hiplnsdrftr

Lives in United States nyc, NY, United States
Works as a photographer
Joined on Jan 2, 2007
About me:

photographer, NYC

Comments

Total: 70, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »

Was excited about this camera until I saw it has a flip screen...

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 13:15 UTC as 9th comment
On article Rock Solid: Canon 1D X Mark II Review (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

Individual11: I appreciate the Nikon v. Canon comparison is useful to some, but as a 1D Mk IV owner, I would be interested in a comparison between the previously-not-reviewed Mk IV and the original 1DX, as owners of these bodies are more likely purchasers than a Nikon shooter looking at a camera in this range.

I used Nikon F, F3, Pentax 67, Contax 645, Canon 1Ds2, 5D, 1Ds3 for pro work... moving to the 1Dx was just about mind blowing.

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2016 at 19:04 UTC
On article Nikon Coolpix A comparative review (16 comments in total)

I had a Ricoh GR, never quite loved it so when it's screen cracked I bought the Nikon A used for $300. Like it enough that I bought a second used one for the same price. Only downside I notice is that the menu and features are rather dumbed down. I don't need a flashing warning that I might consider using the flash... Also the A has way less back focus that my original GR.

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2016 at 18:52 UTC as 1st comment
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (618 comments in total)
In reply to:

filmrescue: Do professionals really not want articulating screens? Looks solid like a rock though.

Will not buy any camera with an articulating, moving, flipping screen of any kind.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2016 at 15:46 UTC
On article Rock Solid: Canon 1D X Mark II Review (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

footeab: Other than the nice AF, why bother with a 20MP camera at 14FPS? Not even sports photographers need that amount of FPS. Those that do, may as well just shoot 4K(8-12MP) @30 fps video and then pull the frame you want, as they are publishing at best to magazine quality. No one needs 14FPS for shooting some power hungry lying pleeb standing at a podium for political office either. All this is going to do is make more mirror fip up noise drowning out the speaker. Hrmm, guess there is a good side to this new camera... Cameras today are shaving the absurd to differentiate themselves. Effectively the only camera type that needs a little work is 4/3 on AF in low light and long telephoto.

Actually in terms of having enough photos to chose from, the more the better, for sports, fashion, shooting from a moving car or aircraft 14 fps is needed. I guess one could shoot 4k like you say but then maybe storage, playback etc. might be an issue. I'm pretty happy with the 1Dx for all those scenarios and others.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2016 at 15:42 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (618 comments in total)
In reply to:

hiplnsdrftr: Is there a reason they made it so ugly? The top used to be clean and smooth. I was set to buy it, but can't justify owning such an ugly camera regardless of it's performance. I guess they just saved me several thousand $. Will settle for another 1Dx original at half the price I guess.

I may be one of the few people on this site that actually needs a 1Dx for my job.

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2016 at 04:27 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (618 comments in total)
In reply to:

hiplnsdrftr: Is there a reason they made it so ugly? The top used to be clean and smooth. I was set to buy it, but can't justify owning such an ugly camera regardless of it's performance. I guess they just saved me several thousand $. Will settle for another 1Dx original at half the price I guess.

The reality is it would just bug me every time I looked at it. I realize it has nothing to do with the performance, but have to be honest. Petty maybe, but not full of it.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 16:31 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (618 comments in total)

Is there a reason they made it so ugly? The top used to be clean and smooth. I was set to buy it, but can't justify owning such an ugly camera regardless of it's performance. I guess they just saved me several thousand $. Will settle for another 1Dx original at half the price I guess.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 00:09 UTC as 45th comment | 4 replies
On article Hands-on with Canon's 'not-coming-to-USA' EOS M3 (598 comments in total)
In reply to:

hiplnsdrftr: The flip screen kills it for me anyways.

And ya, whats up with those hands?!!

I just like the camera to be essentially one piece. I don't like the added pieces, moving parts etc. I can still see the screen on every camera I own from most angles when I hold it low or over my head. I just feel like if the point of a camera is its small size, then it should be as small as possible while still have a built in flash.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2015 at 21:43 UTC
On article Hands-on with Canon's 'not-coming-to-USA' EOS M3 (598 comments in total)

The flip screen kills it for me anyways.

And ya, whats up with those hands?!!

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2015 at 16:39 UTC as 122nd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Paul Guba: Great photographer I respect her work. I have been lucky to meet some great photographers through work and education. Irving Penn, Karsh, Avedon, George Tice, etc. most of my heroes. Mary Ellen Mark was the only one I can say I would never want to meet again.

Despite the controversy associated with their respective work... Joel Peter Witkin, Jaques Sturgis and Terry Richardson were all very pleasant.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 01:27 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Guba: Great photographer I respect her work. I have been lucky to meet some great photographers through work and education. Irving Penn, Karsh, Avedon, George Tice, etc. most of my heroes. Mary Ellen Mark was the only one I can say I would never want to meet again.

We tend to assume, that greatness in one's field, implies a level of congeniality... when in fact, it often does not.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2014 at 20:52 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Guba: Great photographer I respect her work. I have been lucky to meet some great photographers through work and education. Irving Penn, Karsh, Avedon, George Tice, etc. most of my heroes. Mary Ellen Mark was the only one I can say I would never want to meet again.

Same here.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2014 at 16:16 UTC

...

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2014 at 16:15 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

James Booba: Sony lost me with:

Continuous shooting: Max. 2.5fps,
Speed Priority Continuous shooting: Max. 5.0fps

such a small MP sensor fast processor and barely 5fps? wtf? guess i have to wait for a7h - high speed full frame with more fps.

The selling point of this version is low light and video... the Alpha 7 shoots 5 fps. Though still not all that fast.

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2014 at 12:52 UTC

While this website might not make it clear, this contest is from the US branch of Ricoh.

From the link- "RICOH IMAGING Americas Corporation is a subsidiary of RICOH".

Ricoh Europe can have their own contest if they so chose.

Ricoh Europe's website, in regards to digital cameras, points to a 404 page...

http://www.ricoh-europe.com/products/digital-cameras

Probably won't be a contest for European customers any time soon!??

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2014 at 13:03 UTC as 26th comment
On article Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II: a quick summary (533 comments in total)
In reply to:

NCB: Canon have made the same mistake as Nikon, dropping the viewfinder, as Nikon did in the P7700 before bringing it back as as EVF in the P7800. Too much of the potential market for this sort of camera wants a viewfinder of some sort; the optical type was never that bad that omitting it was a good thing, and while the EVF in the P7800 isn't great, compared to other EVFs now appearing, it's better than nothing.

Unless Canon and Nikon start putting quality EVFs in this sort of camera, they might as well drop them; there are too many attractive alternatives around in the quality-but-not-too-large market. The sensor-size of the G1 X II isn't enough on its own to make a difference.

I'm not convinced that so many people are concerned with a built in viewfinder. My guess is that by now, most people are acclimated to using the LCD on a camera of this size.

I'm pretty sure both of my S70 and both of my G9 had optical viewfinders and I honestly never used them.

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2014 at 14:05 UTC
In reply to:

Johannes Zander: They should ask Hasselblad for help about wooden grips. And then charge $10.000. Below that price I don't take cameras with wooden grips serious.

The Pentax 67, one of the most widely used PRO cameras ever made, featured a wood grip.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2013 at 20:03 UTC
In reply to:

hiplnsdrftr: So now you can press this little black cigarette pack up against your eyeball and look like a real dimwit... perfect.

WTF?

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2013 at 02:47 UTC
In reply to:

hiplnsdrftr: So now you can press this little black cigarette pack up against your eyeball and look like a real dimwit... perfect.

Then again, I guess there's always gonna be people that want to drive their car using reins, those that wish their cellphone had a rotary dial?

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2013 at 19:56 UTC
Total: 70, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »