wlad

Lives in EU
Joined on Sep 16, 2010

Comments

Total: 284, showing: 261 – 280
« First‹ Previous12131415Next ›Last »
In reply to:

dannyboy5400: Let me get this right. They are going to charge similar prices for an equivalent 24-70mm 2.8 when it uses LESS OPTICAL GLASS. Oh, but you pay more for less but it is lighter. Yeah, a lighter wallet.

It will cost $1200 at least. And that's way too much for a MFT lens imho.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2012 at 10:42 UTC
In reply to:

wlad: If you need to record more than 30 minutes in one shot, you're probably doing something wrong :P

so the take a 30 minutes long shot from the same boring angle...

Link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 06:15 UTC

If you need to record more than 30 minutes in one shot, you're probably doing something wrong :P

Link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 05:01 UTC as 40th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Waterengineer: Seems expensive.

@millsart why on earth would anyone do that anyway ?

Link | Posted on May 15, 2012 at 17:23 UTC
On article Canon offers EOS 5D Mark III firmware v1.1.2 (26 comments in total)
In reply to:

John P.: Does it fix the light leak issue?

a strap of black electrical tape should do it

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2012 at 06:44 UTC
In reply to:

wlad: I doubt any Nikon shooter will buy this, when the Nikon version costs just $500 more.
It would be competitive with 1/3 to 1/2 the price of the Nikon lens. Not so with 2/3s of the Nikon's price tag.

...make it half the MSRP price

@ryansholl - because it's a Tamron.
And it's not even $500, it's only $400. Makes the "cheap" 3rd party alternative not cheap at all. And I doubt it's gonna be as sharp with the AF as fast and accurate as the Nikon's original.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2012 at 18:34 UTC

I doubt any Nikon shooter will buy this, when the Nikon version costs just $500 more.
It would be competitive with 1/3 to 1/2 the price of the Nikon lens. Not so with 2/3s of the Nikon's price tag.

...make it half the MSRP price

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2012 at 18:17 UTC as 69th comment | 4 replies
On article Pentax K-01 Hands-on Preview (376 comments in total)

wait, you have to put real lenses on it ? I thought you only have to fill the water tank.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2012 at 07:13 UTC as 101st comment

so, these "new sensors" - will they make it only into new camera models ? Or new batches of the affected cameras ? Or will the current users get a replacement ?

..not that I have such a camera, I'm just wondering how will fujifilm deal with current owners...

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2012 at 21:38 UTC as 100th comment
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark III low-light ISO series samples (302 comments in total)

omg, why did Canon even bother with ISO 102400, when ISO 25600 is already absolutely unusable ? pure marketing I guess

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2012 at 14:45 UTC as 102nd comment | 2 replies
On photo Too dry this summer in the Cruel Summer challenge (1 comment in total)

I really miss a vulture sitting on one of the trees :D

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2012 at 19:11 UTC as 1st comment
On article First impressions shooting with the Olympus OM-D E-M5 (264 comments in total)
In reply to:

wlad: why on earth would somebody want to drag around a mirrorless camera of a size and proportion which more or less exactly fail to please the eye ?

no, really, this is as *huge*, as a DSLR... so there goes the only benefit of mirrorless cameras...

@88SAL - Im not bashing m43 at all.
In fact I'm considering a m43 camera for traveling light, but something more in the directions of the Panasonic GX1.
This OM-D E-M5 thing appears really monstrous to me.

NEX has crappy lenses that are too huge for that camera.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2012 at 08:22 UTC
On article First impressions shooting with the Olympus OM-D E-M5 (264 comments in total)

why on earth would somebody want to drag around a mirrorless camera of a size and proportion which more or less exactly fail to please the eye ?

no, really, this is as *huge*, as a DSLR... so there goes the only benefit of mirrorless cameras...

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2012 at 21:39 UTC as 73rd comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

wlad: spending 400€ on a bulky P&S which takes shots that are not any better than those from a small 150€ P&S. Makes perfect sense.

@Rachotilko - yep, looks the same as the 200€ Powershot SX230 HS. And I guess there wont be any difference in IQ between the P7100 and the Coolpix S6300.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2012 at 14:09 UTC

spending 400€ on a bulky P&S which takes shots that are not any better than those from a small 150€ P&S. Makes perfect sense.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2012 at 12:09 UTC as 22nd comment | 2 replies

Good news everyone !

Seriously, this is the one lens that I have been waiting for ever since I got my first Nikon DSLR. A f2.8 70/80-200 Nikon is too huge and heavy to carry around, not to mention far too expensive to justify the cost for all but pros.

my expectations are high, and I'll be happy to spend around $1000 for this lens if it lives up to them

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2012 at 15:47 UTC as 11th comment
On article Pentax announces K-01 K-mount APS-C mirrorless camera (866 comments in total)
In reply to:

topstuff: How can people say this is ugly while they let the Canon G1 X get away with being even uglier?

Are people completely blind? I thought photography was a visual craft?

Photographers who take pictures with an aesthetic perspective won't mind at all about the design of this camera. At least it HAS a design, while many others cameras do not seem to have been "designed" at all. They are just black plastic boxes.

Is this site full of old gearheads and test bed freaks, or photographers?

I don't really see the point of this camera when a K5 ( a really lovely camera) is almost the same size.

But criticism of the K-01 aesthetic sounds like the baa-ing of sheep to me.

beauty is subjective. You can't possibly expect everyone to have the same preferences as you do. And judging by the comments, most people find this camera looks like a toy - me included.

The G1 X looks neutral. It's nothing particulary hip or ugly - just another G-series powershot. It's a proven design - no need to fix something that's not broken.

If I was looking for a APS-C mirrorless, I would pick a NEX over this anytime. I would happily sacrifice some features for the sake of a decent design.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2012 at 13:38 UTC
On article Pentax announces K-01 K-mount APS-C mirrorless camera (866 comments in total)

so, does it also squirt water when you push the shutter ?

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2012 at 12:24 UTC as 417th comment | 1 reply
On article Nikon launches AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 G (135 comments in total)
In reply to:

pheonixfool: RRP: £469.99 / €554.00 versus $499

I was under the impression that the Euro was worth more than the Dollar!

Oh wait the launch date is 22nd March a lot could happen...

How exactly is health insurance FREE ??? You PAY for it YOURSELF! Every single month, hundreds of euros. Unless you are unemployed.

Don't confuse "Free" with "Mandatory".

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2012 at 12:06 UTC
On GalleryItem:1488531 (1 comment in total)

an example of those "great" OOC skin tones of older Nikon CMOS sensors :D

Posted on Oct 21, 2011 at 22:30 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 284, showing: 261 – 280
« First‹ Previous12131415Next ›Last »