timo

timo

Lives in United Kingdom Singapore and/or, United Kingdom
Works as a Ex-publisher, now freelance writer
Has a website at www.pbase.com/timotheus
Joined on Nov 17, 2002
About me:

Pentax *istD, K30, K5 (and several bodies in between)

DA: 15, 21, 40, 70, 18-55 (a gang of those), 50-200, 55-300
FA: 24-90, 50 f/1.7, 135 f/2.8
M: 28 f/3.5, 50 f/1.4, 50 f/1.7, 100 f/2.8, 150 f/3.2, 200 f/4
K: 28/3.5, 50 f/1.2 (until someone stole it on a Belgian train), 105 f/2.8

Fuji X20, Panasonic GX7 (with 20/1.7; 18-42 Mk II; 45-150)

Started photography with egg-shaped Brownie 127. First SLR owned: Canon AE-1, 1980. First DSLR: Pentax *istD, 2002 (ish). Today, the Panasonic GX7 and Fujifilm X20 stand in for the K5 and K30 when a DSLR and lenses are killing my back.

Comments

Total: 80, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »

Even if the figures are not particularly accurate, in the main rankings it seems surprising to me that Sony has not made that much headway. M4/3 is clearly not conquering the world. And in the compact ratings it seems amazing that Canon does not figure, when you consider how dominant they were in that sector 10 years ago.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2015 at 11:16 UTC as 53rd comment
On Budget X: Hands-on with Fujifilm's new X-A2 article (154 comments in total)

The lens could be useful.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 16, 2015 at 01:09 UTC as 25th comment
On Quick Look: The art of the unforeground article (85 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pixel Pooper: This article would have worked better as a tweet.

A comment that applies even more to 95% of all postings on this forum. Still, why waste the opportunity for a bit of pooping?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2015 at 05:04 UTC
On Quick Look: The art of the unforeground article (85 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cane: You have to be brave to post an article to this group of hyenas. It's like serving cold soup at an senior center.

Everyone must be furious at the price they paid to subscribe to this site and then not learn anything because you can't teach experts new tricks.

How true. Except that no one has paid anything to subscribe to the site, a fact that is generally forgotten.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2015 at 04:59 UTC
On Quick Look: The art of the unforeground article (85 comments in total)

The fact is that both these photos do have foregrounds, whether its the effect of reflections in the water or the abstract pattern on the sand.

Everybody on here sounds a bit 'know-it-all", but it's amazing how many landscape shots you see where the photographer has used a wide angle lens to include a lot of interest on the horizontal axis, while forgetting that it includes an extensive vertical axis as well. Hence the need for foreground elements, leaving aside all this guff about 'leading the eye' etc.

It's a lightweight article but makes a point. Why not?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2015 at 04:57 UTC as 16th comment
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1312 comments in total)
In reply to:

macky patalinghug: mock solemn -the article's tone seems to suggest that it is saying something that will open your eyes. :) The content is pretty simple: If you are convinced that full frame is for you, sell your current stuff and start anew. For doing it step by step will only handicap you as a photographer.

of course we may or may not agree to this as some folk have the 2 systems simultaneously.

'For doing it step by step will only handicap you as a photographer.'

Why? I have no desire for a FF camera (too big, too heavy, too expensive). But a high percentage of my Pentax lenses, old and new, will work perfectly on both. Although I have absolutely no intention of doing it, a progressive transition would work fine for me.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 07:05 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1312 comments in total)

Nothing new in the article but some of the points are worth making. Many people reading the Pentax SLR forum will have tired of the never-ending complaints about the lack of a FF 'upgrade path'. It has become a kind of religious dogma for some, it seems to me. And I think we all spend too much time and money on upgrading, when we should be simply making the best use of what we have.

But I disagree about the 'oddness' of FF lenses on APS-C - many Pentax lenses marketed for APS-C will work on FF; and many legacy FF lenses work superbly on APS-C, albeit with a different FOV. You just adjust your mental interpretation of what focal length works for what circumstances.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 03:16 UTC as 209th comment | 1 reply
On UK Landscape Photographer of the Year winners announced article (159 comments in total)

I'd rather look at any of these than the over-processed, artificial-looking, garish monstrosities that attract the oohs and ahs and adulation on Flickr, and in some of the DPR challenges.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 00:47 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
On Canon PowerShot G7 X Review preview (435 comments in total)
In reply to:

timo: In the absence of a viewfinder, I cannot quite see the point of this camera. Yesterday's formula, it seems to me, despite the good image quality. It looks pretty enough, in the nice clean way of the pioneering Canon compacts of old.

@lacikuss I tried to use a phone cam but gave up when I couldn't see how to wind the film on.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2014 at 23:57 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G7 X Review preview (435 comments in total)
In reply to:

timo: In the absence of a viewfinder, I cannot quite see the point of this camera. Yesterday's formula, it seems to me, despite the good image quality. It looks pretty enough, in the nice clean way of the pioneering Canon compacts of old.

@ Joseph Black

So maybe stability and visibility in bright conditions are of little concern to you. And I assume you're not affected by the fact that many (I dare say most) people over 45-50 have to either put on or take off glasses when using a screen for framing ...

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2014 at 09:12 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G7 X Review preview (435 comments in total)

In the absence of a viewfinder, I cannot quite see the point of this camera. Yesterday's formula, it seems to me, despite the good image quality. It looks pretty enough, in the nice clean way of the pioneering Canon compacts of old.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2014 at 05:03 UTC as 44th comment | 10 replies

These re-badged, mis-styled cameras come in the category 'Great Mysteries of Life'. There is a cross-reference in 'What Were They Thinking?'

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2014 at 04:59 UTC as 25th comment

The LX100 is very weak at (i.e. can't do) focal lengths longer than 75mm equivalent. The GX7 is very compact when you put the (excellent) 20mm/1.7 on the front (40mm equivalent). So it's impossible to say which is 'better' than the other - you have to decide where you stand with regard to the various trade-offs. A lot depends on the LX100 lens - I feel we still lack objective information about its performance. I am still not totally convinced by what I have seen.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 6, 2014 at 02:43 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
On Fujifilm X30 First Impressions Review preview (461 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jazz1: I'm pretty happy with my X20, but the upgrade bug is calling. I've got a Sony A6000 on order, and previewed it at a local Best Buy (don't get me started on how awful that experience was).

Anyway, the electronic viewfinder thing is new to me, and I can't say I particularly liked the A6000 EVF, as I panned the camera across the room I go this strobing effect. The sales person said the strobing was the exposure being compensated for and could be turned off. But he didn't recommend it.

I guess I'm old school and like optical. Does anyone thing the X30's EVF will be better than the A6000. I don't know if any reviewers that have access to the X30 haunt these forums.

My real problem is no one in my area is going to carry the X30 so I have to either order one and check it out myself, or hope someone of the forums can make comment on the X30 EVF vs. the A6000's viewfinder at some point.

I'm sure an update to Lightroom will quickly become available (it works ok for the X20). I tried the X30 EVF in a shop the other day and I thought it was excellent, and would transform the experience of using the X30 as compared to the rather frustrating viewfinders on the X20 and X10. I would have pressed the buy button on an X30 if the LX100 hadn't muddied the waters - waiting for the first serious reviews of that before I make a decision.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2014 at 10:18 UTC
On Tune in to DPReview Live this Thursday and Friday article (238 comments in total)

Please ask Ricoh/Pentax (if you ever track them down) if they will produce a mirrorless camera, compatible with K-mount or otherwise, with a viewfinder. Repeat, with a viewfinder. Sales of the Q series and/or the K01 would have been larger if we hadn't had to depend on holding the thing at arm's length to see the screen.

If the GR had a VF I would buy one tomorrow. Optical clip-ons are no good because of imprecision and parallax.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2014 at 05:40 UTC as 23rd comment
On Canon PowerShot G7 X real-world samples gallery posted article (242 comments in total)

First the LX100 and now this. It's all rather depressing. I was hoping to ditch the weight and bulk of the DSLR. Despite all the hype, there's something small-sensorish about both these galleries. And I'm not as impressed by either lens as I hoped I would be. Ho hum. At least that saves some money.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2014 at 10:24 UTC as 48th comment | 3 replies

There's something not quite right about some of those samples. Surely the softness away from the centre can't be inherent in the lens design? Having downloaded some of the originals and looked at them on my large iMac screen, some of them are awful. And definitely there are some where one side is quite noticeably softer than the other. Just to make sure I was not imagining things, I then looked at some X20 shots I took today. Honestly, I think the X20/X30 lens performs better. Where the LX100 is sharp in the middle, it's probably better. But taking the image area overall, I am not at all sure. Oh dear. And I don't think it's only a question of jpg vs raw.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 6, 2014 at 15:42 UTC as 74th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

timo: Very ho hum, I fear. The X30 goes back on to the list of possibles.

Slight second thoughts. I downloaded ten and tweaked them slightly in LR. They do look a lot better sharpened up a bit. The in-camera default sharpening may not do these any favours in the way it treats edges. I would like to have a go at a few more raws, and some with in-camera sharpening set to minimum, as a basis for doing it myself.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 5, 2014 at 03:58 UTC

Very ho hum, I fear. The X30 goes back on to the list of possibles.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 5, 2014 at 01:14 UTC as 114th comment | 4 replies

One thing I do not need is a larger phone.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 03:56 UTC as 30th comment | 2 replies
Total: 80, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »