jdu_sg

Joined on Oct 14, 2009

Comments

Total: 62, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

User7722680286: It is clearly stated as one man's opinion and everyone is entitled to that! What's the problem. He is entitled to give his opinion, just as some commenters are now doing. A lot of hubbub over nothing! What's the big deal?

@user772
To quote i-forget-who, everyone is entitled to a CORRECT opinion.

The problem, is that this goes from opinion to advice.

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2016 at 15:04 UTC
In reply to:

Chris2210: "This image is why the world needs professional photographers"

It's an opinion, but it's really nothing more than that. None of the conclusions of the piece logically flow from that statement or the incident in question.

I'm not sure we actually got anything essential about this sorry incident from the presence of a professional photographer who carried on shooting. The obviousness of a large pro camera may have provoked the gunman into further violence against the audience to prevent any documentary evidence of his presence for example [where a smartphone could have gone unnoticed].

It is regrettable that a lot of photojournalists [I know some of them] are losing their jobs and standards of photojournalism are being eroded as the diminishing printed news cuts costs. I'm not sure this is illustrated by the events pertaining to this article.

Actually, it's a conclusion, with suporting evidence.

On the other hand "... anything essential about this ..." is an opinion.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 16:15 UTC
In reply to:

M Chambers: As a photographer I carry a camera. As an American I carry a gun. This is why I'd never go to Russia, I can't legally carry a gun there and I'd hate to find myself the situation of this photographer.

Yep, that sums it up pretty good. Casual violence is an American (US) right.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 16:12 UTC
In reply to:

Scottelly: Why does it say "Warning: Graphic Image" in red on the black rectangle, where the image should be? I mean this is in no way a graphic image. There is no blood, no nudity, no violence - just a guy standing with a gun and another guy laying on the ground.

Is this just sensationalism?

That's not "another guy laying on the ground".

If you are the family of Andrey Karlov, how do you feel about the image ?

It's not graphic, unless you understand what is happening, and have feelings about human dignity and the taking of life.

Your post is the opposite of sensationalism ... trivialism ?

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 16:09 UTC
In reply to:

Tom Conte: Electronic, not "Electric" parts.

"electric circuits" is correct, clear and un-ambiguous.

"electronic" specifically refers to silicon components, which is likely a too limited description of the extent of counterfeiting.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 19:52 UTC
In reply to:

thubten: Why fake a $200 lens when they make a $2000 lens?

I know, it's like counterfitting a $5 bill. Interesting choice.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 19:46 UTC
On article Simple Studio Technique: Pet Portraits (90 comments in total)

Great project ! It's always heartwarming to see people using their super powers to do good, especially for things like animal adoptions.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 14:43 UTC as 21st comment
On article Fujifilm launches X-A10 as entry-level X-series model (166 comments in total)
In reply to:

aramgrg: Sony must be giving away those 16mp sensors at this point.

You understand that Sony makes m43 sensors, right ?

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 14:41 UTC
In reply to:

Mike99999: Tiny sensors are so 2012.

I have never seen so many disgruntled M43 users. $500 more expensive than the A7 Mark II? No thanks...

Nikon tried to play the framerate card with the Nikon 1 and look how that worked out for them.

You wrote:
"M43 users"

Wrong.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 14:52 UTC
On article Tiny marvel: Panasonic LX10 sample photos (77 comments in total)
In reply to:

Garug: These pictures?

What is the point?

If you can't see the difference, you should buy the cheaper camera, and not worry that others are more discerning than you. No one else will know or care. really.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2016 at 21:31 UTC
In reply to:

Achiron: Dear people who complain about the price - you're clearly new to the world oh photography. This stuff is expansive! And if the price of the topmost model makes you upset enough for you to jump ship and buy an older sony mirrorless because it is cheaper - go ahead, have fun with the sony experience. If you can sell your m43 glass for cheap that would be great, will sure help make the system feel "cheap"

:-)

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2016 at 04:41 UTC
In reply to:

Achiron: Dear people who complain about the price - you're clearly new to the world oh photography. This stuff is expansive! And if the price of the topmost model makes you upset enough for you to jump ship and buy an older sony mirrorless because it is cheaper - go ahead, have fun with the sony experience. If you can sell your m43 glass for cheap that would be great, will sure help make the system feel "cheap"

It's stating the obvious, but the MK2 IS a specialist camera. It simply doesn't make a difference to 99% of pet cat pix. (until I get a cat doing stuff at 18 fps)

And the point of the DJI link is that the size of the sensor doesn't put arbitrary limits on the price of the system; DJI are selling functionality not silicon chips.

It is a basic fallacy to place the MK2 in the same functional niche as the MK1. I'm not convinced the MK2 causes the MK1 to be retired, unless there simply aren't enough sales to support the MK1. The MK2 is an entirely different product, with some of the same goals and features.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 13:49 UTC
In reply to:

Herp Photos: That price is very disapointing and makes me wish I hadn't sold my e-M1 for 600 in prepararion for upgading to this eventually. The difference in capabilities will not justify a 1400.00 diference in mark 1 vs. Mark 2 for me and probably others. I thought this would be priced similar to Fuji x-T2 which I already have. I would rather go with a cheeper Nikon d500 as a second body instead at this price or even a gh4 if I wanted to leverage my remaing m43 lenses.

EM-1 in stock at BH. $1100 body only. Yuo can always go back.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2016 at 20:15 UTC
In reply to:

jonf123: That price is hilarious. Seriously Olympus?

@cw10
Puh. lease.

Let's take a slightly wider view of Olympus:
EM5 EM10 EPL8 PEN-F SH-3. All of these still being sold at the same, competitive prices.

For the sake of Olympus' long term future, they should be looking to make (and expand) profits.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2016 at 17:17 UTC
In reply to:

Achiron: Dear people who complain about the price - you're clearly new to the world oh photography. This stuff is expansive! And if the price of the topmost model makes you upset enough for you to jump ship and buy an older sony mirrorless because it is cheaper - go ahead, have fun with the sony experience. If you can sell your m43 glass for cheap that would be great, will sure help make the system feel "cheap"

@cosinaphile.
No, because I don't expect Oly to target every model at my personal budget. I expect them to expand the system.

There already m43 cams in the 2k to 6k range. It's nothing new

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1186062-REG/dji_x5r_raw_camera_and.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1044789-REG/blackmagic_design_cinstudmft_uhd_studio_camera_4k.html

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2016 at 17:06 UTC
In reply to:

Sirandar: As an EM5 I and II owner perhaps 2000$ is a price that will make it difficult for this camera to meet expectations for real world photographers without an unlimited budget.

I paid about 800$ CDN for my EM5 II and have felt it was good value for money spent. So is this camera going to justify the probable 2800$ Canadian price?

Even though I already have the lenses of suitable quality for the EM1 mk 2, I can't see myself buying this at that price. Part of the problem is how good the EM5 mk2 is in terms for fit for intended use.

Announced Canadian price is $2400, which beats the conversion rate to $USD.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 19:17 UTC

So many people can't get past the price of this body, but I have to give Olympus a tip of the hat for pushing the "performance envelope" of M43. Looks like they want to open up the market for high-speed/fast-response Sports photography. Good for them.

I wonder if the original EM1doesn't still have a place in the line up.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 15:03 UTC as 87th comment
In reply to:

Mateus1: Is there anybody here who buy M1mkII for landscape and is paying $2000 for body? Do you use 3:2 ratio for landscape too with this tiny 4/3 sensor? K1 that is not much bigger is FF 36MP and costs $1800 only!!!! Do you buy M1mkII for sports? Why, when you have best of the best D500 for same or lover price? Or even more cheaper X-T2, A6500? What is the reason to pay this mad $2000 Oly's price for M1mkII with smalish 4/3 sensor? Street shooting? The body is not smaller then APS-C and FF. Oly Pro lenses are also big and expensive. Any 4/3 cam over $1300 is overpriced in my view.

Mateus, That you need to compare it to 4 different cameras, all with inferior specs (in one way or another) is a big clue.

But that's just a big distraction. At this price level you are buying on photographic capability, not a single standout spec.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 14:54 UTC
In reply to:

trungtran: They don't work overtime there? Unit sales are down, should be doing everything they can to get these out the door.

I'd like to do the math, but that amazon page doesn't have any numbers.

Given that this is a list produced by a site that makes money from selling stuff is there any chance that the numbers are cooked ? I mean, the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV is #2, just behind the Canon T5. Is that all time, or just the last 24 hours ? 'cause my intuition is that one of the earlier 5Ds is the most common FF.

In the absence of numbers, I think it's fair to assume that Amazon is a tiny slice of the new DSLR sales pie, and that their transactions are skewed to used and old stock Digi Cams, so that I would not use this ranking as a true indication of anything.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2016 at 17:26 UTC
In reply to:

Scottelly: I guess that $3,000+ price won't be coming down any time soon then. :(

That's exactly my takeaway from the announcement.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2016 at 17:16 UTC
Total: 62, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »