AbrasiveReducer

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

Comments

Total: 4310, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

fedway: This is what happens when you let engineers loose in a company without adult supervision. They'll come up with a technology marvel for a very small market segment that is overpriced and over-featured for most people. Meanwhile where is the E-m5 mark 3? Pdaf in the pen-f? 20mp sensor in the E-m10 and epl lines? Good pancake primes? Profits for the shareholders?

Their shareholders are not doing fine, unless they bought in right after the accounting scandal, but it's true Olympus has always had more stable businesses than cameras.

I wish they would continue to leverage the small size of m43 with a Pen-F II. A few more megapixels and fewer features to get the menus under control, would be great. And yeah, hand-held high res. I don't see how, but a truly small 80mp camera would be impressive.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2019 at 07:54 UTC
In reply to:

james s. kennedy: China had the intelligence not to waste money on putting a man in space. Our manned moon flights were pure hype that produced very liittle in new science. And I was classmates at MIT 1962-64 with three of the twelve persons who walked on the on.

If you're old enough to have been a classmate of three people who walked on the moon, you know it had immense value to the country in terms of pride, inspiration and the respect of other countries. These days, we strive to build a big wall and create a military Space Force. Now that's money well spent!

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2019 at 19:16 UTC
On article Video: The history of B&H in 91 seconds (176 comments in total)

What's missing is how B&H became what it is, while Willoughby's, Olden, Camera Barn, 47th Street and Cambridge, didn't. But that would take more than a minute.

Link | Posted on Jan 2, 2019 at 18:37 UTC as 74th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

NicoPPC: Looking at currentlw available photo equipment.. i do not have much wishes left..

One can for sure produce excellent quality (technically) photo with any recent gears.

And therein lies the problem. Went to an auto show. Mercedes had a vintage gull wing car on display. Hardly anybody looked at the new cars, and the sales rep said (in Geman) "we're all out of used cars!"

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2018 at 20:08 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Sarbu: I see DPReview's New Year's resolution is to continue its mocking of Pentaxians.
We're the most zealous, mobs all too willing of lynching people, and now, silly claims of us demanding "uncritically gushing praise".

Shame on you.

Even "Pentaxian" is self-depricating. It sounds like something Mr. Spock would caution against. Or maybe it's more like a gladiator.... (This is humor, and I still use my Spotmatic.)

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2018 at 20:05 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: Still waiting on someone to make a 1" compact with a viewfinder and a 13mm f1.4 (35mm equiv) lens. It shouldn't really have to be any larger than an RX100 III or ZS100.

Wouldn't that be nice. Especially if they didn't use the f/1.4 as an excuse to omit stabilization.

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2018 at 19:57 UTC
On article Gear of the Year 2018 - Carey's choice: Panasonic GX9 (303 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: This is unbelievable, a camera with so many basic faults is one of DPReview's Gear Of The Year!

It also seems odd that the reviewers in DPreview somehow all picked a different camera for their Gear Of The Year each time.(when this year has some clearly very distinguished new cameras like the X-T3 or A7 III), no duplication, and also they picked a camera with a different brand nearly each time. Sorry to say this, but I hope we are not seeing every brand getting a Gear Of The Year award, i.e. no one misses out. I also hope that these are not just award-o-mercials. This particular Panasonic is a poor choice IMHO.

Sometimes you pick up a camera and it just works for you. It's easy to hold and doesn't feel like a front-heavy brick or a bar of soap. When your nose touches the LCD, it doesn't change any settings. The adjustments that you frequently make are not buried in sub-menus. You don't often hit buttons by accident.

Most of these things are personal and can't be measured by some unbiased number rating system. Sometimes you have to choose between state of the art vs. fun to use.

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2018 at 21:12 UTC

I thought image stabilization lowered sharpness. Guess not.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2018 at 21:37 UTC as 19th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Class A: What is the business case for Amazon?

If Amazon wanted DPReview to "carry on doing exactly what [DPReview] were before it changed hands" why would they invest any money into the operation? Why not just watch DPReview carrying on without getting involved?

I can see that Amazon benefits from a site that has the potential of generating photography gear sales and that it could be in Amazon's best interest to keep such a site going instead of seeing it disappear due to lack of funding.

However, wouldn't there have been enough sites left that would have used Amazon affiliate links? A team of twelve staff is quite expensive. If the salaries are paid by Amazon, what do they expect in return?

Hypothetically, if DPReview staff didn't like any current camera and wrote them all to shreds, would Amazon still continue the financial support?

If it isn't Amazon financing the DPReview operation, what is? Adverts? Affiliate links?

Just trying to understand the situation.

I don't know what the internet term is, but it's simply a matter of "funneling" consumers to Amazon. DPR may find fault with a product and/or a consumer can choose a different camera or even to shop elsewhere. But why? There, right alongside the article are the links to Amazon.

Prices are the same everywhere within a country so that's not a concern and Amazon will get an additional boost when the remaining retailers who don't charge tax in all 50 states, are required to do so.

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2018 at 19:30 UTC
In reply to:

Sannaborjeson: The UI feels quite buggy on Mac. And the software in general needs a lot of love especially in the UX department. In its present form it is hardly usable.

Why would anyone want something simplified when it can be complicated? That's the Mac users wanting to spend less time at the computer. I want a learning curve so steep it's like hitting a brick wall. No pain, no gain!

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2018 at 04:37 UTC

There's a saying "It ain't bragging if you can do it" and DPR certainly has done it, and very well.

My personal opinion is that the reviewer-retailer association with Amazon is inappropriate, but nobody seems to notice. Nor am I sure of the difference between the advertorials Phil refused and current sponsored content. But accurate information is always good to have and DPR is well written, interesting and obviously the result of tons of hard work. Happy 20th!

Link | Posted on Dec 25, 2018 at 18:44 UTC as 110th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

h2k: Do you have a body count of how many print magazines you whacked along the way?

It would have happened anyway. All the big circulation photo magazines were "buying guides", which means mostly ads. And people realized they didn't need to pay for advertisements.

Link | Posted on Dec 25, 2018 at 18:24 UTC
In reply to:

haylebob: what means IBS?

sungphoto, thank you for the best and most meaningful comment of the year!

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2018 at 20:53 UTC
In reply to:

onlyfreeman: Why are people stealing camera gear, I thought nobody bought cameras anymore?

Well, they didn't buy them.

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2018 at 20:50 UTC

There are some basic truths in this world and #1 is: If a thing can be stolen, it will be.

I expect Hunt's insurance agent will be recommending some less attractive but sturdier redecorating. The fact that is was possible to do this in under a minute is just insane.

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2018 at 20:49 UTC as 26th comment
On article Gear of the Year 2018 - Barney's choice: Nikon Z7 (365 comments in total)

My takeaway is that a camera may lack a certain feature or perform poorly in some aspect but depending on the photos the user takes, these "shortcomings" may make no difference. They make a huge difference in test reports and forums, but they may not make any difference to a particular user.

I'll be interested to read what makes SLR use such a pain. Having both types of cameras, the only thing I can think of is size and weight and I don't see these big lens mount mirrorless cameras helping much on that score.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2018 at 18:47 UTC as 50th comment | 2 replies
On article DPReview TV: Best and worst of 2018 (468 comments in total)
In reply to:

Angrymagpie: Not drunk enough! Basically everyone other than Jordan looked sober!

Bravo, Richard. I'm not going to watch the video but I gather the best camera was the Fuji and that was based on--of all things--that it was really enjoyable to use. Cameras being as good as they are, for many people that might be the only significant "differentiator" left. But you can't argue about enjoyment the way you can about dynamic range measurements.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2018 at 19:08 UTC
In reply to:

adventure_photo: I won’t even consider a camera if it doesn’t have IBIS.

A lot of older photographers do not have perfectly steady hands. And try working in a camera store when a customer with Parkinson's disease comes in looking for a camera. Those older folks have the money to buy a new camera every 18 months so manufacturers, if they are smart, pay attention.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2018 at 17:09 UTC
In reply to:

IDoLikeCameras: I posted about this in the forum and I'm glad to see this sort of response. I think what we need is more information about stabilization, does not matter if its IBIS or lens based. We need to understand better how it works as readers, and understand which camera is better at what.
I find good IS makes a world of difference in many more situations than one would think. A lot of people are used to just bump the ISO, bring a tripod, or just "be better at staying still" but it only goes so far.
Can you picture a rocket launch at night handled (so 1" shutter speed)? My 600USD camera can, why can't my more expensive one do it? Which ones are closer?
Etc.

(the G9X seems very good and the XH1+ lens + latest firmware as well, way better than Sony in fact!)

Amen. And please, no more of thie highly educated photographer who "knows" that wide angle lenses do not require (or apparently, benefit) from stabilization. I find stabilization is like using a tripod; it isn't always needed but never makes things worse. Roger may disagree, but I have yet to be disappointed by having a stabilized lens, body, or both. Put the IS in, and take the anti-aliasing/blur filter out.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2018 at 20:23 UTC

To avoid the angst of "taking sides" why not put the burden on manufacturers? Next time you're doing a puff piece interview, ask "What is the specific reason you've omitted in-body stabilization from this camera?" Let them explain why omitting this feature was a good idea.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2018 at 20:06 UTC as 124th comment
Total: 4310, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »