aramgrg

Joined on Nov 19, 2013

Comments

Total: 316, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon granted third most US patents in 2016 (142 comments in total)

Maybe, but I sold all my Canon gear in 2016 and went to Nikon, no to Fuji. Number of patents doesn't matter, I need one patent for good mirrorless system.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 21:42 UTC as 51st comment

And Galaxy S8 is rumored to have 8gb ram.

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 13:40 UTC as 17th comment

DXO's mobile ranking is near useless. Most phones are around 85s anyways. Controls and AF are far more important in mobile.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2016 at 11:51 UTC as 4th comment
On photo Leafless Tree. in the Supermoon! challenge (24 comments in total)

Very nice capture, congrats!

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 00:43 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply

$300? Hah! Grip my...

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 20:07 UTC as 7th comment
On article Kodak Ektra 'photography' smartphone goes on sale (90 comments in total)

I'm in if Kodak announces it is their last ever product.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 06:29 UTC as 21st comment

No mirorrless in the shaw. Yet...

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2016 at 14:38 UTC as 34th comment | 3 replies
On article Fujifilm launches X-A10 as entry-level X-series model (166 comments in total)

Sony must be giving away those 16mp sensors at this point.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 22:01 UTC as 46th comment | 4 replies
On article Venus Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D sample gallery (125 comments in total)

Samyang redifined what a cheap lens is. Laowa shows how far it can go being reasonably priced. Go ahead, Canikon introduce one with $3000 price tag.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 18:39 UTC as 17th comment | 2 replies
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1301 comments in total)
In reply to:

dharma108: Yes, the price is up there--but here is a perspective to consider. I paid $1799 US dollars for an Oly E5 (body only) six years ago and the E-M1 Mark II far surpasses it on all levels. A $200 price increase from six years ago for a far superior camera.
At the time I bought the E5 there was nary a complaint about it being too expensive. I am still shooting the E5 and it's still creating great images, but E-M1 Mark II will soon be in my camera bag.

E-M1 is a replacement of E-5 because can use PDAF.... and can use humongous lenses with an adapter that makes it pointless. M43 that is priced higher than any APS-C and is bigger. Go ahead...

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 18:33 UTC
On photo Me & My Pipe in the Selfie with your favorite thing(s). challenge (6 comments in total)

Very nice capture indeed. Harmonic, unique and simple.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 04:50 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1301 comments in total)
In reply to:

lzeppelin: Overestimated score. It's a micro 4/3 with its limitations. A sony a6000 does better on everything at 1/4 $. Has DPReviw become a sympathizer for Olympus? Or DPreview did not dare to tell the truth in order to avoid negative feelings to focus on this new camera?

@lzeppelin
What you wrote is bigger sensor in different languages

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 20:43 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1301 comments in total)
In reply to:

aramgrg: Just a quick comparison. When E-m5 was announced in 2011, it was $1300 with 12-50 and it was a huge step up in the mirrorless market. Now E-m1 is not an update in IQ part(vs 2011!), but little improvements over e-m5, that costs twice more. Most of us cares more about image quality, rather than 60fps of crap.

@String
D810 is not better than D4, D4 has phenomenal low light abilities, while D810-good light detail.
Fuji X-T2 is in every way better of a camera. The only place it looses is IBIS, but hey, it has one stop(at least) better ISO noise.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 02:02 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1301 comments in total)
In reply to:

dharma108: Yes, the price is up there--but here is a perspective to consider. I paid $1799 US dollars for an Oly E5 (body only) six years ago and the E-M1 Mark II far surpasses it on all levels. A $200 price increase from six years ago for a far superior camera.
At the time I bought the E5 there was nary a complaint about it being too expensive. I am still shooting the E5 and it's still creating great images, but E-M1 Mark II will soon be in my camera bag.

And E-5 has nothing to do with E-M1. E-M5 is the thing to compare.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 01:56 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1301 comments in total)
In reply to:

aramgrg: Just a quick comparison. When E-m5 was announced in 2011, it was $1300 with 12-50 and it was a huge step up in the mirrorless market. Now E-m1 is not an update in IQ part(vs 2011!), but little improvements over e-m5, that costs twice more. Most of us cares more about image quality, rather than 60fps of crap.

It's funny, but I had the opposite feeling.
Any mirrorless today has the ergonomics, lens selection and build quality that is enough. Photography skills could never be limited by any of today's ILC ergonomics, lens selection and build quality ;)
There is nothing wrong about this camera, it is just highly overpriced. While both can be valid statements, the idea is that you can get a fuji x-t2 with 18-55 lens for under $2000.
If "nothing is limiting", then why not one get RX 10 type of bridge camera?

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 18:10 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1301 comments in total)

Just a quick comparison. When E-m5 was announced in 2011, it was $1300 with 12-50 and it was a huge step up in the mirrorless market. Now E-m1 is not an update in IQ part(vs 2011!), but little improvements over e-m5, that costs twice more. Most of us cares more about image quality, rather than 60fps of crap.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 17:35 UTC as 95th comment | 9 replies
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1301 comments in total)
In reply to:

dharma108: Yes, the price is up there--but here is a perspective to consider. I paid $1799 US dollars for an Oly E5 (body only) six years ago and the E-M1 Mark II far surpasses it on all levels. A $200 price increase from six years ago for a far superior camera.
At the time I bought the E5 there was nary a complaint about it being too expensive. I am still shooting the E5 and it's still creating great images, but E-M1 Mark II will soon be in my camera bag.

"I paid $1799 US dollars"
Really? Where did you buy it?E-m5 was launched with $1300 with 12-50 and it was revolutionary in 2011. Maybe you paid $400 for removing the front thing called lens?
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3156989980/olympus-om-d-e-m5-announced

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 17:30 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1301 comments in total)
In reply to:

lzeppelin: Overestimated score. It's a micro 4/3 with its limitations. A sony a6000 does better on everything at 1/4 $. Has DPReviw become a sympathizer for Olympus? Or DPreview did not dare to tell the truth in order to avoid negative feelings to focus on this new camera?

I agree on limitations of sensor size, however the only thing a6000 does "better" is that it has a bigger sensor. I will still not pay more than $1000 for any m4/3, but because IQ is my top priority.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 17:16 UTC

The difference between art and math is that art doesn't obey rules, it's very subjective and that is the beauty of it. Malevich's most famous black square is very valuable because of the same subjective message. I am personally tired of razor thin dept of field photos. I like the feelings I get from this picture.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2016 at 01:48 UTC as 75th comment

The paint cost of more than $1000 indicates precisely how good of a value this lens is!

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 19:02 UTC as 115th comment
Total: 316, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »