AbrasiveReducer

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

Comments

Total: 3422, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

A shame, since these cards always seemed to perform as well as Sandisk but were usually a little cheaper.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2017 at 17:13 UTC as 100th comment

If Rex had bitten into a Nikon F, he'd be on his way to the doggie dentist.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2017 at 21:06 UTC as 50th comment

It looks like a SINAR roll film holder and it's probably just as easy to fit in a pocket.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2017 at 17:24 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

PhotoRotterdam: 591 reactions about a post of which most people would think "so what?". It's a camera folks! Not a life changing experience.

And all over a "game changer" that will be replaced, at the very latest, at Photokina next year (and knowing Sony, almost certainly sooner.) This worship seems to be a problem with electronics, like people who sleep in front of the Apple store to get the first phone.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2017 at 17:49 UTC

Adapters are almost always bad news and at the very least extra expense. But from Sony's point of view, it may make sense to take a little abuse now, so that when they have the lenses people want, customers won't be tempted to use their existing lenses. Sony won't get to be #2 with customers using another brand of lenses.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 18:26 UTC as 106th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

LightBug: Title is misleading. It's the combo of A9 plus adapter that are being evaluated, title seems to suggest A9 is solely responsible for the performance reported.

What's a camera shop?

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 18:17 UTC

Tamron gave us the super zoom and even the need for better quality won't put the genie back in the bottle.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 17:29 UTC as 53rd comment
On article Now we know: Sony a9 is sharper than we thought (394 comments in total)
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: There is a much simple answer to this problem. Shoot the camera like your readers would—use the manufacturers autofocus system for the test scene. If the results are sharp; GOLD! If the images are soft; that's the way the cookie crumbles and better luck next time.
Retesting a camera isn't fair to you or the readers. It wastes your valuable time and gives readers a false sense of what the cameras are capable of. None of us have all day to focus one photo and neither do you.

It sounds like you are saying, if resolution gets any higher, the user can expect disappointment because it will be next to impossible to achieve what the camera/lens is capable of, and certainly no fun trying. (Except for certain bloggers.)

IMO, for a test to be meaningful, it should show what someone buying the camera can expect. Out of the box, no pre-production. For example, if resolution is so high that manually focusing an autofocus camera makes a noticeable improvement, that's interesting and not suprising but quite a sacrifice for the user to make to get the best out of the camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 01:18 UTC
On article Hot mess: Remembering the Leica M8 (155 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: In 2007, Phil Askey found it fit to give an "Highly Recommended" commendation to this camera.

...a camera that was "decidedly unpolished", "rough around the edges", "a buggy mess", which "crashed frequently" and produced JPEGs that "tended to look a bit murky", with RAWs only providing "acceptable results", all this while "getting worryingly hot", a "hot mess", if the title of this article is anything to go by.

It took 10 years for DPR to tell things as they actually are, regarding this camera.

This is what photography enthusiasts have to take into account anytime a specialized publication - any publication - decides to write a piece about a new Leica product.

Respect and reverence is a wonderful thing but, in what regards to accurate reporting, it can be quite detrimental.

...as detrimental as having ones vision temporarily impaired by pesty floating red dots ;)

If it was an expensive camera, people might consider these flaws unacceptible. As it is, they're part of the charm.

Problems aside, it did have something most of today's "rangefinder style" cameras lack: a rangefinder. There really is nothing like shooting a rangefinder with a wide angle lens and Leica's cloth shutters are worlds away from the noise and the recoil of Copal shutters.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2017 at 16:19 UTC
In reply to:

D R C: Waterhouse stops?

Good one!

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 20:38 UTC
On article Adobe achieves record revenue (176 comments in total)

Investors have confidence because subscriptions have locked people into paying, month after month. Think about it. Sony has to introduce a new camera every month to keep people paying. Instead of worrying about Amazon monopolizing, people should realize Adobe has an effective monopoly and that's why their stock is doing so well.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 15:56 UTC as 25th comment
In reply to:

PhotoUniverse: Why would those companies think we should pay extra because they celebrate their own anniversary?

PhotoUniverse - For the same reason camera manufacturers put their name, logo and now, even the model on straps. The customer pays for the camera and then walks around as a billboard advertising the camera. As an added bonus, these brightly colored straps make your camera easy to spot, so you stand out in a crowd.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2017 at 20:50 UTC

And those sticky bits of food that flossing can't quite reach? No problem.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2017 at 19:10 UTC as 59th comment

Leica has, and will always have, a corner on cameras that commemorate, well, anything.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2017 at 14:30 UTC as 22nd comment
On article Report: Ricoh announcing cost cuts in face of crisis (326 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jim Evidon: Obviously, even if Ricoh shut down its camera operation, it is still in a terrible financial crunch because copiers and printers are 90% of its book of business. So it makes sense not to kill off the camera operation. it won't help. I suspect they are heading for a restructuring.

No similarity between Minolta and Samsung at all. Cameras were a tiny speck for Samsung. Minolta was (although not entirely) a camera manufacturer. Samsung realized the market was full and declining; Minolta had market share issues for many years, and then had to pay Honeywell a mere $96,000,000 in a settlement over autofocus.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2017 at 23:27 UTC
On article Report: Ricoh announcing cost cuts in face of crisis (326 comments in total)
In reply to:

DPPMetro: Only in Pentax land can it get worse and worse and the Pentaxians, some of whom are almost certainly employees, will claim it's actually getting better.

The Pentax forum is even claiming the company is selling almost as much as Nikon (and that's not a joke!).

I'm 100% sure the employees know things are not getting better.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2017 at 23:16 UTC

I didn't see the movie but if I recall, the story was that the guy gets younger and younger. So I guess you wear this camera for a few years and then you tell the software to play it in reverse. Teens become toddlers; dogs become puppies. A digital fountain of youth.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 17:19 UTC as 10th comment
On article Canon EOS M6 Review (376 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Again I'm surprised to see the 50mm F1.4 used in the studio tests.

Riddle me this:

Why is the M the only mirrorless system with studio tests conducted with a non-native lens?

Why is the M the only mirrorless system tested with a cheap ($329) lens designed for film cameras 30 years ago?

How am I supposed to use your studio tests to compare when the competitors such as Fuji and sony are equipped with modern $1000 lenses? Am I comparing cameras or am I comparing different generations/classes of lens technology?

A good first step would be ignoring DxO. And by the way, there's nothing wrong with that "crappy" Canon 50mm lens--and it would be difficult to find a really crappy 50mm lens.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2017 at 01:32 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2726 comments in total)
In reply to:

tdkehoe: Does the a9 have less "ghosting" in Auto HDR mode? This is one of the biggest problems I have with my a7. Or is ghosting solely dependent on shutter speed? I.e., at 1/125 second, will the a9 take three pictures faster than my a7?

There may be a camera that can make HDR files in-camera without edge effects or halos or something that gives away what is going on, but I haven't seen one. Of course, if it was possible, we wouldn't know we were looking at an HDR.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 16:31 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2726 comments in total)
In reply to:

jennajenna: Why does Sony feel the need to copy Canon's use of the color white (almost same shade actually) for zoom lenses?

Keeping the lenses cooler is supposed to be a technical advantage (going back to Flourite, I believe) but since black lenses work just as well, my guess is the marketing department wanted the extra exposure.

In the past, all the white lenses meant most guys had switched to Canon. Now, it means Canon or Sony. Pity the photographer who wants to be inconspicuous.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 16:20 UTC
Total: 3422, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »