Lives in United States College Station, TX, United States
Joined on Nov 16, 2010


Total: 14, showing: 1 – 14

Are these cows from Nevada? Where did they find cows that glowed in the dark!?!

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2018 at 01:38 UTC as 59th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Dekandev: Was this just a trick of photography or did this plane take off almost vertically?

No trick. With no passengers, low fuel, and no freight, you can use all that power to wow. https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericmack/2015/06/13/sorry-your-first-787-dreamliner-flight-wont-include-a-vertical-take-off/#5e95aa664795

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2017 at 09:13 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2746 comments in total)
In reply to:

decentrist: 3 minutes to clear the buffer...lmao!

Wrong. You can access the Fn Menu.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2017 at 22:26 UTC
In reply to:

sh10453: Now I see where Apple stole the letter "i" from!!!

Nope. This camera came out in 2000. The iMac was introduced in August 1998.

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2016 at 16:19 UTC
In reply to:

abortabort: "The camera was the surprise launch of Photokina this year, as many assumed Sony had abandoned its SLT cameras in favor of the more popular mirrorless models."

Sorry DPR but you need to stop listening to internet pundits that claim these things and seemingly everyone repeats until it is 'fact'. I mean what was it exactly that made DPR think it was dead? Honestly question? And why was it a surprise? I mean that's like saying the 5D IV was a surprise. Was it really?

So was it that all models were clearly up to date? Or that Sony clearly spent a lot of time / money / effort developing a new AF sensor module for a 'dying' system, something you questioned when the A77 II came out. Something that 'surprised' you when the A68 came out and now 'surprises you' again when the A99 II was announced. Will you be 'surprised' when the A77 III comes out?

I guess the only time you won't be 'surprised' is when they finally do stop making them.

This is after being 'surprised' by Sony introducing a whopping third camera to their APS-C E-Mount line up, I mean that's way too many right? This of course not that long after DPR made claims that Sony seems likely to be dropping APS-C E-Mount all together (just prior to A6300 being announced).

It seems to me that if Sony don't release something every 3 minutes they are abandoning it, but releasing 'too much' is equally a terrible injustice to your expectations.

Stop listening to internet pundits, maybe it might be worth listening to people when you interview them and they say...

"We are continuing to support XYZ, even though we can't talk about upcoming products".

Mic drop.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 14:37 UTC
In reply to:

Frank C.: Canon and Nikon must feel what Blackberry felt when S. Jobs whipped out the first iphone, you know, that 'wtf' moment lol

I don't remember Blackberry having a WTF moment until they looked at their balance sheet a year later. I remember their first impression being "Meh, our users will never leave us. It's too radical - no keyboard - bwahahaha" If Sony wants to go for the jugular, they need to step up the marketing. Stop the camera eye candy commercials that look like sensual skin creme adverts - and go balls-out in-your-face blitz aimed at Millennials.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 21:47 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: If this lens was made from solid gold, it would cost $18,600 (15.5 ounces x $1200).

So it really is a bargain at $6,000!

(Hey, I wonder how much light solid gold can transmit?)

But Gold is 7.15 times denser than Aluminum. So if you made a gold lens at that weight, it would be as thin as paper and crumple in your hand when you went to put it on the body. So to keep the walls and mount as thick as the current lens....you would need a gold lens that was about 111 ounces, or 7lbs. 111 ounces is $133,200.

But you could save a little by subtracting the weight of the glass lenses - those you can reuse.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2015 at 22:20 UTC
In reply to:

Fearless Spiff: It really is a joke. I am more than pi**ed.

Take your time to learn the product. The essential photo editing tools are still there. Do you think this wasn't the same song the choir of the hopeless sang when iMovie was remade, or when FCP was remade? Apple has show time and time they'll remake these products - their products - better in time. At their pace.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 19:10 UTC
On article UK Landscape Photographer of the Year winners announced (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

luben solev: I like all but No 6. That one looks a bit dull in both framing and colour/contrast. I'd be proud to have taken all the others.

I know that beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, but to me No 1 is a worthy winner. It's different, a bit surreal, has lots of detail and has that painterly quality many a landscape photographer aspires to.

A great selection!

Really? When I saw the rabbit and then the scene, I was like "Ohmigosh, England really does look like Watership Down".

Beeg vaatter! Kiaar....kiaar.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2014 at 14:19 UTC
On article Sony announces pricing and availability for Alpha 7S (131 comments in total)


Link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 04:30 UTC as 32nd comment
In reply to:

WolfyWho: This is what Fuji should do with their X100 line (been wishing on that for a while). Three different bodies with 3 different lenses. I'd carry 3 X100's, each having a different focal length (35, 50, 85 in 35mm equiv), and never have to change lenses again.

If it were an absurd idea - then by that rational, carrying around multiple prime lenses when 1 zoom lens can fulfill your needs - would be absurd. And yet its not because primes are perceived as sharper. Ah, but would not a prime lens matched to a sensor be even better? - yes. So it's not so absurd. It's logical. Maybe not practical, but it is logical.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2013 at 21:28 UTC
In reply to:

WolfyWho: This is what Fuji should do with their X100 line (been wishing on that for a while). Three different bodies with 3 different lenses. I'd carry 3 X100's, each having a different focal length (35, 50, 85 in 35mm equiv), and never have to change lenses again.

I thought so too. I think it's a good business model for people that don't mind it. It's more like lenses with sensors rather than a body with fixed lenses. And the great thing is, each lens can be configured for its own settings. I think that Sony should do the same and release a RX2 and RX3 with fixed lengths.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2013 at 16:11 UTC
On article Interview - Phil Molyneux, President Sony Electronics (129 comments in total)
In reply to:

RedDog Steve: A cease-fire in the pixel wars ?

I think it'll happen. A few years ago it was MHz wars, who was faster, Intel or AMD, PowerPC - PC or Mac? But now that doesnt seem to make a much space on a brochure. And now I think that the pixel count will level off.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2012 at 21:19 UTC
On article Fujifilm updates X100 firmware to v1.10 (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

camera lucida: How does the update work with OSX? The Camera does not show on my Mac when connected :-(

Don't worry, the FPUPDATE program will find it. And at least this update won't yack and spit like Sony's a55 Firmware v2, just because of a 64-bit kernal.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2011 at 12:32 UTC
Total: 14, showing: 1 – 14