Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DPReview.com to close

dpreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 387 posts

Re: DPReview.com to close

#171

Post by radicaldreamer »

akho wrote: post #169
vvrm wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> another victim of the rapid pace of improvement in smartphones It's not just the pace of improvement, but also the marketing spin. I find the strengths of smartphone camera and ILCs pretty complementary. Smartphone cameras work pretty well outdoors where there is enough light. DSLR and mirroless are hard to beat indoors in low light conditions. Coincidentally it is also easier to find your ILC indoors at home when…

> Smartphone cameras work pretty well outdoors where there is enough light. DSLR and mirroless are hard to beat indoors in low light conditions. I find the opposite. Proper cameras are much more flexible and plain better when there's enough light. Inside, without a flash, you'll not get a great photo anyway, so might as well benefit from “computational” fakery.

Lots of software tricks make it easy to take low light photos on phones today but require quite a bit of manual tweaking on a DSLR.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#172

Post by redindian75 »

Phil Askey's Photo Review (DPReview's old name) was a pioneer in camera reviews even in back 1998/99 when I first encountered it. I remember it was run from Singapore with the url philaskey.net/~photo or something. He used to review cameras in such clarity and detail that it was so popular among digital camera nerds.

Huge loss!

Re: DPReview.com to close

#173

Post by Topgamer7 »

bmarquez wrote: post #59

RIP. I'm really sad about this, and it's actually something that finally makes me question the Amazon monopoly. Amazon spends so much money on meh (IMO) Prime Video content yet can't keep this site online as an archive. I know that phone cameras have taken over the market in the last decade. For wide-angle lenses, they're great, but iPhones can't quite keep up (yet) with 200-300mm telephotos so I still browsed the si…

THIS makes you question it? Not any of these:

- Blatantly ripping off products listed on their site, using sales data from those products as decision making on which products to steal.

- The monopolization of every market they enter

- Their search listings are garbage, amazon centric and filled with junk

- Anti-competitive practices such as pricing agreements for products on amazon, when listed on websites other than amazon

- They downright treat their employee's as serfs, nearly across the board.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#174

Post by vr46 »

ben7799 wrote: post #152

Definitely sad as this is a site that has been around and is/was an important early website. However I don't really think it's much of a loss for photography. DPreview was always pushing the whole equipment acquisition as the goal part of photography that always seems so weird. They would regularly talk about how you needed some new camera and willfully ignore alteration to your technique that got better results with…

100% this.

Not only will I not miss it, I'm glad it's going, I found the reviews to be extended advertising for camera manufacturers and retailers, and the forums were packed with know-nothings arguing over cameras they'd never used.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#175

Post by superkuh »

TheRealPomax wrote: post #94

I assume a full site mirror will be submitted to the @internetarchive? Because it would be insane to pull 25 years of detailed information that cannot easily be found elsewhere off the internet just because your dad doesn't want you living at home anymore.

Not them. But the archive team have been made aware and are gathering in #dprived on hackint IRC.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#176

Post by yieldcrv »

antisthenes wrote: post #82
op00to wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to shoot only medium and large format film. Maybe 3-4 years ago, I realized I can do everything I want with my phone camera.

If you honestly think your phone camera is a valid replacement for medium/large format film, then you were never serious about photography in the first place. For all their improvements, smartphones are still extremely limited by sensor size and the size of optics. Those are terrible, compared to even the entry level DSLRs. I'm glad it works for your use case (although I can't imagine what that is), but any decent ph…

and film photographers weren't as serious as daguerreotype photographers in the 1840s.

the market shrunk because gatekeeping photographers were insufferable and tone deaf and everyone ignored them because they had an accessible solution that was good enough.

if you want to pursue a convoluted process for self fulfillment, the choice is yours, but almost nobody else will care about the output of your photos or your fine tuned process.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#177

Post by asdff »

arghwhat wrote: post #90
bradlys wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a "boom" is an overstatement. The camera industry overall is dying and struggling. We're down to something like 10% of camera sales from 2010. There is no boom. There is a transition from DSLR to mirrorless for the few existing dedicated camera photographers out there.

The point-and-shoot market collapsed, but the dslr market is not nearly as dramatically affected with 2010 numbers not too far off 2018 numbers based on statista charts[1]. On the other hand, mirrorless is starting to show growth[2]. Looking at the overall camera-sales are misleading, especially considering that it largely shuffled numbers around within big companies: A Samsung point-and-shoot with a Samsung sensor b…

Also, certain camera brands are less affected than others. Fuji is probably doing better than its ever done these days and has trouble keeping inventory in stock from demand, whereas nikon is at a historic low.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#178

Post by Firmwarrior »

PaulHoule wrote: post #63
asdff wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sites like these are also dying breeds with their days numbered. Informationally dense, text and figure, lightweight websites are not being made anymore. Sites like dpreview or Ken Rockwell are pretty clearly holdovers from days long gone and sensibilities long abandoned. Today, all that information that could be read in 5 minutes on dpreview is drip fed to you in video form from a gesticulating talking head, over 25…

I think of how video game walkthroughs have gone this way. It used to be you'd find exhaustive 300k text explanations of everything in a game. Now there is a "let's play" video that goes on for 40 hours, you have to find the right video to watch, then seek to the right place in that video, it's exhausting. The one case I found the video was better was in a certain level where the way forward was to make a jump that d…

I wonder if you could start writing guides on Substack to monetize them.. I think the real problem here is that writing a 300k textbook on GameFAQs gets you a chance at winning some swag, but 40 hours of YouTube videos can actually pay out in the form of money

Then again, even though World of Warcraft sites pay guide authors, the guides are super formulaic and low quality... even though I despise video content, I end up getting most of my detailed info that way

Re: DPReview.com to close

#179

Post by foldr »

yieldcrv wrote: post #176
antisthenes wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you honestly think your phone camera is a valid replacement for medium/large format film, then you were never serious about photography in the first place. For all their improvements, smartphones are still extremely limited by sensor size and the size of optics. Those are terrible, compared to even the entry level DSLRs. I'm glad it works for your use case (although I can't imagine what that is), but any decent ph…

and film photographers weren't as serious as daguerreotype photographers in the 1840s. the market shrunk because gatekeeping photographers were insufferable and tone deaf and everyone ignored them because they had an accessible solution that was good enough. if you want to pursue a convoluted process for self fulfillment, the choice is yours, but almost nobody else will care about the output of your photos or your fi…

This is my standard for serious photography: https://petapixel.com/2022/05/22/photographer-builds-giant-c...

If you aren't shooting giant format wet plates in your own custom-modified darkroom bus, then you're just an amateur like the rest of us.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#180

Post by giobox »

nibbleshifter wrote: post #161
heipei wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The iPhone is waterproof and you can take a photo with the physical volume up/down key. I've used it underwater a couple of times, none of my other proper cameras would be able to do that. My two cents.

Which model? And does it survive saltwater? How deep? Asking for a me who doesn't want to fuck up a thousand euro phone trying something stupid next time I'm at the seaside :)

Pretty much all iPhones have been for some time (since iPhone 7) to various degrees, but Apple themselves make no promises it will always work:

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207043

"Splash, water, and dust resistance are not permanent conditions and resistance might decrease as a result of normal wear. Liquid damage is not covered under warranty, but you might have rights under consumer law."

I think of it more as good to have for an accidental drop, rather than a specification to rely upon for regular underwater photography, although the more recent phones do reach ever higher Ingress Protection (IP67, IP68 etc) water/splash/dust ratings.

Post reply on HN