VENTURE-STAR

Joined on Jul 24, 2010

Comments

Total: 149, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Many years ago, I owned a Nikkor 135mm f/2 AI lens. To begin with, it seemed to be the lens I'd always wanted, but it was quite substantial in size, quite heavy to carry around and proved less useful and optically no better at prime apertures than a relatively cheap 70-210 Tamron zoom. I'm sure this new Sigma lens is optically very good, but it's too expensive, too limited for general use, clearly rather large, takes 82mm filters (my old Nikon lens took 72mm) and I can't see it selling in large numbers. And where's the image stabilisation, or have I simply overlooked this?

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 14:21 UTC as 10th comment
On article Leica SL Review (1079 comments in total)

A lovely camera. Would I like to own one if I could afford it? Yes. Would I use it? Probably not. It is more of a valuable display item that a tool. Am I happy with my Canon equipment? Yes. The pictures I take are not going to be significantly different with any good quality camera gear.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 16:51 UTC as 48th comment

Specially designed for wealthy people who like to remain inside their gated communities. I'll stick to my cheap looking, very functional ex-military bags thanks.

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2017 at 23:10 UTC as 27th comment | 5 replies

I had a new 990. Limited zoom range, pretty bad macro edge performance, a lot of noise at the highest ISO setting, unreliable focus on occasion and it would sometimes refuse to turn off, requiring the batteries to be taken out. Finally, it developed a small cluster of bright pixels! I have no fond memories of this crude Nikon camera which was my introduction to digital photography. I replaced it with an Olympus 5050 and this really was a colossal improvement in almost every respect.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 23:59 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: What a load of idiotic crap. Clearly those writing on here have never been in a situation where someone extremely ugly, menacing and heavily armed orders you to hand over your equipment. Do you really want to accept the consequences of protecting a few images on a memory card? Speaking from personal experience, I promise you there are situations where you do exactly as you are told and you will give up whatever you are asked for.

I'll take it that you are an inexperienced amateur and not a professional photographer who has to operate in the real world?

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 16:57 UTC
In reply to:

M Chambers: If they allowed their own footage to be confiscated then they're not very good photo journalists.

There are several places to hide memory cards even during a strip search.

If you're lucky and they are really stupid!

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 15:34 UTC

What a load of idiotic crap. Clearly those writing on here have never been in a situation where someone extremely ugly, menacing and heavily armed orders you to hand over your equipment. Do you really want to accept the consequences of protecting a few images on a memory card? Speaking from personal experience, I promise you there are situations where you do exactly as you are told and you will give up whatever you are asked for.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 15:31 UTC as 22nd comment | 5 replies
On article Have your say: Best midrange ILC of 2016 (53 comments in total)

So the choice is one of six cameras selected by DP, for not entirely clear reasons. I think I'll pass on this pointless exercise as I would have picked a Nikon.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2016 at 14:46 UTC as 8th comment | 2 replies
On article Gear of the Year: Carey's choice - Canon PowerShot G9 X (212 comments in total)

There seems to be this obsession with putting small cameras like the G9X into the pockets of jeans. I begin to think that for some individuals this is the prime reason for buying certain cameras and how they perform doesn't matter much.

Carrying a compact in a tight pocket is actually a surefire way to damage your camera by encouraging dust to enter around the complex lens assembly, a very easy way to ruin the lens cover and scuff the display screen. There is also the possibility of accidentally turning the camera on while pulling it out of a tight enclosure. For me, this is almost as bad a practice as shooting video on a phone held in the upright position. Buy a small protective case for your compact camera and consider carrying it on your belt!

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 11:43 UTC as 17th comment | 4 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus C-3040 Zoom (119 comments in total)

An Olympus C5050 was my second digital camera and although it had some faults it was a colossal improvement on my Nikon 990 Coolpix, which was a very poor piece of equipment. The C5050 (based on the C3040 in this feature), had a very fast, sharp lens and a viewfinder that was more accurate than my later Canon G cameras. Build quality was pretty good and I hoped that Olympus would progressively upgrade this line, but it never happened. Unfortunately, there is now a sizeable gap between phones and SLRs, with few products delivering affordable quality in this area and nothing that uses handy AA batteries.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 17:10 UTC as 6th comment
On article Fast Five: Sony Cyber-shot RX100 V Review (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: Aside from the lens not being long enough, my real problem with this and all the larger chip, small Sony compacts is the question of reliability and just how much it costs to have them fixed, if any of several issues occur outside the warranty period. These cameras are very expensive and offer little more that their small size. So if you are not worried about jamming one in your pocket (a bad idea anyway), then a cheaper SLR is a far better bet.

The cheapest Nikon SLR will give you the kind of quality this small camera aspires to for still pictures. By speed, do you mean aperture? Fast alternatives to SLR kit lenses are not exactly hard to come by and if you're serious about using this pocket camera for making a load of 4K movies, then good luck to you. With a few exceptions, the weak point of all compacts is the mass-produced, complex retractable lens assembly which can go wrong for a variety of reasons and most are not effectively sealed against dust. SLRs without power zooms, or lenses with complex retraction/front cover mechanisms are more rugged and tend to last longer. These Sony compacts do have their uses, but essentially, you are paying an awful lot just for the size.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2016 at 23:48 UTC
On article Fast Five: Sony Cyber-shot RX100 V Review (420 comments in total)

Aside from the lens not being long enough, my real problem with this and all the larger chip, small Sony compacts is the question of reliability and just how much it costs to have them fixed, if any of several issues occur outside the warranty period. These cameras are very expensive and offer little more that their small size. So if you are not worried about jamming one in your pocket (a bad idea anyway), then a cheaper SLR is a far better bet.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2016 at 12:03 UTC as 85th comment | 5 replies

Yet another ridiculously expensive and rather silly product from Leica. What are the people at this company thinking when they put products like this on the market? Only a handful of well heeled collectors are going to be customers.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 21:39 UTC as 38th comment | 13 replies

Obviously - all done in the best possible taste :-)

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2016 at 09:03 UTC as 27th comment
On article Second Time Around: Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II Review (324 comments in total)

Somewhat annoyingly, this camera is significantly more expensive (in the UK) than the first version and it doesn't appear to be much better. You are probably better off buying a Sony, even if you're a diehard Canon fan.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2016 at 14:24 UTC as 19th comment | 1 reply
On article The price is right: Canon EOS Rebel T6 / 1300D Review (421 comments in total)

This is rather a disappointing superficial review. Actually the kit zooms (said to use Sigma made element cells, like the similar kit zooms fitted to Nikon and Pentax SLRs) are pretty good and perform extremely well for the money. That said, the EOS 1300D has little to offer over the compact EOS 100D which comes with the newer STM lens that has a faster silent focus and non-rotating front element making a polariser usable. Check out the 100D if you are looking for a budget SLR and I would add that the 18-55 STM lens is better made than its predecessor and (IMO) the similar lens supplied with the Nikon D3300.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2016 at 00:37 UTC as 51st comment | 1 reply

A very interesting "hands on" video. More stuff like this please DP Review.

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2016 at 08:08 UTC as 4th comment

I must be missing the point somewhere, because I really cannot understand why this camera is so muchj more expensive than the model it replaces.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2016 at 00:27 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (501 comments in total)

This seems like a totally lopsided review when there are no cameras being produced in the same price band from alternative manufacturers. The RX10 III certainly should be top dog for the price, but if the cheaper models mentioned are close in performance, then it's fair to conclude that the Sony is ridiculously overpriced. Please don't treat your readers as complete plebs Mr Spencer.

Link | Posted on May 28, 2016 at 16:22 UTC as 58th comment | 1 reply
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (375 comments in total)

Ah well, that's that then. I have no desire to buy any of these cameras as they provide no obvious advantage over a budget SLR aside from size. Thanks Jeff, Carey and Dan.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2016 at 13:36 UTC as 69th comment | 4 replies
Total: 149, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »