paulski66

paulski66

Lives in United States IN, United States
Joined on Apr 9, 2010

Comments

Total: 126, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

James Pilcher: It seems DPReview has become a "all D850 all the time" web site. A solid iteration of an already solid camera does not deserve such fawning attention.

Maybe you should demand a refund for your subscription...

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2017 at 17:12 UTC
On article Canon unveils stabilized EF 85mm F1.4L lens (531 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lassoni: Makes me wonder why nikon didn't do this before canon?

Because Canon did it first...duh.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 21:01 UTC
In reply to:

demaio: I am a Nikon shooter and I don't want this camera. I shoot portraits only and I refuse to carry 1kg body. Nikon makes some great and affordable DSLRs, but no good affordable portrait lenses. My next camera will be Sony A7II and it will be bought after price reduction following the release of A7III. My lens choice will vary from Canon to Nikkor and from Zeiss to Helios.

"No good affordable portrait lenses." lol

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2017 at 12:07 UTC
On article Nikon announces development of D850 (538 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joed700: Is this going to be a $5500 camera? Nikon has been pumping up their prices on all prime lenses (28mm f/1.4; 105mm f/1.4; 70-200mm f/2.8E) to make up for the slow sales of their DSLRs among other products...

The 70-200 VRII , which was replaced by the 70-200 VR E, was never $1600. It was $2100, though occasionally available via rebate for somewhat less, but never $1600.

The 105 1.4e has no equivalent lens anywhere, period. Comparing the price of the 105 1.4 to the 105 2.5 (a MF lens, btw) is roughly like comparing the price of the Canon 50mm 1.8 to the the 50mm f/1.2. In other words, not very meaningful.

The 28mm f/1.4d was released in 1994 I believe at a price of $1700, and at the time was one of Nikon's most expensive lenses. Comparitively speaking, adjusting for inflation, etc, the price of the current lens is probably cheaper than the price of the older lens...not to mention that the older lens often sells for more than $3000 on the used market.

Of course, the great thing is that Nikon also sells the 28mm f/1.8 for users who don't need the speed and don't want to pay the price for the newer, faster lens. Ain't life grand?

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 14:28 UTC
On article Nikon announces development of D850 (538 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joed700: Is this going to be a $5500 camera? Nikon has been pumping up their prices on all prime lenses (28mm f/1.4; 105mm f/1.4; 70-200mm f/2.8E) to make up for the slow sales of their DSLRs among other products...

Interesting. Could you point me to a price comparison between the new 105 1.4e and the older version of that lens? Or the new 28 1.4e and the older version?

Or maybe you could compare those two lenses price-ise to their Canon equivalents? I'd be very interested to see such a comparison.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2017 at 17:45 UTC
On article Nikon announces development of D850 (538 comments in total)

In an unrelated note, I'm thinking about considering possibly weeding my flower beds. If I decide to weed my flower beds, work will commence at a later date. Details forthcoming...

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 16:13 UTC as 57th comment
In reply to:

maljo@inreach.com: Probably a nice optic, but of no interest to me.

Awesome. I was hoping to get a sense of whether or not this lens was of interest to you, and bam! there's the info I needed, right in the first comment.

Thanks!

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 12:02 UTC
In reply to:

NatuRaOx2: Nikon already had a crappy 10-24 why make another. Their (New) vision as a company I thought was to become a mostly high end camera company. Then the first things they put out are the d7500 and this lens. Looks like the opposite of what they said a while back. Hummmm??

They're two completely different lenses, aimed at two different markets. The 10-24 is faster (f/3.5-4.5 vs. f/4.5-5.6), doesn't have VR but has a sturdier build, and is significantly more expensive ($900 vs. $300).

I'm not sure why everyone is complaining about this lens; it's a budget lens designed to allow people to go ultra-wide on DX without paying an arm and a leg to do so. It's not really what I'm looking for, but I imagine a lot of people would be very excited about a lens in this focal range and this price range.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 01:05 UTC
On article Finishing the line: Nikon 28mm F1.4E ED sample gallery (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

kaka12moto: Bokeh is nervous wide open. Colors, Contrast, Sharpness and Flare Control don't meet asking price. Uninspiring performance from this highly anticipated focal lens....I guess Nikon has wrongly learned to take its customers base for granted. Maybe not this time...Switching systems have never been easier and at a fraction of the price of the past. This is history repeat for I have seen giants engineering their own demise.

Carey is a good photographer but it’s a shame to see him let down by an overpriced, overhyped lacklustre performing lens from Nikon.

And what's that purple banding in shot number 69 and 70? Pretty horrendous, by any standard.

I don't think any of the fast Sigma Art lenses have VR/OS. None of the primes do that I can think of. The f/1.8 and f/2 primes don't. The only fast (ish) primes that I can think of that have VR are the Tamrons...I think their 85mm f/1.8 does.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 16:02 UTC
On article Finishing the line: Nikon 28mm F1.4E ED sample gallery (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

kaka12moto: Bokeh is nervous wide open. Colors, Contrast, Sharpness and Flare Control don't meet asking price. Uninspiring performance from this highly anticipated focal lens....I guess Nikon has wrongly learned to take its customers base for granted. Maybe not this time...Switching systems have never been easier and at a fraction of the price of the past. This is history repeat for I have seen giants engineering their own demise.

Carey is a good photographer but it’s a shame to see him let down by an overpriced, overhyped lacklustre performing lens from Nikon.

And what's that purple banding in shot number 69 and 70? Pretty horrendous, by any standard.

"Why not VR at this price range?"

None of Nikon's fast primes have VR, at least not until you get to the exotics. The closest you get is the macros: 105 2.8, 85 3.5, 40 2.8. And those aren't exactly fast.

If last year's 105 1.4 didn't have VR, there was little-to-no chance they were going to give it to this one.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 14:31 UTC
On article Finishing the line: Nikon 28mm F1.4E ED sample gallery (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cameracist: "now has 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 58mm, 85mm and 105mm options – it looks pretty complete to us"
...not complete without 40, 70 and 95mm lenses!

Even red? Ugh...

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2017 at 13:46 UTC
On article Finishing the line: Nikon 28mm F1.4E ED sample gallery (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

kaka12moto: Bokeh is nervous wide open. Colors, Contrast, Sharpness and Flare Control don't meet asking price. Uninspiring performance from this highly anticipated focal lens....I guess Nikon has wrongly learned to take its customers base for granted. Maybe not this time...Switching systems have never been easier and at a fraction of the price of the past. This is history repeat for I have seen giants engineering their own demise.

Carey is a good photographer but it’s a shame to see him let down by an overpriced, overhyped lacklustre performing lens from Nikon.

And what's that purple banding in shot number 69 and 70? Pretty horrendous, by any standard.

Give me the power to perma-ban and let me get to work then DPR...

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2017 at 19:39 UTC
On article Finishing the line: Nikon 28mm F1.4E ED sample gallery (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cameracist: "now has 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 58mm, 85mm and 105mm options – it looks pretty complete to us"
...not complete without 40, 70 and 95mm lenses!

I'm not offended. It's just what jumps out upon seeing the word.

I once had a client, Tons Of Toner, and their url was www.tonsoftoner.com. Every time I read the url I thought it said "Tons Softener," like it was a fabric softener company or something.

Me, I'd want to know if people saw my user name and thought "racist" when they read it. All in all, though, no biggie...

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2017 at 19:37 UTC
On article Finishing the line: Nikon 28mm F1.4E ED sample gallery (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

kaka12moto: Bokeh is nervous wide open. Colors, Contrast, Sharpness and Flare Control don't meet asking price. Uninspiring performance from this highly anticipated focal lens....I guess Nikon has wrongly learned to take its customers base for granted. Maybe not this time...Switching systems have never been easier and at a fraction of the price of the past. This is history repeat for I have seen giants engineering their own demise.

Carey is a good photographer but it’s a shame to see him let down by an overpriced, overhyped lacklustre performing lens from Nikon.

And what's that purple banding in shot number 69 and 70? Pretty horrendous, by any standard.

DPReview does a simply horrible job of identifying and weeding out useless trolls like this. Given the prominence of this piece (on the front page of the site), I would expect some degree of urgency in locking this dreck out, and given kaka's posting history, there can no doubt as to his continued use of flaming and baiting tactics. And yet here this garbage sits, 6 hours after being vomited onto the comments section.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2017 at 18:54 UTC
On article Finishing the line: Nikon 28mm F1.4E ED sample gallery (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cameracist: "now has 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 58mm, 85mm and 105mm options – it looks pretty complete to us"
...not complete without 40, 70 and 95mm lenses!

I'm not sure what, exactly, you're going for with your username, but every time I stumble across it the word "racist" just jumps out from the end...

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2017 at 18:45 UTC

These look sharper than the Sony 70-200 f/2.8 samples Lloyd Chambers was posting on his blog last week. Probably less banding than the a9, too...

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 19:37 UTC as 62nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Marty4650: I honestly think if the lens was fast, weather sealed, and free.... someone would still complain about it.

Yup. Nothing like reading through the replies of all of the Negative Nancies on the day after a product announcement.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 14:28 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

jackspra: Good informative article.D500 would be my pick but D7500 is real nice.

Agreed. Well, the d500 is my pick, but if I were deciding again now, and for my use, the d7500 would get a very string look.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 18:05 UTC

Well, that's too bad. I hadn't read the magazine recently, but when I first started getting into photography I used to read it religiously. Always sad to see an institution like this fall by the wayside...

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2017 at 19:37 UTC as 70th comment

"(and personally, I wish they'd taken whatever development costs the KeyMission ate up and poured those into the DL series instead)"

I imagine those sentiments are shared pretty strongly in Nikon's HQ right about now, too.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2017 at 13:09 UTC as 107th comment
Total: 126, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »