meanwhile

meanwhile

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Nov 14, 2009

Comments

Total: 663, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »
In reply to:

(unknown member): are you crazy to post pictures of people smoking ?

" They must not destroy their health so that they can stay alive and keep paying taxes"

It costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to treat lung cancer. It's also a horrible, disgusting death. Intense pain, sorrow for the family, and wasted energy that could be used to treat patients that didn't get there through their own negligence and selfishness. But hey.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2016 at 22:25 UTC
In reply to:

km25: The Nikon 105mm f2.5, that was a very sharp lens. This lens looks to be well make, at least in performance. I had a Leica R8 and there 100mm 2.8 micro. I had a picture very close to one you have here. I feel as if the Leica lens was sharper and had better out of focus the this lens, but not a great deal. seems like a nice lens. But so may companies are producing good lens now a days

And the Nikon 105mm DC (Defocus Control). Different lens than the Nikon 105/2.5 discussed here though.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2016 at 22:13 UTC
On article UPDATED: Sony a6300 real-world samples (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

sporanox: Iso 1600 appalling photos. Sony will not have my money.

Took the ISO1600 RAW into Capture One. It's beautiful.
What's your issue exactly?

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2016 at 22:52 UTC
In reply to:

Mariusz Potocki: Great news! Sony here I come with my Canon lenses!
Thank you Sigma!

Sigma and Canon mount *Sigma* lenses, and only 15 of those at this stage seem to be fully supported. It just depends what fully means.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 22:19 UTC
In reply to:

Mariusz Potocki: Great news! Sony here I come with my Canon lenses!
Thank you Sigma!

I'm not sure that it supports Canon lenses. Does it, Rishi?

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 21:13 UTC
In reply to:

Gesture: Deconstructs? Tear-down? Disassembly?
Not as titillating I guess.

Disassemble? DISASSEMBLE DEAD!

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2016 at 08:25 UTC

They had to do something. Casio kicked everyone's butt in this area.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2016 at 12:10 UTC as 54th comment
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (158 comments in total)

Looking at the manual lenses coming out the Laowa 105mm STF from Venus looks far more interesting than this one. There are way too many other 50/1.4-1.5 choices out there for this to be compelling at this price.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2016 at 07:29 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

BeaverTerror: I remember five years ago when some of the earliest mirrorless M43 cameras were coming out with touchscreens, and the legions of sheep on this site scrambling to point out that they'd never buy a camera with a touchscreen, that touchscreens were for smartphone plebs, and that physical controls were the only way to go.

And now, it's the other way around. Just goes to show that most people have absolutely no idea what they want or need.

"illiterate"

You keep using that word. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2016 at 04:17 UTC
In reply to:

BeaverTerror: I remember five years ago when some of the earliest mirrorless M43 cameras were coming out with touchscreens, and the legions of sheep on this site scrambling to point out that they'd never buy a camera with a touchscreen, that touchscreens were for smartphone plebs, and that physical controls were the only way to go.

And now, it's the other way around. Just goes to show that most people have absolutely no idea what they want or need.

You do realise you are one of the sheep, yes?

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 11:43 UTC
In reply to:

Joseph Mama: Is it just me or do these new advantages seem really minor?

I mean, how often are you spamming shots and have a desperate need to be able to see whats going on withiin that 2 seconds before the buffer fills up?

Secondly, I guess my 179 Autofocus points was somehow insufficient on my A6000? Having 425 is gonna have a huge difference?

In the meantime, NO stabilization which seemed like a shoo-in feature considering the A7 mark 2. Also, considering many of these lenses dont have stabilization already.

I guess the good news is that I won't be tempted to "upgrade" this year...

"fallaciously misapply the word"

Enough that it no longer holds any meaning in and of itself - IN RELATION TO NAMING OF CAMERAS, LENSES AND OTHER ELECTRONICS - not in relation to it's original meaning.

Seriously, TN already answered all this in his first answer. You can't tell anything from a name.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 07:55 UTC
In reply to:

Joseph Mama: Is it just me or do these new advantages seem really minor?

I mean, how often are you spamming shots and have a desperate need to be able to see whats going on withiin that 2 seconds before the buffer fills up?

Secondly, I guess my 179 Autofocus points was somehow insufficient on my A6000? Having 425 is gonna have a huge difference?

In the meantime, NO stabilization which seemed like a shoo-in feature considering the A7 mark 2. Also, considering many of these lenses dont have stabilization already.

I guess the good news is that I won't be tempted to "upgrade" this year...

"In this case, the word "mark" does mean "significant"."

No, it doesn't. In this case, or in your examples. It means line. Whether that line is a significant one, or not, is not included in the word.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 07:06 UTC
In reply to:

Joseph Mama: Is it just me or do these new advantages seem really minor?

I mean, how often are you spamming shots and have a desperate need to be able to see whats going on withiin that 2 seconds before the buffer fills up?

Secondly, I guess my 179 Autofocus points was somehow insufficient on my A6000? Having 425 is gonna have a huge difference?

In the meantime, NO stabilization which seemed like a shoo-in feature considering the A7 mark 2. Also, considering many of these lenses dont have stabilization already.

I guess the good news is that I won't be tempted to "upgrade" this year...

"Got it?"

I already had that.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 06:51 UTC
In reply to:

Joseph Mama: Is it just me or do these new advantages seem really minor?

I mean, how often are you spamming shots and have a desperate need to be able to see whats going on withiin that 2 seconds before the buffer fills up?

Secondly, I guess my 179 Autofocus points was somehow insufficient on my A6000? Having 425 is gonna have a huge difference?

In the meantime, NO stabilization which seemed like a shoo-in feature considering the A7 mark 2. Also, considering many of these lenses dont have stabilization already.

I guess the good news is that I won't be tempted to "upgrade" this year...

Sometimes a MK II upgrade is minor, yes. Sometimes a full number upgrade is minor. Sometimes a small number upgrade is major.

Your perception of this is yours, it's not intrinsically built in to the model numbers.

e.g. My perception of the model number a6300 vs a6000 is that it's not a minor upgrade at all. A minor upgrade would have been a6100.

But that's MY perception, not automatic reality.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 06:19 UTC
In reply to:

Joseph Mama: Is it just me or do these new advantages seem really minor?

I mean, how often are you spamming shots and have a desperate need to be able to see whats going on withiin that 2 seconds before the buffer fills up?

Secondly, I guess my 179 Autofocus points was somehow insufficient on my A6000? Having 425 is gonna have a huge difference?

In the meantime, NO stabilization which seemed like a shoo-in feature considering the A7 mark 2. Also, considering many of these lenses dont have stabilization already.

I guess the good news is that I won't be tempted to "upgrade" this year...

Adding Mark II really is no different to changing the last few numbers of a model number ... it's all just your own perception of what you think it means. How about a Mark II lens? That means pretty much exactly the same but slight improvements.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 06:12 UTC
In reply to:

Joseph Mama: Is it just me or do these new advantages seem really minor?

I mean, how often are you spamming shots and have a desperate need to be able to see whats going on withiin that 2 seconds before the buffer fills up?

Secondly, I guess my 179 Autofocus points was somehow insufficient on my A6000? Having 425 is gonna have a huge difference?

In the meantime, NO stabilization which seemed like a shoo-in feature considering the A7 mark 2. Also, considering many of these lenses dont have stabilization already.

I guess the good news is that I won't be tempted to "upgrade" this year...

"most people would agree" has not really been the case about many things, ever.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 06:08 UTC
In reply to:

Joseph Mama: Is it just me or do these new advantages seem really minor?

I mean, how often are you spamming shots and have a desperate need to be able to see whats going on withiin that 2 seconds before the buffer fills up?

Secondly, I guess my 179 Autofocus points was somehow insufficient on my A6000? Having 425 is gonna have a huge difference?

In the meantime, NO stabilization which seemed like a shoo-in feature considering the A7 mark 2. Also, considering many of these lenses dont have stabilization already.

I guess the good news is that I won't be tempted to "upgrade" this year...

"I mean, how often are you spamming shots and have a desperate need to be able to see whats going on withiin that 2 seconds before the buffer fills up?"

With the a6000, you kind of are just spamming. From the sounds of it (hard to know the truth of it yet) with the a6300 you will be able to accurately track it in real time. Makes it much less spray-and-pray.

"Secondly, I guess my 179 Autofocus points was somehow insufficient on my A6000? Having 425 is gonna have a huge difference?"

Pretty sure there are two main differences. One is the coverage, the a6000's are in the center third of the sensor, the a6300 covers the entire sensor. The other, from the videos anyway (hard to know in real use yet) is that it seems to use adjacent points in an intelligent way, "High-Density Tracking AF" as they call it.

How much of it is actual real-life advances, and how much is marketing bullish*t we won't know until it's out.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 00:19 UTC

Does the a6300 break the card writing speed of ~35MB/sec that all the other Sony cameras seem to be limited to?

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 00:11 UTC as 44th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

BostonC: The videos are nice. The tracking is the most impressive amoung MLI. But if in the middle of shooting video, you want to change the focus point, you have to use the thumb pad step..step left step...step down and recording all the garbage in between, w/o a touch screen to control the AF pt.

"or outright ignorance of its need altogether as is the case here"

Does that mean you discussed it with Sony and they didn't know what you were talking about?

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 10:06 UTC
In reply to:

humbala: I am confused.. Isn't a6000 can do 11 fps with continuous autofocus?

"Yes the a6000 can also do 11 fps with C-AF."-ish

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 10:05 UTC
Total: 663, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »