straylightrun

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Nov 9, 2004

Comments

Total: 1185, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

KrampusClaus: still think that if someone needs +6ev they are one terrible terrible photographer or drunk or drugged out !!

Happy drugged out or drunk AR7III users - stay off highways and away from me please !

I said PLEASE you lousy drunken drugged whoremongers ! ;)

Its another creative tool in your arsenal. If you cant appreciate having more options, then you are not a real creative artist.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 21:31 UTC

$100..... Hahahahahhahahahahahhaha

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 04:02 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

Sirandar: I could comment on this story, but the director and actors and writers of the movie Ex Machina have already done it far better than I could.

Oh God please. Ex Machina was the most boring cliched predictable pop pseudo sci fi movie ive seen as of late.

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2017 at 22:45 UTC
In reply to:

ChapelThrill23: I'd rather see a 16/2 or 2.8 from them. I like small and light primes to pair with a light compact body.

The Sony 16/2.8 already exists.

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2017 at 12:32 UTC
On article Canon EOS M100 review (788 comments in total)
In reply to:

XeroJay: Don't get me wrong, I love my EOS M6, but I feel like we're hitting a point now where any compact digital camera system is basically diminishing returns, as smartphones like the Pixel and current iPhones are really closing that gap. As a working pro I rely on all the horsepower that a full frame pro system can offer. In my personal life though, I'm finding that the phone is just giving me less reason to bother bringing a dedicated camera to most outings, let alone lenses and accessories.

Isnt this common sense? If you shoot wide angle and f/8 in daylight for all your shots and only upload them on facebook, you wont be able to tell the difference between a high end mobile phone and a full frame dslr. But the phone cant compete with dof control, variety of focal lengths and low light situations.

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2017 at 08:00 UTC
In reply to:

straylightrun: Sigma really butchered their own naming convention. Theb16 and 30 f/1.4 lenses should be classified as Art lenses, and the 19,30,60 f/2.8 lenses should be called Contemporary. Its as if some intern got them mixed up but Sigma just went with it.

Sigma emount Art lenses already exist. They are f/2.8. These f/1.4 lenses should be called Art designated, because of the greater control of dof (just like how theyve done with their DSLR lineup).

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2017 at 06:43 UTC

Sigma really butchered their own naming convention. Theb16 and 30 f/1.4 lenses should be classified as Art lenses, and the 19,30,60 f/2.8 lenses should be called Contemporary. Its as if some intern got them mixed up but Sigma just went with it.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 23:28 UTC as 64th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

G1Houston: More smaller, lighter, relatively inexpensive, fast-enough wide angle prime please. There is a good reason why many of us do not want to own a FF camera ...

It already exists. The Sony 16mm f/2.8.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 23:24 UTC
In reply to:

Tom Caldwell: Hmm - I will have to check for an EF mount vesion a DC prime of this capacity could be focal reduced to aps-c image circle on a 4/3 sensor and pick up an extra stop of light along the way. How “mickey mouse” is that? No real advantage in a M4/3 mount version other than saving the purchase price of a Metabones Ultra.

That some are already buying Sigma DC lenses to be focal reduced this way on M4/3 bodies shows that some have had their thinking caps on.

I dont think you understand the concept of mirrorless.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 23:24 UTC
In reply to:

ozy82: Using stepper motors in 2017 is just ridiculous. They just saved 10 bucks but added a lot of noise. Why?

Wait? So these lenses make noise? Thats even more funny! A cheap kit lens can be silent, but a $1200 f/2.8 lens is noisy? Wow.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 00:04 UTC

$1200 for an f/2.4 lens?

.... LOL!

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 21:19 UTC as 55th comment | 9 replies
On article Video: Sony a7R III first look (155 comments in total)

Not a real upgrade. As an r series resolution body, they should have increased the resolution. Thats the entire point of the r line. This is more like an "a7r II mII" model. Sony's incremental upgrades are getting too ridiculous.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 21:19 UTC as 28th comment | 11 replies
In reply to:

danieladougan: I already have the Olympus 17mm f2.8 and 45mm f1.8 as well as the Panasonic 25mm f1.4. They're FINE. I got them all used for less than the cost of one of these new f1.2 lenses. You can get great image quality, shallow depth of field, and bokeh out of all those lenses. I can even get nice portraits from my 40-150mm f2.8 zoom lens.

I'm not upgrading to new prime lenses (at $1199 apiece) just for a little bit of extra aperture width and weather sealing.

Someone is poor!

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 21:05 UTC
In reply to:

Flashback: All those 60+ Mp rumours up in smoke!

This is the r model, it should have 60mp.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 10:27 UTC
In reply to:

Felipe Rodríguez: I'm also among those of you who think that 42 Mp is more than enough, so I'm glad Sony decided to improve the camera's performance rather than increase its resolution. For me, just a silent electronic shutter without the current limitations of this feature in the A7RII would already justify the upgrade. However, I can't afford it right now... :)

The whole point of the r designation is resolution. An upgrade should have more resolution. This makes no sense.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 10:26 UTC

Borriinnnggg. Hurry up Sony and release a cheap entry level FF body already. I cant wait for the Canon and Nikon FF mirrorless system to increase the competition so Sony will have no choice but to stop with these incremental jew updates that continuously get people to pay more for the same thing with a few tweaks changed.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 07:32 UTC as 300th comment | 4 replies
On article Canon G1 X III vs. Sony Cybershot RX100 V (632 comments in total)
In reply to:

Francis Sawyer: Other than sensor size and the attendant optical effects from it, I don't see how Canon's offering here is really competitive. The Sony is smaller and obliterates the Canon's video capabilities.

Canon's failure to implement good video, year after year, is an embarrassment to its management. They've been out in the weeds for ages, making products for no one in particular. They ignore the needs of both still and video shooters. \/\/TF.

Lol davev8 stop being a canon shill. If they arent going to put decent video in, the price should definitely be lowered.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 21:12 UTC
On article Have it your way: which 24MP Canon should I buy? (253 comments in total)

None. Just wait until Canon makes a rangefinder body style mirrorless body with built in EVF to attach the existing cheap and excellent 22/2.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 22:03 UTC as 30th comment
In reply to:

MisJay: The MacBook Pro will still render videos 5 times faster.

And since adobe’s crap optimization, more powerful GPUs don’t help you at all with photo editing anyway.

Will you guys get a room already?

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 01:13 UTC
On article Meet the Canon PowerShot G1 X III (327 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tommi K1: "Relative slow aperture...."

Relative to what?

To other zooms? Are you saying this is faster than a standard f/2.8 zoom?

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 11:39 UTC
Total: 1185, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »