Joined on Feb 7, 2012


Total: 100, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous2345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Don Diafragma: Also named the 'One'D'Kamosaurus X II'.

Strong and powerful, fat and heavy and very jurassic due to its mirror.

About 20 years ago I had to whack a black bear out of my blind using a canon eos 1N. The bear ran away, the camera was fine. Since that day I have a very different respect for overbuilt cameras - for some usages!

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 11:50 UTC
In reply to:

Greg VdB: Funny - for decent results in B&W, you need colour information, which this Monochrom lacks by design, unless you carry filters. A recent high-resolution sensor WITH a bayer filter seems like a much better proposition if you are serious about B&W...

Greg is right in the sense that post conversion of colour to B&W done with channel mixing is like owning an infinite number of filters with non linear responses that you can blend at will after the fact. You can't reproduce the range of possible outcomes by shooting in monochrome. But in many ways, B&W shooting is about the interplay of light and shadow - forcing oneself to see those interplays and highlighting them - in essence it is a colourless process. What this boils down to is the same argument about getting it right when shooting vs. getting it right in post. Neither are right or wrong, they are differences in style, preference and more than likely one will work better than the other in some situations, while it won't really matter in most.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2016 at 17:29 UTC
On article Nikon's New D5 and D500 Push the Boundaries of DSLR (716 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: Those are probably two very capable cameras. Probably better than the previous generation. But, can anyone tell me why this strong enthusiasm? Any groundbreaking news that I have missed?

Well if you think of the D500 as the replacement for the D300s, this is more like a 3 to 4 generations leap and the two cameras don't have much in common. If you look at the D500 against its most direct competition the Canon 7DmkII, it jumps ahead on almost any feature BUT most importantly gives Nikon shooters a long awaited option in that segment.
The D5 is more incremental in nature but it's not like the D4s is a dog - yet they found a way to make meaningful gains in many areas. Not ground breaking any of them, but altogether it is probably the most advancement in any pro camera in a long time. Again, the flagships in any brand move by small increments at best - this time Nikon pilled up more changes than is custommary.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 23:52 UTC
On article Here at last: Nikon announces D500 (1164 comments in total)
In reply to:

FBoneOne: I think the technical term here is "holly crap" - the wildlife shooter's wet dream comes true (unless you can afford the D5 ). I can see this puppy and a 200/500 as the "does 99% right" combo for wildlife. I will give it 9 months to let the usual Nikon QA issues resolve themselves and next Christmas I am all in :-)

Pixel density between 20 and 24mp although a factor is really not a deal breaker for me; at that level and beyond, it will be very rare that I can't get the resolution I want from a 750 mm ep focal length. BUT what stopped me from buying the D7200 is the fps (there is a huge difference between 10 and 5 in raw+jpg when shooting landing birds or breaching whales) and most importantly the buffer TIME - this is 10s of continuous shooting vs 3.5 on a D7200. A full whale breach is about 5 to 7s, a cheetah's chase is longer than that but 10s is going to cover from before the catch to the kill. That's why it matters and why the D7200 doesn't do it for me.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 12:13 UTC
On article Here at last: Nikon announces D500 (1164 comments in total)

I think the technical term here is "holly crap" - the wildlife shooter's wet dream comes true (unless you can afford the D5 ). I can see this puppy and a 200/500 as the "does 99% right" combo for wildlife. I will give it 9 months to let the usual Nikon QA issues resolve themselves and next Christmas I am all in :-)

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 23:40 UTC as 198th comment | 3 replies

Certainly not bashing on my part as they are not doing any worse than any other brand lately - nobody seems to be able to launch a new camera without some level of issues these days. I was just hoping they would be immune and would have actually gotten thorough beta user info before launch - that seems to be a thing of the past in the industry. I think the past couple years have proven beyond doubt that it is now an electronics industry where turn-around time trumps initial launch quality. In all fairness to Leica, they have resisted longer than most even on their digital offerings, and at least they did not wait a year to fix the preliminary issues.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2015 at 18:52 UTC as 13th comment

The issue here is not that Carey enjoys the XA-2; he explains very well why it is his choice.
The issue is that DPR labeled the section "Gear of the year" which does two things. First it gives the gear selected a seal of superiority (it is the best of the year), and an endorsement that DPR (and therefore the reviewing staff as a whole) endorses that gear as the best of the year.
When all it is actually, is the preference (argumented) of one reviewer.

Call it what it is, "individual staff pick of the year" - it serves the same purpose, it still explains why each of you picked one specific piece of gear as your preference of the year, but it does not give the impression that that piece of gear is necessarily better than every other.
Or of course you like the hundreds of argumentative responses and the traffic it generates, in which case cynic me says you hit it right on the head.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2015 at 01:23 UTC as 34th comment | 4 replies

Great. I bought C1 Pro 8 on October 14 - two weeks too soon... So now I need to shell out another $99 to get the latest version :-( I think V8 will do just fine for now.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2015 at 20:52 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply

Too little too late. I moved on. Might have been a consideration 2 years ago.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2015 at 01:50 UTC as 57th comment | 1 reply
On article Fujifilm X100T successor rumored to feature new lens (336 comments in total)

Nothing would kill the spirit of the X100 like zoom... It is a "shoot with both eyes ope, zoom with your feet" camera. It's what made it successful. An X100 with a zoom might be a good camera and even a great one but it would not be a continuation of the current line.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 19:08 UTC as 168th comment
On article Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) (316 comments in total)

Now the interesting question is what will be in that "high end mirrorless" category. The three Sony A7s and what? The Samsung is here, XT1 here, GH4 here, E-M1 here... Obviously nothing from canon or Nikon and no matter how much I love the street shooting abilities of my X-Pro1 it does not compete with the A7s except on build quality.
So what am I missing? I guess sony has a category all by itself.... Which actually may not be far from the truth.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2014 at 13:13 UTC as 35th comment | 1 reply

That's the difference between a luxury brand and a consumer brand. Leica takes out the bling and charges you $1000 more for the privilege of knowing you have a leica but not show it while Nikon adds bling and charges you the same... I wish they had resisted the temptation, just for their own sake.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2014 at 22:14 UTC as 154th comment | 3 replies
On article Price released for Brikk's 24k gold Nikon Df (370 comments in total)

It is April 1st, isn't it? It's gotta be, just gotta be...

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2014 at 23:29 UTC as 57th comment | 1 reply

They sold the company to Sony :-)

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2014 at 17:39 UTC as 685th comment | 5 replies
On article Canon confirms price drop on select EF lenses (139 comments in total)

Purely as a marketer I have to wonder the value of most of those price drops. A couple of them are significant enough to qualify as repositioning, which means attracting customers that would not have bought otherwise, but most of those add up to a few percents. Will anybody in the US decide to buy a 50/1.2 because it is now $70 cheaper?
I have a hard time believing it. What I believe is that it just took $25 of margin out of the retailer's pocket and $45 out of canon's for the same exact volume.
Unless of course canon lenses are now "commodity" where buying decisions are triggered by 1 or 2% difference - I just don't think it is the case.
So I am wondering what this really means - some her infer desperation, but canon has been successful for too long to jump to that conclusion, so I think we are missing a card to make complete sense of this move. Let's wait another few days and see. If there is nothing else up canon's sleeve then it is desperation.

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2014 at 13:40 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Aaron801: I look at it this way: a large part of the appeal of this camera is the level of quality, right? That extra quality is presumably something that's attractive because it means that the camera will outlast an ordinary digital camera. But... since it's digital (and not film camera) and since the tech for these things is evolving so quickly that rather than being some sort of heirloom that your kids and grand kids are likely to keep and use, it's much more likely that this thing will be a doorstop in 8 years time (and probably less than that). The extra level of quality that this thing is made with is then really not all that useful, no? I'm not advocating buying cheap, disposable level gear, but it makes more sense to me to buy digital cameras that are well made enough to last just past the point where you might upgrade them but not decades into the future. As an investment, it seems about as smart as it would have been to buy some sort of diamond encrusted, platinum cased LED watch...

I think we have been re-programmed to think that way over the past decade but there is no real reason for that. This Leica's technical file quality will exceed anything anybody could do with any film camera. So the idea that it will be obsolete any time soon but film leicas won't is artificial. The connectors may become obsolete because computer manufacturers want to sell new stuff, the card readers may become obsolete because we get smaller, faster cards... the camera itself not really and the lenses are still not obsolete after decades. There may be better sensors a decade from now, but it does not mean that this camera won't still be able to take fabulous pictures. Because this camera is really no different from a film camera with a sensor, it is probably the least sensitive to obsolescence of any camera. That's another reason why they can charge what they charge.The M8 is starting to show its age but the M9 and Monochrome files are still outstanding and will be for a while.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2014 at 11:10 UTC

The angry comments below are quite puzzling. Leica has not been able to keep up with demand lately. Regardless of whether any if us think these cameras are worth what they charge, why wouldn't they charge $8000 for it? They still have not found the price point that curves down demand. Actually, if we look at the recent history, Leica M cameras tend to react like true luxury items with increased demand as price goes up.
I actually love Leica Ms and would own one if I could, but I understand their decisions - they may not help me, but they seem right when it comes to maximizing Leica's profits, which is after all what they should be thinking about. Nobody has to buy a Leica, so their pricing strategy does not hurt anybody, and it sure seems to be helping them, so again, we may not like it but I don't see much to criticize.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 18:19 UTC as 113th comment | 2 replies
On article CP+ 2014: Canon stand report (55 comments in total)

After shooting canon for over 20 years this is quite underwhelming. They make good cameras but they stopped making exciting ones a while ago.
I can remember signing up for canon when the first IS lens came out - changed my life. Or the Eos 3, although the eye control did not work so well, it offered so much of the 1v at a fraction of the price with amazing AF for the time and outstandingly accurate light measure - much better than my Eos 1N.
Or the 540ex flash, the first really reliable wireless multi flash system.
I just miss a time when canon made me feel that they were advancing photography with huge leaps.

The last time i felt that way was looking at pictures from the Nikon D800e... Or the Leica M Monochrom.

Might be nostalgia hitting, but I wish canon would wow me again.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2014 at 02:15 UTC as 24th comment | 16 replies

I hate to admit it but this kind of lens on a D800e is what could really make me leave Canon after 28 years.
Then I remember my son starts college in a few months and I decide t be reasonable :-)

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2012 at 22:29 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply
On article Practical HDR, Second Edition (54 comments in total)
In reply to:

doctor digi: A shame they can't use the correct term for the book's title - it's actually tone-mapping that is being created. A true HDR image cannot be displayed with any available technology.

Great review though.

Actually the author makes the distinction in the first chapter and clearly explains the difference between generating an HDR file that can't be accurately viewed and tone mapping which translates this file into something that can be viewed.
The book being about both, the title is not inaccurate, just partial.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2012 at 20:34 UTC
Total: 100, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous2345Next ›Last »