Reg Natarajan

Reg Natarajan

Lives in Canada Vancouver, BC, Canada
Works as a
Has a website at
Joined on Nov 9, 2001


Total: 169, showing: 101 – 120
« First‹ Previous45678Next ›Last »
On Article:4886827527 (249 comments in total)

If I can make a suggestion: at the top right of the new site is a handy link to this site. If you matched that with a link here to the new site, it would be easy to switch back and forth.

Posted on Oct 10, 2012 at 03:54 UTC as 65th comment | 1 reply
On Article:4886827527 (249 comments in total)
In reply to:

HubertChen: I wonder why two sites instead of one? By this choice you emphasize how different mobile photography is from what you refer to as "serious" photography. I believe this is an opportunity lost for dpreview to grow as a community. By your choice of two different sites you are promoting the focus on technology rather than photography. It is a subtle difference if dpreview a) focus on the technical aspects of photography to be complimentary to other websites who focus on the artistic side or b) focus on the technical side of photography because this is all what you can see. This difference of view is shaping attitude. Where readers of type a) would embrace mobile photography and look for things to learn from this new exciting community, readers of type b) would alienate. I am afraid for dpreview that your choice of two sites will attract more readers of type b) and repel more type a), making dpreview a less attractive place for me to come back to.

This site is full of old fuddy duddies who think anything innovative is stupid and who think anyone who likes mobile/connected photography is not a serious/skilled/talented photographer. The new site lets you explore that booming market without having to listen to a bunch of geriatrics whine that their kids' iPhone doesn't have interchangeable lenses. Great idea. Good move. I have just changed my bookmarks to go to the new site first, and will come back here to read news now and then.

Posted on Oct 10, 2012 at 03:45 UTC
On Article:4886827527 (249 comments in total)

Looks great. Actually looks better than this site.

Posted on Oct 10, 2012 at 03:40 UTC as 68th comment | 4 replies

Reading these comments shows me just how disconnected from the new world many DP Review readers are. Connected devices are where the world is going. Sending my images instantly, from anywhere. Checking my email on any device I have handy. If you don't value it and don't see what the fuss is about, well, fine, but my opinion is you better get used to it. Me? I love the new world that's emerging.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2012 at 05:01 UTC as 27th comment

A bit more miniaturization and this thing could be integrated into a pair of glasses.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2012 at 20:29 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

samhain: You know what's really funny?
Photographers are supposed to be the 'creative types', working in a creative industry.
Yet all I see are a bunch of fuddy duddy negative comments that sound like something close-minded grandparents would say.
This product is extremely unique, interesting and so far outside of the box it isn't even funny.
You would think people would be more supportive of this kind of thinking, even if they aren't interested in buying one.

I for one applaud Sony/Hasselblad for their weird, funky new camera.
Bravo Hassony, bravo!!

Creative? Unique? Out of the box? No, it's none of these things. People have been gilding the lily for as long as there have been rich people looking to show off their wealth. I'm surprised they didn't slap a designer name on it.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2012 at 06:28 UTC
In reply to:

attomole: Why would they need to do this?

Because they are dying and desperate.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2012 at 06:23 UTC

Ridiculous. The once proud Hasselblad name is now going down the path of making collectible fashion accessories. Ugly ones to boot.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2012 at 02:41 UTC as 192nd comment
In reply to:

jaycob: First off let me just say that I am no expert in photography so please excuse my lack of knowledge on the subject.
My question about this camera is; Why would Sony develop such an great camera at a premium price yet slap a fixed lens on it? You would think that if they were to put a full frame sensor in any kind of camera they would want to open the doors to additional lenses.
Am I missing something? Please educate me.

If people liked fixed lenses, then there would be more of them on the market. I totally agree with the question raised by jaycob. I would be a serious candidate to buy this thing if it had a decent zoom. I have no interest in fixed lens cameras.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2012 at 19:52 UTC

I'm surprised this has come back for a second round. I like the thing but sales have been terrible, and new Qs can be had on eBay for under $300 (body only).

Jonathan Martin, General Manager for Pentax UK said, "Though it [the Q] has been well received, we haven't seen the numbers that we would have liked to."

Personally, I like the thing. I'm glad it's back for round two. I'm not sure what Pentax is hoping for, though. Do the same thing and hope for different results the second time around. I think it was Einstein who called that the definition of insanity.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2012 at 03:57 UTC as 35th comment | 3 replies

All the naysayers here are going to look foolish when this Samsung hits the market with this and sells a zillion cameras. I'll be one of the zillion.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2012 at 06:00 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

Jan Kritzinger: Needs a much bigger sensor, less zoom.

The problem is, Samsung asks clueless people what they want during market research, and they all want lots of zoom and a trillion megapixels, but they don't care how big the sensor is. They really should rather do their market research in DPR comments.

We don't even disagree, really. I would also have preferred a bigger sensor and less zoom. I'd also trade off for a bigger aperture. That's not the reality of this market, though. I'm sure Samsung will take a poorer camera that sells in the millions rather than a camera that pleases a handful of gearheads (including me) but doesn't sell well at all.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2012 at 01:46 UTC
In reply to:

Jan Kritzinger: Needs a much bigger sensor, less zoom.

The problem is, Samsung asks clueless people what they want during market research, and they all want lots of zoom and a trillion megapixels, but they don't care how big the sensor is. They really should rather do their market research in DPR comments.

Maybe they want to sell to the millions of people out there who have never heard of sensor size, rather than the few thousand here who care deeply about it.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2012 at 20:14 UTC

I love it. I'd love it more if I could make calls with it, but I'll take it just like this. Well, not just like this. I'll take it in black. This totally puts to shame Nikon's feeble Android 2.3 camera from a few days ago.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2012 at 19:53 UTC as 31st comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

JohnFredC: This is the future, folks. In five years, a huge segment.

In five years, cameras that run proprietary OSes may be unheard of.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2012 at 19:49 UTC
In reply to:

John McCormack: Since I don't have a cell phone (Can you make call with this?) maybe this will push me over the edge to join the 21st century.

"missing only the ability to make calls". My guess is you could install the Skype app to make calls, though.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2012 at 19:46 UTC
On article Adobe updates Revel cloud-based image service to v1.5 (20 comments in total)
In reply to:

amachaBrett: Why even contemplate using the cloud given the possible effect of the DotCom situation on data I might have stored there. Inaccessible now, perhaps lost forever. My data is going to stay on my hard drives and other personal memory, no way am I trusting my data to a fickle cloud!

Dropbox is a great solution as MrTaikitso said above, but really, whether you do cloud or local storage, you're going to need some backup solution. There's some fear about the "DotCom situation on data" and I agree with that and don't think it's trivial, but you should be equally afraid of your hard drive crashing at home. Whatever you use to back up your HD could easily be used to back up whatever you have on the cloud.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2012 at 18:48 UTC
On article Adobe updates Revel cloud-based image service to v1.5 (20 comments in total)
In reply to:

gsum: For online editing, it's far better to use PIXLR. PIXLR has all of Photo$hop CS's useful functionality and it's FREE. Also, the developers of PIXLR are keen to improve their product by listening to their users, unlike Adobe.
You can also use PIXLR for online storage (if you want it) - also free.
Who needs Adobe and their stupidly expensive ephemeral software?

I love PIXLR. Sure, it's not Photoshop. Who cares? It does 90% of what I want in a free online app. I have started using it constantly.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2012 at 18:40 UTC
On article Nikon Coolpix S800c Android camera first look (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reg Natarajan: I love the idea. When I saw the headline, I mentally thought, "Sold!" Then I read a bit more. Android 2.3? Are they serious? Someone tell Nikon that Android 2.3 was released in 2010, and they're on 4.1 now.

I disagree. Going back that far is asking for trouble. Software is written for the latest version of Android, not for old versions. Things that work perfectly on Android 4.1 could easily be buggy on 2.3. I'm not interested in going back to 2010.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2012 at 06:32 UTC
Total: 169, showing: 101 – 120
« First‹ Previous45678Next ›Last »