SnakePlissken

Joined on May 9, 2014

Comments

Total: 44, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

Am I the only one who finds the Matt Granger YouTube videos really creepy? His videos always include scantily clad Asian women prancing about, while the corpulent Granger snaps away. He seems to be the only mainstream camera reviewer on YouTube who feels the need to feature women in bikinis.

It's a bit too close to the old stereotype about photographers and dirty old men in macs for me...

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2017 at 20:44 UTC as 55th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Intermittentoverexposure: Hurray! A FF DSLR that would have been cutting edge 7 years ago. Now it arrives, and everyone is moving away from clunky old mirror boxes.

I tried the Sony A7. It's no use being small and light if every lens is enormous. There is no equivalent to the Nikon f1.8 primes which are cheap and brilliant.

I had a Fuji XT1 and sold it and got a Nikon D750. The difference in AF speed, IQ and overall experience was night and day. Sorry, but there is nothing to challenge a high-end DSLR at the moment.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2015 at 09:54 UTC
In reply to:

neatnclean: SRL = Sorry Ricoh Losers.
SLR = So Long, Ricoh.

They will soon go under ... Before any of the other imaging gear suppliers will. Trying to launch another DSLR system in 2016 (or 2017, 2018?) rather than offering a brilliant alternative to the only FF-sensored mirrorless system in the entire market can only be called "entrepreneurial suicide". Almost unbelievable how owners/shareholders of a company can let something so evidently wrong happen.

I have said this many times - I live in London and go on the tube, go to museums and the West End regularly so I see 1000s of tourists every week. They nearly all carry cameras. Most use their phones, but those who carry cameras almost ALL carry a DSLR. I have never seen a Sony A7 camera in use anywhere. I have seen one Fuji XT1 used by a friend.

I had a Fuji XT1 and sold it and got a Nikon D750. The difference in AF speed, IQ and overall experience was night and day. Sorry, but there is nothing to challenge a high-end DSLR at the moment.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2015 at 09:51 UTC
On article Readers' Showcase: Martin Kozak (76 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wedding photographer: Photographers and published photos are very interesting.

but, Dear DPreview, can you fix your gallery layout? because it is auwfull.
Flip through photos very uncomfortable:
1. Button "Next" appears above it is below;
2. No buttons Next, Prev buttons in full screen mode;
3. No hotkeys binded to Next, Prev.

In my opinion, gallery layout is very outdated, please upgrade it.
Thank you in advance!

Sadly, everything about this website feels dated, like the need to click through intro pages to get to reviews, to the clunky photo sets you refer to.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2015 at 14:07 UTC
On article Readers' Showcase: Martin Kozak (76 comments in total)

Brilliant photos.

Who would have imagined that a Canon camera could produce such photos? If I went by the criticism on here, I would have expected every Canon to produce total junk. But I forget, every pro uses Canon, or maybe Nikon, and the constant whingers on here are more interested in micro lense depth and dynamic range stops than actual photography.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2015 at 14:05 UTC as 17th comment | 3 replies
On article Leica Q In-depth Review (1244 comments in total)
In reply to:

pdqgp: $4,250 ? Seriously....I'm a HUGE photography nut but that price is just plain stupid.

Priced for the super-rich 1% as an investment or show-off talking piece.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 16:26 UTC
In reply to:

KW Phua: How can this be a DSLR user? Holding one hand, using the rear viewfinder for shot. How to get an sharp image without shake. Even when I use smart phone for shoot, I hold with both hand and not to extend the arm.

You're right, this is clearly intended to be a serious quasi-documentary and the failure to clarify that DSLR users hold the camera with two hands and use a viewfinder is an unacceptable flaw.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2015 at 11:59 UTC
In reply to:

SSantana75: I don't get people hating on these forums. Who the hell cares what others shoot? so what if they want to carry huge cameras and lenses around or if they want to use their phone or a little p&s, is it really going to somehow make YOUR images better or worse? does it really matter that much that someone else prefers something different to what you like? I for one take as much enjoyment out of making a good image with my phone as I do with my FF with a huge F%&k off lens sticking at the other end.

Sadly, a lot of people posting on DPR are some of the most hateful and spiteful bores on the internet.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2015 at 11:58 UTC
In reply to:

vscd: PLEASE REVIEW THEM! It would be the first real review since the SD1. Give Sigma the fair chance to compete in the Resolution-Charts.

I like my DP3M and the DP0 is seriously a great camera, but there is no real Review available until now. At least not in your quality ;)

THANKS-

Doubt they will ever review a Sigma camera again.

Go back to the Sigma DP1 review, which has a generation twice improved since, and it still looks incredibly sharp in the DPR studio shots. Shame they haven't added the Merrill and Quattro cameras to the studio scenes at least.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2015 at 10:41 UTC

I think the DP Merrill cameras which now sell for about £300 are the best value cameras of all time. Nothing is as pleasing as opening a Foveon file - the level of fine detail, beautiful skin tones, punchy colours etc are just wonderful.

They are quirky and bad photos look horrible, but when they hit the mark, nothing looks as impressive. And for £300 you get a small, light camera that takes images that best most DSLRs 3x the price.

I recommend checking out the photos of NoisyParadise on flickr, he often uses Sigma DP cameras with impressive results.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2015 at 10:40 UTC as 21st comment | 3 replies

$6,200?? Heck, I'll order two.

Link | Posted on May 2, 2015 at 20:35 UTC as 135th comment
On article Massive $33,500 2450mm f/8 NASA lens surfaces on eBay (235 comments in total)

*Sit's back and waits for the inevitable "this is more proof that Canon is overpriced, and out of touch and will soon be liquidated" posts*

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2015 at 11:59 UTC as 40th comment
In reply to:

Dantist: Sorry guys, but term "shot noise" is a complete and utter nonsense in context of normal photography. Just try to calculate photon flux (# of photons) for typical light conditions. Yes, everything boils down to available signal to noise ratio, and part on ETTR etc is absolutely fine, but the main noise source is sensor itself and read-out electronic, and thats why Sony A7s can shot at ISO100000, whereas Canon 1Ds is limited to ISO 1000 (~same sensor size and pixel count). Moreover, cool the later with liquid nitrogen, and the ISO 100000 could become possible as well :) That's why astronomical detectors are only operated cooled to -70C or so. And even then, in most cases electronic noise dominates photon shot noise (and yes, I'm a professional astrophysicist).

Just to give a number:
Flux from a overcast night moonless sky is ~1e-4 lx = 1e-4*(0.019*6e23 to convert to photon flux)*(7.2e-4 multiply by area of 15.2mm aperture)/(16e6 divide by pixel count)~5e7 photons per pixel per second.

I wasn't referring to you per se. I could have made a general post. Maybe I should stop reading the comments on here as 90% seem to be about bashing one brand or another or about some really techie point about microlenses or somesuch, none of which seems to me to be relevant to photo taking.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 15:39 UTC
In reply to:

Dantist: Sorry guys, but term "shot noise" is a complete and utter nonsense in context of normal photography. Just try to calculate photon flux (# of photons) for typical light conditions. Yes, everything boils down to available signal to noise ratio, and part on ETTR etc is absolutely fine, but the main noise source is sensor itself and read-out electronic, and thats why Sony A7s can shot at ISO100000, whereas Canon 1Ds is limited to ISO 1000 (~same sensor size and pixel count). Moreover, cool the later with liquid nitrogen, and the ISO 100000 could become possible as well :) That's why astronomical detectors are only operated cooled to -70C or so. And even then, in most cases electronic noise dominates photon shot noise (and yes, I'm a professional astrophysicist).

Just to give a number:
Flux from a overcast night moonless sky is ~1e-4 lx = 1e-4*(0.019*6e23 to convert to photon flux)*(7.2e-4 multiply by area of 15.2mm aperture)/(16e6 divide by pixel count)~5e7 photons per pixel per second.

All this discussion does is reinforce how utterly boring hardcore techie digital photographers are. Tons of great images taken before the advent of digital photography had loads of noise, it was a fact of life about ISO200. Never ceases to amaze me how tedious the threads are on here with know-it-all techie bores.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 14:26 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II (520 comments in total)
In reply to:

SnakePlissken: Great looking camera and spec. But will it sell? And who will stock it? I have never seen a Pentax DSLR ever and living and working in central London means I see 100s of cameras on the street, tube, museums, galleries etc ever week. I have never seen one for sale in big retailers like Calumet or John Lewis either. I hope it does well as the consumer benefits from choice and Pentax / Ricoh is a great, almost left-field, option to the big guns.

SRS and WEX charge exactly the same as John Lewis and Calumet for a Nikon D750 body.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 15:39 UTC
On article Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 (326 comments in total)
In reply to:

EduPortas: I undestand most readers of this site find this camera unappealing. I would too if I were a landscape or portrait photographer, where every pixel counts.

However, I see the XC10 as a strong bet by Canon to try to get a hold of the nascent ENG industry bursting practically everywhere. Yes, there are cheaper cameras by Panasonic that do practically the same thing, but the allure of the Canon brand is very strong amongst big media organizations. If you're a small media outfit you buy what big boys buy so you can compete with them, at least with logo on your gear.

Also, ergonomics seem very nice on this new camera. That goes a long way for photogs and videographers that use their gear huge amounts of time every day.

I didn't think this sort of balanced, polite opinion was allowed on DPR comments sections.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 09:03 UTC
On article Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 (326 comments in total)
In reply to:

T3: Wait for it to go on fire-sale. But even then, I'm not sure how attractive it will be. It's an expensive fixed lens bridge camera with no RAW!

Then don't buy it. Not sure why you and so many others take things so personally. if you don't like it, don't buy it. It's called freedom of choice. If Canon loses a ton of money, fine, hopefully they will learn from it.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 09:02 UTC
On article Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 (326 comments in total)
In reply to:

ObelixCMM: It took DPReview 8 months to review Pentax K3 and 11 months for Sony A77 II, and we already have 4th article on camera that shoots JPEG stills only.

Barney you are such a lackey and lickspittle to the decadent capitalist parasite that is Canon! Pointing out that an interview takes less time to publish than a full camera review is just more toadying to Canon and Nikon who you alone are propping up with your propaganda. The sooner they are out of business the better!

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 09:00 UTC
On article Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 (326 comments in total)
In reply to:

BarnET: http://www.eoshd.com/2015/04/canon-struck-raw-evf-and-brighter-zoom-from-xc10-for-cost-reasons/

OUCH!!!

Yeah, it's sickening how I was forced to come to this site, forced to read this advertorial, forced to have soon-to-be-liquidated Canon propaganda shoved in my face, then forced to post here about how much I hate Canon and everything and everyone associated with it.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 08:55 UTC
On article Sony SLT-A77 II Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

craig66: I don't understand this in the list of Cons:

"No way to quickly check focus in image review, since only center of image is magnified"

You can move the magnified region around with the joystick and zoom in/out with the rear wheel. I don't see what else it could do.

Wow, Mike FL, if you don't understand what image review is, I am not sure I can trust anything you say since you are so opinionated.

As far as I am aware, all cameras allow you to zoom into an image and you can scroll around to check focus etc. I do agree that pressing a single button to zoom 100% is nice though - D750 has one making it really quick to check focus (provided it is central)

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 13:11 UTC
Total: 44, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »