AbrasiveReducer

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

Comments

Total: 3240, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

And they're made in Australia, right?

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2017 at 21:52 UTC as 35th comment
In reply to:

Arkienkeli: There are several posts about "severe distortions" with this lens. As an old school photographer I find it quite disconcerting that these posters quite clearly do not understand the nature of rectilinear projection, but think that the edge/corner elongation is caused by a flaw in lens design or manufacture, while it is a mathematical fact which can not be avoided. The wider the picture angle, the worse it gets, and nothing can be done about it if we want straight lines to be represented by straight lines in the picture.

Still these "experts" have the audacity to post these uninformed opinions (alternative facts?) of theirs, highlighting their ignorance.

That's a very good idea. If you take a lens this wide, handheld, and aim it at anything vertical, the chances of rendering the verticals perfectly upright are close to zero because the camera has to be perfectly level. Even electronic levels may not be precise enough. But this has nothing to do with distortion.

OTOH, when a lens bends straight lines, that's distortion and some very expensive lenses have tons of it. Seems self-explanatory, but maybe an article on the subject is in order.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2017 at 06:01 UTC

It could replace bulky and uncomfortable hard hats. Just point the camera up and let the cap app do the work.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2017 at 00:54 UTC as 37th comment
On article Canon PowerShot G9 X II sample gallery (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: Canon has "the secret sauce" as Ken Rockwell would say 😁

Pleasing color beats accurate color, any day. Who wants accurate color in Seattle when it's overcast?

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2017 at 20:04 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G9 X II sample gallery (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: "...its slender design..." -DPR

It's 24% thinner than a Sony RX100 IV.

I'm glad I don't have clothes with pockets big enough for either of these pocket cameras.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2017 at 20:02 UTC
In reply to:

DouglasGottlieb: In the history of photography, has there ever been a mainstream camera category where one manufacturer went unchallenged for years?

Rangefinder
SLR
Point and Shoot
120 film
Digital point and shoot
Digital SLR
Compact mirrorless
Action camera
360 VR camera

On and on.

But only Sony makes a mainstream FF mirrorless?

Sure, Canon is #1 by a mile and will likely continue to be for some time. That's all the more reason to experiment and innovate. They have the resources.

Enough people want a high end FF mirrorless. Why has nobody else entered this space?

What's the exact number of people who want a FF mirrorless camera (who don't already have one?) How many who want one, will actually buy one? How much will they be willing to pay? How will the size, weight and cost of available lenses affect purchasing decisions? Will people substitute a mirrorless camera for an SLR they would have purchased, making it a wash, except for the extra R&D associated with developing the mirrorless?

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 18:06 UTC
In reply to:

maxnimo: I wish this pro-wide angle bias would end. I'd sell my soul to see a review of at least one super-telephoto lens for a change. Just who started this irrational super-wide-angle fad anyway?

It would be nice to see a gallery or a contest of subjects where an ultra wide lens was needed. By needed, I mean photos where your first thought about the image is about the subject and not about the lens that was used.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2017 at 22:10 UTC
In reply to:

AlonRozen: It looks very good in all aspects but one - distortion. To my taste the distortion is too much in most of the presented pictures. I know that this is the case with 14 mm lenses but I would love to have it less pronounced.

Perspective distortion (which is dramatic when the subject is a short distance from a lens this wide) cannot be corrected because it's the correct perspective for that focal length and for the that short distance from the lens.

Barrel and pincushion distortion, which are exactly what they sound like, can be corrected with good lens design but nowadays it's usually done in camera or Photoshop. Sort of a step backwards, no pun intended.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2017 at 22:05 UTC
In reply to:

jonathanj: Customer feedback my a***. How exactly do.they engage with their customers? Is there even an official web forum or email address for general feedback? I would like to buy a Canon mirrorless if it has certain features, how would I even begin to communicate that to Canon?
I have ranted about this before, but canon, along with all the camera companies except maybe the real high end such as Leica and Hassleblad, have an almost total absence of direct customer engagement. They sell through third parties, service through third parties, and generally keep as far away from end users as possible. An occasional focus group in Tokyo or a couple of "ambassadors" or such like is not a customer engagement strategy. Note that even most of the English language social media engagement is by regional or national branches, with very little connection to the people in Japan driving strategy and product decisions.
They may well be valid decisions and certainly the people making them know far more than I about the camera market, but the one thing they are not is customer driven.

Absolutely true, although in their position, Canon may not see the need. The days of full-time customer outreach staff are mostly over and guys like Walter Heun and Ernst Wildi are gone from the scene.

It seems all modern tech companies have this problem. They're happy to add sales staff but don't want to pay a salary to a full time evangelist. It's cheaper to give equipment to high-profile, "unbiased" celebrity photographers in exchange for exposure and endorsements.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2017 at 20:29 UTC

Good. Let Sony do the innovating and Nikon stick to making professional quality SLRs. But what's not mentioned here is the decision to cut costs wherever possible and that sounds like poorer customer service.

To be fair, Canon has had their share of flops too (mostly mirrorless, not surprisingly.) But Canon can afford to make mistakes.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2017 at 20:11 UTC as 68th comment

It's just common sense to offer what the other guys don't. But having used and even sold Sigma lenses over the years, the improvements they have made are extraordinary. Consumers seem to be on Sigma's side, too. When Sigma makes a lens that's faster, wider and cheaper than Nikon or Canon, people don't question why there's a big price difference.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 17:15 UTC as 45th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Mared: It's interesting that people here keep posting the "market is shrinking". I know this is probably a tired statement, but the market is not shrinking - people take more photos and videos now then ever before. The issue is the ease of use of smartphones (user interface and internet connection). This is the area where the "hardware" camera manufacturers fell on their faces. Heck just look at the screens on the back of cameras vs smartphones - no contest...

People take more photos than they used to because it's so easy and it's free. But they can do this with the cameras they already have.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2017 at 01:25 UTC
In reply to:

ttran88: I am out of ideas..

So are they, apparently.

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2017 at 06:13 UTC
In reply to:

David Bo: At that price it dosen't change a thing. It's too expensive for most who already shoots 36 or 50 MP FF DSLR 35 mm cameras.

Doctors really are pros (most of 'em, anyway.) They do something most other people cannot do. Photographers do something most other people can do, so equipment that is expensive enough to be somewhat exclusive is important to many "pros."

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 18:00 UTC

It won't replace Ken Rockwell.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 23:57 UTC as 24th comment
In reply to:

Satyaa: The 35 and 40mm seem close to each other.
When there is full electronic support with e mount why not autofocus?

Actually, they already have the size and weight covered so it's a shame they can't include AF.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 22:11 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: the Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L (111 comments in total)
In reply to:

Individual11: With this Throw (or toss?) back, to a lens! My thoughts immediately went to 'what was the first truly sharp zoom that had pros leaving their primes at home?' I recall having the Vivitar 70-210mm Series 1, but I ended up leaving it at home and sticking with my primes, and I'm not a pro. DPReview, any answers?

There were a lot of good 80-200 lenses, even from non-OEMs. Wide angle zooms were another story and there was no Photoshop to remove the barrel distortion.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 18:18 UTC
On article CP+ 2017: Hands-on with Sigma's newest lenses (198 comments in total)

I hope that's a child's hand, holding those lenses.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 18:15 UTC as 43rd comment | 2 replies

Cool. People have forgotten, or never knew, that the Spotmatic was the poor man's Nikon. It was second choice, right behind the Nikon F/Nikkormat. Canon had not yet hit their stride and Olympus was still making half-frame Pens. If Asahi had dropped the screw mount sooner, who knows....

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 04:50 UTC as 23rd comment
On article Leica SL Review (1079 comments in total)

It seems Leica has always struggled with SLRs (even the beautifully made Leicaflex never got close to Nikon.) But what strikes me about their recent cameras is how blocky they look. Whereas an M camera is more rounded like a human hand, the SL looks almost like a Sony.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2017 at 17:46 UTC as 155th comment | 1 reply
Total: 3240, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »