VENTURE-STAR

Joined on Jul 24, 2010

Comments

Total: 162, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Hands-on with the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III (209 comments in total)
In reply to:

embie: Never judge a book by his cover but, this Oly looks like an ex Soviet designed camera from early seventies.
Still, I'm an Oly fan.

Cameras made in the Soviet Union - especially Ukraine were crude developments of earlier, mostly German pre-war designs. The engineering was dreadful, they were built for a price from cheap metals and very unreliable. They generally handles with the finesse of an AK47. On the other hand, some of their optics weren't too bad.

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2017 at 16:24 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III (209 comments in total)

Looks like a clumsy version of the OM-1 35mm film camera with junk added for effect. Not for me thanks!

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2017 at 16:20 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Photo of the week: Hyena at Night (100 comments in total)

An outstanding, very impressive piece of work. Using a wide lens put you right in with the animal. Excellent stuff!

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2017 at 16:15 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

Thematic: @Dpreview - any plans to do a comprehensive review of this? Granted many of us can download the trial and compare to Photoshop and C1 pro and Silky Pix etc but your analysis is always welcome.

Thank you.

Thematic, that would indeed be very useful.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 16:05 UTC
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: I made the huge mistake of buying PSP Pro Ultimate X7 a couple of years ago. It turned out to be over complicated, clumsy and offered no improvement in capability over PSP Pro X2. After an update, I was constantly nagged to upgrade to the next version and ended up uninstalling the package as I just couldn't put up with this nonsense. What also annoyed me was the very poor system of vertical correction and distortion control that was excellent on PSP versions like Pro 8, but was dropped for no obvious reason. Corel just seem to have a moment of madness when they took it out and replaced it with a third rate substitute, for no obvious reason.

As I have no expectation of Corel having made the kind of improvements I want for doing serious work on photographs, I don't think I need this new release, even if they want to give it to me for free.

Prognathous - I have used Corel and Adobe for many years. At one time, there were significant improvements to everyone's software. Now I see things on recent PSP editions that are simply there for the sake of it. PSP X8 does very little better than X2 and it's simply more cluttered and gimmicky - IMHO.

I don't doubt there are certain things on 2018 that will be judged as considerable improvements by Corel and some users, but I can see nothing that is likely to encourage me to start using it and I really don't think Corel are listening to users too often. They are pre-occupied with the appearance of their products rather than good solid features, and often simplicity that provides good results is more useful than having something that looks like the control panel from a space shuttle.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 16:02 UTC

I made the huge mistake of buying PSP Pro Ultimate X7 a couple of years ago. It turned out to be over complicated, clumsy and offered no improvement in capability over PSP Pro X2. After an update, I was constantly nagged to upgrade to the next version and ended up uninstalling the package as I just couldn't put up with this nonsense. What also annoyed me was the very poor system of vertical correction and distortion control that was excellent on PSP versions like Pro 8, but was dropped for no obvious reason. Corel just seem to have a moment of madness when they took it out and replaced it with a third rate substitute, for no obvious reason.

As I have no expectation of Corel having made the kind of improvements I want for doing serious work on photographs, I don't think I need this new release, even if they want to give it to me for free.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2017 at 22:55 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies

Is there any point to any of this? Does anyone risk getting run over while the driver frames the shot with the windshield surround?

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 01:17 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Canon unveils ultra-compact EOS Rebel SL2 / EOS 200D (112 comments in total)

It's spec is okay for a basic amateur DSLR, but it's overpriced and doesn't represent especially good value for money I'm just not blown away with this product and I would personally recommend a cheaper Nikon DSLR to anyone just getting into photography. Soon, the mirror box will be a thing of the past anyway!

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 14:20 UTC as 13th comment

I am just stunned by some of the comments here from people saying they are going to get this lens ASAP. Is nobody interested in checking things like build quality any longer? Is the optical performance of no importance? Best of luck folks, but I'd hold on if I were you.

Yes, I have seen the Photozone test, which did not seem all that encouraging to be honest.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2017 at 15:49 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply

Warhol was essentially a rip-off artist and this is little more that a bunch of Saul Goodman characters finding new ways to line their already bulging pockets. It's Lynn Goodman's original work, simple as that.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 11:52 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

sh10453: A larger sensor at the expense of lower zoom range would be much more desirable from image quality point of view.
I doubt that images from this sensor at ISO 1600 would be anything to brag about.
At least a 1/1.7" sensor and (maybe) 600mm (or even 500mm) zoom range (at this camera size) would've been much more attractive, and I certainly would consider it.
Holding a camera of this size steady at 1000mm (almost) would be quite a challenge (if even possible at all) to most of its intended users.
Personally, I'd never waste money anymore on 1/2.3" sensor based cameras regardless of the price.

I have a Canon SX720 that I'm currently using as a pocket camera for general record keeping. It has the same zoom ratio as this replacement model. At full tele, it is extremely difficult to hold steady in most situations. The stabilization is actually better than my Canon S120 but that's not the issue. If anyone honestly thinks they can take good pictures with a handheld pocket camera with a focal length of nearly 1000mm, then I'm very impressed. Having experimented using the SX720 for subjects like the Moon and airliners at around 25 miles distance, I can promise you, it's a real challenge to stay on target if you are simply holding it in your hands.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 16:23 UTC
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: I had an LX-7 for a while. Very crisp lens at longer focal lengths. Very reliable exposure and well controlled contrast. A few stupid handling quirks, I could live with, but some negative features. I realised that the zoom wasn't long enough for my needs, but that was my fault, not the camera's. However, the autofocus was often unreliable in available light conditions and the camera would often lock up and refuse to work, or tell me there was a problem with the card. Actually, this was never the case and the problems persisted with different ones. I wanted to like the LX-7, but ended up swapping it for a vastly superior, although bigger Canon G series camera. I'm afraid my experiences with the LX-7 and dealing with the company put me off Panasonic products to some extent.

Emm yes! Perhaps I was just unlucky and the product was simply defective, although I was far from impressed by Panasonic's after sales service and all things considered, I have no plans to buy another of their cameras in the forseeable future.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2017 at 12:11 UTC

I had an LX-7 for a while. Very crisp lens at longer focal lengths. Very reliable exposure and well controlled contrast. A few stupid handling quirks, I could live with, but some negative features. I realised that the zoom wasn't long enough for my needs, but that was my fault, not the camera's. However, the autofocus was often unreliable in available light conditions and the camera would often lock up and refuse to work, or tell me there was a problem with the card. Actually, this was never the case and the problems persisted with different ones. I wanted to like the LX-7, but ended up swapping it for a vastly superior, although bigger Canon G series camera. I'm afraid my experiences with the LX-7 and dealing with the company put me off Panasonic products to some extent.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 18:17 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies

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 (1093 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 53rd 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 23rd comment | 5 replies
Total: 162, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »