Mike Oo

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Dec 19, 2007

Comments

Total: 25, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ttran88: This stuff can happen anywhere in the world. No country or city is immune to it.

Camera theft with a getaway vehicle? Name another country where this happened?

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2016 at 22:32 UTC
On article All about control: Huawei P9 camera review (78 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: When would smartphone manufactors build-in at least an 1/1.7" sensor...size does matter...you can't overcome laws of physics with newer processing algorithms and faster cpus...Sony for instance decided it right back into 2012 with their very first RX100 iteration - the 1" sensor is so much better than a usual 1/1.7" which all other prosumers and highend compacts have had back at this day...and now smartphones...12.16..20 or more MP...it doesn't matter...the sensor size is still a mess, JPEGs in 1:1 100% mode look really mushy & like watercolors....they'd never compete with digicams if they wouldn't get a better, bigger sensor for better light gathering ability, low light performance and image quality after all....i am tired of all these smartphone cameras...it's been 2016 - and still no RX100 IQ into a smartphone besides the CM1 Lumix from Panasonic.

Manufactors should do it right that way - bring it on, or just fade away. The typical smartphone cam can never compete with an 1" sensor

Putting RAW and/or DNG into cel phones will defeat the whole purpose and ignores the main reason a lot of photographers use their cel phones now. One of the main reasons people like phones is because they are cameras for dummies. Hold it up, press a button. Press another button and it's on Instagram. Sure there's always been weirdos who spend time retouching their phone pictures with apps but for the most part, veteran photographers are using their phones because they are EASY TO USE. Adding RAW is a step in the wrong direction...

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2016 at 01:08 UTC
On article All about control: Huawei P9 camera review (78 comments in total)

There's some shots by David Guttenfelder in the latest National Geographic mag on a P9 and they flat out suck. They look like they were shot on a 2mp point & shoot. I don't understand the point of cel phone cameras if they are taking us back to the dark ages of digital.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2016 at 01:05 UTC as 19th comment | 2 replies
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)

In December I bought an X100T after all the hype. I have been using it for awhile and convincing myself that I will never need another DSLR. Wrong. I find myself still grabbing my old D90 and actually preferring it. Way quicker to use and change functions even with manual controls all over the X100T. It also has comparable image quality and was made in, what, 2008? Fuji is about HYPE. Until they have image quality and more importantly, the ERGONOMICS, to match Nikon and Canon, forget it.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 04:02 UTC as 31st comment | 7 replies
On article 5 Reasons why I haven't used my DSLR for months (598 comments in total)

I have always used film and digital SLRs and decided to try a more lightweight, smaller camera so I bought an X100T. After using it for about six months, I have decided that it's not my thing. Yes, I like the light weight but I hate the ergonomics and small buttons. I also got tired of the retro styling and manual buttons. It's 2016 and the idea that we have a camera that resembles a 1960s Leica is just plain weird. I guess I fell for the hype. Image quality is great (with the exception of the weird fuji smearing of detail) but it's just not fun to use. To each their own.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2016 at 21:36 UTC as 17th comment
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2487 comments in total)
In reply to:

Atazoth: I’m going to by an X Pro 1 and this is why;
Comparing studio scenes between the XPro 1 and D750 $1700 vs $2000, The Iso noise levels are very close. The D750 is only slightly better. At 12800 you can really notice the D750 has less noise but it looses a lot of detail (notice the lines on the cap of the tube of paint they are invisible on the D750 The XPro 1 is still pretty clear). The Fuji’s color also is better over all and much better in some situations. The type is also easier to read on the XPro 1. That is compared to a full frame body with an equivalent lens. The X pro 1 is also all metal body, the d750 is not and the Xpro 1 has better weather sealing. Fuji’s equivalent zoom lenses are also a *lot* cheaper and a little smaller.

Who cares about ISO 12800? If that's what determines what camera you buy you are not a photographer but rather a tech collector.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2016 at 22:51 UTC
In reply to:

yashicamat124: Call me crazy, but I still prefer the output of my old X100. Jpegs, RAWs and all. But I come from the film days.
By the way, that grain simulator on the Across is awful.

If you came from the "film days" you wouldn't be judging a camera's output from sample images on the web. I own both an X100 and an X100T and the X100T looks far better when printed. Fuji is from the "film days" also and realizes that the crap you see on a screen is simply not visible in print.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2016 at 22:56 UTC
On article Nikon's New D5 and D500 Push the Boundaries of DSLR (737 comments in total)

I have owned the D50, D200, D90 and D7100. I sold my D7100 recently and decided that I am done with Nikon and DSLRs in general. Utterly pointless except for a very small group of professionals who shoot the Olympics, etc.

These "swan song" products for me are more like tombstones. They bring back memories of when I first switched from film to digital and everyone clamored to buy a DSLR.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2016 at 02:38 UTC as 39th comment | 3 replies
On article Leica Q In-depth Review (1140 comments in total)

The JPEG of the girl in the lounge is far better than the author's RAW conversion. People always chant RAW, RAW, RAW but in the end most people have no clue how to colour correct an image.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 22:44 UTC as 197th comment | 2 replies

I don't understand why he wouldn't use this situaition to prove that iPhones are not suitable for serious photojournalism. Show them what a "real" camera can do. Instead, he shoots the same crap he is about to be replaced with. When I read about his project I was expecting incredible work, owing to his status as a former staff shooter for a major newspaper. Now I see that he is just shooting the same sh*t as everyone else. Sorry, why should he have kept his job?

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2013 at 20:25 UTC as 47th comment | 4 replies
On article You'll have to wait a "year-ish" for Google Glass (76 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dvlee: This creates something of a conflict of rights. The right to freely take videos and photographs and the right of individuals to not be photographed and recorded without their permission.

Photographers have been dealing with this conflict for ages, but this takes things to a whole new level.

A bigger issue is that people will be able to reverse people's likenesses in Google Image search and find out their identity. Try it, you can do it now from home already. Take a social media avatar, upload it to Google Image search and it will spit out their twitter, their facebook, etc. This is going to have major implications.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2013 at 20:46 UTC
In reply to:

emilygomez: Well I figured there'd be some negative reviews regarding iPhone photography but blatant ignorance? Geez. There's a reason film changed to digital...because technology advances. Move with it. Go with the flow. Let your hair down. Give it a try. I was actually just asked to shoot an entire wedding love, via my iPhone and Instagram this coming April. By the bride. Times are a changing.

And as for the "we like our photos to look vintage" comment regarding instagram, you've clearly not explored instagram at all.

Can't wait to see the spectacular results Kev. I know you'll kill it!

You're joking, right? I have had brides ask for cross processing. They know film and they want film, because they prefer to the look, and I'm happy to charge more for it (and they seem happy to pay more for it).

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2013 at 04:38 UTC
In reply to:

Maverick_: Wow! one of the most boring videos being shared so far. My suggestion, use the helmet cam style for the divorce, it will generate a much more dramatic and existing footage.

Some of you lack a sense of humour. My guess is that Maverick_ is just writing what a lot of us are thinking....that we are sick and tired of stupid wedding photography BS. All this money being dumped on a single day that ends up in divorce or if they stay together, is shoved in a drawer or hard drive and never watched again. Do you think they will be making sweet love to candle light with their bouquet video playing in the background ten years from now? As well, why are people so old now when they get married?!

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2012 at 20:41 UTC
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: I have now looked at Stephen Shore's images at 303 gallery. And I find them boring - all of them. You have to say though that he is consistent ... ly boring. Thats a kind of quality most people cannot live up to. There is often some thing of interest in some of the images. But Stephen has very skillfully avoided that.

Regarding Eric's blog - I still dont understand what it has to do with Stephen's images. Mostly unrelated as far as I can see.

I have also looked at Eric's images. Not so bad IMHO. Not my style really ... but not without emotional reaction from my side. And after that I understand even less why Eric refers to Stephen. I see no relation at all.

I don't think you have to shoot similar images to someone to comment on their work. You don't even have to be a photographer. Many of the best photo editors are not photographers. Frankly, you are completely entitled to your opinion, but I don't think it's necessary to critique the writer's work and to try and find some "relation." That would be like hunting down Kathy Ryan's photos the next time see a piece she was working on as a photo editor. "I just don't see how these Afghanistan photos relate to her work" etc.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2012 at 23:35 UTC

Stephen Shore is great but only when Stephen Shore does "Stephen Shore" not when someone else does "Stephen Shore." Ditto William Eggleston. Try something new people, there's way too many people copying this style and it needs to be put to death.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2012 at 23:33 UTC as 7th comment | 3 replies
On article Nikon issues firmware updates for D4 and D800/D800E (90 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lea5: Hey Nikon, when do you adress the soft video issue in FX and DX format on our D4's? Or do you expect we record in CX only?

Time to shoot with smaller gear.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2012 at 03:16 UTC
Total: 25, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »