Joined on Nov 26, 2012


Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ArtMar: Boy, this guy is really full of his own greatness.
He gets to know his subjects as only he can -- they reveal to him their otherwise cloaked uniqueness -- and isn't it interesting that the result is that all of his portraits look pretty much like one another. (Maybe it's the look of trying to fend off his oily, ingratiating attitude?)

Ironies abound: "Throughts R Us", inaptly named, promulgates criteria that would suppress critical thinking, and the Great Panton who "gets under the facade that people put up" (PDL, above) makes everyone look the same: their portraits proclaim, "Photographed by Paton" -- and are most emphatically advertisements for his brand.  Hey, he's got a successful shtick, I'll give that to him -- he's raking it in.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2020 at 13:03 UTC

Boy, this guy is really full of his own greatness.
He gets to know his subjects as only he can -- they reveal to him their otherwise cloaked uniqueness -- and isn't it interesting that the result is that all of his portraits look pretty much like one another. (Maybe it's the look of trying to fend off his oily, ingratiating attitude?)

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2020 at 16:56 UTC as 11th comment | 8 replies
On article Nikon Z50 review (1979 comments in total)
In reply to:

teos: I am a pixel-peeper, picture and pixel quality looks EXCELLENT to me!

You didn't mention the Canon 11-22 zoom -- it's an excellent lens.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2019 at 12:10 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G7 X III sample gallery (87 comments in total)

The lens on my G7X Mark I is better than this one at the wide end.
Canon sometimes works in mysterious ways it seems.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2019 at 21:41 UTC as 20th comment | 3 replies

The faces sometimes appear to be unnaturally elongated in the vertical dimension, like the girl's face on the left in the first pair of images. (I wrote "appear" because of course we don't know what she really looks like, but showing her face taken with, say, a 50 mm lens in the center of the frame, would have been an informative comparison).

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2019 at 17:25 UTC as 41st comment
In reply to:

camerosity: We got the notification of this yesterday. Apparently it is because of a copyright issue. We were asked to remove certain older versions of Adobe software from our org because of it. Adobe sent a fairly sternly worded message saying we are no longer authorized to run this specific software. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

In my experience Capture One imposes more of an "interpretation" on the image than Adobe Camera Raw does. Which is fine if that interpretation (higher contrast and more saturation) coincides with your aesthetic. I much prefer the more neutral look of ACR as a starting point,

Link | Posted on May 10, 2019 at 22:22 UTC
In reply to:

blackmondy: When you price your products at a premium, you expect good growth every quarter ? Companies like Nikon should seriously ask themselves why has photography become such an expensive hobby and profession these many years even with inflation taken into account ? Any R&D would have been recovered long ago.

Your comment is way off the mark.
In the UK a Nikon D3500 + Lens can be purchased for £339 (new). so hardly "such an expensive" hobby.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2019 at 16:58 UTC

The bride looks like she already has deep regrets about being married.
Does this lens somehow reveal what people are really feeling, below their public facade? Is that why it's so expensive?
(Oh wait, she's not wearing a wedding ring. Still time to back out.)

Link | Posted on May 8, 2019 at 16:15 UTC as 160th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

007peter: Canon is Blaming Smartphone to hide it's { LAZINESS }. Canon sensor has been lagging behind Sony & Nikon for years, then after breaking new ground with 5dmk2 (1st FF hybrid 1080 cam) Canon got lazy and lost its video crown to Panasonic Gh2,Gh3, Gh5. Later in 2018 $2000 Sony A7-3 took the video crown away from Canon & Panasonic, then $1499 Fuji XT3 stole the crown & won Cinama5d 2017 Best Video camera. Today a cheap $899 Fuji XT30 run circle over any Canon in video capability. As an ex-Canon shooter I AM FRUSTRATED by Canon poor video.

As a non-ex-Canon shooter I AM FRUSTRATED by all this palaver about "poor video". If video is so important to you then why don't you buy a video camera?Canon will be happy to sell you one.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2019 at 20:19 UTC
In reply to:

King of Song: Canon is the most poorly managed high tech company on earth. They spit in the face of their loyal customers by offering inferior sensors, augmented with withheld features. Canon deserves to go out of business. I have been waiting for something fabulous for years that never ever comes. Each new release is inferior to their last, falling further. and further behind the competition.

@KIng of Song. It seems that you watched "The Big Lebowski" and decided to emulate Walter rather than the Dude. You might want to reconsider that.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2019 at 02:17 UTC
In reply to:

LensBeginner: This is bad news for all photographers, photography enthusiasts and hobbysts.

Years of inaction from all the major players are showing, smartphones are more than "good enough" for all those who just need to take a snapshot now and then, camera prices will probably rise as "real" cameras will survive as a niche market, possibly with a much slowed release cycle and fewer improvements, since there will be less money for R&D.

I question the ability to reason of all the commenters who are gloating below... it's myopic at best, idiotic at worst.

@LensBeginner -- Yes, "good enough" regarding smart phones, but consider that "real" cameras are now also (more than) good enough for photographers, photography enthusiasts, and hobbyists (well, at least 99% of them anyway, at a guess)..

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2019 at 12:55 UTC

It seems that a number of people writing comments here don't know the difference between a company reporting a loss, and a company reporting a decrease in profits. Canon is doing the latter (as the headline says).
(But there is some humor to be had perusing these comments: the proposition that if Canon hadn't rested on its laurels and had extended the dynamic range of its sensors then smartphone users (in droves?) would have purchased Canon cameras is particularly amusing.)

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2019 at 11:25 UTC as 80th comment | 2 replies
On article This is the first ever photograph of a black hole (634 comments in total)
In reply to:

David610: For those who think this is a photograph read this link:

"wishful calculating" -- no, I don't think that's a fair characterization.
Among other things, they ran numerous tests on the algorithm to examine its accuracy or lack thereof. In addition, four different (sub-) teams worked separately and independently on the data and their results all converged on the shape of the final image shown.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2019 at 10:50 UTC
In reply to:

snapa: That's nice, but I wish half of them were hired to work on new native APS-C E-mount lenses. That is where Sony needs to apply more people, money, and resources. Sony sensors are already more than good enough. Great sensors without great lenses... makes no sense.

If you want a larger selection of lenses, buy one of their full frame cameras. That's what Sony, Canon, Nikon et al are telling us. Makes good business sense: greater profits on the camera bodies, and the lenses (although inconvenient for those of us still shooting with APS-C camera bodies -- when it becomes inconvenient enough perhaps we'll move up to full frame? That's the business plan it seems).

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2019 at 02:37 UTC
In reply to:

Daft Punk: It is always interesting to see a new Canon launch.

They are the Imperial Empire of the camera world. They have all the resources, the money and the manpower.

Their engineers come up with amazing tech like Dual Pixel AF.

Then the engineers present their ideas to the "product team" and so senior management starts to "CALIBRATE" the offering.

They sit down with the accountants.

The objective is to see what the minimum level of features the market will take and what it costs to deliver.

So they pare back the FPS. Pare back the dual slots to single. Ease back on the AF capability, hobble the video.

This is a carefully calibrated camera. It is an exercise of "just enough".

This is what Canon do. Perhaps more than any other maker.

I am surprised that you are surprised.

Agree Karafuru. Some folks apparently seem to think that Canon is a non-profit organization or a public utility. It's not. As a corporation whose goal is to maximize profits (as it has a duty to its shareholders to do) of course it will "pare back" features on lower priced models. Our power as consumers is to choose to purchase another brand if we so desire. Strange behavior, at least to me, on the part of those who act personally offended by Canon's marketing strategy. Canon's "carefully calibrated" approach is what makes them the most profitable camera company.
(Talk about paring back features in order to induce customers to upgrade to higher priced models, have you looked into buying a new car lately? )

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2018 at 15:53 UTC
In reply to:

Wanderer23: Did Canon do anything about its DR or is this the same sensor/IQ from their dslr's?

Has it been verified that it's the same sensor as the 5D, mk 4? Or is that an educated guess?

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2018 at 10:46 UTC
In reply to:

hetedik: For some reason, this is quite a common case.
When it is too easy to make money, many companies get arrogant instead of honoring their customers. And for some reasons, too many people accept it for too long time, but finally everybody wakes up. The wannabe monopolists too.

First you are forced to accept a subscription, a monthly payment for not owing anything. Than you also have to invest in new hardware and OS, if you still want to use what you have paid for.

Sooner or later, you will find out, it is not a software, it is a trap.

OP: "forced to accept a subscription" -- really, Adobe "forced" you?
Came to your house and threatened you if you didn't accept a subscription?
They are indeed bad people!
P.S. I'm using Photoshop CC2014 on a Win 7 x64 machine. I'm happy with this and will not be updating CC or the OS.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2018 at 17:26 UTC

Well, one perspective is that he got the ruling he deserved for bringing his ridiculously frivolous lawsuit.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2018 at 23:55 UTC as 33rd comment
In reply to:

Nukunukoo: For that to even succeed, Nikon must deliver a system that is at least better than the A7iii at a better price. Sony now knows that they should deliver an A7iv by then to steal Nikon’s thunder, at the very least. Next year’s going to be interesting indeed!

I'm not as sure as you appear to be that if you continue to repeat ad nauseam that Canon's mirrorless bodies are "lousy" that people will, eventually, come to believe you,
And all that in addition to Mastering Light :-)

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2018 at 21:34 UTC
On article Canon EF-M 22mm F2 STM sample gallery (174 comments in total)
In reply to:

ArtMar: For image 2 the 22mm lens was shot at 28mm. This lens really is amazing!
(It seems to have transformed itself into the 15-45mm zoom....)

Yep, looks that way...

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2017 at 21:23 UTC
Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »