Spunjji

Joined on Jan 12, 2012

Comments

Total: 117, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

By this exact logic scaled in the other direction, my Micro 4/3 camera with an f0.95 lens is AWESOME and makes FF irrelevant. I'm not sure that's true.

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2017 at 18:44 UTC as 64th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

rialcnis: Great article and photos. Great camera. Soon I will have one and some new pro lenses.

Lot of weird bickering comments. Srsly, FF and cellphones supremicists? Might as well they blame this camera for global warming or Asteroid threats to earth.

Look at the stats on this amazing camera. For me the 4K video with very high bitrates is most amazing.

"Neither light nor cheap"

Only if you define light as "slightly lighter than whatever this is". It's not a heavy kit.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2017 at 00:49 UTC
On article Rebel in your pocket: Canon EOS M3 Review (464 comments in total)
In reply to:

fstopx2: I have the EOS M, M3 & Canon DSLRs. I wont consider buying another EOS M unless its more DSLR like. The camera itself takes ok pictures but is sluggish. I don't care for the removable EVF. The whole compatibility with the Canon lens catalog is nonsense. Yes it can do it but you need the adapter and most of the lenses that are not STM are sluggish and makes the camera big. I used to want a small systems camera but I am thinking the whole systems thing with the small cameras is a dead end. A few reasons - first off I have noticed that the mirrorless cameras are growing in size. They are now the size of DSLRs - whats the point? Might as well buy the DSLR. I think these small cameras with big sensors and built in lenses are going to eat the small systems camera market. I think Canon and Nikon know this and thats why they are sitting back.

fstopx2, you still haven't indicated how Canon and Nikon designing entire lines of mirrorless cameras - with their own lenses - is "holding back". The fact that Nikon subsequently cancelled theirs sounds very much like a retreat, not holding back. Why ignore a new market?

You claimed that the M produces better pictures because the sensor is bigger which is demonstrably wrong. Canon's sensors under-perform for their size.

So sure, this could be an argument about angels on the head of the pin - or we could elevate discussion to a relevant level with actual facts to back it up. :)

An example: you said "what's the point" of using mirrorless over DSLR if they're the same size. Well, having a viewfinder image that directly represents what you'll get in the final image based on your exposure calibration and white balance is just one example. Manual focus highlighting is another example. There are plenty of reasons to use mirrorless besides just size. You'll need to abandon that straw man.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 09:53 UTC
In reply to:

Reactive: It's strange. When I was watching a news report last night on TV, all the press guys were holding big camera things with big black or white tubes sticking out the front. When I watched the Olympics, all the guys trackside / poolside / seaside had the same things balanced on sticks. When I went to a wedding recently, the photographer had one around her neck, and an even bigger one for the official shots. I read somewhere they even use these big black camera / tube combos to make films and advertisements too. I just can't believe those fools brought all that kit to those events when they could have used their iPhones instead! Doh, stupid or what?

I'll be more clear... I got that your comment was sarcastic, no misunderstanding there - I still concluded that you missed the point of the article, and maintain that perspective.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 09:49 UTC
In reply to:

noisephotographer: The exif data of the images on http://www.si.com/nfl/photo/2016/09/11/iphone-7-plus-sneak-preview-photos deny that iphone 7 Plus has a larger sensor. Crop factor of the wide angle camera is 7.01 (iphone 6s seems to have the same crop factor) and the 56mm camera has a 8.5 crop factor.

Enjoying the replies from people who don't understand anything about smartphone cameras. They all have pitifully low base ISOs around 20-64 and, weirdly enough, can also run at higher ISO than base.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2016 at 09:46 UTC
In reply to:

digitalhecht: "...3MP is good enough for a magazine cover, 6-8MP is good enough for a large-ish wall print and anything more than that is a bonus..."

Really? In which universe? Please put the crack pipe down and step away slowly...
(Also, please define "large-ish".)

QuarterToDoom nails it there.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2016 at 09:42 UTC
In reply to:

princecody: Wonder if Steve Jobs would have through the new wireless earbuds in for Free with purchase or would have been like Apple & Cook are these days?

There is no WAY Jobs would have bundled earphones that can be sold for $150 in with the phone.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2016 at 09:41 UTC
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: A lot of self-righteous priggery going on in the comments.

If that new bokeh simulator works out as well as it looks, it'll be seismic for the pro photographer world. And not in a good way.

It'll be great for professional photography. People will stop using bokeh from wide-aperture lenses as a shorthand for "professional" and will have to consider the overall aesthetic :)

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2016 at 09:41 UTC
In reply to:

minzaw: What is the S/N signal to noise ratio of so called wireless hub connection on this pathetic apple ....compared to conventional headphones with digital optical out versus analogue audio out with respect to frequency responses and S/N ratio in db??/ as far as i am aware NO professionals in audio market used such magnetic connection in studio work??

Connect it to the lightning port and use a DAC then. Why whine when there are solutions.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2016 at 09:38 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: at this point in the evolution of iphone, one would think apple could provide a sensor larger than the smallest sensor in existence .i believe its about 15.5sqmm which is pathetic & much lower than the nastiest cheapest point & shoots sensors that were the bottom of the barrel... which at their nastiest and cheapest had sensors about twice the size of the iphone sensor.... the iphones iso of 25 perhaps makes sense for 1916 ... but is about a century behind in iso goodness and in 2016 is an embarrassment

an actual camera sensor of at least 30 or 40 sq mm is needed. the 41 mp sensor of nokia w pixel binning was a real step forward.. its sensor size is slightly bigger than 58mm sq about 4 times the size of an iphone camera sensor.. a 12 mp version is in my fuji x 30 & its quite nice for iq & iso latitude... its a 2\3 sensor, & its the smallest sensor i think cameras should possess...i wish samsung would use one. so 2 years later we might see one in an iphone .

Yet people keep taking really, really good photos with them. That must be frustrating for your theory.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2016 at 09:37 UTC
In reply to:

Reactive: It's strange. When I was watching a news report last night on TV, all the press guys were holding big camera things with big black or white tubes sticking out the front. When I watched the Olympics, all the guys trackside / poolside / seaside had the same things balanced on sticks. When I went to a wedding recently, the photographer had one around her neck, and an even bigger one for the official shots. I read somewhere they even use these big black camera / tube combos to make films and advertisements too. I just can't believe those fools brought all that kit to those events when they could have used their iPhones instead! Doh, stupid or what?

What was that sound? Oh, yes. It was the whoooosh of the article going riiight over your head.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2016 at 09:35 UTC
On article Rebel in your pocket: Canon EOS M3 Review (464 comments in total)
In reply to:

fstopx2: I have the EOS M, M3 & Canon DSLRs. I wont consider buying another EOS M unless its more DSLR like. The camera itself takes ok pictures but is sluggish. I don't care for the removable EVF. The whole compatibility with the Canon lens catalog is nonsense. Yes it can do it but you need the adapter and most of the lenses that are not STM are sluggish and makes the camera big. I used to want a small systems camera but I am thinking the whole systems thing with the small cameras is a dead end. A few reasons - first off I have noticed that the mirrorless cameras are growing in size. They are now the size of DSLRs - whats the point? Might as well buy the DSLR. I think these small cameras with big sensors and built in lenses are going to eat the small systems camera market. I think Canon and Nikon know this and thats why they are sitting back.

"first off I have noticed that the mirrorless cameras are growing in size"

Have you ever held something like the E-M5 MkII or even the "larger" E-M1? They are really not DSLR sized (or weight) by any stretch of the imagination.

I think Canon and Nikon are sitting back because they have the professional market to themselves and they severely missed the boat on MILCs.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 11:17 UTC
In reply to:

caravan: Beautiful work of Art from Leica.

-facepalm-

It's not even their best lens. Or their best-looking. :|

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 11:07 UTC
In reply to:

Spunjji: Looking forward to seeing someone attempt to justify this with tropes like "well you don't HAVE to buy it" and "you get what you pay for".

Yawn-worthy lens, hilarious price. Glad to see Leica continuing to provide a glorious satire of the entire photographic industry.

@tschotsch - disappointing, I was just appreciating your more balanced reply elsewhere. I do not need to be a lens design /expert/ to know that a fixed focal length "normal" (e.g. ~40-50mm) prime lens will not require a complex design. They can guild the lily however they want with expensive glass and exotic elements but as a design it's going to be fundamentally simpler (and easier to manufacture) than say, a Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 zoom.

In return, can I ask, on what basis of expertise did you make that classic pop-psychology accusation of my obvious and ravening envy? :D

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 11:04 UTC
In reply to:

The Davinator: The typical respons from those that could never afford it, and feel the need to bash it to make themselves feel better. Pretty much describes the internet.

@tschotsch - thanks for that! I genuinely learned something there. Bonus points go to you.

@The Davinator - why so personally offended? Your "low tolerance" appears to be for difference of opinion (which evidently you see as stupidity, YMMV). I am well aware that high quality optics aren't cheap but there is a difference between "not cheap" and "overpriced" and, well, there it is.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 10:53 UTC
In reply to:

The Davinator: The typical respons from those that could never afford it, and feel the need to bash it to make themselves feel better. Pretty much describes the internet.

Bonus points if you have a reason why the silver version costs £300 more :D

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2016 at 13:49 UTC
In reply to:

The Davinator: The typical respons from those that could never afford it, and feel the need to bash it to make themselves feel better. Pretty much describes the internet.

Keep on telling yourself that :D We're all just jealous and will never understand the joy of burning potentially useful money on an expensive bauble.

I would actually glean more pleasure, utility and practical value by buying a classic Leica lens second-hand and burning the rest of the cash on a live stream.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2016 at 13:48 UTC
In reply to:

Cameracist: Well you don't have to buy it. And if you do, you get what you pay for.

Ripped off? :D

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2016 at 13:47 UTC
In reply to:

Spunjji: Looking forward to seeing someone attempt to justify this with tropes like "well you don't HAVE to buy it" and "you get what you pay for".

Yawn-worthy lens, hilarious price. Glad to see Leica continuing to provide a glorious satire of the entire photographic industry.

None of that justifies the price, though - except perhaps scope of production, perhaps, but this is not a complex lens. You can find other equally well-made German lenses for far less money.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2016 at 13:46 UTC

Looking forward to seeing someone attempt to justify this with tropes like "well you don't HAVE to buy it" and "you get what you pay for".

Yawn-worthy lens, hilarious price. Glad to see Leica continuing to provide a glorious satire of the entire photographic industry.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2016 at 12:42 UTC as 44th comment | 7 replies
Total: 117, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »