Joe Bowers

Joined on May 14, 2012


Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Nikon posts sample images from new D7100 (95 comments in total)

These photos look terrible. Blurry and lacking contrast. I hope this isn't an example of what this new camera can do.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2013 at 06:30 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On article Nikon unveils 24.1MP D5200 DSLR with optional Wi-Fi (392 comments in total)

If this camera supports high speed sync (Nikon calls it Auto FP) I will be sold. Sadly, the D5100 didn't, but I'm hoping this one will. After all, the 39 focus points was a nice surprise. As it is, I regretted buying my D5100 when I realized I was limited to 1/250 flash.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2012 at 02:10 UTC as 26th comment | 4 replies
On article Nikon unveils 24.1MP D5200 DSLR with optional Wi-Fi (392 comments in total)
In reply to:

johnparas11zenfoliodotcom: now if this only came with that AF screw thingy.. this will be my one and only Nikon DSLR camera forever..

True, the cost difference to buying lenses with a built-in focus motor really ends up making this a more expensive camera. Thinking maybe 6 months ahead, you could buy a D7100 and two AF lenses for the price of a D5200 and two AF-S lenses.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2012 at 02:05 UTC
On article Nikon unveils 24.1MP D5200 DSLR with optional Wi-Fi (392 comments in total)
In reply to:

EmmanuelStarchild: Aside from the jump in megapixels, I don't see a good reason to buy this camera. My internet pictures won't look any better.

If you only post pictures on the internet, you might as well use your phone camera. Why are you even here?

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2012 at 02:02 UTC
On article Nikon unveils 24.1MP D5200 DSLR with optional Wi-Fi (392 comments in total)
In reply to:

EmmanuelStarchild: Kinda reminds me of a Canon 600D with a better sensor.

The D5200 also has a way better focusing system and much higher resolution.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2012 at 02:01 UTC
On article Nikon unveils 24.1MP D5200 DSLR with optional Wi-Fi (392 comments in total)
In reply to:

smileblog: >The buffer capacity:
>RAW: 8 (which was 16 at D5100)
>RAW+JPEG: 6 (which was 10)

What's wrong!?

Can't shoot even "less than 2 sec" continuously at 5fps!!!

If you need to spray out so many shots hoping for a good one, perhaps you should work on your technique.

It's slower because the files are larger. Don't like it? Don't buy it. It's a fantastic camera.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2012 at 01:59 UTC
In reply to:

Button Pusher: A lossy RAW format seems to be a contradiction in terms as isn't the primary reason that you store and keep RAW files because they are lossless so that you can always revert to all the information that was captured in the original shot in the first place?

As he clearly explained, the lossy format is for long-term storage of less important photos. For your important shots, use the lossless format.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2012 at 08:37 UTC
In reply to:

Joe Tam: Anyone know how fast class 10 SD on the eye-fi can get?

I have a class 10 sandisk extreme pro and it states 95mb/sec but is much slower than that on d7000.

i have 3 eye-fi pro x2 cards are they are sloooowww even when writing JPG basic files.

Shoot in RAW, disable dynamic lighting and noise reduction, set the color mode to standard, and you should get close to the card's maximum write speed. It's slower when the camera has to process the image first, and if you're shooting RAW then any processing it does is wasted anyway as the changes aren't saved to the image.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2012 at 01:49 UTC
In reply to:

Louis Dallara: You can buy a whole Samsung camera with built in wifi for $129 on Amazon
Why would you spend $99 on this card?
IMHO.My Eye-Fi X2 never worked right, so why would I gamble on this card, besides it doesn't work with a D800

Haha, that's cute. Yes you can spend $129 for a Wi-fi camera toy that takes crappy pictures, or you can put this card in your full-frame professional camera. It doesn't work with a D800 is not a problem for the millions of people who have other cameras.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2012 at 01:37 UTC
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Awesome! Eye-Fi upgrades their cards to a usable level just in time to be wiped out by in-camera wireless. I love my Eye-Fi card but I will love my in camera wireless even more.

Hmm. Spend $2500 on a new camera just for Wi-fi or $100 for a Wi-fi memory card? Tough choice. Yes, I can see a bleak future long term for this product, but right now most people do not have Wi-fi in their cameras and this is a great way to achieve that.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2012 at 01:35 UTC
In reply to:

Wayne1234: "... enables you to wirelessly connect a camera to a mobile device, such as a smartphone or tablet,"

I have a Kindle Fire. It is unclear to me that this card would enable me to transfer photos from it to the Fire.

Check the Kindle App store for the Eye-Fi App. I'm pretty sure it will work. I know it's in the Android store.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2012 at 01:31 UTC
In reply to:

camera4me: I tested the D600 at Best Buy yesterday and was not that impressed with the speed of auto focus with kit lens in available light.

Small aperture lens in poorly lit store. You're surprised?

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2012 at 07:47 UTC

I love Pentax, but YAWN. I was expecting something exciting from them for Photokina, like a full frame or at least a 24mp APS-C. Really Pentax, a slight redesign of last year's model? So disappointed.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2012 at 05:13 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

Superka: nothing can compare to Sigma 50/1.4. Why to bye this one?

The Sigma 50 1.4 is widely considered to be the best 1.4 compared to Nikkor, Canon, Sony, or Pentax branded 50mm 1.4 lenses. I'm doubt it could best this Zeiss lens in terms of image quality, but the Zeiss lens will cost likely 5 times more than the Sigma for perhaps a 10% increase in sharpness. Not a good tradeoff for those that care about value.

Additionally, the Zeiss is manual focus. Unless you're incredibly skilled at manually focusing and you have a split prism focusing screen, you will be throwing away a LOT of blurry shots with the Zeiss, and forget ever shooting a moving subject.

People with more money than brains will buy this. Not real photographers, but posers who want others to think they know what they're doing.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2012 at 05:35 UTC
On article Just Posted: Fujifilm X-E1 hands-on preview (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

pixel_peeper: There's no bite to any of the pictures I have seen from the XPro-1, with the same random-array sensor as the X-E1s. They all look as if they've been shot at f22. I put it down to the sensor, which appears to give significantly inferior resolution to equivalent Bayer-array cameras.

I'm really not sure which pictures you've been seeing. The X-Pro1 is sharper and cleaner than any APS-C, and competes with high end full frame cameras in terms of resolution. This isn't just my opinion, check out the Dx0mark scores or any objective image quality tests.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2012 at 05:12 UTC
In reply to:

starwolfy: I looked at those pics with my wife.
Indeed nothing wrong with those. We enjoyed them all and we are not american nor thinking those people look idiots...

I like the raw approach of the photographer. It's like...there a studio...but it feels a bit like the photoshoot was done by a friend for a friend...with this kind of "unprofessional professionalism" if you get what I mean.

I think it changes from what we usually see and it's cool.

I hope the photographer assumed this as it was his idea and how he wanted it to it is what he decided to produce and show...
Instead of this he listened too much to criticism and started to say apologies like he was not prepared blablabla...

There should be no rules to expression.

If he was smart, he would claim that this is exactly what he envisioned and damn the critics. Admitting that he was unprepared just proves that he is unprofessional and that the photos were not what he had planned.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2012 at 09:26 UTC

Crappy photographer.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2012 at 09:21 UTC as 133rd comment
In reply to:

NeilJones: I refuse to put a cheap lens like this on my D800! Sorry!

The $600 price tag is not the problem. The 50mm f/1.4 costs that much or less and I bet plenty of people have those on their D800s. The price isn't the problem, it's the aperture and build quality that make me want to avoid it.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2012 at 13:12 UTC
In reply to:

TTran510: I'm a Canon shooter but if the rumor of D600 specs and price are correct, I'm switching over to Nikon. The D600 and the new 24-85mm VR + a 50mm 1.8g would be perfect for my needs.

5 of the top 10 cameras in the world are Nikon. Zero are Canon. This is DXO ratings, not just my personal opinion.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2012 at 13:10 UTC
In reply to:

Wubslin: Plastic mounting. Variable maximum aperture. Unreadable focusing scale. Ineffective VR. Ridiculous over-complicated optical formula to try and compensate for their inability to design a sharp lens. FAIL.

That must mean that McDonalds makes the most delicious food.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2012 at 13:08 UTC
Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »