Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
The Perfect Camera
Page <<first <prev 9 of 10 next>
Aug 2, 2015 11:21:02   #
JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA
 
Blasthoff wrote:
Hey, you had to remind me? I was nine years old and my dream was shattered. My one redemption was a couple of years later, the Mets came along. After years of some of the worst Baseball ever played, there was the "Miracle of '69". I've had to hang on to that, since I've been a Cub fan for the last 35 years.
:mrgreen:


Oh, I was a Cub fan too. Lived in Chicago 1984 to 1987.

Reply
Aug 2, 2015 12:19:41   #
Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City
 
Mirror less are the future and everyone will eventually realize that. Sony has leaped ahead of Nikon and Canon and it will take a long time for them to catch up

Reply
Aug 2, 2015 13:01:21   #
JPL
 
RichardSM wrote:
Sorry your feelings are hurt, the bulk of the folks here on the UHH are what they are bias towards NIKON and don't like CANON people much either, but so what just take it with a grain of salt! You're adult don't let this petty crap get to you. If your happy with SONY do what you do best take your photo's.?


My feelings are not hurt at all, I have no feelings towards cameras and I am not reviewing any cameras or comparing them. I am just informing people about the fact how misleading it is to seek info on Snapcrap and supporting this fact with examples.

Reply
 
 
Aug 2, 2015 17:10:14   #
RichardSM Loc: Back in Texas
 
JPL wrote:
My feelings are not hurt at all, I have no feelings towards cameras and I am not reviewing any cameras or comparing them. I am just informing people about the fact how misleading it is to seek info on Snapcrap and supporting this fact with examples.


Okay if you say so?

Reply
Aug 2, 2015 18:24:29   #
livingeyes
 
I wonder how many really famous photos were taken with a sub standard camera?

Reply
Aug 2, 2015 18:32:51   #
SwedeUSA2
 
livingeyes wrote:
I wonder how many really famous photos were taken with a sub standard camera?


What is a "sub standard camera"?

Reply
Aug 2, 2015 18:38:55   #
livingeyes
 
Good question. I guess the perfect camera is the one you have with you when you need the shot.

Reply
 
 
Aug 2, 2015 19:10:04   #
wingclui44 Loc: CT USA
 
It's no single camera as a perfect camera, the one you have right now is the perfect one for you, if not, you won't have bought it any way! New camera coming out like flower blooming every month with new stuff, can anybody be able to catch up with them?
No system or camera is superior than the others, it all depends on the handler,

Reply
Aug 2, 2015 19:40:07   #
rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA
 
JPL wrote:
No, this is by far the worst website to compare cameras, they are not fair, they are not honest, they do not base their comparisons on facts or specs, they are lazy and their comparisons are worthless. The trend that you will see if you investigate their comparisons carefully is that older cameras are always better than new cameras. Do you really think that is true?

If we look at the comparison you are doing, Sony A7II vs Nikon D7200, the Nikon gets 50 points for popularity and Sony gets 5. This popularity has only to do with the age of the camera. The older a camera gets, the more accumulated lookup's does it have on the internet, and that is how they decide that the Nikon is so much better than the Sony because this number alone accounts for about 90% of the difference of the cameras. And what does this popularity have to do with the quality of the camera in any way? It is not like this is even reflecting how many cameras have been sold. This number should not be in such comparison at all. This is to explain how they always rate older cameras higher than newer.

Another thing in the score is that the Nikon gets 40,9 points for image quality, the Sony gets 0. That basically means that when Snapsort was testing the Sony it did not deliver any images at all as I understand it. But we know that is not possible unless they were too lazy to put a battery in it so I guess they were lazy and did not bother to take any pics to check the image quality or look it up at any other real website that has this info, they did not even bother to use the numbers from the last model temporarily if no numbers were available for the new model. So they just say that the Sony does not make any images at all. This is neither fair or honest and lazy too because they are not looking for the most important information they are basing their score on. So they are not fair and honest, but they are lazy. And in their evaluation this is the second most important score for a camera.

And there is a lot more about the cameras they are not comparing at all, info that is useful for the possible buyer of a camera, some would be in favor of Nikon, other of Sony. But it really does not matter because Snapsort is a Snapcrap when it comes to camera comparison.
No, this is by far the worst website to compare ca... (show quote)


The problem with Snapsort is not lack of honesty, but the fact that the generated results are entirely automated, with virtually no human input. Someone initially enters the data for each camera, and software does all the rest. Bad programming? Sure. When data is missing, it comes up negative or borrows data from a previous model. Then of course the comparision results are faulty and scores are skewed and meaningless. And there's no one on the other end making corrections to missing or faulty data either. If Snapsort incorrectly claims your DSLR does not have a viewfinder, three years later it still says the camera does not have a viewfinder! Although we like to believe there's a real person creating the scores for us, in reality it's just software doing it.

Reply
Aug 2, 2015 20:18:01   #
CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!
 
^^^This indicates a DELIBERATE move on someone's part to give a FALSE impression.

Using the wrong information to give a so-called camera comparison in this case is not accidental.

Reply
Aug 2, 2015 20:26:21   #
James Slick Loc: Pittsburgh,PA
 
livingeyes wrote:
I wonder how many really famous photos were taken with a sub standard camera?


A hell of a lot of "famous" photos were taken with ordinary "box cameras","Brownies","Polaroids"
and "Instamatics" - Light and photographer make the picture,

Reply
 
 
Aug 2, 2015 20:27:17   #
Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City
 
It's all in the eye and some luck

Reply
Aug 2, 2015 20:34:15   #
James Slick Loc: Pittsburgh,PA
 
Mickey Mantle wrote:
It's all in the eye and some luck


Go Yankees! (and

Reply
Aug 2, 2015 20:34:53   #
Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City
 
What I mean by luck is you need to be in the right place at the right time and realize you are there

Reply
Aug 3, 2015 00:29:11   #
plessner Loc: North Dakota
 
JimH123 wrote:
The Sony A7ii is realy good, but the new A7Rii that is just starting to ship is even better. Watch for reviews to start being posted on line.


Do both of these cameras use the E mount lenses?

Reply
Page <<first <prev 9 of 10 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.