Joined on Feb 17, 2012


Total: 192, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

One word: stunning.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2016 at 10:59 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2673 comments in total)

I am genuinely impressed. And it makes me bemoan that I sold off the (manual) K-lenses together with a ME-body all these many moons ago. Those Pentax lenses were always excellent.

Look like a very capable, well-designed, well-specced camera to me. And I like the classic design. And all that and more for a good price. Classic Pentax!

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2016 at 08:21 UTC as 547th comment
In reply to:

Phileas Fogg: Quote by Pete Conrad, Apollo 12:

Whoopee! Man, that may have been a small one for Neil, but it's a long one for me.


I always get a chuckle from Pete Conrad's quote.


Nov. 14 1969:

Apollo 12 was almost a tragedy as it was struck by lighting 36 seconds into its launch. Messed up the computers for a number of moments. Pete Conrad said he had his hand on the abort lever waiting to hear if they were to be told to abort and eject the command module of the rising powerful, Saturn V rocket. The computers all reset and came back on a'ok. and Apollo 12 " Yankee Clipper " with LM "Intrepid " in tow were on their way to The Ocean of Storms , on the Moon. :-)

"Set SCE to AUX" saved the day.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2015 at 09:34 UTC
In reply to:

bakhtyar kurdi: I know this is like religion, no logic will help, but I ask photographers to do a simple thing, download the picture of the flag that has no shadow, then open photoshop, then file, open as, camera raw
Now move the exposure slide all the way to the right, you will see clearly that the flag was been selected,then pasted as a perfect rectangle shape, then they darkened the extra areas or brushed or whatever to blend it to the rest of the picture, but unfortunately they forgot to make shadow for the flag on the earth(studio or moon) , and don't forget, this is after 2 million times of editing so that they don't leave any signs of mistakes,so how do you want me to accept the rest of their lies?
The flag has been added later to another picture that also been faked in studio .

It has nothing to do with religion, and everything with (real) science. You now, science and scientists - the old Greeks used to call them seekers for the truth.

And the truth is... all this conspiracy nonsense has been debunked a thousand times already. Indeed, like a religion, that nonsense keeps coming back and finds Believers too stupid to think for themselves, or even comprehend real science.


Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2015 at 09:30 UTC
In reply to:

Nukunukoo: China will land some men there by 2021, close to the landing sites, so let's see what new conspiracy will come out. NASA paying off the Chinese to claim the remnants of the equipment are still there?

Thank you for thinking! That restores my confidence in humanity somewhat.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2015 at 09:26 UTC
In reply to:

Phileas Fogg: Here is the thing for me. The Moon landing hoax fools and their ignorant opinions are an insult to the many people who built America's space programme and ultimately the Apollo Moon landings. From the astronauts, to all the engineers, scientists, astronomers, and the many, many, folks who built, transported and prepared all the gear and rockets to send men to the Moon. This hoax crap is so tiring as its all easily dispelled with even by most educated high school students. It must suck to know that if you are a Moon Landing hoaxer that you are considered to be more stupid on this topic than most educated high school students.

The really sad part is that in a few decades we've gone from people smart enough to realize the most complex and most important engineering project in history -- using slide rulers and primitive computers -- to people stupid enough to actually believe it didn't happen, high-res imagery of landing stages, lunar rovers, mountains of equipment and astronaut foot prints notwithstanding.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2015 at 09:21 UTC
On article Nikon D7200 Field Test: Desert dance photo shoot (101 comments in total)

Beautiful. Inspirational. Bravo!

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2015 at 13:47 UTC as 6th comment
On article Fujifilm X100T successor rumored to feature new lens (336 comments in total)
In reply to:

jvt: Leave it alone! There is an endless supply of cameras with zoom lenses, IS, faster AF and great video.

This is the perfect street camera. By all means improve the sensor if you must, but don't change the basic form & concept.

Spot on. The basic form and concept is as close to perfect as it gets.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2015 at 03:19 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T10 Review (509 comments in total)
In reply to:

texinwien: Are Fuji still cheating with ISO on this camera as they've been found to do systematically on other models in the X line over the past few years?

And? Photography is no longer possible, now?

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2015 at 10:38 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T10 Review (509 comments in total)

Tempting system. Oh so very, very tempting. And that gorgeous glass... Fuji is doing a lot of things very, very right.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2015 at 10:33 UTC as 29th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

TN Args: I recommend DPR remove all comments that are overtly political -- including accusations that DPR are overtly political (because such comments are actually an overtly political statement by the commentator).

All I see is a bunch of interesting photos. I don't see any policy statements or policy position or implicit political endorsement in the article.

The comments I see are certainly against the forum rules on trolling (deliberately antagonizing other forum users, who may not share the political rage of the posts), and Bashing (in this case a political 'brand' to which many people would feel some loyalty or liking).

Seriously -- although my politics is a million miles from that of the people in the photos, I'm still offended by the comments.

Thank you for injecting some intelligent remarks here. Unfortunately, the catacombs and crevices of the Internet are full of people like these screaming imbeciles, waiting to be able to beat to death any meaningful discussion or anything resembling intelligent contemplation with cheap propaganda, half-truths and outright lies.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2015 at 13:11 UTC
In reply to:

freediverx: That guy has done more damage to the country than the terrorists.

.... not presented. Ok, clear.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2015 at 12:54 UTC
In reply to:

rened: Interesting pictures of a very special event in history they definitely have a place on DPreview, thanks for posting them. A shame so many readers are unable to view and see them for what they are.

A very special historical event indeed. But simpletons never need reasons or logic, only something to hate.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 06:59 UTC
In reply to:

freediverx: That guy has done more damage to the country than the terrorists.

And your proof for that assertion is...

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 06:49 UTC
On article Leica Q In-depth Review (1166 comments in total)
In reply to:

Slipstack: Review quote:
"The Q is much heavier though and has a far superior build quality to the Fujifilm."

So why is it that that red dot with the Leica logo is not aligned correctly, but twisted 2-3 degrees clockwise, enough to make it seriously annoying to look at? Is this just me, or have nobody else noticed?

First thing I noticed, too. It's a preproduction model, I suppose, but it is sloppy.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 15:27 UTC
On article Samsung NX1 Review (1258 comments in total)
In reply to:

AlpCns2: Amazing camera, which (amazing) optics to match. Bravo, Samsung!

Alessandro, IQ is indeed paramount. Samples pictures can be found at

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2015 at 07:15 UTC

At first I thought: lots of canned, pre-chewed half-answers. Then, after reading DPR's epilogue, the impression was much better, also because much of the "good stuff" was probably off-record.

What amazed me, and still amazes me, is Nikon's insistence that the 1-series covers the need for those that want small, fast, and capable mirrorless systems. Nikon: It hasn't, and it doesn't.

And I am saying that as a great fan of your products, Nikon. That you're obviously listening now is good. You've got to listen better still.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2015 at 10:45 UTC as 80th comment
On article Samsung NX1 Review (1258 comments in total)

Amazing camera, which (amazing) optics to match. Bravo, Samsung!

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2015 at 09:53 UTC as 134th comment | 3 replies
On article Samsung NX1 Review (1258 comments in total)
In reply to:

oselimg: So, Dpreview doesn't rate cameras on the basis of image quality since NX1 is awarded gold. Or Do you have "different" criteria for each brand? Perhaps Samsung now is a huge company to ignore.

Can you please explain what (scientific or not) method you applied in order to arrive at your (rather odd) conclusion that DPR doesn't rate cameras on the basis of image quality.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2015 at 09:51 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M5 II Review (877 comments in total)
In reply to:

phoenix15: This camera deserves gold award. I can't understand DPR judgment.

I completely understand DPR judgment, because it is very carefully reasoned and very well weighted against the competition, which is equally very good. Which is exactly why it is difficult.

The "problem" is that here are no really bad camera systems anymore. They are all good, very good even. All offer performance and features we could only dream of roughly half a decade ago. And then picking "the best" out of a bunch of excellent options becomes (has to become) more of a personal choice -as correctly argued by DPR, "very specific requirements"- than a clear winner on specs and/or performance alone.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2015 at 01:08 UTC
Total: 192, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »