ET2

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Aug 25, 2010

Comments

Total: 1231, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

fyngyrz: The lesson Samsung *should* have learned from the previous generation:

Non-replaceable battery: Battery problem? Phone is garbage. Write off entire cost. Purchaser has nothing. Seller loses everything.

Replaceable battery: Battery problem? Send new battery. Preserve most of purchaser's value and seller's income.

fyngyrz, that's irrelevant. Samsung did try to replace the battery by asking the customers to send the phone back. It didn't work. The replacement phone with the new battery still exploded. It took them a long time to figure out exact issues, and by that time the phone was outdated and had negative impression among the buyers. A replaceable battery would not have solved that problem (as it took a year to figure out exact issue). They would have still lost same money on that phone. The US govt banned the phone from airplanes.

Your whole argument is invalid. Phones with nonreplaceable batteries have major advantages (for example making it easier to waterproof) and other things the previous poster mentioned.

Most important these phones get replaced in two years, long before most people need a new battery.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2017 at 14:32 UTC
On article Pentax KP Review (659 comments in total)
In reply to:

Leonp: It seems like the times of leaps forward in image quality are over. Differences between the top optical-viewfinder-aps-c-dslrs are quite small now.

it's been over for a long time. At least 7 years. There isn't a major leap in image quality since the 16 MP Sony APSC sensor was released in 2010.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2017 at 18:17 UTC
On article Fujifilm GFX 50S Review: Modern MF (904 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edgar_in_Indy: It's nice to see how excited you are for the GFX 50s, but it only makes your lack of curiosity about the Pentax 645D/645Z cameras even harder to understand.

It's been 7 years since Pentax broke the mold by announcing an affordable medium format digital camera in the 645D, and three years since the 645Z was announced, and we still have yet to see a review from DPR.

DPR never reviewed any MF DSLR. Why on earth would they review the Pentax? Pentax fanboys always demand special treatment. Weird. However DPR should review the Fuji as it's mirrorless and the interest in it very high (unlike MF DSLRs).

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2017 at 13:38 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF bokeh demystified (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dragonrider: For Canon, Nikon, and Pentax users, the Venus Optics Laowa 105 f/2 STF should do the same trick and I think they announced the lens before Sony did theirs. The only downside is manual focus, but for a little over 1/3rd the price, that should be workable given that this type of shot will often be set up. The Laowa is also a full stop faster at f/2 and a t stop of 3.2. The lens also comes in Sony A-mount for A99 II users since Sony left them out (as usual) :-).

135 STF is very sharp too

http://www.photozone.de/sonyalphaff/737-sony135f28ff1

The point of the post was that you were claiming Laowa announced STF before Sony did, forgetting that Sony/Minolta had similar lens since 1999

If Laowa is using the terminology "STF" that wording itself is copied from Sony/Minolta.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 18:04 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF bokeh demystified (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dragonrider: For Canon, Nikon, and Pentax users, the Venus Optics Laowa 105 f/2 STF should do the same trick and I think they announced the lens before Sony did theirs. The only downside is manual focus, but for a little over 1/3rd the price, that should be workable given that this type of shot will often be set up. The Laowa is also a full stop faster at f/2 and a t stop of 3.2. The lens also comes in Sony A-mount for A99 II users since Sony left them out (as usual) :-).

A mount had Sony/Minolta 135mm STF for more than a decade now

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 07:50 UTC
In reply to:

ZurichPhoto: Nikon sports shooter here who is keeping my eye on the brand's progress overall. Love what I see. Would really like to take one out for a test drive but until their lens range includes some 2.8 teles, (300MM +) I'll keep doing what I'm doing.... and waiting.

Fun 4 all, most people rent such lenses for special shoots. They don't buy them. Lenses are available.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 16:44 UTC
In reply to:

ZurichPhoto: Nikon sports shooter here who is keeping my eye on the brand's progress overall. Love what I see. Would really like to take one out for a test drive but until their lens range includes some 2.8 teles, (300MM +) I'll keep doing what I'm doing.... and waiting.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/892394-REG/Sony_sal300f28g2_300mm_F_2_8_G_Super.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/845555-REG/Sony_SAL500F40G_500mm_f_4_0_G_Lens.html

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 16:07 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1578 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Can't look at the samples because someone didn't add the A99 II to the database but this:
At base ISO, the differences between the two are virtually imperceptible, save for resolution dropping due to the lens used. That means between the a7R II and a99 II (center) resolution and detail remain largely the same, as does moirè.

There are no high enough resolution lenses for A mount. That is a big problem when using a 42mp or in future even higher count sensor.

AngularJS, he also doesn't know that K mount lenses are rated among the worst on dxomark when they were tested on APSC bodies. K mount has no FF lenses that can match Sony/Zeiss lenses rated 4 to 5 stars on photozone. Did you know Tamron stopped making K mount lenses years ago? Sigma support is shaky too. Some of these third party lenses that are available on A mount aren't available to K mount.

If he was Canon fanboy, he would have a point but if you check this guy's history, you will see he is a rabid Pentax fanboy. That's what motivates all his arguments/posts. I loved pointing out hypocrisy in this thread.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2017 at 08:46 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1578 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Can't look at the samples because someone didn't add the A99 II to the database but this:
At base ISO, the differences between the two are virtually imperceptible, save for resolution dropping due to the lens used. That means between the a7R II and a99 II (center) resolution and detail remain largely the same, as does moirè.

There are no high enough resolution lenses for A mount. That is a big problem when using a 42mp or in future even higher count sensor.

You listed a bunch of Pentax lenses that were tested on APSC and are rated among the lowest in their class on dxomark. Pentax lenses are usually rated worst on dxomark. K mount doesn't have same class of lenses as A mount. Photozone did test many of the A mount lenses and rated them among the best in their class. There is no reason to believe the results would be different on A99 II. Until proven otherwise, these photozone lens reviews stands as among the best lenses in their class.

Even worse, K mount has far worse third party lens support than the A mount.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2017 at 21:14 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1578 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Can't look at the samples because someone didn't add the A99 II to the database but this:
At base ISO, the differences between the two are virtually imperceptible, save for resolution dropping due to the lens used. That means between the a7R II and a99 II (center) resolution and detail remain largely the same, as does moirè.

There are no high enough resolution lenses for A mount. That is a big problem when using a 42mp or in future even higher count sensor.

Dxo did test many of the lenses you mentioned above on APSC camera, most of them are lowest rank lenses on that site. Funny you don't consider the site credible anymore. Photozone did test many of the A mount lenses and rated them among the best in their class. There is no reason to believe the results would be different on A99 II. Until proven otherwise, these lens reviews stands as among the best lenses in their class.

Pentax K mount has no such lenses of such high caliber as these lenses. It doesn't even have third party support that A-mount does. The K mount lenses on APSC cameras that Dxomark did test in the past, they were lowest rated in their class, if we were to believe dxo lens tests, which most people, including pentax fanboys, dispute. Go search the DPR Pentax forum.

In any case, the difference between A mount and K mount is huge in A mount's favor.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 14:32 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1578 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Can't look at the samples because someone didn't add the A99 II to the database but this:
At base ISO, the differences between the two are virtually imperceptible, save for resolution dropping due to the lens used. That means between the a7R II and a99 II (center) resolution and detail remain largely the same, as does moirè.

There are no high enough resolution lenses for A mount. That is a big problem when using a 42mp or in future even higher count sensor.

LOL. This is funny. The fanboy shows his true color by bragging about Pentax lenses,, even though most of these Pentax lenses are lowest rated on dxomark. I guess dxomark site isn't credible anymore when it comes to lowest ranking Pentax lenses?

A mount has huge selection of lenses, some of them are top Sony/Zeiss that are rated 4 to 5 stars on photozone reviews, and unless proven otherwise by photozone tests that these lenses aren't the best on 42 MP, these reviews stand. K mount not only has no such lenses but third party support is basically dead too. When it comes to FF lenses., the difference between A mount vs K mount is huge, and A mount is ahead, by large huge margin.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 05:59 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1578 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Can't look at the samples because someone didn't add the A99 II to the database but this:
At base ISO, the differences between the two are virtually imperceptible, save for resolution dropping due to the lens used. That means between the a7R II and a99 II (center) resolution and detail remain largely the same, as does moirè.

There are no high enough resolution lenses for A mount. That is a big problem when using a 42mp or in future even higher count sensor.

I did discredit you, easily. I have shown that you are nothing but a jealous little Pentax fanboy. That inferiority complex (no lenses whatsoever) and jealousy shines through all your comments, every time you post. You are discredited.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 20:20 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1578 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Can't look at the samples because someone didn't add the A99 II to the database but this:
At base ISO, the differences between the two are virtually imperceptible, save for resolution dropping due to the lens used. That means between the a7R II and a99 II (center) resolution and detail remain largely the same, as does moirè.

There are no high enough resolution lenses for A mount. That is a big problem when using a 42mp or in future even higher count sensor.

Did I discredit you? ah, your own history discredit you. You are a clownish fanboy who were foaming at mouth at random people online because they were critical of your brand.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/5120223341/hands-on-with-ricohs-compact-pentax-kp?comment=8086827166
You discredit yourself.

A mount has a huge selection of lenses, some of them are top Sony/Zeiss that are rated 4 to 5 stars on photozone reviews, and unless proven otherwise by photozone tests that these lenses aren't the best on 42 MP, these reviews stand.

K mount not only has no such lenses (not a single actually), but Tamron stopped making new lenses for the mount years ago. Even Sigma has ditched the mount recently. Now that's pretty pathetic.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 17:52 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1578 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Can't look at the samples because someone didn't add the A99 II to the database but this:
At base ISO, the differences between the two are virtually imperceptible, save for resolution dropping due to the lens used. That means between the a7R II and a99 II (center) resolution and detail remain largely the same, as does moirè.

There are no high enough resolution lenses for A mount. That is a big problem when using a 42mp or in future even higher count sensor.

Your history speaks for itself. If anyone wants to have a good laugh at his fanboyish history, check out this recent exchange

https://www.dpreview.com/news/5120223341/hands-on-with-ricohs-compact-pentax-kp?comment=8086827166

A classic DPR fanboy.

A mount has a huge selection of lenses, some of them are top Sony/Zeiss that are rated 4 to 5 stars on photozone reviews. K mount has no such lenses. Plus third party lens support is 10 times larger than K mount.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 17:12 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1578 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Can't look at the samples because someone didn't add the A99 II to the database but this:
At base ISO, the differences between the two are virtually imperceptible, save for resolution dropping due to the lens used. That means between the a7R II and a99 II (center) resolution and detail remain largely the same, as does moirè.

There are no high enough resolution lenses for A mount. That is a big problem when using a 42mp or in future even higher count sensor.

Pentax fanboy, A mount isn't dead. There are plenty of Sony/Zeiss lenses, many of of them were upgraded to version II last year. K mount is the dead mount as not only there are no lenses comparable to native Sony/Zeiss but third party support is lacking too, like most of newer Tamron lenses that are available in A mount aren't available in K mount.

K mount is like 10 times worse when it comes to lenses. The difference is huge.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 07:34 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1578 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Can't look at the samples because someone didn't add the A99 II to the database but this:
At base ISO, the differences between the two are virtually imperceptible, save for resolution dropping due to the lens used. That means between the a7R II and a99 II (center) resolution and detail remain largely the same, as does moirè.

There are no high enough resolution lenses for A mount. That is a big problem when using a 42mp or in future even higher count sensor.

Funny part is this dude is a Pentax fanboy, where there are not only far fewer lenses (no Sony/Zeiss), but also no newer Tamron lenses that are available in A -mount.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2017 at 14:29 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1578 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Can't look at the samples because someone didn't add the A99 II to the database but this:
At base ISO, the differences between the two are virtually imperceptible, save for resolution dropping due to the lens used. That means between the a7R II and a99 II (center) resolution and detail remain largely the same, as does moirè.

There are no high enough resolution lenses for A mount. That is a big problem when using a 42mp or in future even higher count sensor.

A mount has been around for a long time, and the number of FF lenses made even by Sony/Zeiss (lets forget older lenses) is more than Pentax would produce in the next 15 years. These are some of the best FF lenses ever made, according to photozone and other sites.

Dxomark tested A-mount lenses on older lower 24 MP cameras. That's why the lens rank lower than the lenses that were tested on A7R II. That doesn't prove anything. Dxomark is lens+camera combination, not just lens tests. If and when dxomark retests the A mount lenses with A99II, the results would be very different.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2017 at 16:43 UTC
In reply to:

ET2: Red's raw are cooked. It's highly unlikely that smaller sensor camcorder could score higher than FF still camera sensors. DPReviewers should apply some common sense before posting things like this uncritically

If your aim was to show readers errors in my post, then you have failed . It's highly unlikely that a smaller sensor could score higher than a larger sensor, given we are already at theoretical limit for bayer's sensor. The scores are not just "higher" but ridiculously higher than larger FF sensors.

Yes, there are movies and dramas that are shot on Red cameras, but Alexa has completely dominated that market (Hollywood and Episodic dramas) for past several years. Is Red a successful company? We don't know that as it's a private company owned by a billionaire. Did he make any money? We don't know that, but I doubt it. The market is tiny and is dominated Arri. There is also Sony with F55 and F65, and Canon and Panasonic. Sony and Canon (C300 and FS7) compete at lower end market too. If you go even lower then there is Panasonic GH series. Pretty tough market with a lot of competition.

Red's raws are indeed cooked, so these Dxo scores are pretty meaningless

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 05:40 UTC
In reply to:

ET2: Red's raw are cooked. It's highly unlikely that smaller sensor camcorder could score higher than FF still camera sensors. DPReviewers should apply some common sense before posting things like this uncritically

If all raws are cooked, then you cannot claim these dxomark scores have any meaning, as Dxomark simply looks at noise (not images) . Anyone who is applying more NR will score higher, even if the actual images are worse with soft smeared images.

So let's stick with common sense, and agree with science, physics, and say it's highly unlikely that a smaller sensor could score higher than a larger sensor (not just score higher but score higher with such huge margin). If you believe something like that, then I feel sorry for you. I bet you also believe humans never landed on the moon and earth is flat?

As for Alexa, look up stats on shootwithwhat website. Almost all of Hollywood has been using that camera (90% of movies), despite "high" score of Dragon on dxomark 2 years ago? I guess professionals aren't impressed by made up numbers and actually look at images.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 18:29 UTC
In reply to:

ET2: Red's raw are cooked. It's highly unlikely that smaller sensor camcorder could score higher than FF still camera sensors. DPReviewers should apply some common sense before posting things like this uncritically

APS-H is smaller than FF, so I was correct. It's a well known fact that Red's raw are cooked. That was the same case with previous Dragon that scored high on Dxomark, but Alexa always beat Dragon for DR in actual test. Talk to people who used both cameras. Alexa remained favorite camera in Hollywood and that's not going to change.

I stand by what I said, and DPReview should apply common sense before posting things uncritically. These raws are cooked. A smaller sensor cannot score higher than best larger sensors, when we know for a fact these sensors are getting close to theoretical limit for a bayer sensors. You cannot change laws of physics.

Where is your common sense, DPR?

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 17:59 UTC
Total: 1231, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »