peterpainter

Lives in France Finistère, France
Joined on Aug 12, 2008

Comments

Total: 92, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Satyaa: When I first read this article yesterday, there were two comments. 2!
I got on the train thinking that I'll respond later. When I got back to it this evening, there are over 850 comments! WOW!!

"...personally I’m in need of a little convincing" was exactly how I felt when I read the first impressions review a few days ago. However, my feeling was for reasons totally different from what this article says. I was stuck with the point about sluggish AF. I went back to do more reading on MF cameras. Considering my type of use, and what a MF camera typically offers, it would be an overpriced-overkill for my needs.

I still like the idea of a MF camera. When I find an affordable deal on a reasonably small camera like this one (or X1D, may be used) with a landscape lens and a portrait lens, I will buy it. For today - not because of this article - I will stick with my original thought that I am not convinced to spend that amount on a MF camera.

Continued...

The content of the article was couched in technical terms it is true, but I would imagine that many people when comparing systems would (as I do) investigate lens availability, ISO performance, DR and so on* and come to conclusions themselves actually based on similar principles but possibly not using the same terminology, so I'm not sure that it really is that controversial, revolutionay or what have you. But useful to some people, I think, and relevent.
Btw. usual disclaimer: I'm a Canon / Pentax user, not a Fuji user, but even I thought the original headline a bit outré.
*the 'and so on' may be quite a long list;) colour depth, AF, flash systems...and, of course, how others are getting on with it.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 16:04 UTC
In reply to:

Satyaa: When I first read this article yesterday, there were two comments. 2!
I got on the train thinking that I'll respond later. When I got back to it this evening, there are over 850 comments! WOW!!

"...personally I’m in need of a little convincing" was exactly how I felt when I read the first impressions review a few days ago. However, my feeling was for reasons totally different from what this article says. I was stuck with the point about sluggish AF. I went back to do more reading on MF cameras. Considering my type of use, and what a MF camera typically offers, it would be an overpriced-overkill for my needs.

I still like the idea of a MF camera. When I find an affordable deal on a reasonably small camera like this one (or X1D, may be used) with a landscape lens and a portrait lens, I will buy it. For today - not because of this article - I will stick with my original thought that I am not convinced to spend that amount on a MF camera.

Continued...

I'm pretty sure that if the initial headline hadn't appeared to be saying 'don't buy this (newly released top-end) Fuji camera until' followed by an exposé of why Rishi had reservations, there would not have been so many (negative) comments. The title has changed, thus making a lot of those comments (and even more of the angst behind them) look a bit daft - which is kind of unfair on those of us who commented, but that doesn't seem to bother DPR. Reading the thread now one gets the 'what are those guys getting steamed up about?' feeling.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2017 at 16:04 UTC
In reply to:

peterpainter: I'm lost here. Why is DPR trying to spoil Fuji's party? Interesting read, and all that, but why are they taking a shot at Fuji? The other MFs have been out for quite a while, now, and when poor old Fuji show up we get a party-pooper article. No, I'm not a Fuji user, although I admit I like them very much, and the same goes for all camera manufacturers for giving us such a wonderful choice of gear (sigh, if only I could afford it!), but really.....
Anyway, I'm sure potential buyers will look at this and make up their own minds, but I hope the world doesn't end up with everyone using Sony A7 / Nikon 810 - let's have some variety out there, folks. Sheesh, what a bunch of killjoys! Reminds me of the old hifi days when I was told by some expert or other that I should buy a Pioneer 12D because it could track a Sure M75ED at 1.5 grams or something:(

OSV - yes, indeed, they do, but where do I even imply that they don't? In fact I made that very point, so why did the headline single out those considering buying the Fuji?

User0406267055 - I'm pleased for you.

Please note that the headline of this article has been changed so that it no longer 'targets' the new Fuji camera, so if you read my comment above in the light of the new headline you might think I'm bonkers. Well, I probably am, but as my comment was based on the original report it's slightly unfair to draw the conclusion of 'bonkersness' .....

I'm glad they changed it (after many had complained) but it doesn't half make some of the old comments (like this one) look odd. Still, they wound people up and got lots of clicks - journalism, hey?

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 20:12 UTC

I'm lost here. Why is DPR trying to spoil Fuji's party? Interesting read, and all that, but why are they taking a shot at Fuji? The other MFs have been out for quite a while, now, and when poor old Fuji show up we get a party-pooper article. No, I'm not a Fuji user, although I admit I like them very much, and the same goes for all camera manufacturers for giving us such a wonderful choice of gear (sigh, if only I could afford it!), but really.....
Anyway, I'm sure potential buyers will look at this and make up their own minds, but I hope the world doesn't end up with everyone using Sony A7 / Nikon 810 - let's have some variety out there, folks. Sheesh, what a bunch of killjoys! Reminds me of the old hifi days when I was told by some expert or other that I should buy a Pioneer 12D because it could track a Sure M75ED at 1.5 grams or something:(

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 21:17 UTC as 243rd comment | 5 replies
On article Pentax KP sample gallery (91 comments in total)

Nice gallery, good variety - many thanks. Looks like the KP may be a good 'un and as though Pentax may have set up their default JPEG processing differently (better?).

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 15:31 UTC as 36th comment | 1 reply
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (660 comments in total)
In reply to:

peterpainter: Nice camera. From the the pcitures it looks like you came across a guy with a beard, a yellow wooly hat and a Pentax KP - which is interesting because I've come across a number of people saying that they've never seen anybody using a Pentax DSLR.

Yes, I know. It was meant to be an amusing comment, kind of failed. Sorry, I should have put a ;) smiley on or something:(

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 17:48 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (660 comments in total)

Nice camera. From the the pcitures it looks like you came across a guy with a beard, a yellow wooly hat and a Pentax KP - which is interesting because I've come across a number of people saying that they've never seen anybody using a Pentax DSLR.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 17:36 UTC as 46th comment | 2 replies

Nice. A quick play - I selected all the strawberies en masse and placed them on a white background. They still looked, well, red, to me.
A single one surrounded by a lot of white background looked like its true inedible colour, but zoomed in and out a few times and it wasn't so clear. Fun, thanks, but the eyes didn't like that too much.....
Anyway, I'm now truly impressed by my cameras' white balance systems, but will continue to swear at them when they mess up. Raw can be very useful;)

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 21:39 UTC as 64th comment | 1 reply

Nice comparison, but a couple of typos:

"In most respects, the 80D is the {better} of the three cameras,..."
best?
and later
"If you're pinching pennies then you're probably going to choose the Rebel, whose innards are {considering} better than the T6i which it replaces. If..."
considerably?

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2017 at 21:04 UTC as 8th comment
On article Study: people don't actually like looking at selfies (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

peterpainter: I've no problems with selfies - don't do them, don't often look at them - but why the research?

Maybe the last sentence is a clue - "As so often in science, further study is required." Perhaps they are going to degree-level courses in selfies.

Sjeupie
Interesting - yes, I agree they are, as is the use of the (camera)-phone to document one's everyday life. I have a number of family contacts on Facebook and get regular photos of their children. Tbh, despite? being an oldie, they don't mean a lot to me, yet their freinds and some family members love or at least encourage them. To me, being cynical perhaps, it's a bit like living ones life like, say, a film star where every move is reported, photographed and followed with interest. Good for the ego? Well, why not? Complex stuff in my opinion, and thank-you for your interesting comment.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 20:26 UTC
On article Study: people don't actually like looking at selfies (200 comments in total)

I've no problems with selfies - don't do them, don't often look at them - but why the research?

Maybe the last sentence is a clue - "As so often in science, further study is required." Perhaps they are going to degree-level courses in selfies.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2017 at 23:34 UTC as 6th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

trungthu: I cannot see the color bit depth of this camera in this announcement...
They (Pentax) forgot or it only has 12 bit?
With K20D, they have said about the color bit depth of 22... ?

You're welcome!

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2017 at 15:49 UTC
In reply to:

trungthu: I cannot see the color bit depth of this camera in this announcement...
They (Pentax) forgot or it only has 12 bit?
With K20D, they have said about the color bit depth of 22... ?

http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/kp/spec/index.html
Scroll down a bit, it's under 'File Formats.'
Not the sort of thing I'd think of myself, really.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2017 at 14:51 UTC
On article Hands-on with Ricoh's compact Pentax KP (634 comments in total)
In reply to:

Josh Leavitt: Assuming the ridiculous ISO figure can actually produce usable images, the KP might appeal to low-light landscape photographers. I'm a fair weather, day light-only photographer when I'm outside, so i'd rather just pay $100 more for the Sigma SDQ H and get the benefit of twice the IQ at 100-200 ISO. Buy whatever suits your needs I guess. But I am curious to see what the 800,000 ISO images actually look like on this thing.

Thanks for link @solarider - looks to be interesting bit of kit. Will await developments (film terminology;))

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2017 at 19:40 UTC
In reply to:

trungthu: I cannot see the color bit depth of this camera in this announcement...
They (Pentax) forgot or it only has 12 bit?
With K20D, they have said about the color bit depth of 22... ?

14 bit

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2017 at 12:13 UTC
On article Hands-on with Ricoh's compact Pentax KP (634 comments in total)
In reply to:

twomonger: If the AF still sucks then there's really not much of a compelling reason to upgrade, IMO. I've been waiting for the longest time for Pentax to put out a decent camera for action... but as their third party lens support (no new sigma lenses) declines and they keep putting out things like this, I'm more and more tempted to start looking at other manufacturers (while keeping my K-50 for astrophotography and landscape).

@twomonger - thanks for the link. I remember reading the article. It explains why they make so few, but from what I read not that they will not be making any more (so presumably, just as at present, only the ones that they think will sell in some volume will be made). The cost of setting up the manufacturing line for so few lenses means it isn't viable, and of course that makes a lot of sense. Since then Pentax has introduced the KAF4 version with electronic rather than mechanical link so set-up costs should, in theory, be less, but whether or not that would tip the balance is another matter - so far I haven't noticed a great rush of (well any, in fact) 3rd party lenses making use of it.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2017 at 11:44 UTC
On article Hands-on with Ricoh's compact Pentax KP (634 comments in total)
In reply to:

twomonger: If the AF still sucks then there's really not much of a compelling reason to upgrade, IMO. I've been waiting for the longest time for Pentax to put out a decent camera for action... but as their third party lens support (no new sigma lenses) declines and they keep putting out things like this, I'm more and more tempted to start looking at other manufacturers (while keeping my K-50 for astrophotography and landscape).

I didn't know that Sigma are not going to make any more Pentax fit lenses. Quite a blow - when did that news come out?

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2017 at 23:44 UTC
In reply to:

iae aa eia: "I like that the lens has a bit more reach than the FZ1000, but the way it's always-extended feels a bit awkward, though I understand why Panasonic is doing it."

Why is Panasonic doing it? I am not sure if I understand that. Is it that external parts moving make the camera more expensive to produce and doesn't allow for a lighter and silent zooming? I think those are the or some of the reasons.

Mixed feelings on this. I loved my old Fuji S5600's (5200 in the USA?) internal zooming / focussing lens but having such a small sensor it wasn't very long. This looks like the sort of thing clumsy oafs (like me) will knock into things, and potentially reduces some of the ability to photograph in 'unusual places.' On the other hand, constant distance for subjects from the front element is good to have especially for macro. Looks like a nice camera - the longer zoom reach is appealing to me too. Interesting, and nice one Panasonic!

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 15:27 UTC

Nope, still don't care. Tbh I can't afford to keep paying for the next iteration, so I still lug cameras round and use a PC to process the pics. One day, maybe;)
It's nice to see that they've got round to 2 lenses. I've some really old tat cameras that I bought cheaply, and one is an ITT 110 camera with, gosh, 2 lenses! and I remember early Kodak digitals being slammed for having 2 lenses instead of a zoom - how fashions change! I thought they were a good idea, btw.
But to me it is the electronics, software, pocketabilty and so on that make these iPhones interesting - if I could afford to spend for each iteration I probably would. Meanwhile, I'll stick to cameras and my 25Euro dumb phone - let others pay the price for all the R&D!

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 19:56 UTC as 179th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

barrym1966: 7000 for a piece of glass made in Leicester, no thanks

Leicester crap? Come on, guys, it's the home of last season's football (sorry, soccer to some of you, I guess) Premier League Champions. A bit of reverence, please!

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2016 at 19:47 UTC
Total: 92, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »