d3xmeister

Lives in Romania Alexandria, Romania
Works as a Radio DJ
Joined on Jan 24, 2010

Comments

Total: 116, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: Only suckers will buy this. It will be totally unusable at the longer focal lengths and will likely hit f6.3 somewhere between 150 and 200mm.

That wasn't the point, the first poster said only suckers will buy it because it will produce unusable images. Anyway, people on these forums praising high end gear usually produce worse photos than any good photographers with a point anshoot. There are exceptions of course, but the amount of lousy photographers producing sub-mediocre photos with high end gear is very highon these forums.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 17:10 UTC
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: Only suckers will buy this. It will be totally unusable at the longer focal lengths and will likely hit f6.3 somewhere between 150 and 200mm.

The 70-200mm will look much better, which will probably be irrelevant for anybody looking at the photos displayed. DOF is a different matter.
But more importantly, the 70-200mm will look much worse if you left it at home, or if you don't have it mounted on the camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 13:42 UTC
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: Only suckers will buy this. It will be totally unusable at the longer focal lengths and will likely hit f6.3 somewhere between 150 and 200mm.

Only snobs won't buy this, it will take amazing photos because of its versatility. Their 16-300mm is a suprinzingly good lens optically

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 02:07 UTC

I stopped buying soap shaped, heavy metal or glass phones. My only escape was these Chinese manufacturers who were still making square plastic phones. There were so much better to hold and carry, all the so called ,,flagship,, phones are a just a ,,premium,, showcase, but they are all terrible in use.

I also don't need One Milion K resolution screen. 1080p is enough on a big phone those that think they see the difference, what they see it's actually software sharpening (Samsung), or they stick their nose into the screen. Those 1080p phones are much better for battery than any flagship

For VR purposes, bigger resolution make sense. I don't need VR though.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 19:58 UTC as 11th comment
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (766 comments in total)
In reply to:

d3xmeister: I don't see what stops Canon or Nikon to take a D5 or 1DX, take out the mirror, put really fast internals and EVF (ala A9) and voila. Same lenses, same system, same cameras, nobody has to switch. They can have a OVF/Mirror version and a Mirrorless version.

Yes, it is, unless the E-M1 II is a microwave oven and not a ILC camera aimed at fast shooting. Believe what you want, numbers show this FF pro photogs market is peanuts compared to the sensor business.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 03:33 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (766 comments in total)
In reply to:

d3xmeister: I don't see what stops Canon or Nikon to take a D5 or 1DX, take out the mirror, put really fast internals and EVF (ala A9) and voila. Same lenses, same system, same cameras, nobody has to switch. They can have a OVF/Mirror version and a Mirrorless version.

Like the one in the Olympus E-M1 II ? Sony will sell everything that part of their sensor development manufacturing business is more important that their camera business. If they don't sell some sonsor, it's because there's no demand yet. If you were Sony and Nikon and Canon would want to buy your A9 sensor, would you turn down billions in contracts just to take a swing at a piece of the pro market. (Which is the lowest profit market in camera business)

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 02:39 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (766 comments in total)
In reply to:

d3xmeister: I don't see what stops Canon or Nikon to take a D5 or 1DX, take out the mirror, put really fast internals and EVF (ala A9) and voila. Same lenses, same system, same cameras, nobody has to switch. They can have a OVF/Mirror version and a Mirrorless version.

They said the same in smartphones and look where we are now. I have my doubts. Just to be clear I love what Sony is doing and I do hope they succeed, more choice is always better. I just don't see things as bright as others, and I would not dismiss Canon and Nikon that easy. Time will tell.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 01:41 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (766 comments in total)
In reply to:

d3xmeister: I don't see what stops Canon or Nikon to take a D5 or 1DX, take out the mirror, put really fast internals and EVF (ala A9) and voila. Same lenses, same system, same cameras, nobody has to switch. They can have a OVF/Mirror version and a Mirrorless version.

Sensor availability is a moot point. Sony will sell sensors to anyone if they pay. It already does it. Plus, if a technology exists, it can be copied. Look at other tech. Lens not good for video, no problem, just like they gradually replaced AF-D with AF-S, no need to start from scratch. DSLR not good for PDAF on sensor ? Canon seems to work very well.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 23:11 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (766 comments in total)

I don't see what stops Canon or Nikon to take a D5 or 1DX, take out the mirror, put really fast internals and EVF (ala A9) and voila. Same lenses, same system, same cameras, nobody has to switch. They can have a OVF/Mirror version and a Mirrorless version.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 21:51 UTC as 58th comment | 24 replies
On article Adobe Lightroom CC 2015.10 and ACR 9.10 now available (65 comments in total)

I wonder how in the world in 2017 Panasonic is still not relevant enough to Adobe to support color profiles and advanced lens correction.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 01:50 UTC as 15th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

PAntunes: The images look beautiful, but when they get zoomed in, they look a "little" noisy.

Being a paid shoot, doesn't the client care? Specially when compared to the competition, with images shot by medium format or full frame cameras...

If it's for social media, they look fine, but I wonder how big they could print them...

It's a great camera, but is it really the right tool for the job?

That's not the point isn't it ? I'm sure you can find people that complained Concorde was too slow. ,,I paid $10000 for this ticket and it takes 2 hours to get to NY ?,, You obviously like to argue, so can you please also email Chase Jarvis an email and let me know he is wrong when he said multiple times in interviews that resolution was never a problem and he hadn't had any clients complaining about resolution.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2017 at 01:57 UTC
In reply to:

PAntunes: The images look beautiful, but when they get zoomed in, they look a "little" noisy.

Being a paid shoot, doesn't the client care? Specially when compared to the competition, with images shot by medium format or full frame cameras...

If it's for social media, they look fine, but I wonder how big they could print them...

It's a great camera, but is it really the right tool for the job?

About printing, I know a KFC campaign made in 2016 where the photos ended up at wall sizes on KFC's restaurants walls. This high pay campaign was shot by a friend of mine with a Nikon D700 (12MP) There were no complains, and the photos looked great. That's usually how it works outside internet forums with semi-professionals and hobbyists that thnk they know all.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2017 at 19:37 UTC
In reply to:

PAntunes: The images look beautiful, but when they get zoomed in, they look a "little" noisy.

Being a paid shoot, doesn't the client care? Specially when compared to the competition, with images shot by medium format or full frame cameras...

If it's for social media, they look fine, but I wonder how big they could print them...

It's a great camera, but is it really the right tool for the job?

Is that top of the line Nikon really the tool for the job ? Wouldn't people notice the lack of crispness and image quality when compared to medium format ? Wouldn't the client care ?

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 03:56 UTC
In reply to:

PAntunes: The images look beautiful, but when they get zoomed in, they look a "little" noisy.

Being a paid shoot, doesn't the client care? Specially when compared to the competition, with images shot by medium format or full frame cameras...

If it's for social media, they look fine, but I wonder how big they could print them...

It's a great camera, but is it really the right tool for the job?

,,The images look beautiful, but when they get zoomed in, they look a "little" noisy.,,

Can you tell that by looking at a highly compressed 1080p video ????

,,Being a paid shoot, doesn't the client care?,,

Why would they care ? If it achieves what they search for, that's all that matters. Would a monkey with a 1DX got better photos ? Just a few years ago when top cameras were worse in image quality than this E-M1, you'd think these companies would have stopped everything a just wait for the future. You know the latest and greatest today would be trash just in a few years, but only for gearheads, not for those actually doing the job.

,,It's a great camera, but is it really the right tool for the job?,,

Sure it is, because if it weren't that photographer would have been out of job and you in his place instead of bitchin' on formus

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2017 at 17:32 UTC

I don't know what Nikon are smoking. I've would have instantly bought them, and I know many people who couldn't wait to get their hands on them. There is no doubt in my mind they would have sold very well.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2017 at 05:55 UTC as 36th comment
On article Hands-on and in-depth with the Sony a6500 (556 comments in total)
In reply to:

FodgeandDurn: In a way this camera sums up all that is wrong with the industry in 2016. The specs are lovely, but they don't seem to have thought about the user/ownership experience at all. All around us tech is striving to blend into our lives seamlessly, and here we have another dull ergonomically flawed device with the same old complex work-flows.

When a camera finally arrives where I can shoot in RAW, immediately edit that shot on a high-resolution screen (either on the camera or immediately available on another device a la SnapBridge), and then share to anyone and everyone I want on all the hundreds of platforms we have available to us, then I will be impressed. The most exciting young photographers of today are on Instagram, and why on earth not?

I remember Steve Jobs explaining that the iPod was software. The iPod was great software first, hardware second, although Apple managed to inspire consumers on both levels. The next frontier of digital imaging should be revolutionising UX, not FPS.

Good point. To be honest, as amazing as they are in what they do, all these suck when it comes to use experience. Cameras and phones.

I would love to go shoot photos, and then when I pick up my phone, the raw file is there, with the embedded jpeg so I can quickly share, be able to do basic selectinon (delete, keep, mark favorites) and edit. Then when I arrive on my computer or tablet, the files are already there with all the changes so I can just pick up from where I left. And it should not matter that I use Olympus, Sony, Samsung, Apple.

But I don't see this happen anytime soon. All these companies push proprietary technologies (Apple) or rules (Google) and patents (all of them) its either dance to their song or not at all.

I do realise that's not easy to achieve with security issues, limited battery technology, board of directors pushing year by year to make more money, patent wars and many other, but wouldn't that be great ?

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 20:12 UTC
On article Hands-on and in-depth with the Sony a6500 (556 comments in total)

I know I'll be trashed for this, but for me this must be the poorest system ergonomy wise. Touch screen finally but poorly implemented, lack of direct control, and look at that 24mm f1.8 prime lens, it's bigger than my 14-140mm ultrazoom. Yes Sony has a 1 stop better sensor than m4/3 but there are many sacrifices for that.

That said, I love what Sony is doing in the past years. It's pushing the whole industry and we all are going to benefit from it.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 17:09 UTC as 40th comment | 5 replies
On article Teardown reveals Sony image sensors in iPhone 7 (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

cosinaphile: not honest ..it hides the true sensor size, by mentioning pointless die dimensions instead .. the smallest of any premium phone...sony sensors are well made ,but the issues of iq and iso and dynamic range remain due to apples choice of sensors about 1\2 the size of the poorest p&s....

back when point and shoots existed

Yeah, cause cameras make the photos, not the photographer

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2016 at 12:38 UTC
In reply to:

d3xmeister: It's been a few years already since we keep seeing reviews and praises for newer and newer cameras, and not even one great photo that couldn't have been taken with much older or/and lesser cameras, like a D90 for example. Yes we are gearheads, most of us, I owned so many cameras in the past 10 years, from m4/3 to Nikon full frame and many in between, and I'll be damn if I can tell which ones of my photos are taken with which camera. I can see a big progress I made in observing great things to photograph over the years, but besides that all my photos are the same and could have been taken with any modern ILC camera given the right technique, lens and light (quality not quantity).

Thank you for your kind words.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2015 at 14:43 UTC
In reply to:

d3xmeister: It's been a few years already since we keep seeing reviews and praises for newer and newer cameras, and not even one great photo that couldn't have been taken with much older or/and lesser cameras, like a D90 for example. Yes we are gearheads, most of us, I owned so many cameras in the past 10 years, from m4/3 to Nikon full frame and many in between, and I'll be damn if I can tell which ones of my photos are taken with which camera. I can see a big progress I made in observing great things to photograph over the years, but besides that all my photos are the same and could have been taken with any modern ILC camera given the right technique, lens and light (quality not quantity).

I'll agree when the first person who sees my family photos can tell if or when I upgraded my cameras. So far, not one, not even close.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 22:33 UTC
Total: 116, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »