starbase218

Lives in Netherlands Netherlands
Joined on Sep 20, 2010

Comments

Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article iPhone X: What you need to know (406 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sonyshine: Nice! But a 5SE will still do me. A great little iPhone at a budget price. This would mark me out as a fool flaunting their obscene wealth if I waved this around in public.

Shinan I used a 4S for 4 years. Still a nice looking phone I think. But at one point I needed more memory so that's when I bought the 6S (used).

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 19:36 UTC
On article iPhone X: What you need to know (406 comments in total)
In reply to:

Priaptor: I think this is Apple's first real upgrade in years. Yeah it's a lot of money BUT on a relative basis few things in one's life are used than their smartphone. If you have bought into the Apple Ecosystem, the X is a big upgrade, IMHO.

Photo capabilities look pretty good.

I haven't been an Apple fanboy for years, but these intros yesterday are very interesting and for the better from all aspects. Now Apple can control all aspects of our life, just what they criticized Big Blue for back in 84, but it's for the better, just ask Tim and Co. They have it rationalized.

It is true that the phone is probably the most used electronic device by far. In this day and age we almost seem to be programmed - no, we are programmed - to be interacting with it all the time. I'm currently traveling with my phone, laptop and DSLR camera. The laptop and camera are nice-to-haves, the phone does everything from booking flights and hostels to taking notes, playing back music, allowing me to read books and plan my days. Next time I might just take the phone (and probably my RX100), at least if I don't feel the need to go all-out in terms of photography. The weight it saves is invaluable.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 14:27 UTC
On article iPhone X: What you need to know (406 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sonyshine: Nice! But a 5SE will still do me. A great little iPhone at a budget price. This would mark me out as a fool flaunting their obscene wealth if I waved this around in public.

5S or SE?

Anyway, for me it's a 6S, even though it now has a non-original screen, there's just no way I'm going to spend big bucks on a new phone right now. 8, 8 Plus or X.

I have actually been thinking about going after another used iCloud locked iPhone 6S for just the screen. Had to disable 3D touch with the one I have now because it was all over the place.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 14:16 UTC

I'll keep using my 6S for at least another year, probably two. With an updated iOS, of course.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 02:22 UTC as 110th comment
In reply to:

starbase218: I'm in Vancouver now and flying to NYC the day after tomorrow. I took my camera too. Wish me luck!

And people can't carry guns in NYC?

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 03:36 UTC

I'm in Vancouver now and flying to NYC the day after tomorrow. I took my camera too. Wish me luck!

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2017 at 23:42 UTC as 118th comment | 3 replies
On article Should you upgrade to a Nikon D850? (663 comments in total)
In reply to:

starbase218: The most important consideration wrt upgrading or not is that in 99% of the cases, your photos will not get any better with a new camera. Taking this into account, if you're still willing to spend the money, then by all means do so.

I found out for myself that a) no camera is perfect, b) I often can't justify the cost as I make no money from photography at all, and c) I just need a camera that gets me there for 90% (not 80% like Pentax - and before Pentaxians reply to me, this is my own 80 and 90%).

So for now I'll stick with my D7100. :)

@ Sammy I'm not saying that. But comparing one camera to another is not really useful, if you forget the first thing: what you want to do, and what is currently holding you back from doing that. It might be that a D70 is all someone needs, in which case upgrading to a D850 would only mean spending a lot of money.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2017 at 22:21 UTC
On article Should you upgrade to a Nikon D850? (663 comments in total)

The most important consideration wrt upgrading or not is that in 99% of the cases, your photos will not get any better with a new camera. Taking this into account, if you're still willing to spend the money, then by all means do so.

I found out for myself that a) no camera is perfect, b) I often can't justify the cost as I make no money from photography at all, and c) I just need a camera that gets me there for 90% (not 80% like Pentax - and before Pentaxians reply to me, this is my own 80 and 90%).

So for now I'll stick with my D7100. :)

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2017 at 09:17 UTC as 63rd comment | 7 replies
On article Nikon D850: What we hoped for – and what we got (403 comments in total)
In reply to:

Julian Ray: "in general, more pixels = better images".
Just like more salt = better cake!
And here all along I thought it was the person behind the camera that... never mind.
Please pass the salt.

That goes for any technical spec, so you might as well be arguing for DPR to stop reviewing gear altogether.

Or for the hype around new gear to go away, which would not be a bad thing I think.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2017 at 01:15 UTC
On article Don't buy another lens, buy a flash instead (347 comments in total)

It's interesting. People tend to get all excited about lenses. But a lens is a tool, same as a flash, a filter, a tripod, a reflector, etc. Once you start photographing more you realize that I think.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2017 at 14:51 UTC as 99th comment
In reply to:

Under The Sun: Seriously why care what your students think? Just use what you want to use.

If the purpose is indeed to teach his students, it matters very much what they think. In that respect, an SL1 may be a better tool than a 5D III.

Link | Posted on Jul 4, 2017 at 03:29 UTC
On article Caltech research team develops lensless camera (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

Indohydra: I have no idea how this could work. Please keep an eye on this story.

Visible light, like radiowaves, is basically an electromagnetic wave with a certain frequency. If the light hits the sensor under an angle, the phase of the light will be slightly different at either side of the sensor. The wider the angle, the greater the phase difference. I think that this is what they use, somehow.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 16:12 UTC
In reply to:

TheEmrys: This looks to be quite compelling. Could very well knock off the Sony RX100 in terms of high end compacts.

Put an RX100 in a cheap Chinese underwater housing and it will be able to go deeper underwater and give you better image quality. In fact, I fid this to replace my TG-2.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 01:50 UTC
In reply to:

Fanous: Something is wrong. The cell phones going to be bigger and bigger and our cameras smaller and smaller... Why?
I no need smaller camera. I have big hands. Generations of photographers had SLR cameras and no one had problem with size. Why now we have to have small cameras?
I believe that Canon will introduce Mirrorless camera with classic EF mount and with the same arrangement of the buttons as DSLRs have. Size can be the same; just can be a little bit thinner.
I think that Canon will introduce a something between DSLR and Mirrorless for professionals first. My idea is they first introduce a camera with big body, mirror and ability to switch into faster mode with mirror lock up and live view. It is necessary to learnt professionals that there is way without the mirror...
When professionals try the way without a mirror, then will be possible to release a new 100% mirrorless body. Sony A9 looks great, but professionals are quite conservative I think.

Cellphones can do much more today than 10 years ago. All that cameras do is take photos.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 16:13 UTC
In reply to:

Dante Birchen: Just make a limited zoom or fixed focal length with 1 inch sensor tough camera. it could double as a street cam.

If you just want it for scuba diving, I have an RX100 with a Meikon underwater housing that's not too expensive and can go 40 meters. Just add some weight (e.g. to the tripod socket) to make it neutrally buoyant.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2017 at 20:28 UTC
In reply to:

starbase218: 15 meters? That's no improvement, my TG-2 did that.

They state that it is "now 15 meters", like that's more than before, which it isn't.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2017 at 20:24 UTC

15 meters? That's no improvement, my TG-2 did that.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2017 at 12:01 UTC as 61st comment | 2 replies

I have a Pentax Q system and liked the idea, but found it a bit limiting because of the small sensor size and lack of viewfinder. I got a Sony RX100 too and it's much nicer in terms of image quality with its 1" sensor. But I could definitely see myself getting a 1" MILC to combine the best of both worlds (if an underwater housing would be available, as is the case for the RX100).

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 16:56 UTC as 47th comment
On article Hands-on with Ricoh's compact Pentax KP (634 comments in total)
In reply to:

JOrmsby: Nikon really needs to step up its game when they release the D7300 and add IBIS like Pentax has. Nice feature set on this one, kudos Pentax!

In my opinion (and I have experience with both), VR is better than SR (IBIS), but SR is better than nothing at all. I can get a sharp shot with my Nikon 16-85 at 85mm and 1/20. With Pentax, I've gotten used to the idea that if I really want a sharp shot, I still have to apply the inverse-focal-length rule (times 1.5 because of the crop factor) most of the time, with SR occasionally helping me out.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2017 at 18:38 UTC
On article Hands-on with Ricoh's compact Pentax KP (634 comments in total)
In reply to:

tonybelding: Personally, I don't understand any fixation on "the experience of using an optical viewfinder". I love shooting with an EVF, and I don't get why Pentax are so deathly allergic to them.

Also, is it just me or does the control scheme on this camera look like utter chaos? I mean. . . multiple dials with cryptical markings, plus multiple dials with no markings. This is the first camera I've seen in a while that I think I could pick up and literally not know how to begin operating it.

When the K-01 came out, I didn't really care much for it. I found it an odd looking brick with a chimney on top. But actually, nowadays you can buy it used for not too much money. It's small and light too, and with some Limiteds I'm sure it can produce some great pictures. It's grown on me over time as a fun but high quality camera.

Still, I wouldn't consider it for my main camera. But I'm actually moving from Pentax to Nikon for that, and it's going to be tough to let go of the Limiteds. So maybe I'll get a K-01 for my Limiteds and sell my Q system (don't really use it anyway).

But enough about the K-01.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2017 at 11:39 UTC
Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »