VENTURE-STAR

Joined on Jul 24, 2010

Comments

Total: 200, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sony announces Cyber-shot RX100 VI with 24-200mm zoom (756 comments in total)

I like the general look of this camera. It should certainly have a mike input, that's a bad omission. The lens range is adequate, although the performance remains to be seen. However, the price is too high and you are primarily paying for the compact size when compared to an SLR. Having seen a few worrying mechanical problems with Sony compact cameras (particularly the basic RX100) that are expensive to have fixed, I'd really need to be sure this camera was reliable, as anything I buy as a backup will still need to work reliably for thousands of frames.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2018 at 13:03 UTC as 8th comment
On article First pictures of rumored Samyang 24mm F2.8 AF lens (114 comments in total)

I must be missing something here. What's the big deal? It's cheap and cheerful 24mm lens, that may or may not be optically any good, with a less than inspiring maximum aperture and a totally average filter thread. Who cares?

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2018 at 12:37 UTC as 13th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: Is this what things have come to? Stupid colors? JHC! Personally, I would never buy another camera that wasn't black, as I want a low profile for my equipment. Turning cameras into silly bits of jewelry is nothing short of pathetic. Is anyone who uses amateur equipment actually interested in taking good quality pictures? Might as well stick to a phone and shoot everything, especially videos in portrait mode at arms length.

What's wrong, is the minor detail that this camera - which actually appears to be quite good, is being promoted entirely on the basis of it being a silly fashion accessory. People are being encouraged to buy this for all the wrong reasons. A serious user would want something a little less obvious and I speak with my photojournalist's hat on.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2018 at 13:50 UTC

Is this what things have come to? Stupid colors? JHC! Personally, I would never buy another camera that wasn't black, as I want a low profile for my equipment. Turning cameras into silly bits of jewelry is nothing short of pathetic. Is anyone who uses amateur equipment actually interested in taking good quality pictures? Might as well stick to a phone and shoot everything, especially videos in portrait mode at arms length.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2018 at 09:59 UTC as 13th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Stephen McDonald: What's with this "built-in" battery thing? No interchangeable, extra batteries? That is a severe handicap. If there is a suitable, wired, belt-pack battery unit available, you'd have to use that, for anything longer than a short video shoot. Often, these hard-wired batteries go kaput after a few years and an expensive replacement would have to be installed. The only time I had a camera with a built-in battery I had to make myself a belt-pack unit, as none were available commercially. And after two years, the built-in battery went dead.

It's obviously not totally sealed and airtight, as it uses SD cards.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2018 at 21:51 UTC

The sensor appears to be the same as used in some Canon compacts and it's phone sized as you might expect. The optics are probably going to be questionable. Then there's the position of the EVF, which is not exactly ideally placed. This should be over to the left. If Panasonic were serious about a camera of this type, they'd have a fixed wide lens with a larger sensor. And as it takes SD cards, it could certainly take interchangeable batteries. The whole thing is a very poor piece of design as far as I'm concerned and I'll be surprised if the video quality is anything special.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2018 at 21:48 UTC as 36th comment | 1 reply

This reads like another ad, dressed up to be an article. I really don't see the spec in this product to justify the price ticket. Come on DPR, we expect more from you than Amazon style promotions.

Link | Posted on May 3, 2018 at 18:15 UTC as 6th comment | 3 replies

My first professional quality camera was a Rollie 3.5E2. It was a superb piece of equipment that I kept until I bought my first Hasselblad. This thing that bears the same name is really just a sad toy and not even in the same class as a Timex watch with Rolex written on it. I just don't see the point of doing this, or who they think will want one. It certainly doesn't evoke any fond memories for me. Anyway, nice to know you can eliminate excess noise by manual focusing, whatever that means!

Link | Posted on May 2, 2018 at 13:34 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: For me, the Ryan Kelly picture is completely spoiled by the out of focus person blocking an important section of the subject matter. I'd suggest that many of us coming onto DP Review could produce exactly the same series of pictures without trying any harder in that situation. This was essentially nothing more than being in the right place at the right time. The Refugee pictures in Myanmar represent photo journalism at a very high level, Great work telling a story. That's what it's all about!

Not too many prizes, but a few front pages and I've earned a reasonable living over the years. How about you? An armchair expert by any chance? The picture in question is a one-off and that's about the sum of it. In the same place all you have to do is pull in the subject matter and keep pressing the shutter release. Maybe you think otherwise, but I have been in similar situations and know from experience that producing this flawed image will have been far less difficult that something truly outstanding like the Oswald shooting in Dallas, which showed skill and perfect timing with a one-chance camera. In fairness, I'm not saying the image isn't interesting, but it doesn't deserve first place IMHO!

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2018 at 12:47 UTC
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: For me, the Ryan Kelly picture is completely spoiled by the out of focus person blocking an important section of the subject matter. I'd suggest that many of us coming onto DP Review could produce exactly the same series of pictures without trying any harder in that situation. This was essentially nothing more than being in the right place at the right time. The Refugee pictures in Myanmar represent photo journalism at a very high level, Great work telling a story. That's what it's all about!

No it's not. I've been doing it for years. I assume this particular article will mainly be of interest to the kind of people who earn a living taking snaps, not someone who grabs a chance picture with a phone perhaps once in their lifetime and has no real photography skills.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2018 at 21:51 UTC
In reply to:

Hello123: Everywhere I turn we seem to be to be saturated with violence and death.

@Quantum - Interesting to see this picture has had such an effect on you. Isn't that the point of all this? So, 95 percent of our planet is wonderful and peaceful then? If only! I'm afraid that the sepic tank you visualise, obviously filled with evil, intelligent apes is much bigger than you seem to appreciate.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2018 at 10:39 UTC

For me, the Ryan Kelly picture is completely spoiled by the out of focus person blocking an important section of the subject matter. I'd suggest that many of us coming onto DP Review could produce exactly the same series of pictures without trying any harder in that situation. This was essentially nothing more than being in the right place at the right time. The Refugee pictures in Myanmar represent photo journalism at a very high level, Great work telling a story. That's what it's all about!

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2018 at 10:30 UTC as 2nd comment | 4 replies

Ha, ha. A little late for an April Fools Day joke isn't it?

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2018 at 11:49 UTC as 22nd comment
On article Canon introduces EOS Rebel T7 with updated 24MP sensor (107 comments in total)
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: Very good of Canon to sell this camera with the old lens and not the superior STM version. They must have a warehouse full of these old optics to get rid of. You'd probably be better off buying a budget Nikon SLR if you're starting from scratch.

The difference between a full frame SLR and a cheap entry level model is so wide that it is rather expecting something for nothing to consider one as a backup. As you will know the build quality and performance between the top end pro SLRs and the entry level models is massive. The same goes with the top end lenses. You also have issues with accessories and batteries. For me, two similar spec SLRs are essential to work with, although I do actually carry a Canon S120 which has given me several chance pictures for news stories and I like something small in my pocket all the time which will outperform any phone. As for a plastic SLR backup, I'll pass thanks.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 14:02 UTC
On article Canon introduces EOS Rebel T7 with updated 24MP sensor (107 comments in total)
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: Very good of Canon to sell this camera with the old lens and not the superior STM version. They must have a warehouse full of these old optics to get rid of. You'd probably be better off buying a budget Nikon SLR if you're starting from scratch.

Thermidor, I think you are completely missing the point here. Yes there are a few issues, that's nothing new. But you're not looking at this from the perspective of an occasional amateur user wanting to upgrade from a compact or a phone and they are the target buyers. They only need one additional lens to cover most applications and will not start an expensive system. Cheap plastic SLRs like the Nikon D3400 or this new Rebel are aimed at a specific market and not experienced amateurs or semi-pros.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 11:11 UTC
On article Canon introduces EOS Rebel T7 with updated 24MP sensor (107 comments in total)
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: Very good of Canon to sell this camera with the old lens and not the superior STM version. They must have a warehouse full of these old optics to get rid of. You'd probably be better off buying a budget Nikon SLR if you're starting from scratch.

Just a couple of points. Thermidor - There are plenty of very affordable Nikon AF-S lenses, that are pretty good value and a match to budget Canon optics.

Karroly - Having used Canons with a fair number of different recent lenses , including the 18-55 Mk II and the STM version, I can say that the STM is significantly better. Optically, the lens cells - said to be made by Sigma produce a very similar quality on both of the standard budget zooms. The STM is quieter, faster and the front of the lens doesn't rotate. The STM also has slightly better build quality for a lens made from quite a lot of polycarbonate.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 23:45 UTC
On article Canon introduces EOS Rebel T7 with updated 24MP sensor (107 comments in total)

Very good of Canon to sell this camera with the old lens and not the superior STM version. They must have a warehouse full of these old optics to get rid of. You'd probably be better off buying a budget Nikon SLR if you're starting from scratch.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 10:48 UTC as 27th comment | 12 replies
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: Wish I could see some point to this. The last time I shot a roll of 35mm and processed it was 2005. Never regretted moving on and have no wish to go backwards.

Woodzy, I am unaware of any Wedding Photographers who still use film, or who would want to. Perhaps they do where you live, who knows? The most capable photographers tend to go for full frame digital and being able to produce high quality images almost immediately has been an absolute revolution for most of these small businesses. Wedding photography is skilled professionalism, where you generally stick to a well proven shooting formula. The method of recording a wedding has actually not changed at all since the majority of photographers shot it on medium format. But it's certainly not photojournalism! If you have a good working method that clients like, you stick to it. Digital is today's tool used by nearly every wedding pro concerned about repeatable quality and making a living from their work. Film has zero advantage in this situation and it's not cost effective to use.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 10:38 UTC
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: Wish I could see some point to this. The last time I shot a roll of 35mm and processed it was 2005. Never regretted moving on and have no wish to go backwards.

If you want to use film, that's entirely your choice. Whether or not I can see any point in it, doesn't actually matter much. Yes, you can order film from Amazon and a few other places online. However, most of the small camera stores have vanished since the turn of the century. Toronto used to have a cluster of superb camera stores with brilliant staff. Probably better than anywhere you might visit in NY or LA. You could pick up almost any accessory made for a Pentax 6X7, a Hassel or a Linhof over the counter. Now much of this is gone. At one time you could go into drug stores and pick up a couple of rolls of Tri-X 35mm, if you ran out. That's gone, along with the quick processing But if you want a cheap SD card, just visit the local supermarket. The world has changed and to the best of my knowledge there are no longer any proper film cameras in production by any major manufacturers.

Film technology reached the peak of its development in the late 90s and now belongs to the past.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 00:46 UTC
In reply to:

Tom Holly: I shoot plenty of film. Tmax400 mainly. High iso should be left to digital in my opinion. High iso film is grainy junk.

So you shoot "professionally" with 110 format film? Are you serious? I was unaware that it had been available for a decade or two, but used as professional film? Don't tell me, you prefer it to Minox? Are you just trolling for the sake of it?

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2018 at 18:54 UTC
Total: 200, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »