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


Total: 3107, showing: 501 – 520
« First‹ Previous2425262728Next ›Last »
On article Hell on Earth: Shooting in the Danakil Depression (67 comments in total)
In reply to:

alfredo_tomato: I lived in Eritrea (pre independence) for three years, but never made it down to the Afar region. Some friends travelled there and had an incident. They came upon an Ostrich in the road. They pulled up to it to make it move. It didn't. The driver blew the horn and that startled the Ostrich. It kicked the radiator, causing a leak.

They were lucky they had another car that towed the disabled vehicle to civilization.

What a great story. Those birds have a reputation for being really nasty.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2016 at 19:38 UTC
In reply to:

The Silver Nemesis: In direction, a wise change, this article is...

With no disrespect to DPR, I think its filler between camera announcements and shows. Not to say it's bad but its well covered territory. Admitting that giving everything either a gold or silver award tends to devalue these ratings is a good observation.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 23:51 UTC

A valid point but the real question for DPR readers is, is the current model dramatically better than the one you already have? Another question is, will switching brands translate to better images? It's human nature, after buying expensive stuff, to convince yourself the answer is yes.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 18:53 UTC as 123rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

kharlow: How hard would it be to add a nice little optical viewfinder to these fixed focal length cameras? Maybe even add some parallax correction?

You have to wonder since the original GR-1 film camera has a perfectly decent optical finder. About the closest thing seems to be the Sigma viewfinder for the DP-1. It's surprisingly good and really small.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 00:11 UTC
In reply to:

Brad Sarno: I think that naysayers to the GR simply don't yet appreciate the astounding IQ and the cult-worthy handling and real world performance and feature set linked with ergonomics and pocketability. It's for a certain type of taste, but it clearly wouldn't have risen to such a cult status if it didn't really bring so much pleasure and such astounding results.

A lot of it's strength comes from what it lacks. A big, fast, mediocre zoom. The kind that takes pillow shaped pictures that have to be massively corrected with software.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 00:09 UTC

If you're going to make a niche product, do it right, and they did. Just great image quality and an easy to follow interface. And the film version even has a viewfinder.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 19:55 UTC as 50th comment
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (158 comments in total)

That Russian quality control does not come cheap. Not anymore, anyway.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 18:56 UTC as 41st comment
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

Old Cameras: All of their comments are self reinforcing, they sound a little too sure of themselves. In ten years they'll be in exactly the same market position they're in now. They make cameras that try very hard to look like retro film cameras, and simultaneously can't wait to stop making film. Their products overlap each other and until yesterday they all had the same sensor. Their products are the opposite of innovation. Typical sales guys, toeing the company line. I think they're just throwing cameras against the wall, trying to find one that will stick. I like the style but I can't think of a compelling reason to own one.

They can't wait to stop making film because it isn't cost effective in small quantities (it was pure profit in the glory days.)

As for not innovating, these Fuji are cameras are ideal for people who used to use a rangefinder camera with a wide angle lens; not an experience everybody wants or is familiar with. You can tell when they make comments about how small the frame line is when using a telephoto (which is why a guy would have both a Nikon F and an M4.)

One area in which I think they are on the "cutting edge" is keeping the megapixels down. Customers, although not the DPR crowd, have repeatedly said no more megapixels (Thom Hogan has a good piece on this) but the "innovators" keep piling on the megapixels anyway.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 05:41 UTC
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (354 comments in total)

You can tell these guys are from a photo company, not an electronics company. Guys at Samsung or Sony for that matter would not be drawing comparisons to 400-800 ASA film and how we got along just fine.

But your conclusions are obviously correct. Sony will not flounder and Fuji will not take their spot anytime soon. On paper at least, Sony will offer more for the money too. Fuji certainly knows medium and large format but who knows how many they could sell.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2016 at 21:29 UTC as 108th comment | 2 replies
On article 1.4 and More: Canon EF 35mm F1.4L II comparison (249 comments in total)

I'd be curious how the Sigma holds up after a year or two of hard use. Roger seems to think it will be ok.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2016 at 19:21 UTC as 62nd comment
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2499 comments in total)
In reply to:

arhmatic: I like your subtitle "retro slick"

I am still amazed how many people deny the importance of good design "because we are pros and because we need good ergonomics" or "this is a tool, not a fashion statement".

Industrial design does matter.
Well done Fuji, well done Leica.

Who cares, indeed. What is beautiful to one person doesn't even register for another. There's a famous quote about the early sloped back Porsches "It looks ugly until you see what it can do."

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2016 at 22:34 UTC
On article A classic reinvented? Domke Chronicle Review (125 comments in total)

Canvas is heavy and cheap (at least to the manufacturer.) This bag is over 4 pounds, empty. Canvas tends to soak up water too, even when treated. The only upside is that it looks like you're roughing it. Those big metal hooks add weight as well, and there's no shoulder pad. Ballistic nylon may not look as cool but it's much lighter and the good stuff is practically waterproof. To each his own.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2016 at 20:01 UTC as 70th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

mclaren777: The margin on these things must be at least 80% so it's only a matter of time before other companies help drive the price down.

Come on, China, bring on the knock-offs!

You mean they're not made in Italy (smiley face)?

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2016 at 17:24 UTC

It would be a shame to give this a silver award because the viewfinder behaves like a Leica M camera. In fact, its surprising people are surprised. If the appearance of the camera doesn't offer a clue, the film simulation should be indication. This camera will seem familiar to people old enough to have used a M3, M2 or M4.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2016 at 18:40 UTC as 48th comment | 2 replies
On article GoPro's poor holiday sales lead to staff layoff (116 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vanitas Photo: It is surprising how this companies operate inside:

The CEO screws up the pricing the new camera and the ones paying for his mistake are the 7% of workers being laid off...

But not only that they have less revenue, IE financially speaking they are doing great... There isn't REALLY a reason to lay off 7% of the employees.

Truth be told the real problem of Gopro is their business strategy, they have focused on action cams and now 360 cams, problem is you can't expect the market to be forever like when you started...

These days, layoffs are the solution to every problem, every bad quarter. Photo is no different, except some companies are so short staffed, people have to fire themselves.

But it all pales in comparison to a giant like Carly, who laid off 25,000 in one pass. There are small cities that don't have 25,000 people.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2016 at 09:00 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Fujifilm X70 (263 comments in total)

A (relatively) simple optical viewfinder would have made this a cult camera and distinguished it from the GR and $300 Coolpix A.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2016 at 04:47 UTC as 34th comment | 11 replies
In reply to:

role_of_72: "Image stabilization: Unknown"


I hope it has one...

Not likely but brace yourself for the pros and experts telling you it's not needed with this focal length. Not correct, but they're entitled to their opinion.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2016 at 00:39 UTC
In reply to:

johnvanr: How can it be called a camera in the vein of the X100 if it doesn't have a viewfinder? That viewfinder is a key part of the X100-series, the very essence of it.

Its like the X100 except for the lens and the viewfinder.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2016 at 00:36 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2499 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dave Oddie: Another digital camera without a tilting or articulated rear LCD.

I honestly don't understand why. Having the ability to use it as a waist level finder or for other situations is a real boon and with digital it is not anything hard to implement.

Arguments about robustness are spurious in my opinion. The forums are NOT littered with stories of broken articulated LCD's.

This would make sense if Fuji knew a majority of their customers did, or did not want a tilting screen.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2016 at 23:09 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2499 comments in total)

P.S. I almost forgot. My clairvoyance tells me this will receive a gold award. Now we have "non-final image quality" to go with our pre-production cameras so I predict a virtual gold award.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2016 at 17:22 UTC as 484th comment | 4 replies
Total: 3107, showing: 501 – 520
« First‹ Previous2425262728Next ›Last »