RichyjV

RichyjV

Lives in Hong Kong Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Joined on Feb 1, 2013

Comments

Total: 37, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

electrophoto: Addendum:
To all those (and the writer) about how scary and what not it is:
You know, that you're usually wearing a harness and fixed rope route (Via Ferrata) type lanyard protection systems...
It's considered to be the most basic type of a mountain "climb" ...
I like how the article (nor the full story) mentions any of this and makes it sound that people just "climb" their without any safety... just to make it sound a tad more thrilling.
I'm an avid mountaineer & climber ... but telling stories in that way usually just makes it look silly to someone who knows how reality looks.

Sure, fear of heights is something different - but I dislike that he tries to come over doing something "crazy / heroic" ... if proper technique is used there's not a lot "crazy" and certainly not much heroic in it.

And to finalise this:
http://raredelights.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Yosemite-Half-Dome-Via-Ferrata-1-640x375.jpg
The link shows a photo of the same "climb"... more people, less steep.

Funny thing is that the vast majority of people on the cables don't use even a basic harness, you'd think it would be a no-brainer given the amount of inexperienced walkers up there.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 12:02 UTC
In reply to:

RichyjV: Nice shots! Personally it's enough effort to get up there in good hiking kit, carrying just one lens without the extras of wedding clothes, though I'm slightly envious. Also that's a very quiet set of cables there, usually full of people of whom about half are well out of their comfort zone. Closest I've been to replicating that was some shots on Mt Kinabalu with a bow tie for me and a veil for my wife on top of base layers and jackets, not quite as striking!

? Making this endeavour sound bigger than life? Comment at me or at the thread in general? I've done half dome with kit and for me its a bit of a push. For my serious walking buddies its a doddle. Its certainly got nothing on some of the awesome high himalayer photography out there, but then the story is more about the funky idea of wedding shooting up there and the photographers personal battle with it. So its no superhuman feat, its hardly like the guy did an Alex Honnold and free-solod it just for a shot from underneath, but its a nice enough story.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 11:59 UTC

Quite a lot of WB/colour shifting of those tones, lots of blue in the shadows of some of them. Looks like the photographer trying to set the emotion rather than just documenting what the scene looked like. In this case I'd prefer it were not done, we shouldn't need to be told by the photographer how to feel about these shots.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2015 at 14:39 UTC as 101st comment | 3 replies

Nice shots! Personally it's enough effort to get up there in good hiking kit, carrying just one lens without the extras of wedding clothes, though I'm slightly envious. Also that's a very quiet set of cables there, usually full of people of whom about half are well out of their comfort zone. Closest I've been to replicating that was some shots on Mt Kinabalu with a bow tie for me and a veil for my wife on top of base layers and jackets, not quite as striking!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2015 at 01:58 UTC as 13th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

wansai: Shouldn't the title be: SPONSORED CONTENT?

It's only an analysis insomuch as it talks about the camera but it's actually a marketing and sales pitch (or press release).

I have no issues with reading sponsored content but I'd like to know beforehand so I don't start rejecting the content as I read through, expecting it to be an unbiased look when it isn't.

Their credibility is all they have, so anything that damages that can be a really big deal. They already have something of a reputation for having a core of great testing data which is then diluted by overall score ratings with some 'interesting' weighting decisions (e.g. score for transmission, so a 1.4 lens scores higher than a 1.8, but the users already knew it was 1.8 so how can you now compare the other qualities knowing the score has been uselessly skewed), and more significantly diluted by them writing editorials on the best lenses for XYZ based on their own numbers for one focal distance.

Its not a cardinal sin, its just slightly amateur for them to treat their own product differently, and that's the same vibe I get from some of their other work as mentioned earlier. It could be a fantastic product, but I'm not sure that will sell them extra and it has already upset some of the more serious commentators, so it clearly is a big deal to some.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 22:53 UTC
In reply to:

wansai: Shouldn't the title be: SPONSORED CONTENT?

It's only an analysis insomuch as it talks about the camera but it's actually a marketing and sales pitch (or press release).

I have no issues with reading sponsored content but I'd like to know beforehand so I don't start rejecting the content as I read through, expecting it to be an unbiased look when it isn't.

It reads like sponsored content. Its the problem with your working relationship, you're readership who is aware of it are going to be taking it all with a grain of salt. DXO giving a different set of ratings for the processed output is a really dumb move, you either do it for everyone or no-one, or else your credibility goes out of the window.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 06:40 UTC
On Sony rides wave of US Mirrorless sales surge article (732 comments in total)
In reply to:

yod4444: This says one thing: People want Full Frame Mirrorless ILC's. Unbelievable that Nikon & Canon don't even seem to care about this segment.

N and C don't want to move first. Let others spend the R&D, and then when it gets to a profitable point create something similar with a vastly higher selection of compatible lenses. Target will be to make current N and C users thinking of switch for size reasons move to their option because they are already invested into the lenses, without having to have a class leading mirrorless product.

But they dont want to cannibalise their high end performance market either so expect something reasonably basic aimed at being a smaller version of the lowish end DSLR - still very good cameras, and for them to keep plugging their high end cameras as full DSLR. Maybe in 5 years they go for premium end mirrorless as well as the production costs are lower and they will have figured out how to get the best of both worlds.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 5, 2015 at 01:48 UTC
In reply to:

RichyjV: Hmm, I need a much bigger wall to be able to hang a good print of this on in order to actually get a decent return on all that detail. Given a single 36mp image makes a pretty great 3ft x 2ft print, I'm guessing this would look good 10 meters long or something, where the detail would become more interesting than that actual shot as a whole. In the meantime for regular sized rooms I think a smaller print with better composition is preferable. I love that area for high mountain shooting, but this isn't an especially interesting view of it.

Aside from the undoubted technical merit of such a venture, it really doesn't do it for me as a small size image, and the weirdly lightened bits of the sky in the left quarter of the image are really a no-no.

On top of that the shadows cast from various bits of mountain point in different directions - something pretty much unavoidable when it takes that long, unless you shoot for a few minutes per day, but its one of the limitations of the technique.

I don't think I need that much detail, I think the huge pan would look nice much smaller than 92m, but I think it would have to be much bigger than 3x2 print before the detail interest overpowered the basically lacklustre composition

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2015 at 08:34 UTC

Hmm, I need a much bigger wall to be able to hang a good print of this on in order to actually get a decent return on all that detail. Given a single 36mp image makes a pretty great 3ft x 2ft print, I'm guessing this would look good 10 meters long or something, where the detail would become more interesting than that actual shot as a whole. In the meantime for regular sized rooms I think a smaller print with better composition is preferable. I love that area for high mountain shooting, but this isn't an especially interesting view of it.

Aside from the undoubted technical merit of such a venture, it really doesn't do it for me as a small size image, and the weirdly lightened bits of the sky in the left quarter of the image are really a no-no.

On top of that the shadows cast from various bits of mountain point in different directions - something pretty much unavoidable when it takes that long, unless you shoot for a few minutes per day, but its one of the limitations of the technique.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2015 at 04:36 UTC as 51st comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

buybuybuy: Just about anybody with a decent camera could pull of shots like these. The problem is that, for most people stuck in a 9-5 M-F job, these trips are few and far between--if ever!

1,2,3 (guessing),4 and 6 are roadside photos, but 5 requires an ice climb. So yes, with a good camera and tripod these shots are all technically fairly easy once in the right place, but the hard work is getting into the right spot at the right time for the right light to make it worthwhile. I've been to Jokulsarlon several times and never seen the aurora there, and I've climbed through an ice cave but not like that one with such nice light. The technical ability and kit gap between good pros and good amateurs is rapidly vanishing, but the shooting effort and business effort is much much more important.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 1, 2015 at 00:12 UTC
On Readers' Showcase: Steve Badger article (110 comments in total)

Really like number 7. Not a huge fan of sharpened clouds but compositions good throughout.

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2015 at 13:30 UTC as 50th comment
On Winds of Change: Shooting changing landscapes article (52 comments in total)
In reply to:

mononk: Interesting indeed. But may I suggest you post an identical article with examples from places not so exotic as Iceland and Africa? I.e. NY City, Paris, London, Rio... The average Jo will more likely visit these places a few times in his life and will try his luck in finding a new point of view. Many thsnks.

Have to agree with davidrm, they are nice shots but this is not the first or second time DRP have used this guy's work, the article isn't saying that much, at least the photos don't back up the text content that much, and seems more like an ad for the workshops linked at the bottom.

If the location was some popular city, the style would be much more separable from the environment, and I wonder if this technique would stand out that well..

Direct link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 06:20 UTC
On Winds of Change: Shooting changing landscapes article (52 comments in total)
In reply to:

G3User: Finally, landscape images that aren't post processed to death to make them interesting. I cant believe I'm going to write this but I have nothing to criticize about this article or the associated photos. I agree, most places have been shot to death. To take photos of changing landscapes is a really good idea.

The whole paid photography business is going away. Taking landscape photos for fun is about all that one can do these days.

I would say that probably every one is significantly post processed, lots of shadow raising, plenty of targeted saturation increase. Done well, much better than ones with +20 saturation applied globally and auto HDR.. but still there is a load of PP in these. But if you DON'T PP a photo from Iceland these days then it really won't stand out from 1000 others taken from the same location with the same long exposure settings. Excluding the lava shots, the first image is the one that genuinely relies on the light being just right to make a nice capture, the others are more independent of the light, and are simple nice shots of nice places with good processing.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 06:14 UTC
On Yongnuo creates near-clone of Canon EF 35mm f/2 article (170 comments in total)
In reply to:

AlanG: Keep in mind that Canon and Nikon started out copying Leica and Zeiss cameras and lenses. Maybe some of these Chinese companies will be the major innovators in the future. DJI is certainly doing that with multirotors.

Many lenses use fairly well established traditional designs.

Indeed! Plenty of complete crap made here, plenty of hi tech factories churning out top quality stuff too - but generally the hi quality stuff is foreign companies producing here, home grown innovation is not as profitable yet as making stuff that sells across the globe

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 09:27 UTC
On Yongnuo creates near-clone of Canon EF 35mm f/2 article (170 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edgar_in_Indy: Hmm...$115 AND it has autofocus?

In the past when I've wondered-out-loud why Zeiss doesn't broaden their appeal and usefulness by adding AF into their great lenses, people on here have claimed that adding AF would be too expensive, because of having to reverse engineer the AF system and/or license AF technology. So much for that argument...

True. But I think it is much easier to objectively judge quality when it comes to cameras and lenses than general electronics, where you honestly don't really know if one product is 'better' or 'worse' than others. You can see the quality, measure it if you want, the build quality is also usually fairly obvious too. And in the modern world, having a luxury branding is just begging for bigger sales as the vast wealth of Asia starts to get spent more and more. I've seen people go into a camera shop and ask for the best camera, walk out with a D810 and an Otus, and probably no clue how to use them.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 09:15 UTC
On Yongnuo creates near-clone of Canon EF 35mm f/2 article (170 comments in total)
In reply to:

AlanG: Keep in mind that Canon and Nikon started out copying Leica and Zeiss cameras and lenses. Maybe some of these Chinese companies will be the major innovators in the future. DJI is certainly doing that with multirotors.

Many lenses use fairly well established traditional designs.

I don't expect them to be innovators. I work in China, here's the thing over here (electronics in general): output is really cheap with tiny profit margins, labour is cheap but quality of output is very low so the more automated the better the results for most industries. So they spend as little as possible on R&D in general - often $0, and spend much more time trying to copy something with 70+% of the quality at 40% of the price, which they are really really good at. So you want a tripod that can nearly compete with Gitzo at half the price, you can have it. Lenses, well theres one where quality differences are much more measurable and its a tougher sell.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 04:52 UTC
On Yongnuo creates near-clone of Canon EF 35mm f/2 article (170 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edgar_in_Indy: Hmm...$115 AND it has autofocus?

In the past when I've wondered-out-loud why Zeiss doesn't broaden their appeal and usefulness by adding AF into their great lenses, people on here have claimed that adding AF would be too expensive, because of having to reverse engineer the AF system and/or license AF technology. So much for that argument...

They have a market and they have a loyal fanbase who pay big for their products. Why should they change that? I'm sure there are some real life compromises involved with that change in design, for the moment they get their sales because their best products are better than the competition. And much as people are keen to dismiss expensive manual focus lenses, have a look around at the top quality photographers posting on the internet, a remarkable number of them are loaded up with Zeiss, manual focus and all. I'll take AF when I can get it, but I want image quality more. This story is a bit different, cloning something - we can't see if they have duplicated the quality or the build yet - is vastly easier and cheaper than designing.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 04:47 UTC
On Samsung Galaxy Note 4 camera review post (89 comments in total)

Other uses:
buy usb3 otg for a couple of dollars.
Plug in your dslr to your note 3 or 4
Download one of the many good free tethering apps on android
control your camera on tripod with an ultra hd touch screen, live view focusing etc
Instantly have your jpegs on your phone even as your camera captures the RAW

Direct link | Posted on Apr 14, 2015 at 00:00 UTC as 20th comment
On Readers' Showcase: Rajesh Bhattacharjee article (45 comments in total)

Nice work, not overcooked, look natural and real.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 6, 2015 at 04:02 UTC as 14th comment
On Readers' Showcase: Raymond Pang article (54 comments in total)

Lovely to see a well composed set of images featured here that aren't hugely post processed. Thanks DPReview, appreciate for once not being punched in the face by hugely oversaturated images and mega-HDR, and being able to appreciate a good eye executing well.

To the photographer, thank you, a pleasure to look at.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 29, 2015 at 10:40 UTC as 21st comment
Total: 37, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »