Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
when the sheep follow the herd
#1
This old article
https://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sonys-f...l-mistake/
#2
What a stupid article! To dig that out, interestingly shows how much Sony is still alive - and the shown model was not even their professional mirrorless which is the α9 :p The article is the big failure, not the mirrorless concept. It just doesn't show what you think about it but given the usual laziness in writing an own opinion by the posters who just throw in one link and waste others people time, while already searching for the next link.

Would you care to finish the sentence you started with "this old article... link..." and nothing more. Care to make an own statement or let others talk in your place? Are your trying to motivate someone to stop all this mirrorless errors, big failures and "will probably kill the brand" introductions of new cameras?

It never ever was a valid argument that mirrorless will automatically lead to smaller cameras, as hands will not get smaller - and if one wants to go small, use the smartphone, it will make sufficient pictures in 90% of everyday photos.
#3
Miro just wants the world to use the EOS 400D, because it is all that is ever needed and the last model before this "live view craze" (yeah, it really is that ancient).
#4
Wink 
(09-01-2018, 12:21 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: Miro just wants the world to use the EOS 400D, because it is all that is ever needed and the last model before this "live view craze" (yeah, it really is that ancient).

:-)
Live view is fantastic - My mirrorless Minolta Dimage 5 has one . My Canon 50D have it too - it is great it is fantastic. All smartphones including my latest huawei p20 pro has live view - it is mirrorless & has IBIS but it is to fancy for one dSLR guy

Talking about photography. Your best photograph that I have seen is the one with the boat at sunset/sunrise. How did you made it since canon 350D is crappy APS-C 8MP camera with no live view at all :-)
#5
I would not trust you to know what is good in photography, to be frank Wink
#6
And the point is...? That a clueless author publishing far-fetched attempts at analysis 2,5 years ago was wrong? Well, duh.
(I laughed a few times because that article was so fishy... like trying to push the image of a 24/2 lens instead of a 85/1.4 and drawing conclusions from that... or comparing the size of an APS-C lens to a full frame one with the same stats. To be honest I didn't really read through it because I have better things to do with my life so far. Smile)
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)