AbrasiveReducer

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

Comments

Total: 3107, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1597 comments in total)
In reply to:

JLim22: I don't understand why they decided to flip the screen below the camera...
And crippled auto iso?

It makes no difference to Canon whether you buy SLR or mirrorless (except perhaps that if you buy an M model you'll need to buy new lenses) but things like the way the selfie screen flips don't make much sense.

I expect price reductions on this camera. Not because there is anything wrong with the sensor or it's not a state of the art video camera; but its too expensive for a customer who just wants a small APS camera with interchangable lenses and a built-in viewfinder. That's a $600 camera.

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2016 at 21:08 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1597 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chris62: The strange thing, but over 2 years older Samsung NX bodies are still very competitive and NX1 is even much better.

Such company as Canon this year should present in such camera the sensor 30 MP BSI CMOS, 4k, set of 5 pancake lens, top AF system, the best viewfinder and screen and be the best specified mirrorless on the marked.
Big disappoitment from my side.

Samsung's fault was thinking the camera business was healthy.

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2016 at 01:13 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1597 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thematic: strange praise in these comments and canon forums - every post ends with "even though I won't be buying this camera...."

Why is nobody wanting to purchase it?

There are three reasons why people are posting they won't buy this camera. (1) They are DPR readers, which means having the best performing camera is more important than having the best picture, (2) more than any other manufacturer, Canon can be counted on for significant rebates and price drops and (3) everybody already has more cameras than they know what to do with.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2016 at 18:31 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1597 comments in total)
In reply to:

sykkys: And one other thing, does this camera control distortion in real time? I've read wide angle lens show quite a bit of distortion on Canon mirrorless.

The distortion with the 11-22 is pretty extreme at 11mm, but possibly corrected automatically in the M5(?)

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 00:32 UTC

I wonder if this is new technology or if Canon could have done this years ago but figured people wouldn't pay over $2000.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2016 at 00:15 UTC as 20th comment

Of all the explanations why you should avoid fake lenses, the funniest has to be because they fail to meet safety standards. Nikon pulls this too. We're not talking about flash units. The danger in using these lenses is to your wallet and your images, not your safety.

BTW, the fakers have gotten more bold. I recently bought some Canon electronic cable releases that were too cheap to be genuine. They said Made in Japan, and I thought the counterfeiters would avoid flat-out lying about the point of origin. But in a world where news is fake, anything goes.

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 20:32 UTC as 27th comment | 7 replies
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: "And for that reason, while I like the a6500, I don't love it." -DPR

A camera that costs that much should be lovable.

When it's your own money, you tell yourself (and others) you love it, whether you do or you don't.

When you work for DPR, you can test it and put it back in the box so there's no need to love what you don't love.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2016 at 19:09 UTC
On article Gear of the Year: Richard's choice - Fujifilm X-T2 (169 comments in total)

On the contrary Richard, because all current cameras are supremely capable and the automatic features people complain about didn't even exist for most of the history of photography, choosing a camera because it's fun to use makes complete sense.

I tell people who are looking at the better, more expensive cameras, forget about the test reports--they are for fans. I ask 2 questions. (1) Is it fun to use and (2) how fast and reliable is the repair service, if needed.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2016 at 19:00 UTC as 24th comment
On article Gear of the Year: Richard's choice - Fujifilm X-T2 (169 comments in total)
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: These Gear of the Year pieces are so much better than the site's normal reviews; no bloviating about camera design, no sophomoric conjecture about imaging science, just heartfelt opinion.
You've conveyed more useful information in just a few paragraphs than the regular reviews say in their thousands of ponderous words. All reviews should be like this.

Amen.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2016 at 18:59 UTC

I think I'd rather go with a Fotron.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fotron

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2016 at 01:02 UTC as 216th comment
On article Canon 16-35mm F2.8L III real-world sample gallery (121 comments in total)
In reply to:

aaronbass813: I would be really disappointed if I spent $5,700 (5D MKIV + 16-35 III) and that was the image quality that I was getting out of the combo.

I think this is a case where if you don't like something you shouldn't buy it. And by the way, the 17-40 is a dog. DPR won't say it, but it's the worst of all Canon's L lenses. Some people love it (go figure) but there's no comparsion between the 17-40 and any other L series wide zoom.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 18:03 UTC

You can see the darkening in the corners, but knowing Tokina, I'll bet it's an outstanding lens. Tokina has been making "art" lenses all along.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2016 at 22:03 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS M5 added to studio scene comparison tool (87 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: Interesting that every Sony camera article is rammed with hundreds of comments about how awful and lacking it is, and in a Canon one there is absolutely zero trolling and comparatively few comments, despite Canon being late to market and the performance being behind the Sony.

It seems the rivalry is only one way, or (more probably) that many of the negative comments in the Sony threads are from paid trolls and astroturfers.

Looking at the engraving in the middle left hand ninth of the chart - the wall behind the old lady with clasped hands; the A6300 and A6000 are the only aps-c cameras resolving the lines on the wall here. The image quality is remarkable.

And yet if you visit the forums you'll find that many Canon and Nikon users will not even accept that Sony is a camera company, (They make TVs apparently).

So how do they settle this with themselves? that more detail is recorded in images produced by a camera that was built by a company that isn't even a camera company?

Since you brought it up, here's an idea. Take a Sony camera and a Canon camera. Send each in for repair. Then decide if Sony is a camera company.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2016 at 19:27 UTC
On article Canon EOS M5 added to studio scene comparison tool (87 comments in total)

Interesing that this elaborate chart does nothing to resolve prople's opinions. They look at the same chart and reach completely different conclusions.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2016 at 19:22 UTC as 25th comment
On article Have your say: Best prime lens of 2016 (153 comments in total)

If I'd seen a few tests, I'd probably vote for the 19 PC Nikkor. As it is, all I know for sure is its expensive and made by Nikon.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2016 at 06:47 UTC as 16th comment

What happened to these photos is as important as the photos themselves. These days, you can claim the images were altered in Photoshop and if that doesn't work, create a fake news story about a conspiricy and people will believe it. But nobody is claiming that the events shown here did not happen.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2016 at 06:43 UTC as 37th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

tom1234567: Just got rid of Adobe LR AND PP today
I now use on1Photo Raw instead of LR,
and the new Affinity for windows released today in place of PP.

so Adobe no more monies from me,
the LR done nothing for the Fuji jpeg problems
I have the Fuji X-T2 and the D7200 and the new programs handle the files with no problems
I think a few more users will be leaving Adobe soon

Tom G

When you see what Affinty gives you for $40, you realize how ridiculous Adobe has gotten.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 23:03 UTC

Even though most photography is ridiculously easy compared to how it used to be, not everybody wants to be a professional, or even claim to be one. For those folks, taking photos is about chronicling their lives and for that, any camera will do.

I've had people ask how I took a shot and when I tell them, it's obvious they're not interested in putting in that much effort.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 19:33 UTC as 8th comment
On article Fujifilm launches X-A10 as entry-level X-series model (166 comments in total)

Seems like a good deal for the price. As for the dreaded selfies, if you look at Fuji literature for their lower end models, it's all aimed at young girls so obviously the selfie makes sense.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 19:36 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply
On article The whole nine yards: Canon 35mm F1.4L II USM review (327 comments in total)

The conclusions are sort of funny. A $1600 35mm lens may not be ideal for those on a tight budget. Since the lens is large and heavy, people who want a lens that's not large and heavy might want to look elsewhere. Excuse me, but aren't these things obvious?

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2016 at 20:26 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
Total: 3107, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »