Anastigmat

Anastigmat

Lives in United States San Jose, CA, United States
Joined on Mar 27, 2004

Comments

Total: 180, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Sony Alpha 7R Review preview (796 comments in total)

If only this camera can say "mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the ugliest camera of them all?" LOL

Direct link | Posted on Aug 20, 2014 at 10:10 UTC as 17th comment
On Rare Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM goes on sale in UK article (213 comments in total)

The price is not the only problem. You will need an assistant or two to carry it into the field.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2014 at 20:51 UTC as 53rd comment | 1 reply
On Rare Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM goes on sale in UK article (213 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: That first paragraph confused me. Reading on, it's not actually a copy but a genuine example. That would be a heck of a price for a mere copy!

You may be thinking this is a mockup that looks like the original but cannot take pictures.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2014 at 20:50 UTC
On Rare Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM goes on sale in UK article (213 comments in total)

This sort of lens is made for someone who is a shutterbug and has the wealth of a Warren Buffet, Bill Gates or Larry Ellison.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2014 at 20:49 UTC as 55th comment

By "forces of nature", the law means something like a pebble in a stream, or a shell on the beach, which were created by nature. If I pick up one of these, I certainly should not be able to copyright it as my own creation. But the photographer in this case is very much involved in the creation of the photo, because he turned the camera on, adjusted the controls (auto exposure and autofocus) so that it is possible for the monkey to take its own photo, and he even put a memory card in the camera. If he fails to do any one of these things, the photo could not have been created. It was therefore not a force of nature that created the photo but a collaboration between man and monkey.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 9, 2014 at 18:47 UTC as 31st comment | 1 reply

If I set a camera trap and the shutter is tripped when someone or some animal interrupts a beam of light, then who owns the copyright to the photo? I would say that I did because I did everything that is needed to create the photograph except tripping the shutter at the moment of exposure. Similarly, if I use trap focus to take the picture, and the shutter is tripped when a bird comes into focus, then the bird is not the copyright holder. I am.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 9, 2014 at 07:44 UTC as 38th comment | 6 replies

I don't agree the photograph is a force of nature. Forces of nature do not take photographs.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 9, 2014 at 07:40 UTC as 39th comment | 1 reply
On Nikon D810 Preview preview (1480 comments in total)
In reply to:

Galbertson: Had D810 in hand at camera shop. The Nikon rep was there stating only new lenses will resove best the 36mp sensor, whereas i had read my pro AI lenses would still resolve just fine

Has anyone done crital comparison tests? Some blogs say great, some say poor. Cannot afford to buy camera to find out have to shell out thousands more for lenses.

for people upgrading from an APS-C model, if they find that the lenses they have been using are good enough, then the same lenses will be good enough for fullframe, unless the lenses are APS-C models that cannot fill the image circle of a full frame lens. Some of the sharpest lenses ever made were designed in the film area. There is no guarantee that a newer version will necessarily be sharper. They may simply have built-in VR, which allows the lens makers to charge more for their lens.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2014 at 21:29 UTC
On Nikon D810 Preview preview (1480 comments in total)

Digital camera sales are slumping, and it is not hard to figure out why. There is really little that is worth buying. If you have an APS-C model, you can either keep upgrading to another APS-C model and get no improvement in image quality, or you can spend $2K or more for a slight improvement in image quality. Prices are not falling, and image quality has pretty much remained the same. Consumers are asked to pay more when Nikon took out an expensive low pass filter so the chance of a photo being ruined by moire is increased. Sounds like a raw deal to me.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2014 at 21:11 UTC as 130th comment | 1 reply
On Nikon D810 Preview preview (1480 comments in total)
In reply to:

arcane93: " Why is the D810 priced like the D800E, and not the D800? Well, the D810 takes the D800E's 'AA filter cancellation' trick one step further by dispensing with an AA filter entirely, which should result in a camera that offers greater resolution than either of the two models that it replaces."

So, I'm confused by this logic... Why does it cost more because it *doesn't* have something? Shouldn't that make it, if anything, cost less? I totally get why you'd want to shoot without an AA filter, but what I don't really get is why you have to pay more for the privilege. What am I missing here? Is there something else more costly that has to be done to make shooting without the AA filter possible?

By removing a part, the camera maker saves manufacturing cost, and on top of that charges the customer more. That is killing two birds with one stone. Only way to avoid getting killed is to not buy the camera. Without the AA filter, moire is more likely a problem. So, you get the privilege of shots ruined by moire as a bonus.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2014 at 05:37 UTC
On Nikon announces full-frame D810 with no OLPF article (98 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bob Meyer: Wow. Nikon finally offers full HD recording. Maybe by 2024 they'll catch up to 4K?

Why do cars have speedometers that go over 100 mph if the speed limit is 70 in most places?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 17:46 UTC
On Nikon announces full-frame D810 with no OLPF article (98 comments in total)

More of the same. DSLR sales are down because there is little innovation, and full frames are still too expensive.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 17:39 UTC as 11th comment
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1052 comments in total)
In reply to:

LucaPCP: Old cameras had big lenses, and relatively small bodies around them (because film did the trick). This D4s is ugly: a tiny lens attached to a huge black brick that contains the circuitry. It's starting not to make sense. I wish they gave me a light lens+sensor combo, tethered to the rest of the computer that I could keep in my backpack. It's like taking a photo while handholding a desktop computer.

The reason for the large body is not because of needed space for the circuitry. It is because of what customer expect from a camera that costs this much. Much of the bulk is due to the built-in vertical hand grip that allows easier holding of the camera when shooting vertically. Also allows more batteries to be put inside the camera for longer shooting before running out of juice.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 14:23 UTC

I fail to see how taking away color information improves a photograph, especially a snpashot.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 2, 2014 at 02:16 UTC as 1st comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

RichRMA: Rather than these monsters, where is the collapsible medium format cameras of before, like the Fujis or Plaubels? Can you imagine a medium format camera smaller than a pro DSLR?

There is no need for a new lens system. Just a short extension tue of the right length will work.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2014 at 10:46 UTC
In reply to:

MarshallG: Now THAT'S a Hasselblad! They did Victor proud.

Let me guess. Victor Victoria.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 06:16 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: For anyone who thinks a Nikon D800 matches a medium format camera, take a look at the output from the reference camera used in the studio tests on this site.

There are those who believe that APS-C equals FF, and those who believe that 4/3 equals APS-C in image quality. If we add them all together, that means, 4/3= APS-C = FF = MF. or 4/3= MF. We should all dump whatever camera we have and just buy a camera with 4/3 sensor. But wait, there are actually claims that camera phones are the equal of 4/3 using a different set of equations. So, we should just forget about cameras and lenses and get a camera phone.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 06:14 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Rather than these monsters, where is the collapsible medium format cameras of before, like the Fujis or Plaubels? Can you imagine a medium format camera smaller than a pro DSLR?

To do that they have to go mirrorless. There are additional benefits to going that route, besides compactness, and that is less vibration and noise, if there is no big flapping mirror.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 06:11 UTC

Canon is an electronics company. You wonder why they haven't made a smartphone yet.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 3, 2014 at 23:41 UTC as 68th comment | 4 replies

All manufacturers are pushing the envelope. The difference is the size of the envelope. Olympus is pushing the 4/3 envelope. Hasselblad is pushing the 6x4.5 cm envelope. Canon, Sony and Nikon are pushing the Full Frame envelope. Sigma, Fuji, and Pentax are pushing the APS-C envelope.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 3, 2014 at 08:30 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
Total: 180, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »