Lives in United States Denver, United States
Works as a Photographer every 6th Friday of the month
Joined on Sep 11, 2011


Total: 103, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »

How much will these bodies be worth 75 years from now on Antiques Cyber-Road Show?

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2012 at 20:56 UTC as 246th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

malcolm82: This lens barrel is big enough to fit a 25/1 m43 lens. Do they think it looks more professional this big and will sell better for the price? Maybe they realized people will not want to pay this much for a 5 gram lens if it was too obvious so they built this massive barrel around it.

If someone bought a v1 with 2 lenses for $900 when the system was introduced....a lot of the current customer base, I'm guessing less than $200 for a good, fast prime is not a huge amount.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 21:53 UTC

I'm really happy that Sony kept the "Cyber-shot" moniker, further establishing a very distinguished brand identity and justifying the $2,800 price.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2012 at 15:11 UTC as 99th comment
In reply to:

two_stanley: stick a Leica logo on this badboy and everyone would claim it to be the greatest camera ever!

Nah, Leicas don't have focus peaking...and yes I do understand how a real rangefinder focuses :P.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2012 at 15:09 UTC
In reply to:

Joe Ogiba: Wow, what a bunch of brain dead people here who don't have a clue why someone would want a 5.5x crop factor camera that takes almost any C-mount, K mount , Canon mount, Leica M mount, Nikon mount etc

This is the most frustrating feature of the original Q...decent LCD but crap zoom. What are they thinking here?!?

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2012 at 05:03 UTC

I took a Pentax Q with an adapted 50mm F1.7 MD lens around last weekend hiking and to a football game. I had one helluva great time with the 275mm equivalent field of view. IQ isn't going to be incredible at 1:1 but that's nor the damn point: IT'S FUN.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2012 at 04:52 UTC as 33rd comment | 2 replies
On article Sony NEX-5R Hands-on Preview (145 comments in total)
In reply to:

Doug Frost: If it's indeed true that the wi-fi feature allows for a smartphone app that gives you a wireless remote viewfinder and shutter release, it's a revolutionary breakthrough. That would instantly make this the most amazing street photography camera ever.

Assuming it works well.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2012 at 21:37 UTC
In reply to:

Jack Simpson: Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ... finally an tele zoom for my Q :D, albeit sans TV and AV mode .... thanks Peter_Burian :)

The Q handles so nicely and with IBIS...the perfect OM-D replacement. :P

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2012 at 03:31 UTC
On article Just Posted - Sony NEX-F3 review (129 comments in total)
In reply to:

toomanycanons: Me owning the original NEX 3 was the most frustrating camera experience I've ever had. Both the 18-55 and 16mm lenses sucked and I just could not get used to shooting a "DSLR" (I know I know) point and shoot style. Every time I read the word NEX I start to shiver.

And for the uninitiated, no, the NEX is not pocketable with a lens attached so what's the point?

Firmware update. I use a Nex 3 as a backup cam and for testing out Nex gear for sale. It's easy and operates (menu-wise) just like a 5N...though one hell of a lot louder.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2012 at 01:16 UTC
In reply to:

Gully Foyle: I wonder how many batteries he will have to carry along.

Well, the same battery as in a GH2, so possibly the same space as a 50mm f1.4 Canon or Nikon. So the weight advantage is now down to 15lbs.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2012 at 01:06 UTC
In reply to:

Photomonkey: Speed does help but they were shooting sports well before cameras got batteries.
Great photos will be taken and we will almost certainly not know what camera made them nor will we care.
Further, how many will actually view any of the images anywhere else than the web?

What the hell, this is a gear-related website. Please refrain from posting anything resembling common sense.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2012 at 00:50 UTC
On article Concert Footage from Nokia 808 Pureview (256 comments in total)

So does it come with IBIS or lens based stabilization? :P

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2012 at 02:54 UTC as 41st comment
In reply to:

Marty4650: You just can't please everyone.

If Olympus had made this a cheap lens... made from plastic, with a maximum aperture of f/2.8, then everyone would be complaining saying "I would gladly pay more for a much better lens."

But instead they decided to build a high quality lens, so now they will complain that "it costs too much."

You simply cannot buy high quality optics at bargain basement prices.
No one has them. Not Canon, not Nikon, nor Pentax or Sony.

Incidentally, Leica will be happy to sell you a 75mm f/2.0 lens for $3800, and it still won't autofocus.

In all fairness the 12mm f2 should get much better reviews then the Panasonic 14mm f2.5. You can get a eBay "kit" 14mm for $160 and the 12mm goes for $700-$800. I've used all the m4/3 prime lenses and the only really mediocre one is the 17mm Oly. However, I doubt I'll get the 75mm f1.8 simply because I love my 85mm f1.8 KH AR mount a little too much.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2012 at 23:48 UTC
In reply to:

JackM: Seriously what is the point?? If you are willing to spend that kind of money and carry a NOT compact camera/lens combo, why handicap your image quality with a quarter-frame sensor? Go APS-C or FF!

The lens isn't that big. Let's compare the size of a 5d Mark III with a 150mm lens and the OM-D with this one.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2012 at 16:04 UTC
In reply to:

ebosch: Now if only they make a black version of it... and the 12/2 and 45/1.8 too


Link | Posted on May 24, 2012 at 12:08 UTC

My Konica Hexanon AR 85mm f1.8 ($200) is looking better all the time. Especially with the new OM-D IBIS and the fact it's a full frame lens-adaptible for other systems if needed in the future. I'm sure the Olympus lens is very nice and the auto focus will be lightning quick in good lighting, but to me it's a low-light lens or for portraiture-both which require manual focus.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2012 at 11:09 UTC as 77th comment
In reply to:

Ben Raven: So let me get this straight,

Because some people MIGHT video a movie with a STILL camera, the REST OF THE POPULATION OF PLANET EARTH are now considered convicted co-conspirators. And without due process, must be assessed a penalty AND have our right to video ANYTHING for longer than 30 minutes straight revoked.
Oh, and did I mention that this outrage is being imposed by a for-profit industry in conjunction with vulture camera manufacturers opportunistically using this pathetic excuse to attempt to squeeze more $$$$ out of their customers' pockets !!

One more important technical note--A quality HD video camera, unfettered by this limit, is capable of higher quality than the average still camera, and would be the obvious choice for intellectual property rights thieves.

Also, since more and more people are watching Blu-Ray level movies, the call for inferior video and wretched non-surround sound
(with coughs) knockoffs is diminishing.

And we're supposed to be alright with this ?!?

Wow, you really have nothing better to do?

Link | Posted on May 20, 2012 at 19:58 UTC
On photo FD-G3 samples-2 in zapatista's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Lens is FD Canon 35mm f2 not sure what the aperture was....f5.6 would be a good guess.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2012 at 15:03 UTC as 1st comment
On photo Dusk_ in zapatista's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Konica Hexanon AR mount 40mm, f1.8, f4, shot near Downtown Denver, CO in a residential neighborhood. Max resolution out of LR, no post processing done.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2012 at 14:54 UTC as 1st comment
On photo sunset... in zapatista's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Olympus 45mm f1.8 Shot from Curtis Park, Denver, CO.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2012 at 14:30 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 103, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »