dlinney

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Joined on Oct 4, 2004

Comments

Total: 34, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

mxx: Glad a solution is on the way. Modern cameras are very complicated devices and sometimes glitches like this are bound to happen.

No one got killed by a Canon camera locking up. Every design/production operation has to balance the cost of extensive testing against the final delivery price and timescale and the impact of failure. You have no basis whatsoever, other than prejudice for saying that Canon skimped on QC.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2020 at 11:01 UTC
In reply to:

mxx: Glad a solution is on the way. Modern cameras are very complicated devices and sometimes glitches like this are bound to happen.

Prosecutor, I suppose that in your job you never made a mistake. How nice it must be to live in a perfect world.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2020 at 08:51 UTC
In reply to:

marcio_napoli: I don't expect to get friendly support on my post, and I have nothing to do with street photography, my field is fashion, I have next to none experience in street photography.

That out of the way, I'm increasingly pi$$ed off how sensitive this world is becoming.

Everything is PC. This is F-ing tiresome.

Is there anything left you can do in this world that won't harm the extreme sensitivity of sensitive people?

Let the man shoot.

He's at least man enough to shoot everyone in their faces, therefore letting everyone know what he did.

He's not behind a long lens on the far end of the street, shooting everyone from their backs.

To the sensitive PC world: time to grow some b@lls again. Not everything is meant to be taken as offense.

Its about him not having respect for the subjects he is shooting.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2020 at 21:05 UTC
On article Canon RF 85mm F1.2L USM review (768 comments in total)
In reply to:

Discombobulate: I'd love to have a lens like this but too bad I don't have Canon and there's no adapters to anything yet.

Wide open shot this lens needs super accuracy focus. Let's wait for more end user's (real & not from PR) reviews. or I test it myself.

If you bother to search the web you will find quite a few real-life reviews of this lens which all rate it highly.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2020 at 18:53 UTC
On article Best cameras for landscapes in 2020 (1124 comments in total)

I find it hilarious in a review of landscape cameras it puts a -ve against the Canon 5DSr because it is “limited to ISO 12,500”. Do these guys really shoot landscapes at greater than ISO 12,500?

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2019 at 17:01 UTC as 143rd comment | 4 replies
On article Hands-on with the Canon EOS M200 (169 comments in total)

“and we've reached out to Canon to confirm.” ..... I think the word you are struggling to find is “asked”.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2019 at 13:51 UTC as 36th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS sample gallery (268 comments in total)
In reply to:

CaNikonianite: f4-f6.3 ? This lens is crap. And they want $900 USD for it?! Hey, I got a pet rock I want to sell you.

I am overwhelmed by your analytical skills and linguistic expertise.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2019 at 17:41 UTC
In reply to:

Duncan M: Sounds pretty much like 'fake' news to me.
I really hope you have checked your sources and the facts DPR.

As you may know a 'single' source is not a reliable source.
Fact checking should be done with at least several reliable sources.

There is so much crap on the internet these days that you do not know who is telling the truth and who is not. Before positing such 'sh!t' you must be 100% sure it is a reliable story.

If you bother to go and read the original forum you will see posts from several users over a three month period all reporting similar problems. Unless you believe that there is a conspiracy going on on the Adobe forums then this is real and branding it ‘fake news’ is irresponsible non-fact checking behaviour.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2019 at 14:19 UTC
In reply to:

dlinney: Can I add a different perspective to the discussion of smartphone vs. dedicated camera (mirrorless, dslr etc.)?

I was down in Newlyn in Cornwall and the weekend and walked around the fishing harbour early in the morning taking photographs. I saw probably four or five other people taking photos - all with ILC cameras. No one shooting with their smartphone.

Normally when I am out and about there are hundreds of smartphone shooters for every ILC user. Why the difference? It occurred to me that I and the other photographers that morning had gone out “to take photographs” - i.e. photography was the objective not an incidental of the experience.

Maybe that identifies the market for dedicated cameras: people who want to go out and take photographs. People who simply wanting to record and share what they are doing are better served by smartphones.

While there are clearly some smartphone users who can extract powerful images from their chosen equipment maybe it is the case that it is only the photographers for whom the image itself is important who will buy dedicated equipment.

As photographs become more and more all pervasive they become generally of less and less value. Only for the photographer as artist or the photographer as professional does the image quality have real value. Hence, these are the only markets for dedicated camera equipment.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2019 at 08:59 UTC

Can I add a different perspective to the discussion of smartphone vs. dedicated camera (mirrorless, dslr etc.)?

I was down in Newlyn in Cornwall and the weekend and walked around the fishing harbour early in the morning taking photographs. I saw probably four or five other people taking photos - all with ILC cameras. No one shooting with their smartphone.

Normally when I am out and about there are hundreds of smartphone shooters for every ILC user. Why the difference? It occurred to me that I and the other photographers that morning had gone out “to take photographs” - i.e. photography was the objective not an incidental of the experience.

Maybe that identifies the market for dedicated cameras: people who want to go out and take photographs. People who simply wanting to record and share what they are doing are better served by smartphones.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2019 at 08:58 UTC as 5th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

pixelationX: So because of that fear Canon fired their R&D department some 10 yrs ago and just producing cameras that were planned 10 yrs ago with 5 yr old sensors.

The only reason people still buy canon is because of lenses and that is also changing fast.

So yeah u r right Mr.CEO your company is going down while others r doing great.

vadims ... For the last 10 years I could pick up any Canon DSLR and within a few minutes feel comfortable using its controls and its menus. I used to teach photography and I can tell you that in comparison most other manufacturers Canon was way, way more consistent in its implementation.

On reliability you had a misfortune but they honoured the warranty. My experience is that over probably 15 different bodies and 20 lenses I have only had one that needed repair and that was a 24-105mm L lens that after probably eight solid years of work needed a repair but now works fine.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2019 at 15:31 UTC
In reply to:

Bigsensorisbest: This is really bad for all if us. Fewer models and longer gaps between replacements. I predict Sony will give up once the margins drop they have an opportunistic history in business.

I'm not sure its bad news for us. Sure, the rate of camera releases will slow and they might be more expensive but is that a bad thing? In the days of film you could buy a camera expecting it to last many, many years; if we step back from the "having to have the latest gizmo" craze then I quite like tthe idea that I take my time, choose a camera and then use it for 10 years before it finally crumbles to dust.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2019 at 15:26 UTC
In reply to:

pixelationX: So because of that fear Canon fired their R&D department some 10 yrs ago and just producing cameras that were planned 10 yrs ago with 5 yr old sensors.

The only reason people still buy canon is because of lenses and that is also changing fast.

So yeah u r right Mr.CEO your company is going down while others r doing great.

Many of us buy Canon equipment for superb reliability and greT and consistent ergonomics. If you think Canon don’t do R&D I suggest you read some of the LensRental tear-downs; building reliability takes R&D as much as any new gizmo.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2019 at 09:05 UTC

I find the virulent anti-Canon tone of many of the comments here lowers the tone of what should be an interesting debate about what declining volumes means for the end user. In many ways I am reminded of what happened to the PC/Laptop market - rapid sustained growth when the user needed to upgrade every couple of years both to run the latest software and get real improvements (e.g. screen resolution) - but then the technology improvements flattened out with a 3-4 year old PC still able to run perfectly well and at the same time tablets & phones taking over the low end of the market.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2019 at 09:03 UTC as 138th comment | 1 reply
On article CMOS image sensor sales at all-time high (68 comments in total)

If I read these numbers correctly it means that the average cost per sensor is around 2.5 USD. This suggests the majority are very low end sensors. Also noticeable that the avergae price hasn’t changed in last few years (volume and value go up in line with each other) which suggests that assuming the technology / production costs are in line with most electronics that the capability must be growing: constant unit price but more bangs per buck.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2018 at 10:02 UTC as 3rd comment

The problem with this is that DPR is simply reprinting a news handout without adding any value. It is poor editorial judgement that fails to assess the offer for what it is - a rebadged existing product rather than a new development. The fact that the DPR audience have quickly identified the real background to this product when the editors failed to do so simply shows how lazy the journalism has become.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2018 at 12:45 UTC as 36th comment

This would destroy the great thing about Instagram - you don’t get a feed full of retweeted/shared stuff originating from people and organisations you don’t have a relationship with. And I like that it’s my followers who see stuff I post not a whole bunch of unrelated users.

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2017 at 23:43 UTC as 14th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Rod McD: Surely all of the arguments raised here comparing FF & MF can just as well be cited between any two formats? 1" upgrading to MFT, MFT to APSC, APSC to FF and FF to MF as you see them in print here. Despite all these points, the IQ certainly looks great in online images and the early reviews seem to be dripping with enthusiasm.

To think that the systems are competition rather complementary options would be a mistake. MF will never offer the lens range or lens speed of smaller formats and it's likely to remain costly. OTOH lovers of resolution - landscape, architecture and fashion enthusiasts might just find it just ticks their boxes. Personally, I can't afford it anyway, so I've no vested interest here......

The difference from the APSc vs. FF argument to the FF vs. MF argument in this article is that equally fast lenses are available on FF as APSc and hence FF clearly wins. If MF had equally fast lenses to FF then it would win in MF vs. FF but it doesn't have these lenses hence the near-tie between MF and FF.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 13:10 UTC
On article 2017 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $500-900 (545 comments in total)

I must be missing something, but both Canons are described as "In terms of JPEG image quality, the M3 is matched with the Rebel T6s and T6i, meaning JPEGs with pleasing color and well-balanced tone response. Low light performance is near the top of this class, with relatively low noise levels even at high ISOs." Given, that the majority of users of these cameras will be shooting jpegs it seems these cameras match user needs exceptionally well and yet are downrated for factors that aren't relevant to their target audience.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 20:45 UTC as 86th comment
On article 2017 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $500-900 (545 comments in total)
In reply to:

dlinney: Would be interesting to re-rank the cameras in terms of JPEG shooting only since most of the buyers in this price range will only shoot JPEG. They are also unlikely to be diving into menus to change noise reduction settings and the like.

I'm not saying that no buyers of these cameras will use Raw and optimise the camera settings for the best IQ. What I am saying, based upon teaching photography to several hundred students (is that real-world enough for you?) is that the vast majority of buyers (maybe not DPR readers) of this class of camera will shoot JPEG only.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2016 at 18:33 UTC
Total: 34, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »