Pat Cullinan Jr

Pat Cullinan Jr

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Sep 21, 2010

Comments

Total: 1001, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

I don't feel so bad now about being an animal.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 10:23 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (202 comments in total)

T-stop figures are very desirable. They should be a feature of any lens report. Hat tip to DPR.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 02:06 UTC as 47th comment | 1 reply
On article Woof! Sony a6500 sample images are here (364 comments in total)

Well executed shots.

Wonderful dog pix. I can't have too many dog shots.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2016 at 11:20 UTC as 29th comment
In reply to:

Alen Djuderija: not sure if i want to cry or laugh xD

Cry, laugh, screech, snort, foam, rage, sob, swear. Then have a little lie-down.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 10:11 UTC
In reply to:

Pat Cullinan Jr: Steal this lens.

Paint your face orange.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 10:09 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: I get a bit weary of these "largest ever" or "fastest ever" or "most megapixels ever" claims. It's pretty obvious that each year or two as technology advances that the new gear will be "the best ever". Claiming to have the "best ever" every single year, is a little much.

Something a bit less dramatic would be a lot better. Maybe, "Seagate increases portable drive capacity to 5TB".

Nu, you should only complain in good health.

:)

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 06:42 UTC
In reply to:

GarysInSoCal: Yep... definitely what the web needs... 'RAISR super-resolution 2x'... an amazing utility that makes crappy cell phone photographers with zero editing skills look great... :D

It makes them subcrappy.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 02:33 UTC

Is that John Boehner?

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 02:32 UTC as 13th comment

Is that an aardvark?

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 02:31 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

mxx: Wow, the price of red paint has risen absurdly.

And this is a bit garish. Could they not have done a more subtle, stylish design, still using red?

>Could they not have done a more subtle, stylish design, still using red?

No.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 02:24 UTC
In reply to:

Alen Djuderija: not sure if i want to cry or laugh xD

Why not screech at the top of your lungs? That's what I do.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 02:23 UTC

Steal this lens.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 02:21 UTC as 67th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

gonzalu: It's only $8,000? I'll take two...

Don't wrap it. I'll eat it here.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 02:20 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: I get a bit weary of these "largest ever" or "fastest ever" or "most megapixels ever" claims. It's pretty obvious that each year or two as technology advances that the new gear will be "the best ever". Claiming to have the "best ever" every single year, is a little much.

Something a bit less dramatic would be a lot better. Maybe, "Seagate increases portable drive capacity to 5TB".

"Seagate smashes planet-wide records with new terrific-wonderful portable drive boasting staggeringly monstrous capacity so prodigious we dare not say how monstrous for fear we'd be called liars."

This drive comes at a good time for me, since I'll be transferring my videotape holdings (Uncle Murray's bbq, Rascal busts the coffee table, etc.), Before now, I've been on my bare face for ideas concerning what to do with the rest of my life.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 02:17 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10/LX15 Review (384 comments in total)
In reply to:

ddtwenty: I'm in doubt about the way of charging the batteries. Because no external charging provided, hence have to charge by USB port all the times.Therefor the flip rubber cap of the USB port will be broken so soon.

At least Panasonic should provide external battery charger.

No charger, no shoe of any kind, no viewfinder, no sale, no s--t.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 11:57 UTC
In reply to:

Marco Nero: The images aren't disappointing although the lens isn't f/1.2 ... and that's where the real magic of the 85mmL lens from Canon lies. I don't think I'll be buying this lens for two reasons: One is because, other than speed, I don't see it exceeding the capabilities of the Canon f/1.2L version. And the other reason is that this site has suddenly taken sides in the US election aftermath...

It disappoints me greatly that political statements are now being (obviously) endorsed by DPreview. Those Lens sample-photograph closeups of Anti-American/Anti-Trump signs (as well as the protesters themselves) are two very different things. One shows an affiliation between the photographer and the protest itself. The closeup of the hate-inspired Trump signs is disgusting to see on a review site. We don't need a socialist agenda here on a camera/tech review site. Disgusting. I'm sorry but I won't buy products when reviewers here use them to endorse political agendas.

Use discretion.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 10:31 UTC
In reply to:

Philly: The image quality of the lens looks nice. Personally, I don't think the extreme shallow depth of field is that pleasing on portraits--with blurred noses and ears. I much preferred the one or two portraits by Wenmei, who had the discipline to stop down to 2.4 or so, I believe. At least, keep the nose in focus, along with the eyes, IMO.

The political protest photos do not seem to be a good vehicle to showcase this type of lens--unless the event really did have low energy, as the photos seem to imply. I would much prefer a wider angle of view for actual, spontaneous events, to capture the emotion of the moment. Something like this: https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/161109-trump-camp-election-12.jpg

Or if a sign is to be showcased, capturing it at the right moment would make the photo appear not as trite as the photos in the gallery. Something like this, perhaps: https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/161109-trump-camp-election-01.jpg

>I don't think the extreme shallow depth of field is that pleasing on portraits--with blurred noses and ears

I have to agree, Philly. Extreme shallow depth of field was a peculiarity of portraits taken 80 or 100 years ago. I bought a Nikkor 85/1.4 thirty years ago and used it for existing-light situations, which very rarely meant straight portraits. Today, I would use it for indoor sports, using very short exposure times.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2016 at 23:03 UTC
In reply to:

Marco Nero: The images aren't disappointing although the lens isn't f/1.2 ... and that's where the real magic of the 85mmL lens from Canon lies. I don't think I'll be buying this lens for two reasons: One is because, other than speed, I don't see it exceeding the capabilities of the Canon f/1.2L version. And the other reason is that this site has suddenly taken sides in the US election aftermath...

It disappoints me greatly that political statements are now being (obviously) endorsed by DPreview. Those Lens sample-photograph closeups of Anti-American/Anti-Trump signs (as well as the protesters themselves) are two very different things. One shows an affiliation between the photographer and the protest itself. The closeup of the hate-inspired Trump signs is disgusting to see on a review site. We don't need a socialist agenda here on a camera/tech review site. Disgusting. I'm sorry but I won't buy products when reviewers here use them to endorse political agendas.

>this site has suddenly taken sides in the US election aftermath...

Given that the nation has just emerged from the most bitterly contentious election in generations, it's plain that there's been a failure of discretion here. The DPR website is disputatious enough without provoking political passions.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2016 at 22:52 UTC
On article Tiny marvel: Panasonic LX10 sample photos (77 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: The "marvel" here being having blues rendered as cyans, high noise of the ugliest type at ISO1250 upwards and "flat" looking pictures for $700?

You guys are becoming so easy to impress...

Image quality of images #25 and #49 is quite poor, but #4 and #45 are good.

So what shall we do? Go for the Sony RX100 series?

I must say, I'm not impressed.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2016 at 11:53 UTC
On article Tiny marvel: Panasonic LX10 sample photos (77 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pat Cullinan Jr: I love that dog.

I'm referring to frame #24.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2016 at 11:40 UTC
Total: 1001, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »