Lives in Sweden Sweden
Joined on May 11, 2004


Total: 179, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

fedway: Upgrade? Why stick to one - get both. If you have a camera body, it's not like you made a marital vow of loyalty. The 6dmii for wide angle, dof and high iso; the 80d for the 1.6x reach on your tele lenses, video and ironically DR at base ISO.

And you will pay for the mk2? ;-)
Some people can´t throw out money in just any direction, even if they would benefit from, for example, the use of two bodies.

And some people just would not carry around two bodies for their outings. Their reasons may differ, weight, bulk, or any combination of those and/or other factors.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 08:18 UTC
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: What about for 6D users? Many of us with the older model who don't shoot video are struggling to determine if the upgrade is worth it.

@Jeff Peterman:
Read the 6D mk2 reviews, there are a few out there. Then determine if the improvements are worth the cost, and if they are things that would benefit YOUR "photography style". Simple as that.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 08:14 UTC
In reply to:

ChickenBalls: "That said, we're aware that a great many people primarily shoot JPEG."

Really?? people buy DSLRs just to shoot JPEG? Why not save some money and get a good smartphone instead?

So, to you the main differentiating factor betw. a smartphone and (any?) DSLR is the RAW-mode on the DSLR? Note for you: some smartphones DO allow for use of shooting in RAW, if not that many...

I´d think there are many, many differences, among which RAW isn´t even the "top one", between a DSLR and any smartphone out there!!

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 08:10 UTC
In reply to:

princecody: Sigma is kicking ass! If Only they would make Olympus quality lenses for micro four thirds I'd never buy another overpriced Olympus lens again 😉👍🏻

Optically Sigma has been good, (with variations among the line, of course) since many years. I had the tiny little 24mm/2,8 super wide, for my then Nikon system. Sharp as a tack, sturdily built and 18 cm(!) closest focusing distance. A FUN lens! Cost some 1000SEK at the time, since then prices have goon up "a bit" ;-)

Now, I too find Oly lenses a bit expensive. Still, which other company give THAT quality at the same or cheaper prices, overall? Tell me..
I have the 12-40/2,8, the 40-150/2,8, the 50/2, the 75/1,8, the 14-54 mk2, the old 40-150/3,5-4,5, and the 12-50/3,5-6,3. Only the two last mentioned can be seen as less than REALLY good lenses. SO sharp, and liftable vs what most other can deliver at the same IQ. WEll built all of them, too. That has to cost "something"...I guess ;-)

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2017 at 07:35 UTC
In reply to:

akjos: I tested this abomination on my D4 together with 4 other sigmas in the camera store expo with bunch of teps from different companies. All but 1 had serious focus issues. One would figure that at least the samples to show off to ppl would be cherry picked no??! No... thank you.

What perform "cherry picking" if the company would like to be seen as honest and serious??? That would also point to potentially bad QC..
And what use, if it shows, as it often does, that the camera in question needs to be calibrated? Any DSLR, regardless of make or price level, will have this potential problem/issue. If not using its Live View focusing, that is.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2017 at 07:28 UTC
In reply to:

Bambi24: I don't care how cheap these Sigma and Tamron lenses are, all of them have focus issues. And if they don't have focus issues when you buy them, they eventually develop them or focus completely breaks after the camera gets a firmware update.

And I'm not blaming this on Sigma or Tamron, Japanese companies are incredibly protective, Japan and China are the most protectionist countries in the world. Canon and Nikon refuse to disclose or share their AF tech. But as a result, I refuse to buy Tamron or Sigma, it just is what it is.

Are you sure that Tamron and Tokina (and more) don´t pay licences to Ca/Ni/Pe for use of the AF tech? It´s been a rather well known fact that Sigma do NOT pay any licenses, since long, and therefore Sigma have had more troble with AF function during the years. Which doesn´t prevent many Sigma lenses to work perfectly well, as fex Toni Salmonelli just witnessed.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2017 at 07:22 UTC
In reply to:

Jun2: Not very sharp. May be, it need to be tested through MC-11 to Sony mirrorless cameras to eliminate focus misbehaviors.

@Henry McA: First part of your short rant was fine, true and all. The second, just a totally unnecessary piece of BS. "crap" at the level of cameras the Sony mirrorless system represents, is just not a word to use, At all. Regardless of if you may not like them, or just find them too expensive or so. But "crap"? No way. Says I, an Oly shooter. Is Oly "crap" too?

(If you just wanted to be funny or ironic, I´m fine! ;-) I didn´t read it that way)

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2017 at 07:13 UTC
In reply to:

Frank_BR: Illuminated controls? Hmmm... A virtuoso pianist would consider ridiculous a Steinway & Sons piano with illuminated keys. He does not need to see the keys to play the piano perfectly. Likewise, a real professional photographer does not need to see the controls of a camera; he knows them by touch.

So one must be a professional photog, also with a perfect working "body memory", in order to be interested of a Nikon D850??? So silly, just so silly an idea!!

I did use the Olympus E-620 for a couple of years. One of the nicer things it featured was, you believe me, its illuminated buttons!! SOO good to have. And NO negative thing to be had from the possibility of illumination, either.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 15:13 UTC
On article Ten things we're hoping for from the Nikon D850 (482 comments in total)
In reply to:

cgarrard: Illuminated controls... Olympus did that so long ago on a couple of its DSLR's. Loved that feature! (E620 anyone!)

Had it,(the E-620), liked it, and the illuminated buttons really were a treat!!

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 09:35 UTC

On top of that, a 10 minutes(!) lunch break. Give me a break, that´s just not ok!

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 04:36 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

MIC37: I've checked my camera by the number and it is affected according to the second recall. I believe, that if your serial number is included in present recall, it just means that this camera may be affected.
I've checked the camera trying to replicate the described issues and I do not see any of them because they are not present.
I will not send it in for repairs unless they exchange it for a brand new one.

You mean that because of this possible fault in your camera´s shutter, that also its display, the shutter button and ALL other parts are affected too? LIke "poisoned"?
So probable, not!

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 05:41 UTC
In reply to:

Mariano Pacifico: How in the world Nikon D750 got 90% Gold Award when

"... models produced between July 2014 through September 2014 and from July 2015 through September 2016." ...

had shutter issues? Shouldn't D750 deserve 65%?

Manufacture quality cannot, of course, be a factor when reviewing a camera, if DPR and others were not to wait a year or two before releasing their reviews. Reviews are to tell you about how the camera takes images, and how it is to handle and such.

IF you like a manufacture quality review score, then propose DPR to do that, but I´m in the belief that such a factor will never enter a formal review as a point they will talk about in general! Let even know about before like a year or two have passed after the camera´s release to market.

And that is only self most.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 05:37 UTC
In reply to:

Mariano Pacifico: Is it possible the cause of the shutter problem is because Nikon outsource the manufacturing in Thailand? Lookit above. MADE-IN-THAILAND !!!

Designed in Japan made in Thailand !


"outsource" normally means "letting another company make (manufacture) the product", are you sure the Thailand plant isn´t Nikon´s own?

I´m pretty positive it is a Nikon plant, thus it´s not outsourced, rather made by Nikon but by people born in another country than Japan.
Problem? They have worked with manufacture there for many many years by the way...

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 05:28 UTC
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: It's almost enough to make you feel sorry for them. Why is it that some companies are able to make the transition from complicated, mostly mechanical cameras to ridiculously complex electronic cameras with much difficulty, while others can't? Nothing in Leica's history points to electronics expertise so no surprise there, but Nikon made auto-everything cameras long before digital.

Are you sure this issue is not mechanical, or that it´s not only electrical?

To me it seems the fault is not mostly in the electrical domain, anyway, but I´m not sure about it.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 05:28 UTC
On article Canon unveils ultra-compact EOS Rebel SL2 / EOS 200D (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

LJ - Eljot: Honestly: What is so expensive at a second dial? Almost every manufacturer of cameras distinguishes the lower and the higher priced models thrue the presence of a second dial. They must be very complicated and expensive to implement.
And secondly: 95% - 0.54x Viewfinder? That is not very desireable.
For the rest: It looks very tempting, at least on paper.

Supposedly Canon think users will use Live View, thus will use the rear display. Since it has the dual AF system, I second Canon (if that is what they actually thought...) ;-)

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 09:18 UTC
In reply to:

Frank_BR: The best UWA lens (this 12-24mm); the best sports camera (A9), and "world-first all-rounder camera capable of both high resolution and 12 fps burst shooting with AF" (A99 II). Hat-trick by Sony.

The comment was of course written in the know that D4 was best "at the time", his point was (as I interpret it anyway) that we, today, can simply admit the fact that good sports images (as in "good images even today") could be made even "at that time", with what was then available. Which, also as I see it, makes todays top performers among cameras even more impressive!

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 07:53 UTC
In reply to:

Aberaeron: He's having a laugh [at our expense]! Everyone knows that Bergen is in Norway and looks like that. He's sending everyone to Switzerland instead, because there's just too many tourists in Norway.

"Bergüm" is not the same as "Bergen"! Which I´m pretty sure you do know...!!(?) ;-)

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2017 at 11:56 UTC
On article Nikon D3: The camera that changed everything (290 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gray Photography: Changed everything?

All it really changed was the perception that Nikon was no longer way behind the curve with their top line DSLR's.

The D3 wasn't a game changer, it was a ticket to the game for Nikon.

I agree with previous posters, the Canon EOS 5D was the camera from that era that changed the game.

@Gray Photography:
Depends on which game the talk is about!

Link | Posted on May 27, 2017 at 05:27 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (819 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tim Gander: Those that have been listed will be going up in value now. I'll add this one because I safely have two now, the Canon EOS 1N. Ok, it's a lump, it's loud and nowhere near as cool and chic as an F3, but it's built like a hammer, packed with incredible tech, has AF reliability that blows even some recent DSLRs away and I picked up a second one (the first I bought new circa 1998 and it's still going strong) on Ebay for £160 including the drive booster! Everyone wants the EOS 1V which is much pricier, but heck if you can't take a decent photo with the 1N, the 1V won't save you!

At the other end of the scale, I love my Konica Pop which I picked up from a charity shop for £15. They're a bit of a cult amongst the hipsters and you can easily pay £50 for one. Apart from the flash, there's almost nothing can go wrong with the Pop!

The original EOS-1 is absolutely very cool! Imho that is ;-)

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 22:16 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (819 comments in total)

Nice article, DPR! I´d like to add these:
Pentax ME
Olympus OM-1 and OM-2
Canon Canonet QL-17
Konica Hexar. I primarily mean the original fixed 35mm/2 lens model, albeit the Hexar RF was also one extremely superb camera. (Both of the Hexars tend to not be exactly cheap)

All were good cameras in their respecive niches, and all except the two Hexars are available pretty easily.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 22:14 UTC as 259th comment
Total: 179, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »