AbrasiveReducer

Lives in United States United States
Joined on May 27, 2010

Comments

Total: 3506, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

40 ounces is still 2.5 pounds. Not terrible but not light as a feather either.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2017 at 19:00 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / EOS 200D Review (295 comments in total)

Small, light, inexpensive, yet takes pretty much any lens you might want to use. Beginner? Sure. Second/third body? Why not.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2017 at 18:46 UTC as 28th comment | 2 replies

Thanks, Roger! I wonder how many companies make the circular polarizing film used in these filters. Maybe some polarizers perform the same because they are the same.

You're never going to convince someone who pays $200 for a German made filter with a brass ring that it's optically the same as the most expensive Hoya for $85. It's difficult to do before someone buys and impossible, after. Polarizers also seem to be equally prone to eventual de-cementing regardless of price.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2017 at 19:11 UTC as 33rd comment | 2 replies

Does "Enterprise" mean anything? I mean, do you need a corporation to use it or is it the high tech way of saying heavy-duty? Endorsed by Shatner. At $500, it would seem smaller non-enterprise HDs should be almost free.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2017 at 07:52 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply

APS would get the job done, but for the money they will ask it will have to be full frame. People will ask "If mirrorless costs less to manufacture, why is it so expensive?" and the answer will be "Because it's full frame."

This is going to be a boutique thing like the DF, although hopefully much more successful.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 19:02 UTC as 150th comment
In reply to:

Gesture: Here's an idea. For a lens that expensive, the retrofit is FREE.

The reason a lens should come with a lenshood is because it performs better with a lenshood, and there's no reason reason to believe the manufacturer doesn't want you to get the best from their product.

The reason lenshoods are no longer included is because they are pure profit, while at the same time not essential so no one can say they were forced to buy one.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2017 at 04:53 UTC

How about a movie on GAF 500 film starring Henry Fonda? Ok, Peter Fonda. Even if it was a bad movie it wouldn't be around for long.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2017 at 02:15 UTC as 13th comment | 2 replies
On article Yashica is teasing a comeback to the camera market (275 comments in total)

Assuming they still own the Contax name it would be foolish to make anything new called Yashica. Then again, if the editors of DPR had to go to Wikipedia to find out about Kyocera pulling the plug, a new generation might not know anything about Yashica, who made excellent cameras and sharp lenses but got a reputation as being sort of second tier.

Kyocera is such an interesting company and they seem willing to try anything. They made really nice stereo receivers!

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2017 at 17:57 UTC as 84th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

APenza: I would only consider buying the IQ3 after DPreview reviews it. By then I will have saved enough money cashing in my bottle deposits.

I want to see if the Phase One gets a Gold award. Silver, I might think twice.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2017 at 19:50 UTC

Great. But since Velvia pretty much put the kibosh on Ektachrome, why would things be different a second time around?

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 18:49 UTC as 46th comment
In reply to:

HeyItsJoel: This is like the time a bunch of lawyers got together and decided they wanted a lot of money. So they sued the tobacco industry.

Is Naruto a smoker?

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 18:42 UTC
In reply to:

FD: 1999 euro @ Kamera Express, The Netherlands..

Alas, the cost of free healthcare. (Still worth it.)

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 18:05 UTC
In reply to:

Saurat: 1700 bucks. One could buy a proper camera for that price.

One could buy a proper camera for $1200. This is a proper camera for people who don't want to change lenses.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 17:55 UTC
In reply to:

Bambi24: I don't know what the point of this camera is really.

A puny sensor that won't perform well except when the sun is out.

24-600mm superzoom will cause a rollercoaster in terms of distortion.

And you also can't argue that this thing is compact, it's not, and at 1kg it's very heavy.

And it's super expensive. For $1700 you can just get an APS-C camera with a few nice lenses instead. You'll get way way better image quality for a fraction of the price.

Yup. You can get a big 'ol shoulder bag and load it up with lenses and filters and caps and get slightly better results. You might miss some shots while messing with lens changes and the 600mm equivalent lens will be a giant, but it will be worth the extra work. I'm kidding, of course.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 17:51 UTC

Still big and heavy but I love the concept. Tamron built a business around super zooms and they weren't even sharp, so obviously there is a market for an all-in-one lens you never have to change.

Imagine packing for a trip with just one good camera, batteries and done. And remember most camera buyers are are not pros, they're people on vacation. First, the airlines crack down on what they can carry. Then, they're part of a tour group and don't have time to change lenses. Not to mention, they woudn't be carrying anything close to 600mm, anyway.

To Marty who asked why somebody would spend this much and carry this much just to avoid changing lenses, I would say: dust, wind, water, speed of operation, no need to mess with multiple filter sizes, less stuff to carry, etc. I'm curious to see if they can squeeze any more out of that sensor.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 17:44 UTC as 150th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

justmeMN: "from an original price of $25,995" -DPR

The one person who bought the camera at that price is upset. :-)

What digital camera lasts "a few decades"? If you mean, will it still function in 20 years, sure, but the very reason you buy a camera like this--to get the last little bit of maximum image quality--assures that there will be something better and it won't take decades to arrive.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 23:18 UTC
On article Nikon D850 First Impressions Review (994 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vacilando Productions: Canon 5D Mark 3&4 files look like mush in comparison. So glad i'm selling all my Canon crap.

Every week, they have throwback Thursday and people comment that they got fabulous shots with a camera from the 1990s. But somehow, if you don't have the latest Nikon, all the other current cameras are crap. Got it.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 16:25 UTC

You certainly picked the right quote for the headline. If you translate it to mean "We are savvy enough to know that a Sony sensor in somebody else's camera is still a sale" then it makes sense.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 16:21 UTC as 61st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

ovlov: They'll be out of business before these come to market.

It's Nikon. People don't have to actually have one to adore it. It helps, but it's not essential.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 05:41 UTC
In reply to:

1Dx4me: what is the purpose of this old news? my canon 40D is on one the shelves in my den and collecting dust, why would that be news?

It's summer, and even Sony can't release new cameras every week.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2017 at 23:43 UTC
Total: 3506, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »