Joined on May 24, 2013


Total: 32, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

But only one of the images has blown highlights.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2018 at 02:49 UTC as 3rd comment
On article CP+ 2018: Nikon's space cameras (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dheorl: It's crazy to look at the cameras first being used on the shuttle missions and look at how fast cameras progressed, yet that same shuttle was in use for 30 years.

Actually, two of the shuttles didn't last 30 years, having failed in use.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2018 at 14:06 UTC
On article CP+ 2018: Nikon's space cameras (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

GabrielZ: Cool!! I’d love to own one of those cameras!

You can buy a used DCS-760 Which was a Kodak modified Nikon F5 with a 6 MP digital sensor inside. It was a $10K camera when new in 2001. That model was used on the Space Shuttle and International Space Station in 2001-2004. I bought one used for under $1000 in 2004 and used it for a few years until 2007 when I sold mine to someone in China on ebay , for nearly as much as I paid for it. Image quality wise, it was comparable to a Nikon D50, but it weighed over 3 times as much.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2018 at 15:48 UTC
On article CP+ 2018: Nikon's space cameras (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

dynaxx: Very surprising to see that Gagarin did not take a camera with him in 1961 in Vostok 1. He was a foundryman and part-time dock worker so he may not have owned a camera.

We sometimes forget that these first Cosmonauts were every bit as brave as our Astronauts, although apparently our space explorers and theirs shared an immense mutual respect for one another, borne out of understanding and empathy that only they had for what the others experienced.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2018 at 15:42 UTC

It would be nice if the article actually mentioned the specific attribute of Eneloop batteries that makes them desirable: They are extremely low discharge. Meaning that they hold their charge for years, not days, the way cheaper batteries do. If you don't use a cheap recyclable NiMH battery for months or years, they not only won't be charged when you need them, they may have discharged so much that they can't be fully charged anymore. Not so with Eneloops. This comparison here is what is known as an extremely incomplete test gamed to the strength of one product being tested without testing the attributes that the other product was optimized to perform on, an without explaining why that attribute matters.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2018 at 00:58 UTC as 67th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

MacAllan_25: Thank goodness there's Brikk with their gold plated Nikon out there...

I imagine these folks hope Brikk is hiring.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2014 at 01:47 UTC
In reply to:

aris14: Danger!
It seems that the current and future generations of rich people tend to be more far more idiots than its predecessors.

Not really, not enough of them bought these highly polished turds, to keep this group in business

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2014 at 01:45 UTC

You would think that with all of those brilliantly innovative products this group was responsible for, they'd stick around - NOT!

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2014 at 01:42 UTC as 173rd comment
On article Price released for Brikk's 24k gold Nikon Df (372 comments in total)
In reply to:

MarcMedios: Utterly stupid. More money than brains, that's for sure. Then again, people buy Leicas...

At least Leicas have some unique photographic merits - in particular around their optics and ergonomics - irrespective of whether or not they are worth what they cost. This, OTOH, is just an extra $35-38K wasted on vanity cosmetics.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2014 at 00:30 UTC
On article Price released for Brikk's 24k gold Nikon Df (372 comments in total)

I was sure this was a joke when I first heard about it.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2014 at 00:28 UTC as 55th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Stanchung: 15K huh. :/

The Hasselblad Lunar is a re-badged a NEX-7 with a wooden handle and a $6500 price tag:

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2014 at 15:22 UTC
In reply to:

Ultan: So at a bit less than double the price of the Pentax 645z, you get the same size sensor, no camera, half the frames per second, and about 8 stops lower maximum ISO. Oh, and less than half the pixels on the screen.

Or for the same price as the Hasselblad, you can get a Pentax with better engineering, better metering, better autofocus, better low-light performance, beter proceesor, better ergonomics, everything integrated SLR-style, and two or three new lenses designed for digital.

Wait, let me think about this....

It also offers Hasselblad Zeiss lenses. The Pentax doesn't.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2014 at 00:38 UTC
In reply to:

Stanchung: 15K huh. :/

Well, considering that they were charging $6K for a re-badged Sony NEX camera with a fancy wooden handle, this is definitely better than that.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2014 at 00:35 UTC
On article Sony drops list price of Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lab D: Pretty obvious why they dropped the price.
I am sure all the owners planning on ebaying these to get the wider range lens and 4K on the FZ1000 are really upset now knowing their camera just lost $300 in value.
Since it can't compete for video nor for sports and wildlife due to the short lens and slower focusing, I am guessing used prices will drop even more.

Most of the folks that bought the RX10 camera bought it when Adorama, Samy's and others were selling them as "Open Box" specials for $939 about a month after it came out.

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2014 at 04:29 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T1 Review (657 comments in total)
In reply to:

Richard Franiec: Nothing can tame boundless love for Fuji cameras and prevent 84 point (balanced) score to happen, even this:

"One point we do have to make is that the X-T1 is nowhere near as good a movie camera as it is for shooting stills. Manual control is limited, and video image quality is unusually poor. It's OK for casual use, but if high quality video is high on your list of priorities, you'll probably want to look elsewhere."

Well if video was not part of the rating, this camera's score would probably be pushing 90. Clearly, the video score matters, but no way is it of equal weight as the still image score, because most folks don't use video, and many of those that do don't take it seriously. And if you do, well both Sony and Panasonic have better products for you. Basically, for the 75% or more of us who don't care at all about video, this is probably the best camera DPR has tested. For me personally, the only reason I'm not going to drop my Micro 4/3 gear and get this is the size of the entire kit including lenses compared to my E-PL5 and it's mainly tiny set of lenses.

BTW Richard, don't get upset just because this is one of the diminshingly small batch of new cameras that won't need the benefit of one of your aftermarket grips.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2014 at 18:43 UTC
On article Chicago-based Calumet Photographic closes U.S. stores (195 comments in total)

My problem with the Calumet store in San Diego (actually Escondido) was that they never carried any current gear. They sold some Micro 4/3 and Fuji mirror-less gear, but it was always older gear. They were selling an Olympus E-P3 for list price long after it had been replaced by the E-P5 and was being cleared out elsewhere for half price or lower.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 23:10 UTC as 83rd comment
On article Am I missing something here? (627 comments in total)
In reply to:

vFunct: If you look at the videos on the Nikon site, it looks like this product is targeted exactly for professional outdoor sports shooters. The new 70-300mm lens is equivalent to 800mm, which is terrific for outdoor arenas, AND the size is much smaller than the equivalent 35mm setup.

This really is a very specific target market.

It could be the 2nd camera for any outdoor pro shooter, as well. Really for anyone that needed that 800mm range in a small package + high-speed sport frame rates.

I'm sort of surprised that Nikon went for such a high-end target. They're basically replacing a $20k D4s + 800mm lens combo with a $2k package.

I agree, this camera and the new long lens is ideal for outdoor sports photography and birds and wildlife, if the IQ of a full frame system is not needed. The problem is, this camera system seems to be intentionally crippled for just about anything else. It needs a fast wide angle and a couple of decent speed shorter zooms to be a more well rounded system - but then, the D3xxx and D5xxx series DSLRs would come under canibalization - and Nikon is trying so hard to prevent that that they have crippled the 1 system.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 21:23 UTC
In reply to:

dougjgreen1: I wouldn't buy any Hasselblad that doesn't have a polished wood grip

I have used Hasselblads back when they used film, and in those days, Hassie made their own cameras, they didn't outsource them and re-brand them (with polished wood grips at a $5K markup).

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 00:37 UTC
In reply to:

gerard boulanger: Relatively "affordable". 14 stops DR is a little disappointment.

The best Nikon and Sony full 35mm frame cameras are already slightly above 14 EV of DR, and they can be gotten for $2-6K So I imagine someone considering dropping $20 Large for this might have hoped for maybe slightly better than that.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 00:35 UTC

I wouldn't buy any Hasselblad that doesn't have a polished wood grip

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 00:28 UTC as 70th comment | 6 replies
Total: 32, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »