marike6

Joined on Jul 29, 2011

Comments

Total: 2731, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Olympus announces PEN E-PL8 entry-level mirrorless (23 comments in total)

DPR made a big deal about the Fujifilm XE-2S having "only" 16 mp, in fact in their review the new Fuji got kind of trashed with no award at all. Now that m43 has released a whole bunch of 16 mp cameras from Olympus an Panasonic, will DPR stay consistent and also trash these new releases? Or will reviewers start telling readers that "16 mp is a good balance between resolution and fast processing"? I'm guessing the latter.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 00:01 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

KW Phua: Wrong timing. iPhone 7+ is coming.

Yeah, and people can't even play Pokemon Go on the M5. But seriously, the number of photographers and photo enthusiasts dreaming of framing that perfect shot, arms stretched out like a boob, squinting at their mobile's LCD, is smaller than you think.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 11:27 UTC
In reply to:

Frank_BR: A manual-focus lens from Tokina? Hmmm ... this is the territory of Samyang, which has just launched a 20mm F1.8 lens, which is faster (and probably cheaper, too) than this Tokina. I feel that Tokina is dreaming of the past when it was a competitive lens company.

"when Tokina was a competitive lens company". What are you even talking about? Tokina makes some of the best wide angle zooms in the world (11-16, 12-24, 14-28), Samyang has never produced a single zoom, they've not produced a single AF lens. Because this new Tokina is a MF prime doesn't mean we forget about their legendary UWA zooms or the fact the Pentax has licensed half of their lens lineup from Tokina. Honest to god, this forum is getting more silly every day.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2016 at 12:28 UTC
In reply to:

marike6: This is too funny. It's not enough to simply present the specs and let people decide if they are interested in new iPhone. Now DPR is pleading with people to care about the latest expensive gadget that Apple will obsolete in 6-10 months time. Maybe when Apple builds a couple of factories here in the US or pays its fair share in taxes, I'll care.

http://www.cultofmac.com/77814/is-apple-guilty-of-planned-obsolescence/

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 11:26 UTC
In reply to:

marike6: This is too funny. It's not enough to simply present the specs and let people decide if they are interested in new iPhone. Now DPR is pleading with people to care about the latest expensive gadget that Apple will obsolete in 6-10 months time. Maybe when Apple builds a couple of factories here in the US or pays its fair share in taxes, I'll care.

When you get a handle on basic reading comprehension or do a re-read, you'll see my post was mainly focused on DPR's article shilling for the iPhone. It reminds me of Lady Gaga fans on YouTube giving lists of reasons why people should like her new song, strategies for getting to like the song, even pleading for people to go buy in on iTunes. It's as inorganic as a billboard. As far as Apple, I've been using Apple products for decades, save your lecture. I couldn't care less where Asian companies pay taxes, but Apple is an American company. Anyone reading the newspaper knows that even Ireland is having a tough time getting tax revenue from them. And "planned obsolescence" from tech companies like Apple, is a most certainly a thing, google it. A clear example is the proprietary 5-point security screws in the Macbook pro which are designed to prevent users from replacing the battery or upgrade components, meaning users are forced to upgrade or pay for service. It's just wrong.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 11:22 UTC

This is too funny. It's not enough to simply present the specs and let people decide if they are interested in new iPhone. Now DPR is pleading with people to care about the latest expensive gadget that Apple will obsolete in 6-10 months time. Maybe when Apple builds a couple of factories here in the US or pays its fair share in taxes, I'll care.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 11:10 UTC as 258th comment | 3 replies
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (947 comments in total)

Removing the mini-jack feels like fixing something that isn't broken. But iFans are fiercely loyal, if Apple removed the LCD, defenders would say "but they are including a Lightning-to-HDMI cable in the box you can plug into your laptop should you need to". ;-)

For people who enjoy shooting with their phones, the camera could be interesting.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 14:30 UTC as 24th comment | 8 replies
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (947 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: Apple's desire to replace the ubiquitous 3.5mm stereo audio jack with a proprietary Thunderbolt adapter is turn off about this phone. It's like when companies started telling everybody that vinyl records were old-fashioned, that CDs sounded better. Same with those awful, compressed MP3 files that are about as fun to own as a broom. Of course we now know that tech companies like Sony and Philips lied about CDs, the gold standard for audiophiles is vinyl and records are selling for a fortune. Sorry I want to keep my analog audio jacks around, they work great.

@EricWN Before you get your Apple apologist feathers ruffled, I obviously meant Lightning connectors which are 100% proprietary. The point is the only reason Apple is obsoleting the ubiquitous 3.5mm mini-jack is to sell more accessories. Der. I've been an Apple user probably since before you were born, but Apple could remove the LCD from its iPhone and iFans would make excuses for them. For me, the mini-jack is not broke, there is no logical reason whatsoever to remove it. Buy and defend whatever you want.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 14:02 UTC
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (947 comments in total)

Apple's desire to replace the ubiquitous 3.5mm stereo audio jack with a proprietary Thunderbolt adapter is turn off about this phone. It's like when companies started telling everybody that vinyl records were old-fashioned, that CDs sounded better. Same with those awful, compressed MP3 files that are about as fun to own as a broom. Of course we now know that tech companies like Sony and Philips lied about CDs, the gold standard for audiophiles is vinyl and records are selling for a fortune. Sorry I want to keep my analog audio jacks around, they work great.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 11:19 UTC as 82nd comment | 15 replies
In reply to:

Jefftan: this is Fuji version of A5100 both $600

but Sony with the garbage kit lens, X-A3 with a good kit lens
and Fuji X mount lens lineup now available

Which one will u choose?

Habs Fan27 I've used the Sony E 16-50, it is one of the worst kit lenses ever made. Huge vignetting, and the softest corners of any kit lens by far. Photozone gave it 1 1/2 stars. The compact size is not a plus at all, it doesn't even offer a bayonet lenshood, it's a total joke, made for tourists.

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/842-sony1650f3556oss?start=2

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2016 at 11:48 UTC
On article Canon announces new flagship EOS C700 cinema camera (169 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Quite honestly I can’t say anything bad about this camera. It offers a ton of great video features and the market it is geared towards has already budgeted this kind of money for it. Studios will demand this level of functionality and so this level of financial commitment will be justified for the select few that are lucky enough to shoot with it.

That being said, I still can’t fathom that this camera will be the only thing that can shoot high quality 4K video. The leaked GH5 specs definitely are not quite what this beast offers. However, 10 bit 4:2:2 internal for less than $2000 is extremely powerful in the right hands. In addition the GH5 will make a very commendable stills camera as well.

I can’t help but think that Canon just can’t compete on the consumer level with Panasonic and Sony. They put out amazing Pro level equipment and then everyone just assumes their entry level stuff is equally impressive when it most certainly isn’t.

"Canon just can’t compete on the consumer level with Panasonic and Sony" except that Canon outsells both brand individually by a huge margin and probably both brands combined.

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2016 at 11:40 UTC
On article Canon announces new flagship EOS C700 cinema camera (169 comments in total)
In reply to:

sh10453: I wish that DPR would make a subscription of just a $1.00 per year for membership, and that only the home page can be viewed by non-members!
If you want to read articles, pay the annual dues!

At just a $1 a year, we'd get rid of a large percentage of trolls, if not most of them.

It's sad to see some "supposedly" grownup people write and behave worse than 4th grade children with their useless bashing of one manufacturer or the other.

Agree completely. I only visit DPR occasionally these days, the brand warriors and format trolling make reading about photography gear a total drag.

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2016 at 11:38 UTC
In reply to:

Jefftan: this is Fuji version of A5100 both $600

but Sony with the garbage kit lens, X-A3 with a good kit lens
and Fuji X mount lens lineup now available

Which one will u choose?

The Fuji 16-50 is a million times better than the Sony 16-50, there is no comparison. The Sony is one of the worst kit lenses ever made. And the Fuji lens line up is dramatically better than Sony's E-mount lineup. Unless video is your thing, get the Fuji.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 11:20 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E2S: What you need to know (86 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: My opinion is that no award for the Fujifilm X-E2S after the X-E1 received a Gold award makes almost no sense. The fact that the X-E2S is using a proven 16 mp sensor is hardly a reason for no award at all. This is especially true considering that Fujifilm reduced the price of the X-E2S by $300 vs the release price of the X-E1. And it is also a consideration that many of the existing APS-C lenses from almost all manufacturers seem to struggle on the newest crop of 24 mp sensors (Sony E-mount anyone?). 16mp is a great sweet spot for resolution and file management. On DPR, there are only two scenarios where a camera doesn't get ANY award at all: either the camera performed great but oddly the reviewer didn't like the camera (i.e. Nikon V1, Nikon Df, and arguably the Pentax K-01), or the camera just didn't perform well. I cannot think of a time when the update of a Gold Award camera received no award at all. It's time to dump the awards or add a Bronze award, the XE series is great.

@Richard Butler But Fujifilm has never been interested in making video cameras, why hold a Fuji camera to the standard set by Sony or Panasonic? Fujifilm doesn't make all-arounder, photo/video hybrids, they never have. To review one as such is unfair. With the Ricoh GR, we know going in that its primary focus is still photography. Like the X-E2, the GR is not trying to be an RX100 or G7 style all rounder. Pure still photography, that's what it's designed for. To penalize the X-E2S for not being an A6300 style all-arounder seems ludicrous. To expect the X-E2S to perform at top-of-the-line Samsung, Sony, or Nikon levels AF wise is also unfair. The X-E2S is not dramatically worse than the X-E1, a gold camera, it's no less capable in 2016 than it was in 2013, then it should have at the very least gotten Silver. Measuring all cameras against an arbitrary Sony hybrid photo/video camera standard is a mistake because it sets the bar at an impossible height.

Link | Posted on Aug 20, 2016 at 10:24 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E2S: What you need to know (86 comments in total)

My opinion is that no award for the Fujifilm X-E2S after the X-E1 received a Gold award makes almost no sense. The fact that the X-E2S is using a proven 16 mp sensor is hardly a reason for no award at all. This is especially true considering that Fujifilm reduced the price of the X-E2S by $300 vs the release price of the X-E1. And it is also a consideration that many of the existing APS-C lenses from almost all manufacturers seem to struggle on the newest crop of 24 mp sensors (Sony E-mount anyone?). 16mp is a great sweet spot for resolution and file management. On DPR, there are only two scenarios where a camera doesn't get ANY award at all: either the camera performed great but oddly the reviewer didn't like the camera (i.e. Nikon V1, Nikon Df, and arguably the Pentax K-01), or the camera just didn't perform well. I cannot think of a time when the update of a Gold Award camera received no award at all. It's time to dump the awards or add a Bronze award, the XE series is great.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2016 at 15:03 UTC as 23rd comment | 3 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: when studio lenses retire (203 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sergey_Green: Had this lens a while back, was pretty good for what it was, I thought. It does not produce that tightly sharp images wide open as Sigma Art does, but Nikon does add that certain character to the image (as many lenses from that period do), that can be quite attractive just as well. And it is way smaller (several times in fact) than the 50mm Art lens. Certainly worth having, and they do not cost much.

@boinkphoto The Fujifilm 35 1.4 is not exactly sharp wide open, it needs f2 to get above the standard decency level of most lens test websites. The Sigma 35 1.4 is a different story, it's sharp straight from max aperture. But to imply that Fuji lenses are sharp, while Nikkors have only "character" is absurd. The majority of Nikon's pro glass i.e., 70-200, 300 f/2.8, 200 f2, are designed for sharp images straight from max aperture. The Nikon 50 1.4 is a design from 40 years ago, it's a good lens, just not at max aperture. Nikon's newer primes like the 24 f/1.8 are pin sharp straight from max aperture. And unlike the Fujifilm lens lineup, they cover FF.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2016 at 15:17 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Fuji XF100-400 - European COMPACT system zoom lens? WTH? :D That thing is bigger than EF 100-400L and just as heavy.
Sony FE 85/1.4 GM - European professional COMPACT system lens? ... That tells a lot about COMPACT systems, doesn't it? :D
And no award for Sigma 20/1.4 Art :(. Must be too big and heavy, so nobody likes it. Should have been a COMPACT system lens, THEN it would get an award :D no doubt.
Holy facepalm. I don't get it.

The EISA awards are thinly veiled marketing. Few people take them seriously, they are just a way to get EISA stickers on those Tamron lens boxes.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2016 at 15:00 UTC
In reply to:

Stollen1234: Hey Nikon..what happened..what a disaster for Nikon

Prosumer DSLR of the Year Nikon D500 for the reading challenged.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2016 at 14:50 UTC
On article Still solid: Fujifilm X-E2S Review (230 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: More proof that DPR needs to lose the review awards. If the X-E1 wins a Gold Award, how does the X-E2S get nothing? Not even the spirit of the Olympics could compel the reviewer to give this excellent workhorse a Silver award? ;-) M43 stuck with the 16 mp sensor for years, the rest of the market moved to higher res sensors, and not once did we ever read "dated sensor" or see a lack of Gold and Silver Awards in most of the m43 reviews. For most general photography, the X-E1 with a 35 1.4 or kit zoom is an absolute joy to shoot with, it has great build quality, looks beautiful. And crucially, it's virtually impossible to take bad images with this camera. What Fuji has done with the X-E2S is lowered the price by $300 compared to the release price of the X-E. With that in mind, why is the reviewer expecting an XT-1 specs or performance? When you buy a D3300 or Rebel, you don't expect a D500 or 7D II.

@Androole
And what was the award for the Panasonic GM5? Silver. Case closed. And anyone who tells you that the GM5 is a better camera than the Fuji XE series is delusional. What I think DPR missed is the pricing of the XE-2S has been adjusted to reflect things like the last generation sensor and slower than XT-1 performance. And having owned the X-E1, as brilliant a camera in 2013 as it is in 2016, I'd say that it's illogical to have an improved, significantly less expensive X-E1 given no award when the X-E1 received a gold award. The equivalent would be like giving the OMD EM5 II no award because the rest of the market moved onto 24 mp chips.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2016 at 11:53 UTC
On article Still solid: Fujifilm X-E2S Review (230 comments in total)

More proof that DPR needs to lose the review awards. If the X-E1 wins a Gold Award, how does the X-E2S get nothing? Not even the spirit of the Olympics could compel the reviewer to give this excellent workhorse a Silver award? ;-) M43 stuck with the 16 mp sensor for years, the rest of the market moved to higher res sensors, and not once did we ever read "dated sensor" or see a lack of Gold and Silver Awards in most of the m43 reviews. For most general photography, the X-E1 with a 35 1.4 or kit zoom is an absolute joy to shoot with, it has great build quality, looks beautiful. And crucially, it's virtually impossible to take bad images with this camera. What Fuji has done with the X-E2S is lowered the price by $300 compared to the release price of the X-E. With that in mind, why is the reviewer expecting an XT-1 specs or performance? When you buy a D3300 or Rebel, you don't expect a D500 or 7D II.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2016 at 12:00 UTC as 44th comment | 3 replies
Total: 2731, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »