Najinsky

Joined on Feb 21, 2006

Comments

Total: 567, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

osv: "shortages caused by the earthquake have resulted in 'temporary moderate growth' for interchange lens digital cameras."

translation: canon profited off of the earthquake misery that other companies suffered through, but it wasn't enough to save 'em from a disasterous fy2016:

canon fy2016 vs fy2015:
net sales: -10.5%
gross profit: -13.5%
op. profit: -35.6%
net income: -31.6%

"Canon profited off the earthquake misery"

Seriously?

Are you descended from the middle age witch hunters who declared any virgin that refused to have sex with the witchfinder general must automatically be a witch?

Hands downs to dumbest post I ever read on this ever increasingly has-been of a website (and I've read some real dumb ones). You need serious therapy.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2017 at 19:46 UTC
In reply to:

Donnie G: That's odd, weren't the cameras with the longest and cleverest spec sheets suppose to destroy Canon? Guess it'll take more than having 4k video and a built-in cigarette lighter to get that job done. LOL

Happy 30th birthday EOS! 😎

Those spec sheets are called hype. Once upon a time there was a website established to cut through the hype. Once upon a time. My, grandma, what big eyes you have....

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2017 at 19:34 UTC

And here we see how Canon are just so much smarter than the rest.

While DPR have repeatedly got on their case for not jumping into the latest money draining not quite ready for prime time fads, Canon simply continue make extremely well targeted products that people actually continue to buy and continue to enjoy using.

And all the while, quietly in the background, Canon continued to innovate in key areas, but in such a low key way not even the pundits see it happening (that seems to be a common risk factor when pundits are enthusiasts too).

Even the headline that Canon were granted more patents in 2016 than Apple, Google and Microsoft managed to stay below the radar for many.

Or maybe DPR are simply playing the double bluff game, taking the opportunity to be the criticiser now, so as they can be seen as they influencer later. Maybe. But Occam's razor suggests they are more likely just GAS addicts, like the rest of us.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2017 at 17:05 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1878 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: £4500 - USB 2

<shakes head>

£4500 - USB 2

<shakes head harder>

£4500 - USB 2

Nope. It won't compute. My head just doesn't want to let it in.

Even slower AND a power drain, nice.

Wifi speeds are measured in Mbps, USB 3 in Gbps.

USB 3 / Type C offers bidirectional power and data and can carry other signals such as audio and video, potential replacing the need for a multitude of ports such as HDMI, Mic and Headphones.

Perhaps your not aware of what a versatile and consumer friendly little port this is:

https://www.cnet.com/uk/how-to/usb-type-c-thunderbolt-3-one-cable-to-connect-them-all/

But still, if you guys are happy, I'm happy for you.

And besides, Sony probably had to hold something back for next years Mk II version.....

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 03:48 UTC
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1878 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: £4500 - USB 2

<shakes head>

£4500 - USB 2

<shakes head harder>

£4500 - USB 2

Nope. It won't compute. My head just doesn't want to let it in.

"Does anyone ever use the USB for anything but charging"

Certainly less useful when it's slow, but if it was the faster USB 3.....

Common uses:

- Simultaneously charging while transferring images
- Firmware upgrades
- Tethered shooting
- Remote support

Potential use:

- Backup to Hard Drive / Thumb drive
- Emergency charging of phone.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 14:02 UTC
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1878 comments in total)

£4500 - USB 2

<shakes head>

£4500 - USB 2

<shakes head harder>

£4500 - USB 2

Nope. It won't compute. My head just doesn't want to let it in.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 08:37 UTC as 92nd comment | 7 replies
On article Canon EOS 77D Review (258 comments in total)
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: "it does offer a compelling balance at this price point."
A great review that could have been written by Phil Askey himself, god rest his soul.

Well it did make me wonder too. I checked and his last tweet was April 8 and there has been no news reports so I assume (hope) he's just fine and that if his soul is resting in peace it's simply because he has discovered the secrets to inner harmony.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 13:41 UTC
On article Canon EOS 77D Review (258 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: So, DPR, please help me understand.

They put their very best APS-C sensor in a mid level enthusiast camera for $900.

It's an excellent sensor, with base ISO DR the same as full frame sensors from a few years ago, such as the Nikon D4.

But because it's not the very best APS-C sensor available, that's now a "Con".

And to squeeze it into this category, you introduce the role of peers; citing D7200 and A6300.

D7200, a camera introduced for $300 more.

A6300, also introduced at slightly higher price ($1000) but a now a mirrorless camera?

Why not Sony's most recent APS-C DSLR, the A68. Which has almost identical sensor performance to the Canon (Canon fractions better but negligible)?

Say we accept a mirrorless 'peer', so what about the Fujifilm X-T2 for $1600 or the cheaper X-T20. These have near identical sensor performance to the Canon (fractions). Yet for those, sensor DR is not a "Con".

I get that you like to rib Canon a bit, but is the DR of this camera really a "Con"?

You also haven't mentioned the Fujifilm inconsistency. That the sensors measure the same base ISO performance, and are visibly comparable in your exposure latitude test:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr144_0=fujifilm_xt2&attr144_1=canon_eos80d&attr144_2=fujifilm_xt2&attr144_3=canon_eos80d&attr146_0=200_0&attr146_1=100_0&attr146_2=200_6&attr146_3=100_6&attr177_0=off&attr177_1=off&attr177_2=off&attr177_3=off&normalization=full&widget=412&x=0.39849413706189113&y=0.7719468565438498

Was it simply an oversight, or this this approach something new, or is there still something I'm not getting about the relative performance of these two sensors?

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 09:15 UTC
On article Canon EOS 77D Review (258 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: So, DPR, please help me understand.

They put their very best APS-C sensor in a mid level enthusiast camera for $900.

It's an excellent sensor, with base ISO DR the same as full frame sensors from a few years ago, such as the Nikon D4.

But because it's not the very best APS-C sensor available, that's now a "Con".

And to squeeze it into this category, you introduce the role of peers; citing D7200 and A6300.

D7200, a camera introduced for $300 more.

A6300, also introduced at slightly higher price ($1000) but a now a mirrorless camera?

Why not Sony's most recent APS-C DSLR, the A68. Which has almost identical sensor performance to the Canon (Canon fractions better but negligible)?

Say we accept a mirrorless 'peer', so what about the Fujifilm X-T2 for $1600 or the cheaper X-T20. These have near identical sensor performance to the Canon (fractions). Yet for those, sensor DR is not a "Con".

I get that you like to rib Canon a bit, but is the DR of this camera really a "Con"?

Fair points.

I'm just thinking back to when I purchased many of my cameras using DPR as a guide, and before I got deeply into the technical nitty gritty.

The Cons were the warning signs, I had to assess their potential impact; slow or low accuracy AF, long shot to shot delays, features locked while buffer clears, poor auto WB in mixed lighting, etc, etc.

I don't really see the difference between excellent and outstanding as a Con, and I'm not sure if the Me of yesteryear would have known how to go about assessing for myself if this "Con" would be something to be concerned about or not. Without some kind of 'acceptability benchmark' to relate it to, it may well have put me off the camera unnecessarily.

It seems inconsistent in that I don't see the same approach used in other metrics. If AF performance is excellent, it's usually a Pro. Within the excellents, one will be best, class leading. But I don't recall seeing only excellent AF, not class leading, listed as a "Con" anywhere.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 08:50 UTC
On article Canon EOS 77D Review (258 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: So, DPR, please help me understand.

They put their very best APS-C sensor in a mid level enthusiast camera for $900.

It's an excellent sensor, with base ISO DR the same as full frame sensors from a few years ago, such as the Nikon D4.

But because it's not the very best APS-C sensor available, that's now a "Con".

And to squeeze it into this category, you introduce the role of peers; citing D7200 and A6300.

D7200, a camera introduced for $300 more.

A6300, also introduced at slightly higher price ($1000) but a now a mirrorless camera?

Why not Sony's most recent APS-C DSLR, the A68. Which has almost identical sensor performance to the Canon (Canon fractions better but negligible)?

Say we accept a mirrorless 'peer', so what about the Fujifilm X-T2 for $1600 or the cheaper X-T20. These have near identical sensor performance to the Canon (fractions). Yet for those, sensor DR is not a "Con".

I get that you like to rib Canon a bit, but is the DR of this camera really a "Con"?

Well I wouldn't want you pretending things aren't there, I'm all for the whole truth.

And yes at base ISO the latest Nikon/Sony give up to an extra stop, but from ISO 200 they are all pretty well bunched together on the following site:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%2080D,FujiFilm%20X-T2,Nikon%20D7200,Olympus%20OM-D%20E-M1%20Mark%20II,Panasonic%20Lumix%20DMC-GX8,Sony%20ILCE-6300

Certainly not seeing anything as dramatic as your:

"However, it is visually (as well as measurably) still behind the chips used in just about everyone else's cameras"

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2017 at 22:22 UTC
On article Canon EOS 77D Review (258 comments in total)

So, DPR, please help me understand.

They put their very best APS-C sensor in a mid level enthusiast camera for $900.

It's an excellent sensor, with base ISO DR the same as full frame sensors from a few years ago, such as the Nikon D4.

But because it's not the very best APS-C sensor available, that's now a "Con".

And to squeeze it into this category, you introduce the role of peers; citing D7200 and A6300.

D7200, a camera introduced for $300 more.

A6300, also introduced at slightly higher price ($1000) but a now a mirrorless camera?

Why not Sony's most recent APS-C DSLR, the A68. Which has almost identical sensor performance to the Canon (Canon fractions better but negligible)?

Say we accept a mirrorless 'peer', so what about the Fujifilm X-T2 for $1600 or the cheaper X-T20. These have near identical sensor performance to the Canon (fractions). Yet for those, sensor DR is not a "Con".

I get that you like to rib Canon a bit, but is the DR of this camera really a "Con"?

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2017 at 20:19 UTC as 39th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

cosinaphile: A PREemptice lawsuit says more about our litigious society than it does about any specific instance of wrongdoing

also if she has not sued yet what are the warhol foundation suing for exactly
the law , i think is a special cancer over the machinery of commerce and life and i instances like this push that point

i woukld like instances of misuse of the justice system to be singled out for punishment ... obsessive suits have no place in a free society

all law suits should with merit or with penalty for pushing garbage into over loaded courts ... its the blood suckers who win in the end anyway

This is all about creating commercial value and limiting costs. They have a buyer ready to purchase the rights. That buyer doesn't want to buy with the threat of a lawsuit hanging over it.

Once the asset is protected from future lawsuits, by this pre-emptive action, the buyer will pay and AWE will recover their costs and make the profit they seek.

As DPR have reported it, commercial implications have not been mentioned, its only about about securing the right not to be sued in future.

Think about that.

By doing it preemtively, Goldsmith now has to spend big money to defend, which maybe she doesnt have. And because the work doesnt yet have any defined commercial value, any damages from a counter-suit could be limited, so she is less likely to get any help for the counter action, and less damages even if she wins.

If they had simply sold the rights, it would establish value and Goldsmith would have lawyers knocking down her door to represent in the infringement suit.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 22:59 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Government is meant to be transient. Adminstrative in nature, an enforcer of the principles for a fair society. That's what they are empowered to do, in theory.

People could simply fight each other (and did for a long long time). Whomever is stronger wins, gets to eat, lives a little longer and maybe takes a chance to procreate.

People who were not stronger had to get smarter to survive, and society was born. Lets all work together for the common good.

The common good has only three pillars:

Prosperity - we all get to eat, all live a little longer, all get to procreate.
Security - we protect each other, we fight together when needed, not with each other.
Justice - We dont exploit each other, we do what is right and fair for everyone.

That's not the world we live in. 98% of the wealth resides with 2% of the people. Government failed to enforce, instead it was bought and used its powers to protect the purchasers.

And so we get stories like this.

Maybe fighting is better.

When they came for John, no one stood for him because they were afraid they would be next. When they came for me, there was no one left to stand for me.

Which part of divide and conquer is ambiguous?

But we are in danger of straying off topic ;-)

Cambell's soup were eventually happy with the exposure AW's art brought with it. There is similar mileage for Goldsmith. They should simply agree a royalty and move on. Do the right thing, not what you can legally get away with.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 21:02 UTC

Government is meant to be transient. Adminstrative in nature, an enforcer of the principles for a fair society. That's what they are empowered to do, in theory.

People could simply fight each other (and did for a long long time). Whomever is stronger wins, gets to eat, lives a little longer and maybe takes a chance to procreate.

People who were not stronger had to get smarter to survive, and society was born. Lets all work together for the common good.

The common good has only three pillars:

Prosperity - we all get to eat, all live a little longer, all get to procreate.
Security - we protect each other, we fight together when needed, not with each other.
Justice - We dont exploit each other, we do what is right and fair for everyone.

That's not the world we live in. 98% of the wealth resides with 2% of the people. Government failed to enforce, instead it was bought and used its powers to protect the purchasers.

And so we get stories like this.

Maybe fighting is better.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 20:35 UTC as 54th comment | 2 replies
On article Hasselblad X1D final production sample gallery (142 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: That dog portrait shows perfect depth of field control. A breath of fresh air in this age of nothing-in-focus mania and a lovely example of the potential quality of the system.

Maybe that was 'blads rationale in not offering fast lenses, saving photographers from making bad artistic choices?

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 05:35 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: Eric00:

Did you see lots of Full Framed Sony models?

I have to bow out now before it becomes a threesome

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2017 at 17:32 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: Eric00:

Did you see lots of Full Framed Sony models?

Over 12 months and the force is still strong with you two. Get a room.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2017 at 16:54 UTC
On article Hasselblad X1D final production sample gallery (142 comments in total)

Yeah yeah, just take the rest of my money ya heartless b'stards.

And my daughter is pretty, she'll get by.

And really, I ask ya, who the hell needs two kidneys, clearly a design error....

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2017 at 13:18 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: Eric00:

Did you see lots of Full Framed Sony models?

@Mared - "Sony will pass Canon in the near future"

Not a Snowball in hell's chance. Yes, 2 similar cameras can do a similar job, but a broken camera can't do any job. Until Sony can match Canon's support service it just isn't going to happen. And "Sony Customer Service" is probably one of the best known Oxymorons on the planet.

@ttran88

I have an A7, and it's a capable but quirky camera. But I didn't upgrade because they started making them bigger and heavier to support video. If I want a big stills mirrorless I'd probably go Fujifilm or Hassleblad but I'd be happy for Sony to convince me otherwise.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2017 at 12:39 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Well done DPR, managed to mention 2nd and former 2nd without mentioning first. Can we assume it's Canon?

Lol, I guess people don't know the full sketch

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2017 at 05:11 UTC
Total: 567, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »