Jonathan Brady

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

Comments

Total: 204, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon granted third most US patents in 2016 (97 comments in total)

Clicked just to read the comments. VERY disappointed in the DPR community. Y'all can do better than that. MUCH better. I'm so sad now, I'm going to go sit in a corner and cry. I'll be back later and in the meantime, I want you kids to think about what you've done (or not done). Get these comments up to snuff! I expect entertainment!

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 23:23 UTC as 34th comment
In reply to:

Vegetable Police: I never liked Nikon. Not sure why. That is all.

Define "better". Is it the number of recalls per camera?

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 22:03 UTC
In reply to:

villagranvicent: The outcome looks pretty generic, like anything else.

Neither is the cost

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2017 at 15:49 UTC
On article Dell's 8K monitor goes on sale in March for $5000 (219 comments in total)
In reply to:

Internet Enzyme: What GPUs are capable of outputting 8k @ 60hz with 4:4:4 and 10 bit color? Does displayport 1.4 even support that? Does thunderbolt 3 support that? But that does sound dope. One step closer to being able to display a 5dsr image at 1:1. That would be a sight to see.

Print one

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 03:03 UTC

Wouldn't it be awesome if everyone who complains and moans about the absence of a specific feature related to video on any given camera went out and bought a gh5? Then they could all just shut up and enjoy the very best the market has to offer. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening and instead I believe we will continue to see people without a cinema-line budget or even a much smaller gh5 budget complaining that their preferred manufacturer didn't throw every conceivable feature into the cheapest possible camera and then sell it at a loss so that they, personally, could be happy.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 19:00 UTC as 145th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

PhotoUniverse: No issues with my iPhone7+. Love the camera!

A comment such as yours communicates one of two things to the person reading it... 1) yours isn't having a problem, which is a pointless comment to make as the article quite clearly points out that it's "some" owners of the phone and it can be inferred it's a very minimal percentage as the problem hasn't even had a recall issued by Apple (it was also a very teeny tiny percentage of Note 7 owners who had an issue as well) or 2) you don't believe the problem exists because your device is fine which would be a ridiculous way to go through life - thinking that if something doesn't apply to you, it applies to no one.
Maybe there's another interpretation of your comment, but I'm sure it's equally worthless as the above 2 possibilities.

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2016 at 17:48 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoUniverse: No issues with my iPhone7+. Love the camera!

Well then! Everyone else must be lying!

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2016 at 16:52 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1593 comments in total)
In reply to:

PRohmer: What's the bloody hump for? And why bother with a built-in flash?

It's a lovely lady lump

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 21:33 UTC
In reply to:

kiskami: Yeah! Very good Pro Journalist instincts and technical reflexes! Congrats!
Risking to anger the killer more and get shot yourself and other people (maybe) for fame and money - thats where criminal psychology has a different opinion. I guess.

I agree, that's definitely a possibility. But there are also terrorists who WANT the fame, or at least the message to get out. In those cases, the one holding a camera is likely the safest in the room. The trouble is, how do you know which situation is which?

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2016 at 22:00 UTC
On article Gear of the Year 2016 - Barney's choice: Nikon D500 (216 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: Other than better dynamic range & a tad better focus system @Barney how could you pick this over the Olympus EM1 MII? 🤔

size of the userbase and thus, the number of people who could benefit from it, perhaps?
Also, notice that if you search this webpage, there's no mention of the word "battery" until you get to the comments section and people are discussing mirrorless systems...

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2016 at 14:50 UTC
In reply to:

scottcraig: Just had to chek mine to make sure it wasn't a fake. Thankfully it's genuine. That being said its always best to buy new and even used gear from a reputable source. If you're ever unsure where to shop B&H is your safe bet.

@Sacher - there are plenty, but B&H is the biggest and most well known. They also have a great reputation and liberal return policy. Thus, MANY people shop there. But in reality, you can get equally great customer service and the exact same pricing (thanks to manufacturer enforced minimum pricing) from many other retailers. I regularly purchase from B&H as well as Adorama, Amazon, Profeel, BuyDig, Cameta, and even from a store in Canada (Camera Canada) as the Canon products sold in North America are all covered under the same warranty. I have no doubts there are numerous other fantastic retailers as well.

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 10:51 UTC
In reply to:

Photoman: How much profit must there be to counterfeit a cheap lens? Is it a Yongnuo factory doing this???

@leonche64 - you have a very uninformed idea of what it takes to run a business. And if you're using the counterfeit lens as an example of a product produced by a legitimate company, I think you have a very skewed notion of what a legitimate company is. All in all, you should probably seek out a business education from a legitimate school. And to avoid confusion - any place offering "classes" is NOT legitimate (ie, Trump University).

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 10:46 UTC
On article The whole nine yards: Canon 35mm F1.4L II USM review (318 comments in total)
In reply to:

fiatLuxFoto: Ok Canon, outside recouping marginal R&D over the previous technology why are they charging $1,700? The physics has been known for decades, there is nothing new here so why charge so much for such incremental value? The majority of images from this lens will be viewed on a computer monitor or laptop monitor so how does this lens justify it's cost?

I highly recommend a few business courses at your local University. Heck... even an online University would do. Even one of the free ones. Or just a conversation with a business owner, perhaps...?

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2016 at 10:40 UTC
On article Canon EOS M5 real-world sample gallery (240 comments in total)
In reply to:

Flashback: Nice set of pics. Nothing to worry about with this sensor.

Just add IBIS, 4K, include a couple fast primes and this could slow the Sony juggernaut.

I honestly don't recall, bit hasn't the Sony juggernaut already slowed? Their market share hasn't grown for a while, has it?

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 20:23 UTC
On article The whole nine yards: Canon 35mm F1.4L II USM review (318 comments in total)
In reply to:

HarryLally: Rather a 'rave' review - could almost have been written by Canon. The Photozone review (using the same camera) is more balanced IMHO. The lens still gets an excellent review, but it's rather less gushing.

@Suntan - they did mention it... Here's the quote: "The Canon MkII recorded 2.3 stops darkening at F1.4, reducing to negligible at F2.8-4 which is very much on par for the spec, but perhaps surprisingly, it's actually slightly worse than the MkI, by about 0.3 stops at F1.4."

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 16:34 UTC
On article The whole nine yards: Canon 35mm F1.4L II USM review (318 comments in total)

I've never been enamored by the 35mm focal length, instead preferring short/medium telephoto. But I've also never been particularly impressed with the 35mm f/2 IS wide open and sold it. This lens will be my next purchase as I think it'll satisfy me where the 35/2IS left me wanting - sharpness in combo with a shallow depth of field. Now if Canon would simply release a 50L and 85L replacement with similarly astounding optics, I'd be all set! I'd even upgrade my favorite lens, the 135L with similar improvements in the optics. Canon can simply have my next bonus check! lol

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 16:29 UTC as 74th comment
On article Video: Shooting Dog Portraits with the Sony a6300 (185 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: Wow! I thought all the sponsorship talk had run its course. Clearly not.
Here are my 2 suggestions if you have a problem with it...
1) never visit the site again
2) open your own site where you spend your own money to do reviews of more equipment than anyone else, employ a staff and either pay them or convince them to volunteer their time to you instead of a paying full-time job, and if you're really a stickler don't run ads either because that would make you biased as well. So, no revenue coming in and spending your own money to buy equipment, website, pay employees, etc. *Should you decide to do this, be sure you let us all know the website so we can all go there and accuse you of everything under the sun and criticise your testing methodologies.
Options 1 and 2 above are not mutually exclusive, of course.
Oh... There's another option...
3) come to grips with reality and acknowledge that making money from banner ads and affiliations simply isn't sufficient for a lot of businesses. Then do your best to either ignore or simply enjoy the content.

Hey... One good turn deserves another, right? Also, I wasn't complaining; I was frustratingly trying to educate. Perhaps only the frustration came through...? Complainers (especially ignorant complainers) do that to me.

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2016 at 02:13 UTC
On article Video: Shooting Dog Portraits with the Sony a6300 (185 comments in total)

Wow! I thought all the sponsorship talk had run its course. Clearly not.
Here are my 2 suggestions if you have a problem with it...
1) never visit the site again
2) open your own site where you spend your own money to do reviews of more equipment than anyone else, employ a staff and either pay them or convince them to volunteer their time to you instead of a paying full-time job, and if you're really a stickler don't run ads either because that would make you biased as well. So, no revenue coming in and spending your own money to buy equipment, website, pay employees, etc. *Should you decide to do this, be sure you let us all know the website so we can all go there and accuse you of everything under the sun and criticise your testing methodologies.
Options 1 and 2 above are not mutually exclusive, of course.
Oh... There's another option...
3) come to grips with reality and acknowledge that making money from banner ads and affiliations simply isn't sufficient for a lot of businesses. Then do your best to either ignore or simply enjoy the content.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 17:18 UTC as 66th comment | 4 replies
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1291 comments in total)

I'm a little confused... Does dpr want the ability to customize everything, or not? In the 5D Mark IV review, it was said that customization was limited (even though it's relatively extensive) but here, one of the cons is "Customization options can be overwhelming". So, do you want the ability to set every button to whatever your heart desires, or not? And how can both be bad?

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 15:20 UTC as 292nd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

endofoto: This will be usefull for fashion shoots. No need to increase f to 11 in order to be within flash sync speed of 1/250. You can shoot f3 and than replace the sky afterwords. Cool

If your depth of field is shallow and the background is blurred but the sky/clouds is in focus it won't look natural. You'll still need an appropriate depth of field for natural looking results.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2016 at 13:26 UTC
Total: 204, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »