Beat Traveller
Joined on
Mar 21, 2013
|
Comments
 |  |  |  |
| Home from first day. by Frank LoPriore from Back to School | Hummingbird in Flight by Lensmate from A Big Year - birds | Green turtle in the shallows by gcachon from Underwater | Bruce Green by George Veltchev from -Yuge and Nasty- |
Beginner's GuidesGetting Started
In-depth testingLatest Camera Reviews
Beyond the studio testsFeature Articles and Videos
real world performanceField Test Videos
see how we seeSample Galleries
In-depth ReviewFujifilm X100F
Show CoverageHits and Misses from CP+ 2017
Throwback ThursdayClassic Cameras from Days Past
2468FeatureWhat is equivalence?
What's that Noise?Shedding some light on the sources of noise
Beat Traveller: I don't know why anyone cares about DXO's obtuse numbers when there are hundreds of free image websites where you can easily get a sense of how good a camera is.
If 99% of the difference comes down to ability, that only makes the internet fights over the remaining 1% even more ridiculous.
Beat Traveller: I don't know why anyone cares about DXO's obtuse numbers when there are hundreds of free image websites where you can easily get a sense of how good a camera is.
If you care more about which camera has the biggest number in a test scene score than you do about being able to see images you like created with that camera, then your hobby is not photography but gear.
I don't know why anyone cares about DXO's obtuse numbers when there are hundreds of free image websites where you can easily get a sense of how good a camera is.
Beat Traveller: DPR 2 years ago: "Everyone is going to buy these new full-frame cameras because bigger sensors are just better."
DPR now: "Hang on a second, there's such a thing as a sweet spot in sensor size."
I don't disagree with anything written here, I just find it amusing.
Sorry, I was using 'new' as a synonym for 'Sony A7 series'. That was the point at which everyone jumped aboard the full-frame hype train due to the smaller size and lower price point.
@Rishi, know the feeling buddy. Good to see you putting your considerable qualifications to use around here.
DPR 2 years ago: "Everyone is going to buy these new full-frame cameras because bigger sensors are just better."
DPR now: "Hang on a second, there's such a thing as a sweet spot in sensor size."
I don't disagree with anything written here, I just find it amusing.
Very impressive. Between the Foveon sensor and the high quality Sigma glass, this could be a cheap contender to medium format for low ISO work.
Albert Valentino: No love anymore for us early XE1 users :(
We got so much additional functionality and fixes out of firmware updates for the original X-E1 that it felt like a new camera. I'm not going to sook because they have treated us very well.
This looks good. I admit to being a little disappointed though: my first thought from the pictures was that Olympus were releasing a camera with an optical viewfinder and a fixed lens - like an X100 but more compact.
Still, quite impressive.
davob: Unless you want to set off a new equivalence tsunami, I suggest you amend the commentary to slide 6 to something like "a 34mm f3.6 lens would (at least from a depth of focus perspective)..."
Or maybe they just don't care, seeing as how a mouse could quietly break wind miles away and it would still set off an equivalence tsunami on these forums.
I love Fuji's ILC line and the X100, but I can't really see a reason to recommend this over a GR.
Thank christ, now people can stop speculating about when the X-Pro2 is going to come out and move on to discussing when the X-Pro3 is going to come out.
Absolutely love that last one.
Serious Sam: Spends 1.5k $AU on ONE lens on a 16mp APSC system? PLEASE!!!
Add a $AU100 and That the ENTIRE cost of my new Nikon D5500 system. Body + Kit lens(only use at 18mm) and the three 1.8G(s)....
I know some people has money to burn but at least spend it on something has high retain value like Leica lens....
I am speechless.....
Why buy a car for 20 grand when a pushbike can be had for $200? I know eh, people are crazy.
He's also one of the best Irish outside backs since Brian O'Driscoll...
FBoneOne: 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.
Does it keep you up at night knowing something is not right on the internet?
Hmm... think I'll stick with my 35 1.4.
This new season of Vikings is a lot tamer than I remember.
That's actually a pretty good list. If my X-E1 did even one eighth of those things he suggests I'd be incredibly happy with it.
Beat Traveller: This thread doesn't really need another 'what is the point of this' post from someone who would never really buy one, but I just don't get it. Leica prices are hard to justify even when the IQ is top notch, but considering that you can get a Sony for less with more resolution it does baffle me.
To all of you: IQ does not equal resolution, but resolution is one component of it.
This thread doesn't really need another 'what is the point of this' post from someone who would never really buy one, but I just don't get it. Leica prices are hard to justify even when the IQ is top notch, but considering that you can get a Sony for less with more resolution it does baffle me.