toni2

Joined on Jul 4, 2012

Comments

Total: 131, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

toni2: You question it's very simple: try some EF and EF-S lenses on a Canon M5. You will see if AF is quick or there are some problems, and you can compare it with some other mirrorless only system.

A thing it's very clear: DSLR will die, as 99.9% of films died. People will have to do something with it's lens...

In fact, Canon and Nikon will sell DSLR until people stop buying it. But I think that nowadays DSLRs are outdated for a lot of people (for amateur people, I think).

It will be an interest thing to compare a Canon 6d mk2 and a Canon 6d mk2-mirrorless (same body, same mount, without mirror and with EVF, with face detection...) sales. What camera would have more buyers? At what price?

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 14:57 UTC
In reply to:

toni2: You question it's very simple: try some EF and EF-S lenses on a Canon M5. You will see if AF is quick or there are some problems, and you can compare it with some other mirrorless only system.

A thing it's very clear: DSLR will die, as 99.9% of films died. People will have to do something with it's lens...

@NicoPPC
You said "dslr will continue at least 15 years..."
I really think that DSLRs will be a marginal product within 5 years. I think it will be like the switch from analog to digital. Once it's really started, it will blow.

I agree that mirrorless must have great handling and confort. Mirrorless is not about that (that's a misunderstanding, to have bad ergonomics); mirrorless is about to remove the mirror and to have an EVF, and a lot of new software improvements.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 13:19 UTC
In reply to:

toni2: You question it's very simple: try some EF and EF-S lenses on a Canon M5. You will see if AF is quick or there are some problems, and you can compare it with some other mirrorless only system.

A thing it's very clear: DSLR will die, as 99.9% of films died. People will have to do something with it's lens...

#NicoPPC
Mirrorless will kill DSLRs. It's only question of time...

Mirrorless will offer a lot of better things: no need of microAF, live changes (as realtime histogram), eye focus, smaller and lightweight lens (on new native lens)...

If mirrorless has not killed DSLR yet it's because manufacturers prefer sell you now a DSLR and sell you a mirrorless in the future. It's only a marketing interest.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 10:46 UTC

You question it's very simple: try some EF and EF-S lenses on a Canon M5. You will see if AF is quick or there are some problems, and you can compare it with some other mirrorless only system.

A thing it's very clear: DSLR will die, as 99.9% of films died. People will have to do something with it's lens...

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 13:00 UTC as 155th comment | 7 replies
On article Canon EOS 77D Review (273 comments in total)
In reply to:

toni2: It has microAF? Not? So, you are saying that it's not professional, so it can have focus problems that are not present in any smartphone or in any mirrorless system?

A DSLR without microAF is an outdated system. Point.

@NicoPPC Or miss focus with a DSLR in full day light (if you have microAF problems)...

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 13:22 UTC
On article Canon EOS 77D Review (273 comments in total)

It has microAF? Not? So, you are saying that it's not professional, so it can have focus problems that are not present in any smartphone or in any mirrorless system?

A DSLR without microAF is an outdated system. Point.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 06:55 UTC as 30th comment | 7 replies
On article Canon EOS 77D / 9000D sample gallery (147 comments in total)

Another DSLR without microAF? Another toy? It's time that Canon and Nikon know what are they selling...

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 12:47 UTC as 32nd comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Mariusz of PL: Still no DEHAZE mode in stand-alone version.

@hikerdoc 'flexibility'? Call it force you to buy the CC version.
Speak clearly, not as you were a marketing man.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2017 at 20:56 UTC
In reply to:

toni2: There are people that still think that suscription (a rent) is cheaper than purchase.

Anyone can think that a company like Adobe, will sell you a thing cheaper if they can sell it more expensive?! Think a little, please...

@TheDman Renting is cheaper but you don't get the same. Price is not the only value.
That doesn't make sense is talk with a marketing man. You only know to cheat.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2017 at 14:18 UTC
In reply to:

toni2: There are people that still think that suscription (a rent) is cheaper than purchase.

Anyone can think that a company like Adobe, will sell you a thing cheaper if they can sell it more expensive?! Think a little, please...

@TheDman Hahaha. It could be cheaper if you buyed a new PS version each 3 years, it could be cheaper if it was the same (buts not the same, it's renting vs buying).
Admit that you don't know more how to cheat people.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2017 at 20:26 UTC
In reply to:

toni2: There are people that still think that suscription (a rent) is cheaper than purchase.

Anyone can think that a company like Adobe, will sell you a thing cheaper if they can sell it more expensive?! Think a little, please...

@TheDman "So, it's cheaper, but you don't get the same."
Just read ALL the phrase until the end point.
There you go. I knew you could learn something.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2017 at 14:38 UTC
In reply to:

toni2: There are people that still think that suscription (a rent) is cheaper than purchase.

Anyone can think that a company like Adobe, will sell you a thing cheaper if they can sell it more expensive?! Think a little, please...

@TheDman Yes, it's easier to pay 10 every month than 500 one time. But the counterpart is that you can't stop paying every month.
So, it's cheaper, but you don't get the same.

It's not like a store where you can buy and download a song, it's more like a audio streaming service.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2017 at 10:15 UTC
In reply to:

toni2: There are people that still think that suscription (a rent) is cheaper than purchase.

Anyone can think that a company like Adobe, will sell you a thing cheaper if they can sell it more expensive?! Think a little, please...

@TheDman Hei! You are a good marketing man!!

Let's see money for Adobe:
10*500=5000
100*100*3=30000

Let's see bad assumptions:

1) Down price by 40% and you get a 1000% increase in customers? Very hard to believe. Even with Adobe dirty policy to force people to get PS CC blocking CR releases for PS CS6.
2) How much people doesn't need more than PS CS6? Whats is cheaper for them, spend one time 500$ or 100$ every year?

I hate marketing men; you add nothing to the market, only speculation and overprices. Nothing about good products. You're destroying innovation and people. Go away.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 18:22 UTC

There are people that still think that suscription (a rent) is cheaper than purchase.

Anyone can think that a company like Adobe, will sell you a thing cheaper if they can sell it more expensive?! Think a little, please...

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 13:52 UTC as 10th comment | 11 replies
On article Adobe Creative Suite 6 has been officially retired (351 comments in total)
In reply to:

Paul B Jones: It's a plot by a corporation to make money.

@JaredTarzan I think that this is a great business decision for Adobe. But for users, it is not a great option. They will be renting a software for life, and it really don't improves a lot.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2017 at 12:44 UTC
On article Adobe Creative Suite 6 has been officially retired (351 comments in total)
In reply to:

Paul B Jones: It's a plot by a corporation to make money.

Not. It's a plot by a corporation to make you to use their cloud, and rent you a software for the rest of your life.

Of the supposed CC great improvements, nothing. Only small improvements as when you buy their software.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2017 at 20:07 UTC

Where's the Google Picasa "auto-enhance" mode with area improvement? That technology was a lot better than google photos.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 19:20 UTC as 14th comment

it seems as if no one (Mac users) knew what they were buying, until now... Perhaps you are waking from sleep?

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 10:14 UTC as 203rd comment

When a 22mm lens (35 mm eq.) for the APS-C market? Or a 100 mm macro?

Anyway, I suppose that image quality is better on the Canon lens.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 16:33 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

toni2: Only €3500? hehehe
The best input from Canon in photo marketing is the price increase in every new camera of any manufacturer.

Sorry for the redaction.
The thing that I wanted to say is that the best contribution from Canon to the photo marketing is the price increase in every new camera.
So, for this the Sony a99-ii has it's price increased too.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 17:43 UTC
Total: 131, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »