess I could have slacks custom-made with big enough pockets with the money that I'd save.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2018 at 01:54 UTC as 56th comment | 2 replies
On article Sony announces Cyber-shot RX100 VI with 24-200mm zoom (740 comments in total)
In reply to:

DualSystemGuy: Looks pretty awesome actually. 4.5 is acceptable for 200mm - I wonder how soon you are at 4.5 though. Great travel camera no doubt, but the price is getting pretty high - you are way above some current APS-C mirrorless kits at this point.

The biggest problem with the RX100 series now is that you can still buy every single one of them:

RX100: $398
RX100 II: $548
RX100 III: $813
RX100 IV: $848
RX100 V: $948
RX100 IV : $1200

Who the heck is buying a III or IV when the V has a stacked sensor and PDAF for $100 more?

The lack of a ND filter is rather disappointing, they got rid of it on the RX10 IV too.

The DSLR world used to be bad for multiple overlapping models confusing customers, this takes it to a whole new level haha. If the lens is anything less than amazing at all focal lengths, people may not be willing to pay that much for it. Hopefully it delivers.

Meant for DualSystemGuy, but no reply tab.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2018 at 23:55 UTC
On article Sony announces Cyber-shot RX100 VI with 24-200mm zoom (740 comments in total)
In reply to:

DualSystemGuy: Looks pretty awesome actually. 4.5 is acceptable for 200mm - I wonder how soon you are at 4.5 though. Great travel camera no doubt, but the price is getting pretty high - you are way above some current APS-C mirrorless kits at this point.

The biggest problem with the RX100 series now is that you can still buy every single one of them:

RX100: $398
RX100 II: $548
RX100 III: $813
RX100 IV: $848
RX100 V: $948
RX100 IV : $1200

Who the heck is buying a III or IV when the V has a stacked sensor and PDAF for $100 more?

The lack of a ND filter is rather disappointing, they got rid of it on the RX10 IV too.

The DSLR world used to be bad for multiple overlapping models confusing customers, this takes it to a whole new level haha. If the lens is anything less than amazing at all focal lengths, people may not be willing to pay that much for it. Hopefully it delivers.

The V and the I are inverted in your price list. You typed 4 instead of 6. I hope DPReview lets you edit.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2018 at 23:48 UTC
Total: 55, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »