Alex Moscow

Joined on May 29, 2013

Comments

Total: 12, showing: 1 – 12

Looking at Nikon Z and this Canon we must accept: industrial espionage in Japan is routine

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2018 at 08:04 UTC as 49th comment | 1 reply
On article Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM review (592 comments in total)

Some guys describe back/front focus issues with this lens, seems Sigma does it with salling their USB-dock on the back of its mind (almost kidding :-)
My lens had +5 from the start... luckily, corrected fully with AF fine-tuning on my Nikon

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2018 at 07:29 UTC as 16th comment
On article Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM review (24 comments in total)

Got mine few weeks ago, for Nikon. Cheked for potential back/front focus issues carefully. Zero correction, hurray! (my 50 mm Sigma Art had had +5 initially and took a lot of time spending with dock station)

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2018 at 07:17 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Sony Alpha 7R Review (810 comments in total)

Is this the end on mirror-stuffed, big-bodied heavy weighters?
The only thing is left: to prove new Sony lenses are up to the expectations

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2014 at 07:35 UTC as 100th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS 70D Review (680 comments in total)

This conclusion page is a great example of diplomacy: lots of secondary points, like handling etc., and nothing about pictures relative quality.
Should we read it "nothing to boast"?
Nikon 7100 in this reviews shows better picture at the same price level, then - what we buy cameras for?

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2013 at 07:33 UTC as 136th comment
On article Fujifilm XQ1 First Impressions Review (163 comments in total)

Sony has proven itself with its RX100/100 II. Isn't it just a mee too thing, this new Fuji? Somewhere in the middle of the compact class...

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2013 at 05:51 UTC as 34th comment
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 II Review (512 comments in total)
In reply to:

Serenity Now: What's the food in the white bowl?

No idea. But I am sure it is good for a pint of ...

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2013 at 09:50 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 II Review (512 comments in total)

I feel lots of compassion to those folks who try to compare RX100 to one or another camera. But: to me the reason to compare only within the compact class comes from the class itself – it is a pocket gadget, period. When you do not walk around with a DSLR or another medium/large camera, but pretend to have a fair quality shot at ones – is this Sony a good choice, regarding the sharpness, responsiveness, manual or auto handling, dynamic range, ability to have a good crop afterwards or adjusting the RAW? And for what $? My experience with the RX100 answers me “yes”. Right from the beginning I was missing movable LCD, true. Hot shoe? – I was not. The final question: am I happy with the pictures, without arguing the comparisons with the canons or whatever? – YES. If I was selecting a pocket camera now, would I go for the ungraded RX100 – no doubts. Because I am getting great pictures from it.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2013 at 09:37 UTC as 91st comment
On article Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm 1:4G ED VR review (6 comments in total)

Nikon 16-35 is a very nicely working tool as long as you stay with the prints below A3 - at this and bigger format lateral areas are far from being called sharp. All other characteristics are fairly described in this dpreview.com post and some others tests. People who look for lanscape photografy of high quality/forrmat should consider a different lense - I mean some sort of a fix e.g. Nikon AF-S 28mm f/1.8G. Plus you'll get more light with such alternative.
Again, if you are happy with magnification up to A4 - no problem with this lense, no any at all.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2013 at 11:12 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply
On article Bad Weather = Good Photography (77 comments in total)
In reply to:

ironcam: Watch Josef Hoflehner''s work to see some amazing bad weather photos.

http://www.josefhoflehner.com/patience/33.html

thanks, I enjoyed it a lot

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2013 at 06:10 UTC
On article Bad Weather = Good Photography (77 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thatcannonguy: Exposure seems to be random. These pictures should not have been published. They are simply not good enough. Especially with this hardware in mind.

100 percent true

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2013 at 05:56 UTC
On article Bad Weather = Good Photography (77 comments in total)

Very righ location for demonstrating the bad weather -Scotland, isn't it? I put only 3 examples of those in my own gallery, and I have dozens more. Author's pictures do not prove much - I agree with Thatcannonguy's comment

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2013 at 05:56 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
Total: 12, showing: 1 – 12