T3

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jul 1, 2003

Comments

Total: 3793, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

fberns: I never understood Samsung's insanely stupid camera division. It took them ages to build at least a bit of a lens slection that makes more or less sense. (Fuji did a much much better job with starting their lens programme) and finally they had a wonderful camera just to find out they better stop the whole thing?

I thought Samsung had a great lens selection. For example, they offered four pancake primes-- the 10/3.5, 16/2.4, 20/2.4, 30/2.0-- and a very compact 20-50/3.5-5.6 zoom. That was an excellent selection of compact lenses. In addition, they had the cool 16-50/2.0-2.8 zoom. Yep, 2.0-2.8! And the lens was still quite reasonably sized. And pretty much all of these lenses were more reasonably priced than Fuji's.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 22:00 UTC
In reply to:

mikeodial: I guess they are not out of the camera business after all...

Samsung has had 360 degree cameras for a while. This is just their latest one.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 15:28 UTC
In reply to:

T3: Sad to see Samsung leave the market. They really should have stuck it out a little longer. The NX1 was just too ahead of its time.

@Najinsky - it was ahead of its time in terms of mirrorless acceptance.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 14:10 UTC

Sad to see Samsung leave the market. They really should have stuck it out a little longer. The NX1 was just too ahead of its time.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 13:15 UTC as 78th comment | 3 replies

Manual focus on DSLRs...it's doable but I can't imagine doing it for any extended period of time. It's a pain in the butt. DSLR viewfinders just aren't designed for manual focus. For those who are truly interested in using manual focus lenses, I definitely recommend EVFs which offers focus peaking, focus magnification and even digital split image focusing aids (Fuji).

http://admiringlight.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/split_prism_full.jpg

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 13:12 UTC as 1st comment
On article Have it your way: which 24MP Canon should I buy? (226 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reactive: Waiting for an EOS 90D, with 4K and Digic 7 (or 8) processor.
If Canon don't manage that by early 2018, they should start closing their factories.

@john Clinch - There may be the odd person in the world who isn't sold on having anything more than one AF point in the center of the camera. But does that mean the rest of us should settle for that?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 13:03 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

rsf3127: Maybe an a6000 for half the price would be a wiser choice for the average user.

@vscd - Wow, what vacuous responses.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 12:58 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

rsf3127: Maybe an a6000 for half the price would be a wiser choice for the average user.

@vscd - Haha, the nice try is on you. First, you talk about how the $1300 G1X III is great for "normal people" who are "outside of tech-spec-gear-pr0n." Then you talk about how the Sony 16-50 is a "miserable" lens, even though it's a great lens for "normal people" who are "outside of tech-spec-gear-pr0n!" Haha, what hypocrisy! I do think that a $650 A6000 kit is a better fit for "normal people" who are "outside of tech-spec-gear-pr0n." It's half as expensive, and gives people room to grow. It would be a different story if the G1X III was also $650, or even $850, but it's neither of these things.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 22:56 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

rsf3127: Maybe an a6000 for half the price would be a wiser choice for the average user.

@vscd - "While the only lens form Sony which has the same formsize is plain miserable. (16-50)."

I think you're being a bit of a hypocrite. The only people who are really going to say that the 16-50 is "miserable" are those inside the "tech-spec-gear-pr0n" bubble. I've shot countless travel/leisure photos with the 16-50 and it's definitely not miserable unless you're a "tech-spec-gear-pr0n" pixel-peeper and measurebater, lol. The reality is that the 16-50mm is definitely a great choice "for families or people outside of tech-spec-gear-pr0n", while still giving them the option to swap it out for one or two other lenses as needed. For the price, I would definitely encourage anyone "outside of tech-spec-gear-pr0n" sphere to opt for an A6000 kit. You can get a great A6000 kit with two lenses for $850.

https://www.amazon.com/Mirrorless-Digital-Camera-Bundle-Graphite/dp/B072ND2N5J/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?ie=UTF8&qid=1508364425&sr=8-1-spons&keywords=a6000+kit&psc=1

Great for families and travel.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 22:10 UTC
On article Meet the Canon PowerShot G1 X III (292 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photomonkey: Again we hear the lamentations and groaning in the land.
I wanted 60p 4K!
I wanted at least a constant f2 zoom!
I want pocketability!
I want it for $300!!!!.
"let me show you the equivalence shame".

@Photomonkey - I think you should probably count yourself as a complainer. Except that you're not complaining about any concrete feature or spec. You're just complaining about the complainers, lol.

I think people are perfectly reasonable to voice what they don't like about a product. I'm less supportive of people who are simply complaining about those who are voicing what they don't like about a particular product as if that product is their own child or something.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 21:56 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

rsf3127: Maybe an a6000 for half the price would be a wiser choice for the average user.

@vscd - I wouldn't say that it's an issue of counting how many times or how often, but rather than you can. For example, I probably have the 16-50mm kit lens on most of the time, but there will be days when I'm only shooting with the 35/1.8 OSS. For portraits, I mount the 50/1.8 OSS. For travel, I can't imagine being without the 10-18/4 OSS. Obviously, someone buying a G1X III can't do any of these things.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 20:50 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

rsf3127: Maybe an a6000 for half the price would be a wiser choice for the average user.

@vscd - "ask the owners of a Ricoh GR, Sony RX1 or Fuji X100S (me)... how often do you change the lens?"

So you want me to ask users of fixed lens cameras how often they change lenses? LOL, yeah that makes perfect sense.

"This is a cam for the car or for vacations."

And a camera like an A6000 with 16-50mm pancake zoom isn't for the car or vacations? That's a bit ridiculous. Like I said, the size and weight are pretty darn close. I literally have an A6000 + 16-50 with me in my messenger bag (or in my car) every day. It's a very small package. And I still have the option to swap out the lens. I simply can't see anyone making any sane argument that a Sony AXXXX camera is too big and heavy for "the car or for vacations."

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 16:10 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

rsf3127: Maybe an a6000 for half the price would be a wiser choice for the average user.

@vscd - They are actually quite close in size and weight.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#535.360,723,ha,f

G1X III is 13.2mm taller because of the protruding viewfinder hump and hotshoe. The A6XXX is 5mm longer in body, and maybe about 7mm deeper with the 16-50mm lens mounted. So there's not a huge difference between them. A6000 with 16-50 is 61g heavier. Depends on if you want minimum in size, or a bit more size and weight but with greater flexibility to change lenses. I think it'd rather take a little bit more size and weight, in exchange for lens interchangeability.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 23:35 UTC
On article Meet the Canon PowerShot G1 X III (292 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photomonkey: Again we hear the lamentations and groaning in the land.
I wanted 60p 4K!
I wanted at least a constant f2 zoom!
I want pocketability!
I want it for $300!!!!.
"let me show you the equivalence shame".

@Photomonkey
How many people are really complaining that it doesn't fit in the pocket? What percentage of people? How many people are really comparing it to an NEX 3? What percentage of people? You're really making some ridiculous generalizations.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 23:11 UTC
In reply to:

ottonis: This is a bad joke, isn't it? A Sony A6000 + kit lens costs around 600 US-Dollars and is just as small or even smaller / more compact than this G1Xmiii camera, while performig as well or better (IQ, AF. fps, video etc)
So, Canon charges more than twice the money for the same (or lesser) value? How is this not a joke?

@Najinsky - "The irony is that A6000 was introduced as the fast AF on the market, but what use fast AF if it's slow to set the AF point?"

I have my A6000 set to Face AF and center-point AF. When there is no face in the scene, the camera defaults to center AF. When a face appears in the scene, it switches to Face AF. Very fast, flexible and effective. This is as fast or faster than touch AF. Touch AF is great, but I've found that the combination of Face AF and center AF to be highly effective. And considering its low price, it's a reasonable compromise. The A6000 is the best bang for your buck in the marketplace right now and has been for quite some time. It's a great camera and packs a lot of performance in a very compact package, for a great price. I've traveled with it throughout the world in all kinds of nasty conditions, and it has survived just fine. Is the G1X III worth several hundred dollars more, and you lose the ability to change lenses? No, I don't think so.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 22:53 UTC
In reply to:

Chris59: Why would anyone buy a Canon G1X Mark III over an SL2? Same sensor, inferior specifications and twice the price...

DLSRs are big. Even the SL2 is a big camera compared to the G1XIII, or even an APS-C mirrorless camera.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#723,715.377,535.360,ha,t

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 22:42 UTC
In reply to:

Zoom Zoom Zoom: :
It used to be that we bought finished products based on what they did. Now we buy unfinished products based on what they might do in the future. The only immediacy that hasn't changed with the times, is the fact that just as before, we still need to pay them upfront.

We feed the people that make the machines that control us, live in the hopes of one day they delivering as promised, and perpetually stay prisoners of the follow-up purchase that will repeat the cycle.

And you wanna talk about "pictures"? Do you even know what's wrong with THIS picture? Unfortunately, everything!

First of all, no one is making you buy the product right now. People can choose to buy the product as it is right now. Others can wait until later. That's freedom of choice. Frankly, I like that I can buy a good product that has the capability to get even better with further updates.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 20:15 UTC
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Companies should really consider shipping fully developed products instead of having users pay to be beta tester

We're not talking about toothbrushes or shovels here. Products as advanced and complex as today's smartphones are going through a constant state of evolution and maturation. It's like saying, "Don't leave the house until you are a fully mature adult, mentally and physically!" That's not realistic. I think it's great that many of today's products have the opportunity to improve, get better, and gain capabilities even after they've entered the real world...just like people do.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 20:08 UTC
On article Meet the Canon PowerShot G1 X III (292 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photomonkey: Again we hear the lamentations and groaning in the land.
I wanted 60p 4K!
I wanted at least a constant f2 zoom!
I want pocketability!
I want it for $300!!!!.
"let me show you the equivalence shame".

Who here has said that they want a pocketable 4K constant f/2 zoom for $300? I think most critiques have been pretty reasonable.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 17:48 UTC
In reply to:

jwasturias: Makes you wonder that after so many years of digital photography evolution, we can still not make A truly pocketable full frame compact like the contax tvs iii ,35mm film compact with tiny zoom?
Such as this. https://goo.gl/images/Qr17XY

Lens may be slow, but it is small and full frame cover, and truly pocketable.
I almost bought one in the good old days.

I guess we have to wait for variable curved sensors?

@Gmon750- the electronics required for a device to be "a still-camera, video camera, audio-recording, and GPS-mapper" are not that large. You can cram all of those things into an ultra-thin smartphone that is mostly battery, after all. Stills and video are performed by the same components. Audio recording is a trivial matter. And a GPS chip is a tiny little thing.

http://zdnet4.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/2014/10/04/ade723c3-4b73-11e4-b6a0-d4ae52e95e57/18ce61281145ae37ffd8847588750367/iphonegps02bsm.jpg

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 00:07 UTC
Total: 3793, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »