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


Total: 2923, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

M1963: This article must have been so frustrating for fanboys on both camps...

I think each of these cameras is way better than the other.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2016 at 19:28 UTC
In reply to:

Tariag: She didn't have much damage... Reputation? Hard to value...
Those who have had damage, are those who paid the licence to use pictures that should have been free.
Getty should refund them. Period.

DPR needs more amateur attorneys, so we can settle this. I wonder if Ken Rockwell has a law degree?

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2016 at 18:26 UTC
In reply to:

brycesteiner: How is this any different than breaking into someone's house, stealing the television and selling it on eBay?
If convicted the person would go to jail. In this case, they probably won't but should.

These photos are high quality, not misrepresented, and not labeled "rare". That's how this differs from selling something on eBay.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2016 at 18:23 UTC

Once again...if a thing can be stolen, it will be. With stakes this high, I wonder who has the deeper bench of lawyers (smiley face). Interesting that she feels her reputation has been damaged. Were the photos used in ads for something distasteful, like cigarettes or politicians?

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 20:27 UTC as 71st comment
On article Rock Solid: Canon 1D X Mark II Review (406 comments in total)
In reply to:

Earth Art: Great job with getting this review done and on time. I don't personally ever use any review from any site to make purchasing decisions for my gear, but I know others do, and this will be very helpful. There is a wide demographic that actually buys the 1D bodies. While most are probably wildlife and sports shooters, I see quite a few being lugged around cities and national parks as family vacation cameras and landscape photography cameras.

I've never even held a 1D camera, even though I have been shooting Canon for over 20 years. Thus I am not qualified to praise or complain about the camera or the review itself.

That's ok. You don't need to have any familiarity with the camera to comment on it, or on the accuracy of the review.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 16:54 UTC
On article Getting up close: Canon EF-M 28mm macro hands-on review (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

rfsIII: Vindication! At last a lens that will make people take the EOS M seriously.

I haven't been that impressed with the 22mm but as you say, the 11-22 is terrific. Small, slow, sharp and cheap.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 20:49 UTC
On article Nikon D500 versus D750: Which one is right for you? (369 comments in total)
In reply to:

turvyT: I see that a thread with a post and two answers mildly critizicing the election of two Nikons together for this article has disappeared hours after being posted. Censorship or mistake?

While you're removing brand bashing, there's a comment a couple up from here that says there is something "wrong" with Fuji camera users. Ok, that's not brand bashing, just passing judgement on people the author doesn't know, but still pretty bad.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 16:39 UTC
On article Nikon D500 versus D750: Which one is right for you? (369 comments in total)
In reply to:

AngularJS: Don't buy any. The 5dmk4 is around the corner.

I didn't realize the Canon 5D4 had been released.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 15:11 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

Martin Meier: no thing is too stupid to sell it ... a very expensive gimmick nobody needs ...

It's hard to imagine anyone needs one of these. But I'd sure like to toss one around before the novelty wears off.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 04:09 UTC
On article Second Time Around: Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II Review (288 comments in total)
In reply to:

thetechhimself: I've noted the copy variance myself in the G Series, specifically my former G1X II had a so-so compared to other folks copies.

Any suggestions for detecting a good/bad copy via benchmark for us mere mortals?

Get a job working for DP Review. If you get a softie, just pick up the phone.

It's really good of DPR to point out these quality control lapses because the average guy has no way of knowing if the camera he just bought is as good as it gets. A complex, wide to tele zoom in a camera that costs less than the lens alone would cost, if it was interchangeable, is a real challenge. I had two Sony RX100 (I and II) and both had one or two corners softer than the others.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2016 at 05:09 UTC
On article Trippy mirrored timelapse turns Hong Kong upside down (15 comments in total)

Looks like the opening to the Bosch TV series.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 16:16 UTC as 10th comment
On article Fujifilm X-Pro2 versus X-T2: Seven key differences (362 comments in total)
In reply to:

JosephScha: Re: "So which one should you buy?" Really? Is that the purpose of the info presented on dpreview? I hope not. Using phrases like that will bring out all the people who think Amazon has influenced content, to say "see? See? I told you so!".

Barney, your candor is appreciated. It's all about helping people decide what to buy, period. Not that long ago, people paid money for subscriptions to magazines that told them what to buy. Literally paying to be advertised to.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2016 at 18:52 UTC

Doing laundry, now there's a twist on tragedy. Generally, I like photos of ruins, except when they are staged but at least there's no smokey HDR.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 16:41 UTC as 35th comment
In reply to:

Impulses: Why are they trying to make renting gear like one of those swag subscriptions for tochkes or some sorta curated experience. Gear isn't content, gear is for producing content. This seems like a solution in search of a problem at worst, and a service for those that just don't know what they want (at all) and simply wanna dabble in photography...

The latter isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I don't see the market. If you can afford $150/month ($200 with insurance) then you can afford to buy/return/resell a few cameras, and in the end actually own something in return for your time/money. Paying up $1,800 (yr) or even $900 and in the end come away empty handed is a tough sell.

That's the key. If you can afford it, you don't need it. The pro needs a specific item at a specific time, and if it needs to be rented, it's part of the cost of the job. The amateur wants to try stuff, sure, but the cost of trying something could just as easily be put towards buying it. Or, you could pull a Ken Rockwell and just buy stuff and return it.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 17:41 UTC
In reply to:

obsolescence: That Theta cam is junk. If you want to see some really high quality 360˚ VR Panos, check out http://360-foto.dk or http://worldwidepanorama.org

Yes, but what would happen if the Theta did have decent image quality? Its bound to happen eventually, and then it will be the time to make a comparison like this.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 04:20 UTC
In reply to:

Skyscape: I'm betting that greater than 98% of the "photographers" existing now wouldn't have the slightest idea how to produce a good photo with this camera.

"How many autofocus points does it have?"

"OMG OMG the images are not super-razor sharp!" We all know the definition of a good photo is sharpness now.

"Does it shoot 4K video?"

"Where do you insert the memory card and battery?"

"Can I return it to the seller if, after 'testing' the camera I find the lens to have some silly 'flaws' that only I can see because I am a super-professional photographer that requires their lenses to be NASA-quality perfect, so as to shoot flowers and brick walls in my back yard."

I do think today's cameras are superior but the level of skill required to get a good image is vastly less than it used to be. It's like saying "I know how to drive an automatic transmission!"

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 19:10 UTC

Its funny to read this because anyone who's ever studied photography knows about Ansel microwaving the prints to check for dry-down. But maybe its worthwhile, to show to today's photographers how much effort it used to take to get to a great image.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 18:59 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies

Nice. If your idea of a nice carbon tripod is a Chinese knock-off, the price will seem unimaginable. But if you're comparing to a really good tripod like Gitzo or RRS, this FLM looks quite reasonable. And unlike your camera, you don't replace your tripod every other year.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 22:03 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: Technology is one thing but cmon curmudgeons. There's no way you don't look at a camera with dials for shutter, ISO, aperture, exposure, and still have a dial under your finger to use for whatever else you can desire and not start to drool. I'm starting to feel like the camera is more about the enjoyment I get out of using it and all the dials and big EVF really make it fun to USE, not just fun to look at the pictures that come out afterwards.

There are two generations here; folks who want as many features as possible, with as many buttons and menus as possible...and people who want the technology under the hood, with exterior designs going back to what worked in the first place. Maybe someone will make a camera you use for 20 years, that doesn't require a battery.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 20:35 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

jl_smith: So I did a short comparison between an X-T2 setup and a D750, since someone mentioned one could just buy a D750 for 'these prices'. Of course you cannot *DIRECTLY* compare FF and APS-C (insert equivalence blah blah blah) but I came close. Also, this is an older camera vs a new X-T2, so prices are skewed a bit.

For those curious - took the prices and stats from B&H:
D750 w/ 35mm f/1.8, 70-200 f/4, and 16-35
bulk:215 in^3

X-T2 w/ 23/1.4, 50-140/2.8, 10-24
Bulk:162 in^3

So with the Fuji setup you pay 1.6% more in cost, for 82% of the weight and 75% of the bulk (volume) of the Nikon. Specs you all can compare for yourselves (video differences, OVF vs EVF, whatever).

Then there are the intangibles: control preferences, after-release support of camera, battery longevity, etc.

I prefer Fuji ;)
Others may prefer Nikon.

Good to have choices.

Interesting comparison. Both these outfits are heavy (bring on macho comments) but if you're going to carry all this stuff, why go with a smaller sensor? I don't fault Fuji; if you want lenses of this quality, they will be heavy.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 17:28 UTC
Total: 2923, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »