dmanthree

Lives in United States (USA), MA, United States
Works as a IT Security
Joined on Nov 24, 2003
About me:

Plan 9.

Comments

Total: 552, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Panasonic officially unveils 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH (300 comments in total)

It's expensive, so I'll wait to see the tests. Hopefully the hype isn't just that. Specs look stellar, though.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 21:26 UTC as 27th comment
On article Panasonic officially unveils 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH (300 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gonzie: I agree with many that this price it too high. I understand that quality costs money, but this puts it in the same price range as the Canon 70-200 IS II, after mail in rebate. The canon F4 is $1149. I get you pay for quality and I have with lenses, but when you ask this much it loses the value side of the argument, for me at least. Like others have said, I would do the Olympus 40-150 with a 1.4. More bang for the buck IMO. Now if they have a killer bundle with the G9, similar to what Olympus is doing with the EM1.2, then that may change things.

The Oly 40-150 is already a big lens. Adding two stops of speed would, well, put it out of reach for the majority of us and create an absolutely huge lens. It'll never happen.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 21:22 UTC
On article Panasonic officially unveils 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH (300 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edgar_in_Indy: I just about die of sticker shock every time a new "consumer" m43 telephoto lens is announced. It's like you either have to choose between dog food or filet mignon when shopping for m43 telephotos.

Tamron sells a very nice 70-200mm f2.8 DSLR lens for $769 new. It features internal zoom, and has close-focus abilities. When DPR reviewed it in 2008, they found that it delivered "Excellent optical quality" and was capable of "matching or even outperforming the much more expensive Canon 70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM".

Would anybody else be interested if Tamron made something similar in m43 mount? I know I'd be first in line. I think I could live with a touch less sharpness than Panasonic/Olympus's latest wonder-lens if it meant saving $1000 while getting a longer and/or faster lens.

Something like this from a 3rd party undercutting the high OEM prices may serve as a much-needed wake up call. Give me a good lens I can afford rather than a perfect lens that I will never be able to justify!

We'd all like some competition for this lens, but my guess is if a third party maker matched the build and optical quality, as well as weather sealing the price would be very close. I think the depth of offerings from Panny and Oly scare the third party makers away since the market is not the size of the Canikon market.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 21:20 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9: What you need to know (211 comments in total)
In reply to:

dmanthree: Should have been named the GX90. Definitely not an "upgrade" to the GX8. I was hoping for a genuine improvement to the GX8, but this certainly isn't it. It's a nice, capable cam, but when you drop something like weather sealing and put a less capable EVF in you may alienate GX8 users looking for something more. And that "grip?" Really? When you recognize that the grip is so lame you sell one as an add-on, you've failed. Not for me.

To each his own on the grip, but dropping weather sealing? Downgrading the EVF? Removing the fully articulated LCD? Sorry, this isn't any upgrade to the GX8, not even close.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 15:19 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9: What you need to know (211 comments in total)

Should have been named the GX90. Definitely not an "upgrade" to the GX8. I was hoping for a genuine improvement to the GX8, but this certainly isn't it. It's a nice, capable cam, but when you drop something like weather sealing and put a less capable EVF in you may alienate GX8 users looking for something more. And that "grip?" Really? When you recognize that the grip is so lame you sell one as an add-on, you've failed. Not for me.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 13:41 UTC as 84th comment | 6 replies

Good review, but he totally ignored the most important aspect of the iMac Pro: the color. It just looks a lot cooler.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2018 at 18:08 UTC as 35th comment

No low light comparison?

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2018 at 13:26 UTC as 24th comment

I like it. If I was getting married I'd love a shot like that. I don't see any deep or hidden meaning in the shat at all. It's just a damned unique shot, so why not?

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 18:29 UTC as 29th comment
On photo Life a Beach and it's hotl in the That hot day of summer.. challenge (2 comments in total)

Damn, where is this?

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2018 at 20:21 UTC as 2nd comment

On a side note, I'll be getting my $29 battery replacement today. ;-)

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2018 at 13:45 UTC as 5th comment
On article Film vs Digital: Fashion photography shootout (401 comments in total)

I guess I missed the memo that said digital *had* to be faster.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2018 at 13:42 UTC as 87th comment
In reply to:

Roland Schulz: Apple is doing right - halfways!
Batteries, especially LiIon batteries are becoming weaker over the time of usage/charge cycles. The internal resistance is growing and so they become less powerful. A faster clocked processor needs more power (current) that an exhausted battery isn‘t capable to deliver, so the voltage will break down and the system will crash due to undervoltage.
My partner had an old iPhone 5s with an exhausted battery. It happened very often when using the camera that the whole phone crashed, probably due to higher power consumption when using the camera.
Everything became fine after a battery swap!
We would have prefered if the system had clocked down to keep the system running! Nothing else Apple is doing in the current discussion.

But - Apple should display the bad battery status to the user and offer a battery change to a lower price than before!

Hell, I like Apple products, but this is just idiotic. Planned obsolescence is one thing, but *forced* obsolescence is another.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2017 at 23:19 UTC
In reply to:

Svetoslav Popov: Apple again. LOL. They should've made the batteries replaceable in the first place. Who needs those things to be so annoyingly thin and bendable anyway?

Every time i read something like this on the news i am reminded that i made the right choice in 1998 to NOT buy into Apple.

Now, where's my popcorn?

What if the thief just shut off the phone? Wouldn't beep then, would it?

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2017 at 14:19 UTC
In reply to:

Roland Schulz: Apple is doing right - halfways!
Batteries, especially LiIon batteries are becoming weaker over the time of usage/charge cycles. The internal resistance is growing and so they become less powerful. A faster clocked processor needs more power (current) that an exhausted battery isn‘t capable to deliver, so the voltage will break down and the system will crash due to undervoltage.
My partner had an old iPhone 5s with an exhausted battery. It happened very often when using the camera that the whole phone crashed, probably due to higher power consumption when using the camera.
Everything became fine after a battery swap!
We would have prefered if the system had clocked down to keep the system running! Nothing else Apple is doing in the current discussion.

But - Apple should display the bad battery status to the user and offer a battery change to a lower price than before!

Why did they keep is secret? The problem is that the software change was stealth, and the user had NO choice in the matter! Why?

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2017 at 14:18 UTC
In reply to:

razorfish: That these two 35mm dinosaurs are high end cameras of the year is just wrong on so many levels. Probably less than 10% of those voting could ever actually afford these cameras, and less than 1% actually need the overkill/oversize performance on offer. Photography enthusiasts really need to get a grip on reality. The winner should clearly be Panasonic G9.

dave8, are you saying that FF cams can match the Hassy or Fuji MF cams? Based on what I've seen, they can't. So are they *not* high end? The GH5 can do things in video the Nikon can dream about. And the Oly has certain features, like live time, hi-res, and pro capture that nothing else has. No realighment needed here.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2017 at 01:03 UTC
In reply to:

razorfish: That these two 35mm dinosaurs are high end cameras of the year is just wrong on so many levels. Probably less than 10% of those voting could ever actually afford these cameras, and less than 1% actually need the overkill/oversize performance on offer. Photography enthusiasts really need to get a grip on reality. The winner should clearly be Panasonic G9.

dave8, you wouldn't consider the Panny GH5 or the Oly E-M1 II high end? May need to realign your beliefs.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2017 at 20:40 UTC
In reply to:

razorfish: That these two 35mm dinosaurs are high end cameras of the year is just wrong on so many levels. Probably less than 10% of those voting could ever actually afford these cameras, and less than 1% actually need the overkill/oversize performance on offer. Photography enthusiasts really need to get a grip on reality. The winner should clearly be Panasonic G9.

I shoot with an Olty E-M1 II but voted for the Nikon D850. It's not a popularity contest.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2017 at 16:21 UTC
In reply to:

ZeBebito: People should take a minute and read ALL the info before complaining about the "crop mode". Hasselblad just releases an adapter that allows the X-PAN lenses to be used with the X1D. Is NOT only a gimmick.

But if you don't already own those XPan lenses, what's the point? Now a digital Noblex, that would be something. :-)

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2017 at 01:49 UTC
In reply to:

dmanthree: I think this is as close we'll ever get to a Mamiya 7 II, as well. I'd love to see the Texas Leica appear in digital form, but that's beyond a longshot.

I had an xPan and loved it, but honestly adding a crop mode to this cam isn't quite the same. And not really necessary.

Zeb, I saw that, but to what end? What do those lenses give you that the native lenses don't? (unless you already own them)

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2017 at 01:47 UTC
On article Canon patents 400mm F5.6 catadioptric 'mirror' lens (220 comments in total)

Can't wait to adapt this to my Oly E-M1 II. Had a mirror lens decades ago and I really miss those donuts.

;-)

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2017 at 15:03 UTC as 4th comment
Total: 552, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »