VadymA

Lives in Canada Calgary, Canada
Joined on Jul 31, 2009

Comments

Total: 258, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

VadymA: I like my J5 with 6-13VR and 32 1.2. No other camera with 1'' sensor allows for such freedom of creative choice in such a tiny package as Nikon 1. Nikon literally has no competition in this segment. All other brands only offer fixed lens options. Too bad Nikon doesn't see it as an opportunity to offer something unique. Kind of like that salesman who thought that there was no market for a shoe company in a courtly where everyone walks barefoot. Sometimes all that's needed is to show the alternative to create the market.

Well, they are not even close in functionality, but yes, body size is similar. Panasonic is also more expensive and, of course, it's a Panasonic :( . But I don't really want to argue with you, this market is changing too fast anyway to be hung up on anything specific. They talk about nano-lenses that could be sprayed directly on a sensor for crying outloud. If that will get into production, we will all be shooting sport events with our sunglasses. On the other hand, people will still be arguing which sunglasses are better in IQ here on DPR.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 20:42 UTC
In reply to:

VadymA: I like my J5 with 6-13VR and 32 1.2. No other camera with 1'' sensor allows for such freedom of creative choice in such a tiny package as Nikon 1. Nikon literally has no competition in this segment. All other brands only offer fixed lens options. Too bad Nikon doesn't see it as an opportunity to offer something unique. Kind of like that salesman who thought that there was no market for a shoe company in a courtly where everyone walks barefoot. Sometimes all that's needed is to show the alternative to create the market.

I agree about the price strategy, and this correlates to my point, Nikon is not marketing this product as a potential winner, it is like they themselves don't believe in it. I disagree with the size argument. Nikon systems is still considerably smaller than anything else out there, lenses attached. And there are plenty of YT videos showing no significant advantage between 1" and m43 sensors, especially when using best quality lenses. In my view, it makes more sense for 1" and APS-C ILC systems to co-exist on the market than for m43 and APS-C systems, which are getting so much closer in size.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 19:06 UTC

I like my J5 with 6-13VR and 32 1.2. No other camera with 1'' sensor allows for such freedom of creative choice in such a tiny package as Nikon 1. Nikon literally has no competition in this segment. All other brands only offer fixed lens options. Too bad Nikon doesn't see it as an opportunity to offer something unique. Kind of like that salesman who thought that there was no market for a shoe company in a courtly where everyone walks barefoot. Sometimes all that's needed is to show the alternative to create the market.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 06:38 UTC as 14th comment | 14 replies
On article Sony a9 first look videos (300 comments in total)

Hmm, for the first time MILC camera makes DSLRs look like amateur equipment ;)

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 00:21 UTC as 55th comment | 1 reply
On article Light's L16 camera is in final stages of testing (301 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lan: I see three challenges that it'll be interesting to see how they overcome:

The first is cost; the extra 15 camera modules aren't free.

The second is battery life, 16 camera modules eat 16x more power than 1, and interpolating that image data into a final image is likely to be hard on processor usage (and thus power) too.

Third is performance; processing those 16 images into one final image is going to take time; due to the interpolation process I expect it's going to take more than 16x the time. Yes, you can intelligently buffer, and use one single image as a proxy whilst you develop the image in the background, but you'll still need a more powerful processor etc (which again drives up cost and drives down battery life)...

Good to see someone thinking outside the box though!

I agree with your points, just one minor correction, I think the way I read it a while ago is that only up to four cameras can fire at once. This is probably why they mention 52 mp, which equals 13 x 4. I don't know why 16 cameras, one guess is 4 sets of cameras for four different focal length, for example four cameras with different apertures firing simultaneously for a select focal length or zoom range. I might be wrong, but it makes sense to me. Still doesn't negate your points. Stitching 4 x 13 mp takes a lot of resources too.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2017 at 22:04 UTC
On article Light's L16 camera is in final stages of testing (301 comments in total)

No matter how many sensors and lenses you squeeze in a small box, it is still a tiny-sensor-slow-lens solution with all related consequencies to image quality. Stitching can mitigate some of the problems but not all of them and introduces new problems at the same time, like drain on battery life and slow operation. The fact that they already delayed the release by two years also tells that the results they are getting are not up to even their own expectations. Last time we heard they only managed to secure $30M of private funding, this is tiny for anything groundbreaking in imaging solutions other than gimmicy software tricks. So while I like their thinking, I don't expect any miracles here. Might as well just end up being another quirky device for collectors and museums.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2017 at 17:31 UTC as 28th comment | 3 replies

The reality is that one half of the camera market has been eaten by the phone companies and the other half is being ripped apart between old and many new players in this business. There is just not enough pie for everyone to stay financially "healthy". Someone needs to go to allow for proper "ration" of this pie among remaining players. So I think we should see some mergers and wind-ups in the near future as a result of proper industry restructuring.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 04:45 UTC as 33rd comment | 3 replies

I don't care about the train tracks issue but I don't like the picture. The woman is standing too far, I wasn't even sure if it was a woman until I read the narrative, her pose is really confusing, the scenery is dull. Since it is on Instagram I assume it was taken with a phone. If that's what people give likes to on Instagram, I don't think I missed too much by not visiting this site.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 00:25 UTC as 192nd comment
On article Nikon announces midrange D7500 DSLR (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

VadymA: I left a comment yesterday that “people don’t buy DSLR’s anymore” and many readers took it way too literally throwing all sorts of stones at me. I don’t blame them, but nevertheless would like to clarify my point. While D7500 looks like a perfect upgrade for my D300, I was quite disappointed to see this announcement knowing how deep in financial trouble Nikon is. Of course people still buy DSLR’s, but not nearly in enough volumes to make it a viable business. This was always the case, even 15-20 years ago we always heard that the real money are made by both C&N predominantly in P&S market. Now that this market is almost completely taken over by phones, and a big chunk of DSLR market is bitten off by mirrorless and large-sensor compacts, it is disappointing to see that Nikon is not fighting back to regain at least a fraction of that piece of pie. So my comment was mostly tongue-in-cheek pointing to Nikon’s ignorance of other sectors of ever shrinking camera market, that's it.

Nikon overall is profitable but their imaging division is recognizing huge impairment loss this year and undergoing substantial restructuring including cutting back on several already annaunced products. This to me sounds pretty much like deep financial trouble. OMMV of course. I hope I am wrong in any case.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 00:13 UTC
On article Nikon announces midrange D7500 DSLR (396 comments in total)

I left a comment yesterday that “people don’t buy DSLR’s anymore” and many readers took it way too literally throwing all sorts of stones at me. I don’t blame them, but nevertheless would like to clarify my point. While D7500 looks like a perfect upgrade for my D300, I was quite disappointed to see this announcement knowing how deep in financial trouble Nikon is. Of course people still buy DSLR’s, but not nearly in enough volumes to make it a viable business. This was always the case, even 15-20 years ago we always heard that the real money are made by both C&N predominantly in P&S market. Now that this market is almost completely taken over by phones, and a big chunk of DSLR market is bitten off by mirrorless and large-sensor compacts, it is disappointing to see that Nikon is not fighting back to regain at least a fraction of that piece of pie. So my comment was mostly tongue-in-cheek pointing to Nikon’s ignorance of other sectors of ever shrinking camera market, that's it.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 16:12 UTC as 28th comment | 5 replies
On article Nikon announces midrange D7500 DSLR (396 comments in total)

Nikon, wake up. People don't buy DSLR's any more.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 04:53 UTC as 120th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

BobT3218: I don't understand how such tiny camera phones produce pics so good compared to our orders of magnitude larger DSLR's etc. DSLR's should blow camera phones out of the water. Are we so bad as photographers that we can't exploit the advantages of DLSR's?

To newe: why compare trucks and cars? Because the result is the same - transportation of a load from point A to point B. The difference is only in the type of load and route conditions. Truck are designed to handle loads and route conditions that are not possible to handle with small cars. Same with cameras. DSLR's or MILC are designed to take pictures which are not possible to take with cellphones. That is so simple that I am starting to believe you are just yanking my chain for fun...

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2017 at 03:54 UTC
In reply to:

BobT3218: I don't understand how such tiny camera phones produce pics so good compared to our orders of magnitude larger DSLR's etc. DSLR's should blow camera phones out of the water. Are we so bad as photographers that we can't exploit the advantages of DLSR's?

We need DSLRs because they do different tasks. Why compare a cellphone to a DSLR?

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2017 at 00:36 UTC
In reply to:

BobT3218: I don't understand how such tiny camera phones produce pics so good compared to our orders of magnitude larger DSLR's etc. DSLR's should blow camera phones out of the water. Are we so bad as photographers that we can't exploit the advantages of DLSR's?

At 40 mph on a nice clean highway, my $20k car rides as good as any $100k truck. It doesn't mean we don't need trucks anymore.

You are taking the easiest task in photography of taking a snapshot and declaring that DSLR can't do anything better than that. They can do another twenty things that smartphones can't do. Doesn't mean you need those 20 things, just like not everyone needs a $100k truck.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2017 at 23:42 UTC

Every new invention in post-processing just makes pure photography even more intriguing for me.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 23:28 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
On article The Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 is old-fashioned fun (189 comments in total)

I think most people who buy it will only use it ones or twice, or most likely never, because they buy it for a different reason. If you don't know that reason, than you don't understand Leica market.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 17:45 UTC as 39th comment
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (891 comments in total)
In reply to:

stormy_weather: Photograhy is about making pictures, two dimensional representations of reality. Your photo will be a good one when you successfully manage to bring this preception of reality into those two dimensions. A feeling of "being there" as optical viewfinders indeed offer it sometimes, does not help. This is not a virtual reality game nor is it a Disney Land visit - "being there" may be a nice feeling but does not help assessing if what you are in, could be a good photo.

Regards,

Sven

Looking with one eye automatically transforms everything into two-dimansional reality. So this is not an issue with OVF.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2017 at 13:38 UTC
In reply to:

DANdeMAN: Oooooh yeah this is "Art" but please don't use the word fine in front of it.
Here are a couple of her "fine" work for you to admire.
First a naked woman with baby and menstrual fluid running down her leg. You can't get more "fine art" than this. http://www.tate.org.uk/art/images/work/P/P78/P78098_10.jpg

Next up. Another naked woman and baby with nappy in a see trough panties.
http://www.tate.org.uk/art/images/work/P/P78/P78097_10.jpg

BTW, you can license those images. Does that mean that they are "commercial" art?
As for the rest of her work from a google search, our parents did exactly the same stuff in the sixties and seventies...

As I mentioned earlier and as it is stated in the article the photographer is recognized for her long-term projects in depicting human transformation. The photo series presented in the article is a great example of this effort. The girl and the woman on each picture is the same person and looking at them as a sequence instead of individually does create a very strong emotional effect. So the images that you are pointing at is most likely only a fraction, or a moment, in a series of images that, like individual words, create a story only when put together.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 05:02 UTC
In reply to:

Ooxus: The results of the competition show the personal opinion of the jury.
But I'm interested in something else! Does this result help other photographers learn to take pictures?

In my opinion, yes. It shows that finding your artistic vision and individuality and nurturing it regardless of reaction of masses is more important than just learning how to take pictures.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 04:51 UTC

PEOPLE, you really don't get it, do you?! The images are not independent portraits. They are connected into a cohesive story about a girl and her transition through life, which ends where it begins making it a perpetual circle of life. I am not quite sure, but from the article it seems like the series could, in fact, depict the same person. This is a brilliant, beautiful, and inspiring project. Bravo!

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2017 at 21:33 UTC as 48th comment | 1 reply
Total: 258, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »