Docno

Lives in Singapore Singapore
Joined on Dec 31, 2005

Comments

Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

Perhaps they should have just left the van there to 'rot'. Might look photogenic after a few years, like those ships on the former Aral Sea. :-)

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 13:13 UTC as 53rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Magnar W: Many photographers don't know why art is something else than commersial photography or amateur photography. They 'know' that art is 'fake', they don't even have to argue, and they typicelly claim that they themselves or their children could have done much better! All this even without examining what modern art is, it's present status, or how photography is used as a technique and a medium by those highly trained artists who are critically and analytically looking into 'our' medium - those who work within the tradition called art and the field called contemprorary art.

Why not just check out what this is all about before commenting?

Diving into this field is exciting and challenging, and what I have found has surprised me over and over again, made me question how I look at and how I read photographs and other kinds of visual work, and learned me a lot more about pictures, also about my core interest, photography! ;-)

@b craw You don't think that developments in Art paralleled those in literary theory? Post-Modernism and deconstructionism? The mission there was to demolish notions of literary meaning that have existed since our ancestors told stories around campfires. Duchamps and others were quite explicit in their desire to challenge what Art is all about ... you buy a urinal, put it in a museum, and it becomes 'art' because of that. You dispute that this drive has been a major influence in the arts over the past 100 years?

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 12:54 UTC
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (889 comments in total)
In reply to:

Docno: Once you start using a good EVF for a while, you forget it's an EVF. I use a Sony A7Rii and particularly appreciate being able to avoid blown out highlights without the guesswork necessary with the OVF cameras I've used in years past. (Of course, it's great to also have the improved DR of modern cameras that further reduces this problem). Nice also to be able to adjust settings without having to move your eye away from the viewfinder and not to have to press a button to check DOF. I don't even remember what that supposedly 'immersive OVF experience' was like anymore ... and I wonder if I would even notice the difference compared to a good EVF.

@rrccad With the greater DR of today's cameras, that EVF representation provides more than enough accuracy to avoid blown highlights. I never have a problem...

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 12:47 UTC
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (889 comments in total)

Once you start using a good EVF for a while, you forget it's an EVF. I use a Sony A7Rii and particularly appreciate being able to avoid blown out highlights without the guesswork necessary with the OVF cameras I've used in years past. (Of course, it's great to also have the improved DR of modern cameras that further reduces this problem). Nice also to be able to adjust settings without having to move your eye away from the viewfinder and not to have to press a button to check DOF. I don't even remember what that supposedly 'immersive OVF experience' was like anymore ... and I wonder if I would even notice the difference compared to a good EVF.

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2017 at 09:02 UTC as 73rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Magnar W: Many photographers don't know why art is something else than commersial photography or amateur photography. They 'know' that art is 'fake', they don't even have to argue, and they typicelly claim that they themselves or their children could have done much better! All this even without examining what modern art is, it's present status, or how photography is used as a technique and a medium by those highly trained artists who are critically and analytically looking into 'our' medium - those who work within the tradition called art and the field called contemprorary art.

Why not just check out what this is all about before commenting?

Diving into this field is exciting and challenging, and what I have found has surprised me over and over again, made me question how I look at and how I read photographs and other kinds of visual work, and learned me a lot more about pictures, also about my core interest, photography! ;-)

You have bought into the over intellectualisation of art that perhaps started with Duchamp's Fountain (a urinal submitted to and displayed In a gallery as a piece of "art") and proceeded to works such as "Pi$$ Christ" (a crucifix in a jar of the artists urine ... I needed to use dollar signs to keep DPR happy). I have immense respect for Duchamp, but that phase of his oeuvre led to art becoming an activity driven by ideas over beauty, and often where beauty had no place at all because it seems "dated". I think that's what we have here. Everything is about the message ... aethestic appeal and technical proficiency are irrelevant. Not everyone buys into this notion of art, and they have a valid point to make.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2017 at 02:47 UTC
In reply to:

Scottelly: Why does it say "Warning: Graphic Image" in red on the black rectangle, where the image should be? I mean this is in no way a graphic image. There is no blood, no nudity, no violence - just a guy standing with a gun and another guy laying on the ground.

Is this just sensationalism?

I see his point. 'Graphic' means clear, explicit and detailed in this context... and suggests you will see blood, gore, or violence, etc. I almost didn't click on the article for that reason. Even though the image is disturbing from an intellectual standpoint (you know the man lying there has just been killed), I wouldn't say this image is graphic. We see much more on the news most nights. Then again, we live in an easily-triggered world now...

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 16:42 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10/LX15 Review (402 comments in total)
In reply to:

goveil1: I have to admit I don't get the Panasonic or Canon approaches. If you are going to spend between $600-900 it says you are serious about getting past the iPhone and are willing to invest in taking pictures with more than the average point and shoot. But without a viewfinder, you are stuck at arms length and stuck when the sun is out. I love Canons for the better menu and the familiarity but I love the Sony Rx100 I have for the darn viewfinder. How can be serious (and expensive) without a viewfinder?

I had the RX100i and now have the RX100v. I never had a problem with the original RX100 despite its lack of viewfinder. In fact, I prefer that model over the v because it more comfortably fit in my pocket. [In fact, it feels a little awkward / ridiculous holding such a small camera up to one's face to use the viewfinder]

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 05:34 UTC
In reply to:

naturetech: Sexy lens!!

Just goes to show how people's tastes can vary so widely... I think it's brutally ugly with all those 'faux segments'

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 16:10 UTC
In reply to:

PVCdroid: This is the tech that will be in bigger sensors in the future. Predictive fast AF and the laser for accuracy in literally no light at all will be interesting.

Sony had laser AF in its F828 camera way back in 2003.... Worked very well as I recall

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2016 at 00:59 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: the Samsung NV10 (75 comments in total)

Wow - you make me feel old. Got my first digital in early 2000 - the Oly C2020z. Still have the files and they're not too bad... all glorious 2MP of them. By 2006 I'd graduated to DSLRs and was on to the Sony A700, having moved up from the A100 (which I converted to IR use). And I can barely remember high school and my first car, which was a red Duster... I'm sure many haven't even heard of that. :-)

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2016 at 02:44 UTC as 27th comment | 1 reply
On article A photographer's intro to the world of video (98 comments in total)

Very nicely done. I've tried video a few times--I think I understand the basics--but I have never been satisfied with the outcome. It may be that my expectations are too high, but the learning curve seems pretty intimidating as well. Your description of your own experience has inspired me to not give up. Thanks.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 17:30 UTC as 11th comment
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2660 comments in total)

"It becomes the only conventional DSLR to offer a full frame sensor with image stabilization."

Could be a little clearer... you really mean the only FF DSLR still in production. The Sony a900 had in-body stabilisation, and is certainly still available used. In fact, I just sold mine last month. :-) The quoted statement makes it sound like this camera was pioneering in this aspect...

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 11:32 UTC as 253rd comment | 4 replies
On article Lenovo Phab2 Pro is the first Project Tango phone (29 comments in total)
In reply to:

goodgeorge: Nine phone-related articles on Dpreview homepage just now. Ok.

Yep, and any McDonald's outlet probably sells more meals per day than any of the world's finest restaurants (with apologies to those who consider McDonald's to be among the finest restaurants).

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2016 at 14:16 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1123 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: I think the review should be drawing a negative conclusion about Nikon's failure to implement any kind of IBIS.

The technology is mature and has been present in DSLRs from other manufacturers in some cases for some more than ten years. Nikon don't even have the excuse that that they're using a FF sensor and the body is very large.

Norseman, how many of your primes are stabilised?
Also, stabilisation is not just useful for telephotos but also in low light situations as a way to keep your ISO down...

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 10:23 UTC
In reply to:

a-flying-wuss: Are the current a7 bodies weather-sealed? I remember reading about the original a7 how it was first marketed as "weather-sealed" (before it was available in stores), but then, after it hit the stores and people started using it in bad weather, there were multiple reports of a7 units failing miserably even under moderate rain.. a few dead bodies and then Sony stopped advertising it as weather-sealed, even removed it from some of their materials if I recall correctly.

I haven't payed any attention to the a7 series after that and so I'm curious now, seeing how this 70-300 is marketed as "dust and moisture resistant": are those newer, a7 II bodies really weather-sealed (similar to Olympus E-3/E5 or Pentax K-3/K-5)? Or is it still the same kind of "gimmick" as it was with the 1st generation and you can't actually use them in rainy/dusty/snowy environments without worrying about ruining them?

You can apparently wash your A7 under running water and it still works :-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7hvJTGW4BA
Must be some decent sealing in there...

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 22:47 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (615 comments in total)
In reply to:

sebasantos: Hello, I have a Canon 5D Mark III and I have focus peaking, zebras and lots of features that sony users say that canon are missing. And also my 5DIII has 14 stops dynamic range. It's free and easy to have those features. I don't use it for video, but there are also a lot of features for video like RAW video, etc, etc, etc.
I am not going to buy this camera, I don't need it but i am very interested in the sensor performance, because I hope that 5DIV is in its way and use the new sensor technology. If the 5DS sensor without the new technology close the gap between sensors, I think that the new sensor could be a very good surprise. The patent for this new sensor was introduced in 2014, so they were working in it for a long period of years.

I thought that you only get those features via Magic Lantern (i.e., Canon IS missing them).

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 15:28 UTC
On article Studio tests and samples: Leica SL (beta) (754 comments in total)
In reply to:

t.c. marino: again,no disrespect to leica and their fan base..but after seeing these samples..I'M NOT IMPRESSED,my recently purchased nikon d750 absolutely destroys this very expensive leica and way overpriced kit zoom lens..damm.for those on a budget the very affordable nikon d610 and short nikkor primes is a killer combo that will wipe the floor with this leica in the iq department..and dont forget canon's equally affordable and outstanding 6d...dont even try to compare this leica to the canon 5ds/r nikon 810 or the new 42mp sony.

@HowaboutRAW - Sony may not advertise its a7 line as being weather-sealed, but here's a compelling video of one being 'washed' under a tap and still none the worse for wear. If it can survive a stream of water, it certainly can survive a little 'weather'. Care to try that with your pricey Leica?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7hvJTGW4BA

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2015 at 13:37 UTC
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1495 comments in total)
In reply to:

Robert Kempen: Hey, not bad - so far 1133 comments on a camera that the haters call "ugly", "huge" and of course "expensive" etc etc

When will the penny drop, I wonder

Leica is not interested in selling this against the silly little Sony A7 with the kiddy controls that needs Zeiss glass to make it work (read: big, heavy and expensive)

This is aimed at the Canon 1DX and the Nikon DS4 with 18MP and 16MP which are also far bigger than the Leica, equally expensive, slower and just as heavy and not nearly as well built

Leica will bring out glass for this that will make the haters weep and trust me, many freelance pros will move and these cameras will start showing up at sports events and in game reserves and of course in the studios

Robert, I'm comparing FE 24-70 ff to my SAL24-70z. The latter is a beast by comparison, even before it goes on to the A900. That combo was back breaking when hiking for a day in tropical heat. The FE Zeiss on the A7rii is a breeze....

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2015 at 14:44 UTC
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1495 comments in total)
In reply to:

Robert Kempen: Hey, not bad - so far 1133 comments on a camera that the haters call "ugly", "huge" and of course "expensive" etc etc

When will the penny drop, I wonder

Leica is not interested in selling this against the silly little Sony A7 with the kiddy controls that needs Zeiss glass to make it work (read: big, heavy and expensive)

This is aimed at the Canon 1DX and the Nikon DS4 with 18MP and 16MP which are also far bigger than the Leica, equally expensive, slower and just as heavy and not nearly as well built

Leica will bring out glass for this that will make the haters weep and trust me, many freelance pros will move and these cameras will start showing up at sports events and in game reserves and of course in the studios

Hmmm... strange. The Zeiss glass I have for my A7Rii (35mm, 55mm, and 24-70mm) is neither big nor heavy. The 35/2.8 close to pancake size. Expensive, I won't argue, but at least be accurate in your motivated criticism.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2015 at 06:25 UTC
On article Sony brings uncompressed Raw to a7S II, a7R II and... (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

robbinsbox: good one dpreview, good one sony. Next pls push for the firmware to be given to older A7 A7s A7r cameras.
Then onto the compressed lossless issue.

This issue was already being looked at by Sony 3+ months back, before DPreview raised it here. They understood (and were being told) that the push was for 'pure', uncompressed RAW. See this interview: http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2015/06/16/sony-qa-the-must-have-sensor-tech-of-the-future

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2015 at 11:39 UTC
Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »