RedFox88

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jul 29, 2007

Comments

Total: 1041, showing: 201 – 220
« First‹ Previous910111213Next ›Last »
On article Nikon D3400 Review (386 comments in total)
In reply to:

endofoto: I think Nikon put the old sensor in this camera the same sharpness as D3200 at ISO 100. D7200 has the same sharpness as D750 at 100 ISO. If they used D7200 sensor it would be much better. I use D3200 with 40 mm Mikro Nikkor for hand held macro, it is so lightweight, I can shoot hand held. I have D300 too with 105 Micro Nikkor, impossible to shoot hand held. This cam is very usefull hor macro.

"sharpness" isn't a function of the image sensor, but the lens used and the jpg settings.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2016 at 16:23 UTC
On article Nikon D3400 Review (386 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ozaveshe: I need a Nikon camera for both digital and video. The video side must act like the VHS, to be use in life Church programme/coverage.
Can someone recommend please

Don't get a nikon for any video. They still have old style autofocus in video - which isn't good. You'd need to consider Canon with their dual pixel autofocus for very good autofocus in live view or video mode or a mirrorless/evil camera.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2016 at 16:22 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Truly amazing imagery. Just wow!

Interesting to see some not currently state of the art gear get these winning photo's yet again - GoPro, Canon 7D Mark I, 5D Mark III, Nikon 18-105 (isn't that a kit lens?). But but but, what about pushing those exposures 5 stops and where is the 4K damnit??? According to the Sony fanboi's here you NEED the new tehcnical whizbang wizardry to take photo's. Which begs the question, why isnt Sony represented in the winners since it should be so easy to get maximum DR and super quick focusing, even with adapting EF and F lenses? Hmmmm.

no 7D mark I

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2016 at 14:36 UTC
In reply to:

Mister Joseph: So, worse IQ than previous generation (e.g. Samsung S6) cellphones? Could've been nice if Kodak went all the way like a Samsung Galaxy Zoom.

Also, I remember Kodak dropping their camera business during a time when they were had nice devices like the PlaySport, PlayTouch, Zi8 etc.

Kodak doesn't exist any more. It's a paid for licensed brand name , that's all read the article.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 21:56 UTC
In reply to:

telawrence: I don't think we should be surprised at the price for this lens. With the market dropping for cameras due to phones they are doing what Sony is doing and focusing on professional lenses at top prices. They have to make a profit like every other company. Pros will buy this in droves. This is the same reason they aren't making APS-C lenses, why bother when pros mainly use FF and they can make more money per lens on a FF lens than they will on an APS-C lens.

Phones aren't replacing users of 70-200 f/2.8 zooms! Doh!

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 15:50 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Relative to that being from a phone and watching that on my 23" monitor, it looks pretty good.

My next phone will be another Apple device but there is nothing wrong with the Pixel's output.

Screen size doesn't factor in because the bigger the screen the farther away your eyes are from the screen.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2016 at 22:51 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Fujifilm F10 (122 comments in total)

I have/used it. Decent iso 800 but iso 1600 was clumped up noise reduction.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2016 at 19:37 UTC as 49th comment
In reply to:

ProfHankD: My wife and daughter both had iPhones which didn't burn, but had their cases burst by expanding batteries. Serious problems with glued-in batteries are common; Samsung was just unfortunate enough to (very rarely) have a very dangerous failure mode for the one in the S7. In my opinion, the disadvantages of glued-in batteries, which include various environmental issues involving disposal, far outweigh the advantages. Samsung used to have removable batteries -- as they do in the S5 that I use -- and I hope removable, sealed, batteries are what everybody gets back to. BTW, it wouldn't be that hard for the battery to be smart enough to detect a pending problem and disable itself.

Serious problems are "common"? Nope.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2016 at 16:12 UTC
In reply to:

WillWeaverRVA: If Google were smart they'd offer a discount for Note 7 users looking to switch to the Pixel. The Pixel is looking like the class of the field in the world of Android smartphones. I'm almost tempted to get one to replace my iPhone 6.

At the very least, they need to introduce "does not explode" into their marketing...

No way to prove being a note user since you have to return it to get your $700 back. Doubt Google wants to give users a free new phone for a note 7.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2016 at 16:11 UTC
In reply to:

PKDanny: Can waiting Note 8 improve. I still own my Note 4! No in hurry.

Note series phone may just die with the n7.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2016 at 04:41 UTC
In reply to:

aramgrg: Getting Note 7! In a month. Refurb ;-)

Not gonna happen

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2016 at 04:41 UTC
On article Google publishes gallery from upcoming Pixel smartphone (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

RedFox88: This is a HTC phone with the name Google on the back, right? Google doesn't make phones.

No this article says it's a HTC phone but doesn't say it on the phone anywhere. They used to make phones but that came and went when they quickly bought then sold Motorola.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2016 at 10:18 UTC
On article Google publishes gallery from upcoming Pixel smartphone (158 comments in total)

This is a HTC phone with the name Google on the back, right? Google doesn't make phones.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2016 at 22:22 UTC as 39th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

crashpc: Ok Canon, Lower your weapon! errr, I meant, PRICE! :-)

You mean raise? 80D is $200 less already!

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2016 at 17:01 UTC

$1400?! So much for "cheap" mirrorless /evil cams. $200 MORE than the 80D!

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2016 at 17:00 UTC as 206th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Dimit: The most popular cellphone in the world is Samsung Galaxy,not i-phone.Profoundly,same applies to the respective camera. Period.

No, you got that wrong. Samsung sells the most smart phones but they sell several /many models. Iphone is the best selling model, always.

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2016 at 21:06 UTC
In reply to:

Robert Zanatta: The Nokia phones are still impressive.

The Galaxy S7 has noticeably better IQ.

S7 has samsung detail smears. Like water color painting!

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2016 at 21:05 UTC
In reply to:

photomedium: WOW galaxy s7, come here baby!

Samsung smears detail. Plus you got the buggy android power hog. No thanks. Been there done with that.

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2016 at 21:02 UTC
In reply to:

Timbukto: This is why I feel the iPhone optics are so subpar, this is what my personal S6 can do in RAW - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58428407
That is 16MP at a demanding 16x9 aspect ratio. I've honestly shot softer MFT kit lenses before at wide angle wide open. This is what I find so 'grating' about the recent iPhone praise and its ability to shoot RAW. I am getting RAW update for free on an old phone with what easily looks to be superior optics, proof in the pudding.

Samsung smears detail. Yuck. Apple knows how to balance detail with grain.

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2016 at 20:59 UTC
In reply to:

avatar77: I'd like to see the Galaxy Note 7 results. Perhaps the exploding battery will help it ace the low-light test?

Note 7..You mean one that HASN'T burned up ? And is note 7. Nobody calls their stuff galaxy. That's been a failed marketing attempt by samsung. It's just note 7 or s7.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 21:43 UTC
Total: 1041, showing: 201 – 220
« First‹ Previous910111213Next ›Last »