Mike99999

Joined on Feb 7, 2012

Comments

Total: 601, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »
In reply to:

eno2: The image quality is fantastic and ISO 6400 is extremely clean!

I'm sorry, but I have to reply to this nonsense.

The ISO 6400 samples provided here are mush. Towards the edges of the frame, it looks like a blurred image. There is no sharpness or detail to speak of. High-ISO performance is abysmal here.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 09:55 UTC
On article Olympus E-M1 Mark II Iceland sample gallery (83 comments in total)

Wow, just wow. $2,000 for images that look like they were taken with a compact. Underwhelming.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 09:33 UTC as 23rd comment | 6 replies

$2,000

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 09:31 UTC as 150th comment | 5 replies

Oh boy... dictionaries will have to be rewritten as that Surface Dial gives new dimensions to the word "useless."

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2016 at 11:37 UTC as 17th comment
In reply to:

Daft Punk: I still remember when Microsoft was the evil empire and Apple was the plucky minority offering resistance.

Now the too have swapped roles.

Who would have thought it?

That new surface looks like a lovely piece of kit..

Have you ever owned a Surface? If you would, you'd know what you are saying is nonsense. No roles were swapped. Microsoft is still broken.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2016 at 11:34 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2222 comments in total)
In reply to:

GarysInSoCal: CERTAIN DEATH to any decent (or even great) DSLR is 'very limited lens selection'. Sorry Fuji... hello Nikon D500!

@VisualFX: "What lens do they lack that you "think you need"?"

Something similar to the Nikon 300/4 PF (lightweight) and 200-500/5.6 (affordable range).

The Fuji 100-400 is a piece of junk.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2016 at 20:28 UTC
On article Video: Sony a6500 First Look (339 comments in total)
In reply to:

Everythingis1: I'm starting to believe that either a lot of people who use this website are idiots, or there are just a huge amount of paid marketers constantly trash talking everything about their competitors on the most popular websites. It just doesn't make any sense for their to be so much non-nonsensical trash talk about freeking digital cameras.

Paid trolls are a thing now. Fuji is leading the pack.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2016 at 09:22 UTC
On article Video: Sony a6500 First Look (339 comments in total)
In reply to:

tom1234567: There is just no way the Sony a6500 is worth a £100 more than the Fuji X-T2.

Tom G

"bang for buck APS-C lens system"

Crop lenses are per definition not "bang for buck" because their resale value drops much quicker than full frame lenses. In the long term, they are significantly more expensive.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2016 at 16:08 UTC
On article Video: Sony a6500 First Look (339 comments in total)
In reply to:

tom1234567: There is just no way the Sony a6500 is worth a £100 more than the Fuji X-T2.

Tom G

IBIS is priceless. I'd even get Olympus over Fuji.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2016 at 16:04 UTC
On article Video: Sony a6500 First Look (339 comments in total)
In reply to:

thoth22: Entertaining buffer test by steve huff - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMn4dkLVNxg

Steve gets paid by referral commission. If he berates a product nobody is going to click his link and buy it. You just have to read into how positive he is and look at his sample photos.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2016 at 16:00 UTC
On article Video: Sony a6500 First Look (339 comments in total)
In reply to:

five5pho: I m not a someone who would buy this camera, but like or not Sony will sooner or later get to the top of professional cameras we use.

Sony and Nikon need to merge their camera businesses as ASAP as possible.

Nikon needs the sensors and the mirrorless system.
Sony needs the professional services and the long lenses.

If not it's just going to be crippled Canon mush from here on out.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2016 at 15:58 UTC
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art real world sample gallery (216 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alexdi: I wonder if the first-party makes understand the extent to which I, and people like me, are building entire systems around lenses like this? That this is the starting point? The press goes to the camera bodies, but it's compelling glass that gets me to your brand, not your ability to fire off 300 frames at 11 FPS.

I spend a lot of time in the backcountry, so my current kit is the product of weight constraints. If I could justify a second kit for daily use, I'd build one around a full-frame DSLR, this lens, and Sigma's 85/1.4. Which DSLR? Whichever one has the most megapixels and the highest DR in a compact package.

The correct way to build a camera kit is indeed first looking at the lenses you need, and then finding a body that fits.

Unfortunately, 99% of the buyers are obsessed with specs, and lenses are an afterthought.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2016 at 15:09 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Fujifilm Interview (116 comments in total)
In reply to:

raindance: To me Fuji represents everything that is exciting about the art of photography. While Canon and Nikon continue to churn out good, but very status quo products and Sony seems like a lost puppy trying to figure out what they want to be, Fuji concentrates on what diehard passionate photographers want. No this isn't fanboyism, I own several brands (Canon, Sony) and just have a deeper connection with Fuji products. Thank you Fuji for making photography great again ;)

You sound like a paid shill.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2016 at 02:06 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Fujifilm Interview (116 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Davinator: Some valid points. I agree that there is little to gain for them to move to a 35mm FF system....the differences are marginal and would rarely show in print or display media. MF was definitely a good move to provide higher quality than the current X series, as well as any existing 35mm system.

The reasoning behind APSC and full frame is economy of scales. All components are cheaper.

The only reason why Fuji can't do full frame is because Sony won't supply them that sensor.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2016 at 02:05 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Fujifilm Interview (116 comments in total)
In reply to:

Androole: "The difference between APS-C and full-frame is too marginal, so there was no point. So we decided to go for a bigger sensor format, to show a clear differentiation from APS-C."

I know they need to keep repeating that statement because that is their marketing goal to differentiate their camera. But when you look at it objectively, it rings a bit hollow.

After all, the difference between APS-C and FF (1 1/4 EV) is only a little bit less in photographic terms than the difference between 1" and APS-C (1 2/3 EV), and no one seems to view those as "too marginal" a difference.

Likewise, people seem to think there's a big difference between M4/3 and APS-C. But it's only just over 2/3 EV, about the same as the 3/4 EV difference between 44x33 and 36x24 FF. Both of those are half as much as the difference between APS-C and FF.

Seems there are "marginal" differences all over when looking at sensor size, but the numbers show that APS-C is firmly on the "smaller sensor" side of the spectrum.

They have to repeat this mantra because Sony refuses to supply them a full frame sensor.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2016 at 02:03 UTC
On article Hands-on and in-depth with the Sony a6500 (556 comments in total)
In reply to:

Theelderkeynes: So now Fuji have some competition in the APS-C mirrorless market?

I can easily spin this around: Fuji X lenses don't offer an upgrade path to full frame. This is important to many people. Ask Nikon and Canon.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 14:09 UTC
In reply to:

Kostasm: sony should make dedicated aps-c lenses if they want to seriously support these cameras. It's like a joke showing this small body with a g lens.

Most A6x00 users I know use FF lenses on their APS-C camera, very similar to all the Canon users I know. I wonder why?

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 13:13 UTC

Judging from the trollfest in these comments, many Canon and Fuji affectionados are getting their panties in a bundle over this lens.

This lens seals the deal for Canon being an outdated system.

The Batis, Loxia, Sony Zeiss and GM lens lines have taken away Fujis crown of most desirable mirrorless lenses.

I can understand why people are lashing out.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 06:12 UTC as 13th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

ogl: new Pentax 70-200/2.8 is $1,796.95

Pentax is old tech, not mirrorless.

A Canon 70-200/2.8 non IS can be had for $1000.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 05:57 UTC
In reply to:

Suave: Good news for Sony users. They've waited long enough.

You said Sony users. A-mount is Sony.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 05:54 UTC
Total: 601, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »