Lives in Sweden Kristianstad, Sweden
Works as a Student
Joined on Feb 18, 2010


Total: 6, showing: 1 – 6

I really liked the X100 in firmware 1.30 but now with 2.0 it really is like getting a new camera. Or at least and updated model. Noticably faster AF, huge improvement to MF and focus peaking! Some companies release new camera bodies for that kind of improvement. Well done Fuji!

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2013 at 14:22 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply
On article Hands-on with Nikon V2 (455 comments in total)
In reply to:

nunatak: First barrier, to my mind, is it appears to be neither ergonomically friendly, nor pocketable. No indication of whether it's made of environmentally friendly materials, or will be another piece of toxic landfill in a few years. As a designer, it looks to me like a franken-cludge that was slapped together upon one evening's brainstorm, and after five bottles of saki.

The next barrier Nikon faces is the performance of their "improved" CX sensor. Is it just more lipstick on a pig, or can it deliver relatively rich, fat, data files that will replicate the wide range of tones, and crisp focused edges that the larger, more proven sensors do? To my mind that's a Herculean effort considering the price point Nikon has chosen to introduce this product.

IMO, these are just some of the earliest barriers Nikon has to cross to make this technology popular enough that they won't need to discount it by half (e.g. V1) before the next iteration comes to market.

I second this post! Who is the Nikon 1 series for? The image quality is good, no denying that. For a CX size sensor! There are many tiny cameras with larger and better sensors. Want a stylish small one? How a bout a PEN Lite or a Sony NEX5? Want a practical one? How about a Panasonic GH3 or X-E1. A stylish and practical one? Olympus OMD-EM5.

The lens selection isn't very good and the crop factor is huge on legacy lenses. But the AF is very good! Yes, it's class leading! I guess this camera is great for sports and wildlife photographers who want a small camera then.

Regarding beauty. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder so to each his own. Unless your a Leica camera I guess :-) I still think it's dog ugly!

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2012 at 17:58 UTC
On article Hands-on with Nikon V2 (455 comments in total)
In reply to:

victorenglund: Holy **** that's an ugly camera...

Well I'm certainly not buying it for the lenses or the shallow depth of field :-) All joking aside it actually looks pretty much like a super zoom bridge camera. The Pentax X-5 comes to mind.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2012 at 17:41 UTC
On article Hands-on with Nikon V2 (455 comments in total)

Holy **** that's an ugly camera...

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2012 at 10:45 UTC as 59th comment | 2 replies

I also feel this i a triumph of form over content. It's not that the images lack content, because they have plenty of content, it's because the photographer chose to shoot them with Hipstamatic! If a smartphone was his ONLY camera available he could have used an app like hipstamatic but I'm sure a pro like Lowy could have brought any camera he wanted. So why use hipstamatic? Did he do it to prove that you can take amazing pictures with any camera? In that case I feel he kind of disrespects the beauty of the subject by using it to prove a point. Did he do it to more easily get noticed and published? I sure hope not, that would be a dick move! Did he do it simply because he simply likes hipstamatic?

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2012 at 13:12 UTC as 11th comment | 2 replies
On article Is Instagram 'debasing photography'? (291 comments in total)

Analyse this article side by side with the one on Hipstamatic and Ben Lowy. He got published in the NY Times with his Hipstamatic images. I feel software like instagram and hipstamatic affect the world of professional photography in a very real way!

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2012 at 12:58 UTC as 26th comment
Total: 6, showing: 1 – 6