quatpat

Lives in Greece Athens, Greece
Works as a Product Designer
Joined on Sep 16, 2007

Comments

Total: 82, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Tungsten Nordstein: Why is Instagram being singled out over this phenomenon? Why not photography as a whole?

@Tungsten Nordstein: With those links you sort of give the "proof" yourself - "Normal" photographers can take nature photos without having to put themselves into them, while Instagram is largely selfie-driven, causing in this case the destruction of the tree. Maybe not the fault of Instagram, but of the bunch of idiots that compete for selfies on it.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 07:08 UTC
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: Not natural. Looks like in-camera over sharpening. Noise control on the background is terrible.

The "noise control on the background" is called "bokeh", and is not terrible at all, it's just what a 400mm f6.3 lens can produce.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2018 at 06:41 UTC
In reply to:

Scott Pickering: I don't see why Canon is number one, other then marketing. It is the least innovative of the three companies (Canon, Nikon, Sony) and is using more old technology in their cameras then the other 2. They especially are lacking in their sensor technology. Yet Canon hold the number 1 spot. I used to be a Canon guy, but switched long ago when they couldn't keep up.

@arbux - No, it took me about 2 hours to learn it, but not everyone has that level of learning ability... ;-)

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 09:42 UTC
In reply to:

Scott Pickering: I don't see why Canon is number one, other then marketing. It is the least innovative of the three companies (Canon, Nikon, Sony) and is using more old technology in their cameras then the other 2. They especially are lacking in their sensor technology. Yet Canon hold the number 1 spot. I used to be a Canon guy, but switched long ago when they couldn't keep up.

@Tom Holly - Sony's menu system is not appalling, it's just not what you are used to. I use Sony cameras for 10 years and don't have any problem with the menu system.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 07:01 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: No mention of Olympus in the headline?

@Mukul Chaudhuri - Can you tell me in which way is "Canon tops Sony in mirrorless" supposed to be a promotion for Sony...?

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 06:57 UTC
In reply to:

Slapstick Noir: So, with the TC it becomes 200-500 f/5.6, and you're paying 12k for the coatings and the golden ring? Or they're trying to convince you, it's going to be 10x better than the existing 200-500? Really?!
Can't wait to see the proof!

Nope, it will become a 252-560mm f/5.6 lens. And, it will also be a 400mm f/4 lens and a 180mm f4 lens, all of which the 200-500 is not. Plus, it will probably be sharper, have faster and more capable AF, better build quality, weather sealing, and internal zooming. And, probably less sample variation.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 09:52 UTC
In reply to:

otto k: Ooooh, I read that as T/1.4 and went blank for a while....

That would make a 50kg lens, at least... :-)

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 09:46 UTC
In reply to:

FantasticMrFox: Oh, look, another Frenchman who refuses to speak English. Germans do it, Italians do it, Norwegians do it - but not the French, oh no!

You posted your reply while I was writing my comment. Nevertheless, your initial statement sounds about as idiotic as can possibly be.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2018 at 19:09 UTC
In reply to:

jaykumarr: I took some photos like these birds, but deleted them thinking they are not good.

If you deleted them, then probably the photos WERE not good...!

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2018 at 18:55 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: I loved that the documentary so aptly and beautifully conveys that wildlife photography (...like most types of photography...) is more about the ability to pause, wait and see and recognizing the "discourse" of light than about anything else.

I was frustrated, though, that such a masterly done narrative and build-up led to so few final actual shots.

Why don't you check out his portfolio for the shots? It's all there in front of your nose, just click on his website link and enjoy the photos.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2018 at 17:46 UTC
In reply to:

FantasticMrFox: Oh, look, another Frenchman who refuses to speak English. Germans do it, Italians do it, Norwegians do it - but not the French, oh no!

Wow, FantasticMrFox... you must be RALLY fantastic to think that everybody should talk, and every movie should be made, in YOUR language, just because you haven't managed to learn a few other languages yourself. In case you hadn't noticed, there are also subtitles, but I guess reading english isn't really for you either...!

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2018 at 17:37 UTC
In reply to:

ZeBebito: That's why I never fund Kickstarter crap. I rather pay full retail than giving my money to scammers and then deal with reality.

I agree.
Too many beautifully advertised scams, with the only goal to grasp as much $$$ as possible, before going "bankrupt".

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2017 at 21:43 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III review (611 comments in total)
In reply to:

KLO82: So compared to G5X/ G7XII/ RX100V, use a larger sensor, and then lower the light gathering capability by using a slower lens. So whats the point?! Thanks a lot dpreview for publishing the equivalent aperture graph!

@GaryP: The lower noise at higher ISO's is great, but the slower lens practically eliminates this advantage. In fact, you might be getting less noise on a 1" Sensor shot at f2.8, compared to an APS-C Sensor shot at f5.6 at the same equivalent focal lenth / field of view. So, the question of "what's the point" is really justified.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2017 at 06:40 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III review (611 comments in total)
In reply to:

GaryJP: My favourite compact camera I've owned so far. And yes, I have owned some from Fujifilm and some in the RX100 series but couldn't stand the ergonomics and don't much like the colour. It seems a bit meaningless to be comparing the lens with ILC cameras rather than compacts. The bar often gets mysteriously raised on Canon reviews.

Incidentally I have the G5X and the G7XII and am liking the images I get from this one more, even in low light.

"The bar often gets mysteriously raised on Canon reviews."... Maybe because it has a much larger APS-C sensor than the 1" competition...? ;-) Not that mysterious after all...!

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2017 at 23:44 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III review (611 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boeing skipper: Soft lens? Are we talking about the same camera? This does not look any softer than the RX100 series to me.

The test charts don't show the entire zoom range, so a lens can be sharp at one focal length, but softer at another. I agree that it looks rather sharper than the RX100 V in RAW in the test charts, but don't forget that the RX100 has a 1" sensor, compared to the APS-C on the G1X III. I own the original RX100, and it has a very sharp lens at all focal lenths, except at the wide corners.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2017 at 05:49 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III review (611 comments in total)
In reply to:

Docno: Forget jacket-pocketable. Like much of the world, I live in a tropical climate. Even in my 'Canadian period', I didn’t wear a jacket in the summers. The original Sony RX100 fit easily into my jeans pocket; my RX100iv does not (comfortably) and so stays home most of the time. And I wouldn’t make the attempt with this camera. I just wish some company would go back to the dimensions of the original RX100 with good IQ ... I don’t need a viewfinder etc in a compact camera. I just want it to be COMPACT...

@Docno - Yes, all iterations of the RX100 are still available pretty much anywhere. I see that in the U.S. they sell the orignial RX100 around 448 USD, which is quite a bit more than here in Switzerland at around 360 USD. At the U.S. price level you might also look at the slightly cheaper priced Canon G9 X II which is even more pocketable, although with a bit less good IQ than the RX100.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2017 at 05:35 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III review (611 comments in total)
In reply to:

Docno: Forget jacket-pocketable. Like much of the world, I live in a tropical climate. Even in my 'Canadian period', I didn’t wear a jacket in the summers. The original Sony RX100 fit easily into my jeans pocket; my RX100iv does not (comfortably) and so stays home most of the time. And I wouldn’t make the attempt with this camera. I just wish some company would go back to the dimensions of the original RX100 with good IQ ... I don’t need a viewfinder etc in a compact camera. I just want it to be COMPACT...

Why not just get the original RX100? I just bought one, brand new, for around 380$ including a little rubber grip for better handling. The image quality is outstanding, and for the price this little thing really rocks - and it is... pocketable! (Though I keep it in my jacket rather than putting it into the jeans and sitting on it :-)

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2017 at 18:37 UTC
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: Global Warming bull. Hey guess what animals including Polar bears get old and they die. They get diseases and everything else we also get. It is natures way and it has always been this way.

@Whitesands... No, I didn't get "the memo" and I do not know where you got your highly credible conspiracy information from, but the one thing I do know is that I live on another planet than you do. (Which I am happy about ;-)

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 08:38 UTC
In reply to:

Thomartin: I am honestly appaled at the top comments being in denial of climate change and the general impact of pollution on our environment. Sure the bear might have been sick, and all bears die, but the number of bears dying indicates a very fast change in their environment. The analysis performed on dead bears reveal abnormal metal concentration ( nowadays a common sight with predators) and we observe ice is shrinking, and therefore the behavior of their preys evolcves as well, making them harder to catch. But, you're right climato sceptics, maybe their disparition has to do wih the illuminati, or star alignment, or the maya calendar.

I am actually curious to know what kind of proof could convince you that this is a real deal. Since many of you deny scientific studies, claiming they are bias without even caring about the arguments and evidences. Funny enough, I am yet to come across a rightful study denying man-induced climate change ( went through 400 papers based on wrong hypothesis).

You might not have been flooded yet by the oceans yet, but the rising temperatures can also affect the brain...! ;-)

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 08:05 UTC
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: Global Warming bull. Hey guess what animals including Polar bears get old and they die. They get diseases and everything else we also get. It is natures way and it has always been this way.

How nice it must be, to live in total and utter denial and ignorance!

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 07:57 UTC
Total: 82, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »