PIX 2015
biza43

biza43

Lives in Portugal Lisboa, Portugal
Works as a Petroleum Geologist
Has a website at www.paulobizarro.com
Joined on Oct 6, 2009

Comments

Total: 45, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On Opinion - Erez Marom: Whatever it Doesn't Take article (190 comments in total)

Nice article and a good reminder of a well known fact: any photo needs to be able to stand by its own, regardless of how difficult it was to make it. In this regard, landscape photography is not different from sports or documentary photography.

IMO, the exception is war photography, or photography done in zones of conflict, where quite often photographers suffer a lot just to come away with "something", "anything".

In landscape photography, it is many times very hard to get to a particular vantage point. Many times I have climbed tall sand dunes in the Empty Quarter of Oman, at sunrise or sunset, only to come back empty handed, because nature did not collaborate.

Perseverance is the key here, we need to keep trying.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 10, 2015 at 14:16 UTC as 16th comment
On Sony reportedly shifting focus to full-frame cameras article (454 comments in total)
In reply to:

Suave: Lenses, they have to make the leses first. More and cheaper.

@Suave - you know what, photography, as life, is full of compromises. When I moved from Canon to Sony A7, I did my homework, and chose the lenses accordingly. Sony made the choice of producing first the better and most expensive lenses. The majority of which are over 1000; guess what, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sigma, Tamron top quality lenses are also not cheap. Quality comes at a cost. Sony G lenses, and Zeiss lenses, are made of metal, weatherproofed, and robust. My Sony SEL 55 f1.8 is better built than most Canon L lenses I have used. Is it expensive for a standard prime lens? Not for me, I like quality. For those that can not afford the expensive lenses, there are thousands of lenses that can be adapted and used on the A7 system.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 13:50 UTC
On Sony reportedly shifting focus to full-frame cameras article (454 comments in total)
In reply to:

Suave: Lenses, they have to make the leses first. More and cheaper.

They already have enough lenses to provide a viable system for plenty of users. Sure, the Canon 50 f1.8 STM is a lot cheaper, but then it only offers top optical quality a few stops down from wide open, contrary to the Zony.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 08:05 UTC
On Sony reportedly shifting focus to full-frame cameras article (454 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thomas Richter: Problem is, Sony does not have a single decent standard zoom for any of their mirrorless systems.

If you can not take a decent pic with a Sony A7 and 24-70 f4 zoom, the problem is not with the gear...

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 08:01 UTC
On Readers' showcase: Dan Hogman article (36 comments in total)

Very good work. To me, this is clear evidence that you need to understand the subject you want to photograph, to make quality images.

Certainly, a background in architecture provides a solid background to photograph buildings; as a good background in arts or painting, makes for better landscape photos.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 13, 2015 at 11:49 UTC as 9th comment

This is great work.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 13, 2015 at 08:56 UTC as 30th comment
On Nikon D810A: An astrophotographer's perspective article (113 comments in total)

Very good article and images.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2015 at 12:54 UTC as 38th comment
On Otus Readings: the Zeiss 85 F1.4 Otus Comparison article (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

biza43: I find these comparisons and tests pointless, really... Nobody buys an Otus because it performs great stopped down... people buy this sort of lenses because they want wide open no-compromise performance.

If all you want is to shoot f5.6, then don't buy the Otus, buy any 85 f1.8.

Also, high res sensors demand the best from lenses and from photographers, so you should not expect budget lenses to perform well wide open with such cameras.

Rishi, I assume you are replying to my comment. If that is case, please point to a comment of mine where I stated:

"First we get complaints of 'Why did you shoot the 5DS R with the 85/1.8 and not the Otus?'

Then we shoot with the Otus.

Then we get told 'What a pointless test!'

You can't win. :)"

Otherwise, while I appreciate your efforts, do not wrongly attribute statements to me.

Thanks.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 30, 2015 at 13:33 UTC
On Otus Readings: the Zeiss 85 F1.4 Otus Comparison article (223 comments in total)

I find these comparisons and tests pointless, really... Nobody buys an Otus because it performs great stopped down... people buy this sort of lenses because they want wide open no-compromise performance.

If all you want is to shoot f5.6, then don't buy the Otus, buy any 85 f1.8.

Also, high res sensors demand the best from lenses and from photographers, so you should not expect budget lenses to perform well wide open with such cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2015 at 14:28 UTC as 75th comment | 5 replies
On Otus Readings: the Zeiss 85 F1.4 Otus Comparison article (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lil g: Zeiss Planar T with Otus image?

Also noticed it, if the 85 Otus were that price, now, that would be interesting news:)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2015 at 14:23 UTC
On Readers' Showcase: Raiatea Arcuri article (55 comments in total)

Some nice images, keep up the good work and inspiration.

That said, I would invite people to read this article here:

https://luminous-landscape.com/a-new-perspective-on-landscape-photography/

It makes some very valid points about "too much use" of wide angles in landscape photography. Quite often we include uninteresting and boring foregrounds in our photos, and then the interesting stuff shows up as small and distant.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2015 at 08:29 UTC as 12th comment | 4 replies
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1085 comments in total)
In reply to:

biza43: I have moved from Canon EOS (shot with it for 20 years) to Sony A7 system. From my experience, all these items mentioned in the article are very valid, but they will have a small impact in the "pro" world. For a pro photog, Canikon systems are still much more reliable than all these MILC advancements.

If you need to get the shot, poor AF in low light does not cut it... fidgety controls and menu driven interface controls do not cut it... some of these "lowlights" can be overcome by familiarity; but the point is, it takes time to get acquainted with a system, and who can really tell that Sony will not drop the A7 system, as they have dropped the Sony-Minolta DSLR line? Or the NEX line?

Pros require support and reliability, and Sony are not there yet... for us amateurs and hobbyists it is fine, but if you need to put bread on the table? Not really...

But the point is, Sony are trying to go after the pro market: sensor, lenses, quick and reliable AF, all in with mirrorless. the problem is that pros require much more than that, they require reliable support when something breaks down. Same issue with say Olympus or Fuji, they have pro spec cameras and lenses (weather sealing, AF, f2.8 zooms, etc), but the support is appalling... One has to build a reputation, and that takes time; for amateurs and enthusiasts, technical advances are good enough, for pros, a supporting system has to be in place. As for Leica, different story; again, its built on reputation and quality products, and that is expensive. I just bought recently a Leica M 90mm lens that is over 50 years old, it operates like new. This inspires confidence, and costs money.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 07:50 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1085 comments in total)
In reply to:

biza43: I have moved from Canon EOS (shot with it for 20 years) to Sony A7 system. From my experience, all these items mentioned in the article are very valid, but they will have a small impact in the "pro" world. For a pro photog, Canikon systems are still much more reliable than all these MILC advancements.

If you need to get the shot, poor AF in low light does not cut it... fidgety controls and menu driven interface controls do not cut it... some of these "lowlights" can be overcome by familiarity; but the point is, it takes time to get acquainted with a system, and who can really tell that Sony will not drop the A7 system, as they have dropped the Sony-Minolta DSLR line? Or the NEX line?

Pros require support and reliability, and Sony are not there yet... for us amateurs and hobbyists it is fine, but if you need to put bread on the table? Not really...

Yes, indeed it may be only a question of time, time will tell:)

OTOH, I am sure that Canon will be happy if they start selling lenses to Sony users:)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 12:37 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1085 comments in total)

I have moved from Canon EOS (shot with it for 20 years) to Sony A7 system. From my experience, all these items mentioned in the article are very valid, but they will have a small impact in the "pro" world. For a pro photog, Canikon systems are still much more reliable than all these MILC advancements.

If you need to get the shot, poor AF in low light does not cut it... fidgety controls and menu driven interface controls do not cut it... some of these "lowlights" can be overcome by familiarity; but the point is, it takes time to get acquainted with a system, and who can really tell that Sony will not drop the A7 system, as they have dropped the Sony-Minolta DSLR line? Or the NEX line?

Pros require support and reliability, and Sony are not there yet... for us amateurs and hobbyists it is fine, but if you need to put bread on the table? Not really...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 11:53 UTC as 117th comment | 6 replies
On Video Overview: Leica Q article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Over the years you've reviewed several real photography power houses, versatile offers from several brands, machines that have taken us into imaging levels never imagined but, more than 10-15 years after the advent of generalized digital photography Leica finally manages to come up with an interesting but application-limited and still quite expensive product that, for the very first time, departs from their almost-fraudulent performance-price ratio and seems to be a very valid, well specified proposition and THAT's when you decide to open your full-accolade, puerile enthusiasm box...?

Wow!...that little red dot REALLY has traction...

Should we expected the introduction of an all-new 120% Overall Score with a matching posh-neoteric Platinum Award?

... continuing...

Lots of people do not have money to buy Leica, including me (well, at least M system). That does not prevent me to appreciate the quality, workmanship, and ethos, of their product line. The Q is a fantastic camera and lens, as are the M cameras, and many others. And no, it is not the red dot.

Yourself, why do you use L lenses with your Canons? You could get the same results with cheaper lenses, could you not? Or cheaper cameras. It is all relative, is it not?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 11:51 UTC
On Video Overview: Leica Q article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Over the years you've reviewed several real photography power houses, versatile offers from several brands, machines that have taken us into imaging levels never imagined but, more than 10-15 years after the advent of generalized digital photography Leica finally manages to come up with an interesting but application-limited and still quite expensive product that, for the very first time, departs from their almost-fraudulent performance-price ratio and seems to be a very valid, well specified proposition and THAT's when you decide to open your full-accolade, puerile enthusiasm box...?

Wow!...that little red dot REALLY has traction...

Should we expected the introduction of an all-new 120% Overall Score with a matching posh-neoteric Platinum Award?

Really? I at least offered a reason why Leica products are more expensive then other ones; I at least gave my experience about a rationale regarding Leica products and what I bought, and why. You, on the other hand, just keep fluffing away...

And finally, someone dissing Leica because they release too expensive photo gear, is intelligent? I was not patronizing, I was providing facts to the discussion. Apparently, you don't like to hear the truth on your high mountain seat, ok, go to the beach, it is pretty hot today:)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 11:47 UTC
On Video Overview: Leica Q article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Over the years you've reviewed several real photography power houses, versatile offers from several brands, machines that have taken us into imaging levels never imagined but, more than 10-15 years after the advent of generalized digital photography Leica finally manages to come up with an interesting but application-limited and still quite expensive product that, for the very first time, departs from their almost-fraudulent performance-price ratio and seems to be a very valid, well specified proposition and THAT's when you decide to open your full-accolade, puerile enthusiasm box...?

Wow!...that little red dot REALLY has traction...

Should we expected the introduction of an all-new 120% Overall Score with a matching posh-neoteric Platinum Award?

"Leica would just be another brand, as far as I am concerned, if it was not for fact that they willfully and knowingly embrace, propagate and take commercial advantage of the one of the most nefarious concepts in photography: That it is the brand/type of camera that makes a good photographer."

This tells me you do not appreciate and understand the role of Leica in the last 100 years or so. Their cameras and lenses are expensive because they are still, to a large extent, assembled and quality controlled by hand in Europe. QC has a cost. You just have to hold a Leica camera or lens to notice the difference. Am I willing to rationally spend that money? No, I prefer to buy cheaper Sony A7 and used Leica lens:) But I also bought a Leica Typ 113, that has one of the best lenses I have ever used. And I could afford it. They must be doing something wright, as Leica are one of the few camera companies turning a profit...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 11:32 UTC
On Video Overview: Leica Q article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Over the years you've reviewed several real photography power houses, versatile offers from several brands, machines that have taken us into imaging levels never imagined but, more than 10-15 years after the advent of generalized digital photography Leica finally manages to come up with an interesting but application-limited and still quite expensive product that, for the very first time, departs from their almost-fraudulent performance-price ratio and seems to be a very valid, well specified proposition and THAT's when you decide to open your full-accolade, puerile enthusiasm box...?

Wow!...that little red dot REALLY has traction...

Should we expected the introduction of an all-new 120% Overall Score with a matching posh-neoteric Platinum Award?

Seems like you don't appreciate Leica? Fine, but spare us the exaggeration... Yes, Leica makes expensive products, we get it. It was always the case, no news there. Saying the Q is the really only interesting camera made by Leica in the last 10-15 years??? Have you been under a rock, isolated?

Which is more expensive: changing a 1000-3000 USD camera every year, or every 2 years, or buy a Leica and change every 5-6 years?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 08:17 UTC

It is important to say that the Q is the natural progression from the X: similar chassis and operational controls.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 15, 2015 at 15:13 UTC as 16th comment

Good images all.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2015 at 13:29 UTC as 23rd comment
Total: 45, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »