Jonathan Brady

Lives in United States Sarasota, FL, United States
Joined on Dec 31, 2010

Comments

Total: 244, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

When I think Zeiss, I always think "budget"

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2017 at 01:04 UTC as 8th comment
On article Alpha-better: Sony a9 versus a7R II (507 comments in total)
In reply to:

DWM: Another A9 article. Makes you wonder.

There's very little I enjoy more than snarky, flippant responses from employees to anonymous internet @holes. Well done, Barney!

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 16:58 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

MaxiMax: Sony is not necessarily aiming its new line of pro equipment towards established photographers. Old photographers will disappear with time, and a new generation will take over. There are many new photographers out there who want to build a system from scratch, and many of them might start with Sony as it is making its products attractive. About a 300/400 mm f2.8 prime, I have no doubt that it is on the way.

One key element that new entrants to photography rely on as a group (not necessarily every individual) is used gear to save money. That's not an option here. Not only that, Sony's G-master lenses are more expensive than Canon's equivalents.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 17:12 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience (1170 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: I think most photographers would be more interested in a 5D Mark IV or D810 competitor - so an A9r. A higher MP count and lower frame rate would get my attention. 6-7 FPS with 50-60 MP would work just fine for me and tempt me away from my 5D Mark IV and 5Ds.

There are other improvements in the A9 that add up to a better total package. I'll likely still be on the fence due to Canon's RT flash system.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2017 at 20:59 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience (1170 comments in total)
In reply to:

Abel89er: As a Sony user, some things bother me:
- one UHS-I and one UHS-II. So you have to be careful where you put each. Was it THAT hard Sony?
- USB 2
- RAW transfer via wifi would be awesome
- yet no compressed loseless raw, althought benefits from it would be small, it would end the trhead for ever.
- Option for less or more cooked raws. There's some times when the jpeg conversion the camera builds is good, would be good to keep tjose setting embeeded on the raw.
- Yet can't open the Menu while saving to sd card (not sure about this one)

You can buy two UHS-II cards instead. UHS-II cards will work in a UHS-I slot, but at UHS-I specs.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2017 at 15:05 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience (1170 comments in total)
In reply to:

PictureTakerPhotoMaker: The fastest AF for a mirror less. Who cares? Give us the info whether it beats the 1Dx and D5 in AF or not. Anything else is neither addressing the white elefant in the room nor in any ways journalistic. Ah, forgot, in the background you are awaiting which cameras will make your company more profits before having an opinion.

Curious... Would you speak to someone like this in person?

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2017 at 13:49 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience (1170 comments in total)

I think most photographers would be more interested in a 5D Mark IV or D810 competitor - so an A9r. A higher MP count and lower frame rate would get my attention. 6-7 FPS with 50-60 MP would work just fine for me and tempt me away from my 5D Mark IV and 5Ds.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2017 at 13:36 UTC as 173rd comment | 5 replies
On article Sony a9 shooting experience (1170 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nikonmaniac0620: Just as I kept saying, a toy will remain a toy.
I won't buy naught from Sony unless they come up with a body like D5 or 1DXII.

I'm so thankful you big, burly men have chosen to share how big and manly and burly you are. Your machismo is inspiring... What would the rest of us do without your macho input and revelations? We'd certainly never realize how inferior and child-like we all are and we are all better off for your contributions and degradations. Thank you!

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2017 at 13:18 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience (1170 comments in total)
In reply to:

PerL: Wow - talk about advertorial for Sony.

It's not if it reflects true feelings and beliefs.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2017 at 13:11 UTC
In reply to:

matthew saville: Dear Nikon / Canon,

STRIKE TWO.

(Strike 3 will be more glass. Heck, even if Sony doesn't do much at all at this point, and just kicks it into cruise control, ...Canon and Nikon could strike out just by attempting to deliver a full-frame mirrorless system that falls short. At this point, the only thing that can save Canon / Nikon is the NEAR-FUTURE delivery of SUPERIOR mirrorless system. And to be quite honest, I'm losing confidence in that happening. One o the big two (probably Nikon) now has a 50-75% chance of becoming the next Pentax. (Though, IMO, neither will pull off a full "Kodak" self-implosion; they didn't put their heads in the sand THAT much.)

I'd like to see Samsung buy Nikon.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 19:18 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: I've been trying to think of a decent analogy, and here it is...
Imagine a 4x4 race where one person runs a lap around the race track and then hands the baton off to the next person on their team who runs the next lap who runs a lap and hands off the baton to the next person who runs the final lap. So, 4 people, 4 laps. The total time run is the final time.
Now, imagine that a team is set to race against other teams and 2/3 of the way through the very first lap (so, still on the first runner), a team which last year finished in 3rd place stops and says "we left the starting line 23% faster than last year so we're in 2nd place in this race".
WHAT!?!?!
Questions:
Where are you in the current race? Your growth over last year is irrelevant with regards to where you are compared to others.
What about the other 3 runners? It's a bit premature to claim any sort of victory from the 2/3 mark of the very first lap!
Are you mentally deficient? Where's the precedent for such a proclamation?!?!

I'm anti-Sony? Please, elaborate. I'd love to learn something about myself that I've been totally oblivious to...

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 14:12 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: I've been trying to think of a decent analogy, and here it is...
Imagine a 4x4 race where one person runs a lap around the race track and then hands the baton off to the next person on their team who runs the next lap who runs a lap and hands off the baton to the next person who runs the final lap. So, 4 people, 4 laps. The total time run is the final time.
Now, imagine that a team is set to race against other teams and 2/3 of the way through the very first lap (so, still on the first runner), a team which last year finished in 3rd place stops and says "we left the starting line 23% faster than last year so we're in 2nd place in this race".
WHAT!?!?!
Questions:
Where are you in the current race? Your growth over last year is irrelevant with regards to where you are compared to others.
What about the other 3 runners? It's a bit premature to claim any sort of victory from the 2/3 mark of the very first lap!
Are you mentally deficient? Where's the precedent for such a proclamation?!?!

Most corporations won't bother rebutting another corporation's advertising propaganda. All it does is breathe further life into the original propaganda. Like feeding a troll on a forum.
Honestly, I don't feel like it's Nikon's responsibility to call Sony out. I feel like it's the websites which spread this junk around.
All they have to say is: Here's what Sony released today, but as we all know, revenue growth doesn't determine market position, sales volume (or market share) does.
To be clear, I'm not questioning whether Sony actually is or is not number 2 in sales volume or market share - I have no idea and frankly don't care. I'm saying that if they are, using revenue to make the point is stupid and doesn't necessarily correlate - and websites have a responsibility to their readers to not perpetuate stupidity.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 13:12 UTC

I've been trying to think of a decent analogy, and here it is...
Imagine a 4x4 race where one person runs a lap around the race track and then hands the baton off to the next person on their team who runs the next lap who runs a lap and hands off the baton to the next person who runs the final lap. So, 4 people, 4 laps. The total time run is the final time.
Now, imagine that a team is set to race against other teams and 2/3 of the way through the very first lap (so, still on the first runner), a team which last year finished in 3rd place stops and says "we left the starting line 23% faster than last year so we're in 2nd place in this race".
WHAT!?!?!
Questions:
Where are you in the current race? Your growth over last year is irrelevant with regards to where you are compared to others.
What about the other 3 runners? It's a bit premature to claim any sort of victory from the 2/3 mark of the very first lap!
Are you mentally deficient? Where's the precedent for such a proclamation?!?!

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 11:09 UTC as 18th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: A couple days into this and I'm absolutely mind blown that people STILL think this means Sony has the number 2 spot when it comes to market share. They don't!
According to this VERY, VERY selective data, Sony's FF camera revenue grew at 23%, putting them in second place behind Canon. This also means Canon's revenue grew MORE than 23% over this same time period, which is actually kind of amazing.
Sony is literally the only company ever to decide they're in second place because of revenue growth over 2 months when they were running HUGE cash back and trade-in incentives and the competition wasn't. And especially when market share is the metric everyone normally uses!
And honestly, I'm not even mad at Sony. Bravo to them for getting all the folks who don't have more than a couple dozen brain cells (apparently) to believe their propaganda. It's not even making me mad that all these people aren't intelligent enough to decipher this stuff on their own. It's depressing me how utterly stupid everyone is.
George Carlin had a bit years ago about intelligence... It went something like this: imagine a guy with average intelligence (high school graduate in the US) and then realize half the people are dumber than that.
Well general photography publishers and populace, you've proven George Carlin right. And that's depressing as hell.

IdM-no class needed. Look at the 3 footnotes. They ALL reference "based on dollars" which is "revenue". +/- means growth/decline. So, revenue growth, as a percentage, year over year for Jan+Feb. The total market's revenue growth is irrelevant as we don't have a breakdown for each company, only that Sony's % revenue growth is 23%. That puts them in second place behind Canon which means Canon's is 23.x% or higher (maybe it's 40 million percent? who knows?) and it puts them ahead of Nikon's which could be 22.9% or it could be negative 10 trillion%. How? UNKNOWNS! How many companies? Which companies? Leica? Pentax?
Again, my point still stands. Literally everyone who's ever discussed market position in cameras looks at the #1, #2, and #3 positions based on market share. No one, ever, has looked at revenue growth percentage. Like... no one. Ever. It's an idiotic way to look at it. And this deserved scrutiny AND PUSHBACK from DPR and everyone else.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 10:50 UTC

A couple days into this and I'm absolutely mind blown that people STILL think this means Sony has the number 2 spot when it comes to market share. They don't!
According to this VERY, VERY selective data, Sony's FF camera revenue grew at 23%, putting them in second place behind Canon. This also means Canon's revenue grew MORE than 23% over this same time period, which is actually kind of amazing.
Sony is literally the only company ever to decide they're in second place because of revenue growth over 2 months when they were running HUGE cash back and trade-in incentives and the competition wasn't. And especially when market share is the metric everyone normally uses!
And honestly, I'm not even mad at Sony. Bravo to them for getting all the folks who don't have more than a couple dozen brain cells (apparently) to believe their propaganda. It's not even making me mad that all these people aren't intelligent enough to decipher this stuff on their own. It's depressing me how utterly stupid everyone is.
George Carlin had a bit years ago about intelligence... It went something like this: imagine a guy with average intelligence (high school graduate in the US) and then realize half the people are dumber than that.
Well general photography publishers and populace, you've proven George Carlin right. And that's depressing as hell.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 01:14 UTC as 19th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: Ohhhh there's so much wrong with this article.
1) the article says cameras and lenses but the press release mentions only cameras.
2) this is 2 months of data - not even minimally conclusive
3) it's a single data point. Often times, a single data point is worth less than no data points. At least moderately intelligent people can't draw incorrect conclusions from zero data whereas numerous conclusions can be drawn from a single data point: correct, incorrect (see criticism 1 above) and irrelevant. Context is incredibly important with a single data point and Sony has provided none (strangely, but not really when you consider this is their attempt at some free advertising).
4) the chart references "US Dollars", not number of units sold. Yet the headline would have readers believe Sony is number 2 in volume. I think most people would agree that number of units is more important than $$ when talking about "taking the number 2 position". Revenue is important, but is not as important as profit. Sony hasn't provided expense information nor profit information.
Ultimately, this was Sony figuring out a way to get some free advertising from every major online photography source and not get called out for their worthless info. The lack of objective reporting is alarming, but not surprising. After all, Sony has been paying for a lot of trips for reviewers over the past few years. I had hoped for continued objectivity from these sites, as most of them were quite objective in their gear review articles, but not calling Sony out for a worthless, self-agrandizing, commercial disguised as a press release is troubling.

Honestly, I'm normally defending DPR against the trolls. I think they do good work. But I do my best to be impartial and in that spirit, I can confidently call this garbage.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2017 at 01:42 UTC

Ohhhh there's so much wrong with this article.
1) the article says cameras and lenses but the press release mentions only cameras.
2) this is 2 months of data - not even minimally conclusive
3) it's a single data point. Often times, a single data point is worth less than no data points. At least moderately intelligent people can't draw incorrect conclusions from zero data whereas numerous conclusions can be drawn from a single data point: correct, incorrect (see criticism 1 above) and irrelevant. Context is incredibly important with a single data point and Sony has provided none (strangely, but not really when you consider this is their attempt at some free advertising).
4) the chart references "US Dollars", not number of units sold. Yet the headline would have readers believe Sony is number 2 in volume. I think most people would agree that number of units is more important than $$ when talking about "taking the number 2 position". Revenue is important, but is not as important as profit. Sony hasn't provided expense information nor profit information.
Ultimately, this was Sony figuring out a way to get some free advertising from every major online photography source and not get called out for their worthless info. The lack of objective reporting is alarming, but not surprising. After all, Sony has been paying for a lot of trips for reviewers over the past few years. I had hoped for continued objectivity from these sites, as most of them were quite objective in their gear review articles, but not calling Sony out for a worthless, self-agrandizing, commercial disguised as a press release is troubling.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 23:59 UTC as 92nd comment | 5 replies

Idea for next year, the Canon Cannon. A telephoto lens shaped like a cannon that is so heavy and large, it needs its own wheels. Bonus: it's its own tripod! Bonus 2: it's motorized and works just like a Segway!

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2017 at 10:25 UTC as 77th comment
In reply to:

CaPi: Just hope we get this day over with real quick

I actually look forward to April Fools day every year. It's great to see the creativity and sense of humor people have. Some fall flat (this one, for instance, IMO) but I do appreciate the effort. The best, IMO, are those that take you by surprise and/or are plausible.
Then of course, there are always those who don't appreciate creativity and humor and feel the need to show the world their April Fool's Scrooginess.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2017 at 10:23 UTC
In reply to:

mikeSF: bad idea.

So you commented before you read the article?

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2017 at 14:45 UTC
Total: 244, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »