Revenant

Joined on Jul 29, 2011

Comments

Total: 2262, showing: 561 – 580
« First‹ Previous2728293031Next ›Last »
In reply to:

TN Args: Are we investors? Never understood the passion for 'market watch' discussions. If, as consumers, we are obsessed with minimizing resale losses, then fear has overtaken passion, And buying gear that is 'less right' because it might resell better (in digital tech for goodness sake!) is a sure sign that you have taken up the wrong hobby.

Or maybe some of us just find it interesting to read about the state of the camera market and of its major players? It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the money we 'invest' in camera gear.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 10:02 UTC
In reply to:

itaibachar: How about Nikon, Sony, Pentax sales?
Are they on the rise?

Nikon has apparently lost market share recently, so Canon's #1 position has actually been strengthened, relatively speaking.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 09:55 UTC
In reply to:

photomedium: Oh FuJ!
Incredible sloppiness for the amount of $$$ they charge.

It's actually interesting to think about how few stupid cameras we get these days. Every manufacturer used to release a dozen or more compact cameras a year, and now most of them don't even release half that amount. Some don't even make cameras at all. And the cameras that we do get nowadays are generally much better imaging tools than those that were released during the heyday of the digital compact camera.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2016 at 16:47 UTC
In reply to:

JonB1975: Did they deliberately wait to do this until the camera has been discontinued? (The X-30 is no longer available in the UK at least)....

The X70 is clearly not intended as a replacement for the X30. A fixed FL camera with an APS-C sensor and no EVF clearly occupies a different position in the market than a zoom lens camera with a much smaller sensor and an EVF. There are really too many differences for them to have the same target market, or be intended to satisfy the same customers.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2016 at 08:45 UTC
In reply to:

Ansel Spear: Why do some of you across The Pond insist on referring to lenses and bodies as 'copies' of lenses and bodies?

They are not copies of lenses and bodies. They ARE lenses and bodies in their own, original, genuine bona fide right.

There isn't a 'master' lens or body from which all others are copies. You don't buy a copy of a car or a copy of a can of beans, so why a lens or a body.

Not that I feel strongly about it! :-)

"Using 'copy' in the context of referring to an identical item in a manufacturing production run is plain incorrect. "

No, it is not. It's just that 'copy' in that sense doesn't mean the same thing as in its original sense.
Think about buying/comparing/testing two lenses versus buying/comparing/testing two copies of a lens. Do those expressions mean the same thing?

I agree that it's unnecessary to say that you buy a copy of a lens, if you only buy one, but if you buy several, then there's a distinction between several lenses and several copies of a lens.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2016 at 15:21 UTC
In reply to:

Ansel Spear: Why do some of you across The Pond insist on referring to lenses and bodies as 'copies' of lenses and bodies?

They are not copies of lenses and bodies. They ARE lenses and bodies in their own, original, genuine bona fide right.

There isn't a 'master' lens or body from which all others are copies. You don't buy a copy of a car or a copy of a can of beans, so why a lens or a body.

Not that I feel strongly about it! :-)

Like many other words, the word 'copy' has several meanings and usages. Here are two of the meanings from the Merriam-Webster dictionary:

1. an imitation, transcript, or reproduction of an original work

2. one of a series of especially mechanical reproductions of an original impression; also: an individual example of such a reproduction

A camera or lens is not a copy in the first sense, but it is a copy in the second sense. Both are very common, and correct, ways to use the word in English, so this is a non-issue, I think.

Edit: As usual, someone else typed faster than I did.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2016 at 12:22 UTC
On article Hands on with the Hasselblad H6D 50c/100c (267 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marksphoto: Can somebody tell me what jobs I can shoot in order to pay off an investment into this cameras system?

If we're talking hobbyists, it's certainly true that the higher the disposable income, the more money one can afford to spend on the equipment. And in the case of, say, Leica's rangefinders, I do think that doctors, lawyers, pilots and other well-paid people are a large part of the customer base.

However, in the case of the Hasselblad and Phase One MF systems, I think that most of the buyers are actually professionals, many working in the advertising and fashion industries, or running very successful businesses shooting weddings and portraits of celebrities and other "high-end" customers.
There are also many professionals who rent the equipment when they feel they need it. Many MF cameras are probably sold to rental houses.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2016 at 10:46 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: 'serious issues with the integrated circuit for image processing'

Unusually blunt and specific language for a company to use. Must have been pretty catastrophic.

But why? They use these ICs all the time, you'd think it was completely known quantity by now.

The lack of sugar coating perhaps indicates that it isn't Nikon's fault, but rather that a parts supplier screwed up somehow?

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 23:51 UTC
In reply to:

noflashplease: I wonder how much longer Lytro can stagger along with the $50 million in funding raised back in February of 2015, when they fired 50 of their 130 employees? Maybe they've raised more money? Maybe they are revenue neutral or somehow profitable, although I'd be very surprised?

This new product looks absolutely ridiculous, a bit like a TV camera from the early 1950s. Unless they already have it sold and in service, I don't see any future for it. It's a cumbersome implementation of a kooky concept.

Looking back, Lytro did produce real products and even had a retail presence. Oh well, so long and farewell.

I doubt they will produce many of this behemoth. And they will likely rent it to studios, so I wouldn't expect a retail presence at all. If they make a smaller version perhaps.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 22:25 UTC
In reply to:

mxx: Hope everything will be back to normal as soon as possible. I wonder if camera manufacturers with factories in less earthquake prone countries are better off regarding production interruptions?

Both Nikon and Sony make some of their cameras in Thailand, and the floods a few years ago caused massive damage to their factories there, with production delays as a result. Natural disasters occur outside Japan too.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 21:56 UTC
On article Miggo wants to 'DSLR your iPhone' with the Pictar grip (134 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Here's the MAIN problem with cell phone add ons.... cell phones are disposable commodities. This device will only work with iPhones, and probably with ONLY their current model. Apple is notorious for making new phones that don't work with accessories you bought for your last iPhone.

Fortunately this thing seems reasonably priced, but you would be foolish to buy any expensive add on that cannot be used with your NEXT cell phone.

And an even bigger problem might be that ANYTHING that makes a cell phone into a better camera defeats the whole purpose of having "one small, convenient, and pocketable device that can be used as a camera." Because once you have to carry around extra parts they become just as inconvenient as real cameras are.

This is like trying to turn a blender into a meat grinder. You are better off buying a meat grinder if you want it done right.

Had I seen your comment first, I wouldn't have bothered writing my own.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 13:26 UTC
On article Miggo wants to 'DSLR your iPhone' with the Pictar grip (134 comments in total)

So, people abandoned the dedicated camera for the more convenient and portable smartphone. And now they are expected to buy accessories that make their smartphone more similar to the camera they stopped using. Is there some kind of irony in this, or is it just me?

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 13:24 UTC as 73rd comment | 1 reply
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (375 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeF4Black: So viewfinderless cameras are still marketed over the cheap p&s segment? Amazing.

"They're handy in bright conditions, or when you need stability."

Absolutely, but the notion that a camera without a VF can't be targeted at enthusiasts is absurd. There are serious, skilled photographers who prefer using the LCD screen for composition. It's just a matter of personal preference, not a matter of beginner vs. enthusiast.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 09:37 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (375 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeF4Black: So viewfinderless cameras are still marketed over the cheap p&s segment? Amazing.

Well, manual exposure control and raw is usually enough for a compact to be marketed as 'advanced' or 'enthusiast'. Usually they also have slightly better build quality and better lenses than most cheap P&S compacts.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 19:39 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (375 comments in total)
In reply to:

SeeRoy: I'd suggest reading this.
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2016/04/bunnell-fujifilm-x70-vs-ricoh-gr.html
Odd that DPR comes up with the idea of reviewing this camera a couple of days after TOP's article...

I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time that different reviews or articles about the same product have appeared within days of each other. And I don't understand why this would be considered odd.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 15:51 UTC
On article Fujifilm X70 Review (375 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: This is the 1st Ever camera review on here where JPEG has a higher score than RAW? 😏 How can this be?

On a side note, I just re-read DPR's explanation of the different scoring categories, and apparently the IQ categories for JPEG and raw only include noise performance up to ISO 800.
Noise performance above ISO 800 is included in the category "Low light / high ISO performance" together with low light focus and exposure.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 10:20 UTC
On article Huawei P9 Leica-branded dual-cam made by Sunny Optical (81 comments in total)
In reply to:

greenarcher02: Isn't that similar to their partnership with Panasonic? Panasonic actually manufactures, and sometimes designs the lenses, but the design is approved by Leica.

It's exactly the same. Panasonic has admitted that Leica's only involvement is in certification of the lens designs and of the manufacturing equipment.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 10:00 UTC
On article Huawei P9 Leica-branded dual-cam made by Sunny Optical (81 comments in total)
In reply to:

TonyPM: I wonder what Panasonic has to say about this.

I think he's referring to the 'partnership' between Panasonic and Leica. However, the Leica-branded MFT lenses and compact camera lenses, are no different from the optics used by Huawei. The design was approved, and the production facilities authorized, by Leica. And Panasonic has put such lenses in pretty cheap compacts in the past, not just in premium models.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 09:51 UTC
Total: 2262, showing: 561 – 580
« First‹ Previous2728293031Next ›Last »