SteveY80

Joined on Dec 29, 2012

Comments

Total: 126, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon got it right on International Women's Day (463 comments in total)
In reply to:

landscaper1: What? No comments? I guess DPR's comments and forums are populated by, at best, a bunch of indifferent males.

Kudos to Canon. Now, can we hear from Nikon and Sony?

A number of reviews have pointed out issues with Testosterone Rex, especially with Fine's dismissal of sexual selection e.g.:
http://quillette.com/2017/03/21/cordelia-fines-testosterone-rex-a-review/

I'd certainly support greater pay transparency and anything that gives parents more flexibility and choice when it comes to childcare. Other progressive policies aimed at manufacturing equality of outcome (almost always focused on desirable and well paid jobs of course, not anything dirty or dangerous that's male dominated) are unfair discrimination if there is a biological explanation.

There's also the issue that hiring quotas and workplace affirmative action doesn't address differences in educational choice made before people enter the workplace. If most graduates in a particular subject are of one sex it's not surprising that they make up most of the job applicants in related fields. It isn't necessarily sexist discrimination if that leads to gender disparity in those fields.

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2018 at 08:19 UTC
On article Canon got it right on International Women's Day (463 comments in total)
In reply to:

landscaper1: What? No comments? I guess DPR's comments and forums are populated by, at best, a bunch of indifferent males.

Kudos to Canon. Now, can we hear from Nikon and Sony?

My point was the bias and hypocrisy of the Guardian in smearing Peterson for the behaviour of a few of his supporters, while their own journalists dished out worse towards him.

Peterson has certainly made some dubious claims that are worth criticising, but people on the other side of the debate like Cordelia Fine have used at least as much faux science to push their ideological position.

Of course I think that men and women should have the same opportunities and equal pay for equal work. My problem with a lot of feminist policies is that they aren't based on equality on an individual level. As with wage gap statistics, they're collectivist and based on comparisons of the average woman and the average man.

Progressive policies like quotas and all women shortlists generally assume that biological differences aren't an explanation, and that inequalities are down to discrimination that can be socially engineered away. In my opinion the evidence doesn't support that position.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2018 at 14:58 UTC
On article Canon got it right on International Women's Day (463 comments in total)
In reply to:

landscaper1: What? No comments? I guess DPR's comments and forums are populated by, at best, a bunch of indifferent males.

Kudos to Canon. Now, can we hear from Nikon and Sony?

My main problem with the Guardian article is how it tries to poison the well rather than just addressing what he's said. About half of the article is a sly attempt to link him to unsavoury characters on the far right. It stops just short of outright blaming him and his "intellectual machismo" for abusive behaviour online. It's like trying to link a moderate left-wing speaker to extreme radical feminists and violent groups like Antifa.

One thing I found particularly disingenuous was the way it used Peterson asking his fans not be abusive as evidence that there is widespread abuse. I went looking for that abuse after the Cathy Newman interview and examples were extremely thin on the ground. There were a few genuinely nasty youtube comments, and some harsh mockery on Twitter, but nothing actually threatening.

Peterson received at least as much bile from his critics, including Guardian journalists calling him mentally ill, a f---ing idiot, and saying that he deserved to be punched.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2018 at 13:01 UTC
On article Canon got it right on International Women's Day (463 comments in total)
In reply to:

landscaper1: What? No comments? I guess DPR's comments and forums are populated by, at best, a bunch of indifferent males.

Kudos to Canon. Now, can we hear from Nikon and Sony?

I'm not a huge Peterson fan, but that laughably biased hit piece against him is a nice reminder of why I don't take the Guardian seriously.

I think there's only so much you can reasonably do to fix inequalities that are caused by biological difference. Providing paternity leave and encouraging sharing of child care roles is great, but it'll still be women who go through pregnancy and childbirth. Many women simply don't want to leave their child in someone else's care and immediately go back to work.

How do you stop that from having some impact on their career? Do you force women to go back to work, or force men to take the same time off as women to equalise things?

It's interesting you bring up the Nordic countries. They've done the most to end gender inequality, but the impact on the workplace has been quite limited. The average pay gap in those countries isn't significantly lower than the EU average, and the disparity between men and women in some fields has actually increased.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2018 at 11:39 UTC
On article Canon got it right on International Women's Day (463 comments in total)
In reply to:

landscaper1: What? No comments? I guess DPR's comments and forums are populated by, at best, a bunch of indifferent males.

Kudos to Canon. Now, can we hear from Nikon and Sony?

@SteveAnderson
I don't think the feminist campaigns against promo models (grid girls/ring girls/booth models at trade shows etc.) are based on the idea that those women need help. From what I've seen many feminists view those models as privileged and entitled enemies, who are harming their entire gender when they exploit their looks for profit.

Personally I find using models to sell things a bit outdated and I'm not surprised that they're being dropped. That said, I'm not convinced by the specific claims of harm made by feminist groups that campaign against them, especially the argument that having models at an event encourages the harassment and sexual assault of other women. I've seen no evidence of there even being a correlation between the use of promo models and increased violence against women.

When F1 dropping grid girls was presented as a #metoo movement victory it looked like unnecessary mission creep to me. A distraction from the exposure of actual sexual assaults.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2018 at 21:40 UTC
On article Canon got it right on International Women's Day (463 comments in total)
In reply to:

landscaper1: What? No comments? I guess DPR's comments and forums are populated by, at best, a bunch of indifferent males.

Kudos to Canon. Now, can we hear from Nikon and Sony?

It's a tricky one - a very narrow idea of pay equality is open to abuse when men and women have slightly different job roles.

Pay equality law is usually based on the idea of equal pay for equal value work. The difficult thing is determining what the relative value is.

There's a case in the UK where supermarket cashiers are claiming pay discrimination because they receive lower wages than warehouse workers. The argument is that both jobs are of equal value and should be paid equally.

Men aren't paid more in the same role, but because most of the cashiers are women, while most of the warehouse workers are men, this has been held up as a clear example of gender pay discrimination by feminist groups.

A counter argument is that warehouse work requires more physical labour, less sociable hours, is more dangerous, can requires a forklift license etc. and therefore higher wages are justified.

These are complex issues that too often get reduced to black and white claims of sexism IMO.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2018 at 20:31 UTC
On article Canon got it right on International Women's Day (463 comments in total)
In reply to:

landscaper1: What? No comments? I guess DPR's comments and forums are populated by, at best, a bunch of indifferent males.

Kudos to Canon. Now, can we hear from Nikon and Sony?

Yes, there's a gender pay gap - the question is whether it's primarily down to injustice rather than choice.

I find the presentation of the pay gap by many feminists and the mainstream media to be highly dishonest and misleading. Looking at the IWD coverage I see the BBC et al. talk about the pay gap being between women and their "male counterparts", while feminist websites talk about the number of days each year women "work for free" compared with their "male colleagues".

It makes it sound like women are being paid less for the same work, rather than this statistic simply being the average pay of all men against all women.

In my country there's around a 7% pay gap (median hourly pay) favouring men. However, this varies considerably from region to region. Where I live there's actually a 16% pay gap favouring women, and in the next county that raises to 23%.

Does that mean that men are being discriminated against, or is it more complex, reflecting choices and available employment?

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2018 at 17:49 UTC
On article Canon got it right on International Women's Day (463 comments in total)
In reply to:

landscaper1: What? No comments? I guess DPR's comments and forums are populated by, at best, a bunch of indifferent males.

Kudos to Canon. Now, can we hear from Nikon and Sony?

@SundridgePete

No, the "facts" in that piece aren't the same the world over, they're specific to Australia. For example, the average gap in pay between men and women varies significantly from country to country.

Some of the claims in that quiz are from research that's disputed/contradicted by other sources. For example, the "actual science" on whether gender differences are largely biological, or just down to "deeply held cultural biases, mythology and gender stereotypical language" is by no means settled.

The fact that one researcher found that a small sample of mothers interacted differently with their infant daughters than with their infant sons doesn't instantly debunk all the other research indicating that biological sex differences can influence behaviour.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2018 at 11:34 UTC
On article Panasonic officially unveils 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH (303 comments in total)
In reply to:

SteveY80: Based on the spec listings everywhere else, the 0.5x magnification stated above is an error.

All the other sources put it at a much less interesting and impressive 0.25x.

Actual magnification isn't changed by the sensor size. The spec above doesn't point out that it's "equivalent to 0.5 in 135 format", it just states that it's 0.5x.

What's particularly misleading is that DPR aren't consistent about this. They've used the actual magnification when listing the specs of other MFT and APS-C lenses rather than converting it to the equivalent.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 08:05 UTC
On article Panasonic officially unveils 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH (303 comments in total)
In reply to:

SteveY80: Based on the spec listings everywhere else, the 0.5x magnification stated above is an error.

All the other sources put it at a much less interesting and impressive 0.25x.

I don't really understand why you'd do that when other figures like the focal length are actual rather than equivalent.

If nothing else it should actually state "full frame equivalent" next to it to avoid confusion and disappointment.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 00:46 UTC
On article Panasonic officially unveils 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH (303 comments in total)

Based on the spec listings everywhere else, the 0.5x magnification stated above is an error.

All the other sources put it at a much less interesting and impressive 0.25x.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 23:30 UTC as 21st comment | 7 replies
On article Panasonic officially unveils 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH (303 comments in total)
In reply to:

Androole: Is that magnification stat for real?

A full 0.5x at 200mm makes this into the "tele macro" lens that many have been hoping for. That's amazing.

I hope it's not a typo...

Based on the specs on other sites it unfortunately is just a typo. BH Photo and others put it at a more standard 0.25x magnification.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 23:27 UTC
On article Panasonic officially unveils 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH (303 comments in total)
In reply to:

ijm5012: $1700? For a variable aperture zoom? Are they smoking crack?

I’m a big fan of m43, but this is just crazy...

From what I've seen Canon's 55-250mm punches well above its weight - within its zoom range it pretty much matches the sharpness of the 70-300L. If you want something less plastic, there are well constructed budget lenses like the Tamron 70-300 USD.

Of course we don't know how the Panasonic will compare - maybe it'll blow all of them away and justify its price...

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 18:05 UTC
On article Panasonic officially unveils 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH (303 comments in total)
In reply to:

ijm5012: $1700? For a variable aperture zoom? Are they smoking crack?

I’m a big fan of m43, but this is just crazy...

It does seem rather expensive.

I wonder how it'll compare to a decent 70-300mm lens mounted on APS-C? Or even Canon's budget priced 55-250mm EF-S?

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 17:48 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9: What you need to know (215 comments in total)
In reply to:

SteveY80: According to other reports it's now possible to use the EC dial in M mode + auto-ISO. That's a definite upgrade over the GX8.

Personally I don't find the grip of the GX85 to be "perfectly comfortable" - it's certainly not as comfortable to handle as the GX7/8. The optional grip would probably solve that issue if it wasn't idiotically designed to block access to the battery...

Some of the reviews mention it, for example: http://www.photobyrichard.com/reviewbyrichard/panasonic-lumix-gx9-review-the-best-street-photography-camera/

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 20:16 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9: What you need to know (215 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shlomo Goldwasser: "an optional grip is available for the pretty reasonable price of $59"

So you find 59 dollars reasonable for a piece of plastic? You need to get back to reality because this is insane.

It doesn't even have a cut-out/flip-down section to allow access to the battery compartment without removing the grip completely. That's something often found on cheaper 3rd party grips or ones made by other brands.

A camera with a CIPA 260 shot battery life and the official grip has to be screwed in and out every time the power runs low... Just not good design from Panasonic in my opinion.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 16:14 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9: What you need to know (215 comments in total)

According to other reports it's now possible to use the EC dial in M mode + auto-ISO. That's a definite upgrade over the GX8.

Personally I don't find the grip of the GX85 to be "perfectly comfortable" - it's certainly not as comfortable to handle as the GX7/8. The optional grip would probably solve that issue if it wasn't idiotically designed to block access to the battery...

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 13:23 UTC as 89th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

princecody: The GX7 & GX8 had Great grips. This doesn't practically have a grip? What in the world was Panasonic thinking?

I don't see any advantage to making it slimmer than the GX7. Even the slimmest pancake lenses stick out more than the GX7's grip.

I'd be more accepting of the GX9 add-on grip if it was better designed. Having to remove it every time the battery needs changing (on a camera with poor battery life) is just ridiculous.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 10:12 UTC
In reply to:

SteveY80: One quick nitpick - it weighs 450g inc. battery, 407g is for the body alone.

I've never found having a heavier body helpful with hand-holding myself.

But all I'm pointing out here is a minor error in the spec DP Review have posted above.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 16:33 UTC

It's ridiculous that they didn't design the grip to allow access to the battery/SD-card, especially on a camera with such poor battery life.

Many of the 3rd party cases and grips have a cut out, as do the official grips that Fuji provide for their cameras.

On my Fuji X-T10 I only had to securely attach its grip one time. After that it became part of the camera and I haven't even had to think about it again. It even works as an arca-swiss compatible quick release plate when I use it on my tripod.

With the GX9 I might have to unscrew and reattach the grip several times in one day of wildlife/macro shooting. Not the end of the world, but inconvenient and bad design.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 16:04 UTC as 143rd comment | 2 replies
Total: 126, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »