Old Ed

Old Ed

Lives in United States Vancouver, WA, United States
Joined on Sep 20, 2000

Comments

Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10
On Ten items you should have in your camera bag article (288 comments in total)
In reply to:

Will Edwards: It's not in my camera bag, but if in the city in the middle of the night or for sunrise shots, I carry a 9mm, and I know how to use it. If out in the woods, it's a 45mm. And I am not talking about camera lens.

Wow, 45mm is pretty serious stuff! Do you ever use the fragmentation shell or canister shot options?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/45_mm_anti-tank_gun_M1942_%28M-42%29
You could take out a SWAT armored personnel carrier with one of those; but you'd be in a whole lot of trouble if you did!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 4, 2013 at 22:27 UTC
On P1030170 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (6 comments in total)

As a long-time Nikon DSLR user (+LX5), I find these samples very impressive. Per halfwaythere's comment, the kit lens, sensor, and JPEG conversion all look excellent. It's too bad that Panny didn't decide to fit the new kit zoom with the metal mount ring (for another $20 or so), which would have put it in the same league as the respected 14-45. Well done Panny, I'm looking forward to the real reviews.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 14, 2013 at 17:21 UTC as 5th comment
In reply to:

Old Ed: Has anyone else noticed that there is STILL no "portrait prime" for DX, THIRTEEN YEARS into the format??? Please forgive me if I don't get excited that one has been announced for the "m43 wannabe" format.

Oops.. I forgot one...
BorisAkunin: Thanks for pointing out where some other makers are doing better than Nikon in this area. I agree with that. However, I was referring only to Nikon's lenses, not the DX market in its entirety. BTW, Fuji is planning a DX portrait prime, the FX 56mm F1.2R. It is shown on their "roadmap" as X lens #10. But Nikon can't seem to find room for one, among their lineup of "more than 70" lenses. Sigh.

Direct link | Posted on May 14, 2013 at 19:04 UTC
In reply to:

Old Ed: Has anyone else noticed that there is STILL no "portrait prime" for DX, THIRTEEN YEARS into the format??? Please forgive me if I don't get excited that one has been announced for the "m43 wannabe" format.

I can't see how to Reply individually, so a group Reply...
peevee1: too short (75mm equiv.), poor bokeh, poor contrast wide open, bigger than needed for DX.
Mike99999: 50mm see above; 85mm too long, and bigger than needed for DX.
tkpenalty: see peevee1 response, above.
Seeky: So perspective doesn't matter, and no one needs a portrait prime, for any format! This will come as news to many fine portrait photographers, past and present.
Happy shooting to all... Ed

Direct link | Posted on May 14, 2013 at 18:48 UTC

Has anyone else noticed that there is STILL no "portrait prime" for DX, THIRTEEN YEARS into the format??? Please forgive me if I don't get excited that one has been announced for the "m43 wannabe" format.

Direct link | Posted on May 14, 2013 at 15:06 UTC as 70th comment | 6 replies
On Photokina 2012: Interview - Dirk Jasper of Nikon article (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

Old Ed: Regarding focus peaking, this is a BIG DEAL to MF lens users, even if video is not involved at all.
It's very nice that the D600 can do AE with AI-S lenses; but AE obviously does not eliminate the need to FOCUS. And if the D600 follows earlier models, there is still no USEABLE MF focusing aid. A dim, flickering dot low in the viewfinder is total bleep.
BTW, focus peaking is not the only solution. I would be very happy if Nikon would just BRIGHTLY light in-focus AF points, when in MF mode. That has GOT to be an easy firmware upgrade, and has been for years. But still nada.
It may sound like a conspiracy theory, but what excuse could there be for leaving out focus features so simple, cheap, and valuable? I can only think of one: Nikon would still like credit for supporting older lenses, so they offer up AE (on higher end bodies). But they don't actually want to detract from new AF lens sales, so they cripple MF focusing ability.
How about DPR calling them out on this, Barney?

Hi Tape5, Thanks for your comments. It was really quite lovely "back in the day," to concentrate on the image itself, and not worry about sRGB, or AF error corrections, video codecs, compressed vs. uncompressed RAW, etc., etc.
Of course the modern equipment also has its charms; but simple elegance isn't one of them. It would be nice if someone offered cameras that tried to produce a simpler, cleaner, more effective tool by seriously culling unnecessary digital gimmicks. Perhaps Fuji is going down that road. Happy shooting, Ed

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2012 at 20:21 UTC
On Photokina 2012: Interview - Dirk Jasper of Nikon article (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

Old Ed: Regarding focus peaking, this is a BIG DEAL to MF lens users, even if video is not involved at all.
It's very nice that the D600 can do AE with AI-S lenses; but AE obviously does not eliminate the need to FOCUS. And if the D600 follows earlier models, there is still no USEABLE MF focusing aid. A dim, flickering dot low in the viewfinder is total bleep.
BTW, focus peaking is not the only solution. I would be very happy if Nikon would just BRIGHTLY light in-focus AF points, when in MF mode. That has GOT to be an easy firmware upgrade, and has been for years. But still nada.
It may sound like a conspiracy theory, but what excuse could there be for leaving out focus features so simple, cheap, and valuable? I can only think of one: Nikon would still like credit for supporting older lenses, so they offer up AE (on higher end bodies). But they don't actually want to detract from new AF lens sales, so they cripple MF focusing ability.
How about DPR calling them out on this, Barney?

Hi Jaybird1x, It sounds like you have never used an MF lens with a really good focusing aid. (The classic aid towards the end of the film era was the split-image with microprism surround.) Try one, if you get the chance, and you'll see what this "thread" is about.
And consider this: Before AF lenses became practical in the mid to late 80's, ALL (focused) photos were MF. And there were plenty of successful captures of moving targets during that first 100 years or so of photography. There would have been a lot fewer such captures if photographers had been taking their eyes off their subjects to look for flickering dots.
IMHO, there is no good reason that cameras can't provide MF focusing aids in 2012 that are as good as the ones produced 25 years ago. YMMV, of course.
Happy shooting, Ed

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2012 at 20:03 UTC
On Photokina 2012: Interview - Dirk Jasper of Nikon article (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

Old Ed: Regarding focus peaking, this is a BIG DEAL to MF lens users, even if video is not involved at all.
It's very nice that the D600 can do AE with AI-S lenses; but AE obviously does not eliminate the need to FOCUS. And if the D600 follows earlier models, there is still no USEABLE MF focusing aid. A dim, flickering dot low in the viewfinder is total bleep.
BTW, focus peaking is not the only solution. I would be very happy if Nikon would just BRIGHTLY light in-focus AF points, when in MF mode. That has GOT to be an easy firmware upgrade, and has been for years. But still nada.
It may sound like a conspiracy theory, but what excuse could there be for leaving out focus features so simple, cheap, and valuable? I can only think of one: Nikon would still like credit for supporting older lenses, so they offer up AE (on higher end bodies). But they don't actually want to detract from new AF lens sales, so they cripple MF focusing ability.
How about DPR calling them out on this, Barney?

Hi Barney, Thanks for a good interview, and for your courteous reply to my comment! As you can tell, I feel strongly about the MF focus aid issue; and I hope DPR will bring it up prominently in the D600 review. IMHO, being able to focus is an essential CAMERA tool, and not "primarily a video tool."
I might also point out that back in the days when camera bodies had only 10 or so "features" (vs. the present day 1000 or so), FOCUSING ability was one of the 10. So I would argue that a useable MF focusing aid is not just #1001 in an long list of superfluous features; it's an ESSENTIAL feature.
Thanks again, and happy shooting, Ed

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2012 at 16:48 UTC
On Photokina 2012: Interview - Dirk Jasper of Nikon article (220 comments in total)

Regarding focus peaking, this is a BIG DEAL to MF lens users, even if video is not involved at all.
It's very nice that the D600 can do AE with AI-S lenses; but AE obviously does not eliminate the need to FOCUS. And if the D600 follows earlier models, there is still no USEABLE MF focusing aid. A dim, flickering dot low in the viewfinder is total bleep.
BTW, focus peaking is not the only solution. I would be very happy if Nikon would just BRIGHTLY light in-focus AF points, when in MF mode. That has GOT to be an easy firmware upgrade, and has been for years. But still nada.
It may sound like a conspiracy theory, but what excuse could there be for leaving out focus features so simple, cheap, and valuable? I can only think of one: Nikon would still like credit for supporting older lenses, so they offer up AE (on higher end bodies). But they don't actually want to detract from new AF lens sales, so they cripple MF focusing ability.
How about DPR calling them out on this, Barney?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2012 at 16:14 UTC as 61st comment | 12 replies

I've been looking for the filter size, but no luck so far. Possibly a 77? Also, it will be interesting to learn if it focuses in the "Nikon" direction or not. BTW, I still have a Tokina f4-5.6 70-200 zoom that I bought back in the 70's. It still looks and works like new. I cannot say the same for my (then top-of-the-line) Nikkor f4.5 80-200; it is now unusable because of zoom creep. And the Nikkor cost about 3,000 USD, in today's dollars. So I'm a BIG Tokina fan. I just wish they had a more extensive line, and I'm sad to see them phasing out of primes.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 20:46 UTC as 25th comment | 2 replies
Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10