AbrasiveReducer

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

Comments

Total: 3605, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

nicoboston: Whatever the specifications, I will never give $1300 for a compact camera.
The tiny SL2 body costs $500 and is incredibly more versatile.
This new G1X is certainly a decent camera, but why spending $1300 for a (not so) compact camera with fixed and slow 3x lens?

But the SL2 is an SLR and SLRs are out of fashion. That's why you get so much more value for money.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 18:29 UTC
In reply to:

CCD FTW: This camera would have been extremely interesting if instead of a 24-70 equivalent they made a 16-35 equivalent version. Theoretically it could be even smaller and would make a cracking compact PJ / travel camera. The wider angle would also have made it easier to be a bit faster, like f/2.8-3.5 or f/2.8-4.

I would hands down buy that camera for the price of this one. I won't buy this one at all until it's at least half that price.

Maybe Canon noticed what happened to Nikon with different compacts with different focal length ranges. But I agree a wide angle G1X would be cool but also a slow seller with a very high price.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 18:21 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (416 comments in total)

Everyone is worried about the price but that's the one thing that can be changed.

What can't be changed, it seems, is the physics. Want a bigger sensor? No problem, we'll make the zoom range shorter. Want a smaller camera? That's easy, we'll just make the lens slower.

Something I didn't realize..the effective sensor size of the original G1X mk I was actually larger than the mk II. Another example of "progress", giving with one hand and taking with the other.

Using a compact camera should mean not having to take a second camera. 24-70 is just not enough, even if everything else is great.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 18:16 UTC as 52nd comment | 2 replies
On article ICYMI: Canon 28mm F2.8 IS USM sample gallery (68 comments in total)
In reply to:

photoMEETING: 28mm/2.8?

Not sexy. At least for me.

The G1X mk III is pretty sexy looking! Just kiddin'.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 03:00 UTC

If anyobody can make a realistic auto-HDR, it's Apple but judging by that smoky sky and fake-looking cloud, they're not there yet.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 17:25 UTC as 44th comment
In reply to:

KrisAK: Clip-on polarizing filter, anyone?
(I see they exist, though never used one.)

Too much effort.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 17:21 UTC

They re-introduced the Thunderbird, it was a great looking car and it bombed. There is no Yashica, only the name remains.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 18:36 UTC as 160th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

HeyItsJoel: I don't understand why this would be any different from any other major metropolitan city like Chicago and NYC?

A lot of the time, it's overcast in Chicago and NYC. You could turn off every light and still not see much.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 04:22 UTC

These were very popular before it became declasse to use a Canon compact, and a compact camera with a 35-140 lens is still pretty versatile. And like all digital cameras, they obviously had great resale value, so what's not to like?

In 1973, I traded two Nikon SP (including a 25mm Nikkor) for a Leica M2. A bad mistake for sure, but what makes it worse is that all these years later, those cameras are worth much more, not less.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2017 at 18:11 UTC as 39th comment | 1 reply

At least they have excellent unemployment benefits in the UK and Finland.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2017 at 04:39 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply

Anyone who calls workload "production bandwidth" is a BS-er of the highest order. But people still put faith in this outfit because they love numbers and ratings.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 21:17 UTC as 101st comment
On article Here's why your beloved film SLR is never going digital (285 comments in total)

Let them overcome the technical hurdle of making Coolscans again.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 16:18 UTC as 61st comment
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV sample gallery updated (182 comments in total)

Even 600mm looks ok. Of course, this being digital, someone will make a zoom that goes to 800mm. It would be fun to do a blind test and see if people can tell it's a small sensor.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 17:34 UTC as 32nd comment | 8 replies
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX10 IV sample gallery updated (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

makofoto: Why is the no Dislike and/or Laughable option under Comments ... to combat the unknowledgeable folks?

Because it's not neccessary.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 17:26 UTC

In a word, no. But from behind it looks a lot like an Instamatic and adjusted for inflation, $125 is about right.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 17:25 UTC as 207th comment
In reply to:

Stitzer23: When the silver award review is (eventually) posted by DPR, the internet will be broken.

Well, if DxO with their brilliant scoring scheme can go to 100, and then over 100 for medium format, there are metals more precious than gold so maybe it's time for the plutonium award. It wll be like having an amp that goes to "11".

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2017 at 21:53 UTC
On article Sharp and wide: Sony FE 12-24mm F4 G gallery updated (43 comments in total)
In reply to:

DFPanno: Not a criticism at all but some of these images highlight the difficulty in effectively utilizing ultra-wides.

Ultra wide lenses make small spaces appear larger but they are not designed to do this. It's the way optics work.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2017 at 17:25 UTC
In reply to:

Vik2012: Isn't this what some of the usual suspects expected Apple to build into their latest iPhone to impress them? :D

Seriously high spec. from a company that many thought might never get past prototypes and announcements at the start.

I wonder when this technology will filter down to a more affordable level.

Not all Canon users are ignorant. They just don't care about DxO scores and they are able to do what they need to do with the cameras they already own. But Canon needs to narrow the gap with Sony sensors or eventually, the difference will be so dramatic, everyone will notice.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2017 at 22:53 UTC

As with all DxO scores, the 100 doesn't mean anything except that it's half of 200 and twice as much as 50. But what is impressive is the ways in which D850 outperforms medium format despite size, weight and cost difference.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2017 at 17:47 UTC as 164th comment

If the principle purpose of a phone was to take photos, this might matter.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 22:28 UTC as 92nd comment | 1 reply
Total: 3605, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »