larrytusaz

larrytusaz

Lives in United States Tucson, United States
Works as a Database Design
Has a website at http://bit.ly/1DT7VSN
Joined on Aug 20, 2005
About me:

Equipment:
Sony NEX-6
16-50PZ
50mm 1.8 OSS

Nikon 1 J1, 10-30VR

Comments

Total: 398, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Palm-sized: Hands-on with new Fujifilm X-T10 article (91 comments in total)

Why is everyone posting about what the camera looks like? WHO CARES? It's a camera, not a woman in a bikini. If it takes good photos and is ergonomically sound, who cares what it looks like?

I practice what I preach too--I recently picked up a red (yes, red) Nikon D5300, it being red isn't my thing, but I got it for cheap (only $120 more than what I got from selling my Nikon D5000 which is 3 generations older) and its sensor is great. With the good photos I've been getting from it, I forget about the ugly red body real quick.

Direct link | Posted on May 18, 2015 at 14:27 UTC as 13th comment | 3 replies
On DPReview recommends: Best smartphone cameras post (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: I picked up a Nikon D5000/18-55mm kit for only $175 around two weeks ago, it even included a portrait grip, 2 spare batteries, a Toshiba case and a 4G card. It would totally blast any of these to pieces. Yes it's large--so? When you care about quality, you only use the good stuff, not the stuff the Kodak/Polaroid crowd is using. Besides, if you can't deal with an SLR, there's always a Sony RX100 or Panasonic LX100, or the Sony NEX-6 which I also have and which, with Wi-Fi, can beam your images to a device for instant sharing, if that really matters so much.

No, but you can stick a RX100 or LX100 into one.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2015 at 05:46 UTC
On DPReview recommends: Best smartphone cameras post (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: I picked up a Nikon D5000/18-55mm kit for only $175 around two weeks ago, it even included a portrait grip, 2 spare batteries, a Toshiba case and a 4G card. It would totally blast any of these to pieces. Yes it's large--so? When you care about quality, you only use the good stuff, not the stuff the Kodak/Polaroid crowd is using. Besides, if you can't deal with an SLR, there's always a Sony RX100 or Panasonic LX100, or the Sony NEX-6 which I also have and which, with Wi-Fi, can beam your images to a device for instant sharing, if that really matters so much.

It would seem to me that it would be a good thing for one to recognize an SLR's superior image quality and possess the dedication to almost always have it on them, or at least an RX100 type of camera.

Certainly these are plenty for the selfie crowd, absolutely, but for an aspiring hobbyist, you get the good stuff and make sure to have it with you.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 31, 2015 at 01:03 UTC
On DPReview recommends: Best smartphone cameras post (246 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: I picked up a Nikon D5000/18-55mm kit for only $175 around two weeks ago, it even included a portrait grip, 2 spare batteries, a Toshiba case and a 4G card. It would totally blast any of these to pieces. Yes it's large--so? When you care about quality, you only use the good stuff, not the stuff the Kodak/Polaroid crowd is using. Besides, if you can't deal with an SLR, there's always a Sony RX100 or Panasonic LX100, or the Sony NEX-6 which I also have and which, with Wi-Fi, can beam your images to a device for instant sharing, if that really matters so much.

Exactly (brownie314). I'm well aware of what other things smartphones can do, I have a 6" one in fact. However I still take a camera of some sort with me practically always because its image quality is superior. Instant uploading won't matter when you're looking at them later, whereas the better quality will.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 30, 2015 at 22:15 UTC
On DPReview recommends: Best smartphone cameras post (246 comments in total)

I picked up a Nikon D5000/18-55mm kit for only $175 around two weeks ago, it even included a portrait grip, 2 spare batteries, a Toshiba case and a 4G card. It would totally blast any of these to pieces. Yes it's large--so? When you care about quality, you only use the good stuff, not the stuff the Kodak/Polaroid crowd is using. Besides, if you can't deal with an SLR, there's always a Sony RX100 or Panasonic LX100, or the Sony NEX-6 which I also have and which, with Wi-Fi, can beam your images to a device for instant sharing, if that really matters so much.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 30, 2015 at 17:39 UTC as 45th comment | 13 replies
On Nikon D7200 First Impressions Review preview (1113 comments in total)

Not enough cross-sensitive AF points, the 7D II has 65 AF sensors and ALL of them are cross-sensitive. We shouldn't have to be doing "focus center, recompose" on a $1000+ camera.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2015 at 15:33 UTC as 123rd comment

McDonald's sells more hamburgers than the local place which makes fresh hamburgers, but that hardly means that McDonald's hamburgers are better. It just means some people are either lazy, in a hurry, or have no taste.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2015 at 07:18 UTC as 68th comment | 4 replies
On Apple iPhone 6 Plus camera review post (205 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: No thank you. I have an NEX-6 that would just smoke this thing (and via Wi-Fi can still share quickly), and if I needed something really small I could always get an RX100. These sorts of cameras remind me of the junky Polaroid SX-70 candy cameras of yesteryear, I didn't care for those either.

My opinion is real photographers would NEVER use their fruit-phone camera. That's my opinion, and it's not changing. Get over THAT

Direct link | Posted on Nov 19, 2014 at 17:22 UTC
On Apple iPhone 6 Plus camera review post (205 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: No thank you. I have an NEX-6 that would just smoke this thing (and via Wi-Fi can still share quickly), and if I needed something really small I could always get an RX100. These sorts of cameras remind me of the junky Polaroid SX-70 candy cameras of yesteryear, I didn't care for those either.

"Anything" meaning that use use its built-in camera when real cameras are readily at your disposal. "Real camera" is defined as being a camera that doesn't mutate or moonlight as a platform for playing Angry Birds. By that definition, a Nikon 1 is definitely a real camera. (Then again, so is a Coolpix, so that definition could probably use more refining.)

Direct link | Posted on Nov 14, 2014 at 17:49 UTC
On Apple iPhone 6 Plus camera review post (205 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: No thank you. I have an NEX-6 that would just smoke this thing (and via Wi-Fi can still share quickly), and if I needed something really small I could always get an RX100. These sorts of cameras remind me of the junky Polaroid SX-70 candy cameras of yesteryear, I didn't care for those either.

If you use a "fruit phone" as a deliberate choice for ANYTHING, then right there, automatically, by my definition,-you are not a professional photographer, REGARDLESS of your portfolio. Those are the actions of a con artist, or at least someone with no taste. What's so hard about "lugging" around something like a Sony RX100. What kind of an attitude is that, are you kidding me? Anyone with any sense of decency and even the most remote amount of a work ethic has to be laughing hysterically at that notion.

I'm not even a pro, yet I have the decency and the taste to carry at least a Nikon 1-series EVERYWHERE I GO. I would sooner jump in an active volcano before Ieft the house without a camera in tow. It's not hard, and I'm not lazy like that, acting like doing such is just SUCH a hardship. Come on.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 3, 2014 at 06:54 UTC
On FroKnowsPhoto guide to DSLR video now available article (154 comments in total)

There's no need to spend the time and money on this. I can summarize it easily--buy a dedicated video camera. Done.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 1, 2014 at 14:56 UTC as 52nd comment | 1 reply
On Apple iPhone 6 Plus camera review post (205 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: No thank you. I have an NEX-6 that would just smoke this thing (and via Wi-Fi can still share quickly), and if I needed something really small I could always get an RX100. These sorts of cameras remind me of the junky Polaroid SX-70 candy cameras of yesteryear, I didn't care for those either.

Yes, different people draw the line at different places. That's because some people clearly have no sense of taste. You can say you like Kool-Aid better than real grape juice--you have that right, but I still say it's poor taste. Someone calling themselves a "photographer" but using a fruit phone's camera by choice--same thing, as is a newspaper firing photographers who actually know what they're doing, not that it would be the first time a business took the cheap way out & excellence suffered because of it.

Like I said, if it were up to me--it isn't, but regardless--professional photography would be a licensed endeavor, just like being a doctor or attorney is. It would be REQUIRED by the licensing committee that you NEVER use a camera phone for any shoots. Break this requirement--wham, your license to practice pro photography is revoked. Pro photography is supposed to be a totally separate world from the world of teeny-boppers taking selfies with a Polaroid-quality toy. Please.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2014 at 14:22 UTC
On Apple iPhone 6 Plus camera review post (205 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: No thank you. I have an NEX-6 that would just smoke this thing (and via Wi-Fi can still share quickly), and if I needed something really small I could always get an RX100. These sorts of cameras remind me of the junky Polaroid SX-70 candy cameras of yesteryear, I didn't care for those either.

One may say it's "apples and oranges," but I don't see a legion of golfers practicing their craft with broomsticks, or even "laymen" grade golf clubs. They want the BEST for what they do, because in being the best you not only have to have the best skill, but it's only natural to want the best equipment as your toolkit.

The same goes with basketball players and the shoes they wear, baseball players and what sorts of bats and gloves they purchase, cyclists and the bicycles they acquire, and you sure as heck don't see someone participating on the racetrack using a "stock" Toyota Prius.

The same goes here. You want to call yourself the best, USE the best tool available for the job. OK, I can understand not toting a 4x6 view camera everywhere, or using a Nikon D3300 instead of a D4s, or heck, using an RX100 instead of an A7, but come on, you've got to draw the line somewhere.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2014 at 14:16 UTC
On Apple iPhone 6 Plus camera review post (205 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: No thank you. I have an NEX-6 that would just smoke this thing (and via Wi-Fi can still share quickly), and if I needed something really small I could always get an RX100. These sorts of cameras remind me of the junky Polaroid SX-70 candy cameras of yesteryear, I didn't care for those either.

I agree with IcyPepsi. No phone can replace an SLR or mirrorless etc for people who actually CARE. Show up for my daughter's wedding using a smartphone as a camera while calling yourself a professional and I will personally throw you out on your butt.

Yes smartphones have replaced the Powershots and Cybershots of the world, yes, but we're talking about Polaroid and Instamatic types for the masses who think Spaghettios is the same thing as real spaghetti served in a bistro. That's fine if that's all you want, but enthusiasts are supposed to strive for excellence.

In fact, I think pro photography should be licensed & usage of a real camera should be one of the stipulations for being able to practice your craft professionally. Use a phone--license revoked. I'm totally serious.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2014 at 16:36 UTC
On Apple iPhone 6 Plus camera review post (205 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: No thank you. I have an NEX-6 that would just smoke this thing (and via Wi-Fi can still share quickly), and if I needed something really small I could always get an RX100. These sorts of cameras remind me of the junky Polaroid SX-70 candy cameras of yesteryear, I didn't care for those either.

Real photographer s know lighting & such of course, but they ALSO use a camera commensurate with their aspirations. Just like people who aspire to be something of a golf enthusiast don't use broomsticks on the golf course, or people who have baseball aspirations try to get a quality bat and baseball glove etc even though they COULD just use a stick, the same goes here.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2014 at 01:43 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (819 comments in total)

An otherwise fantastic and top-level camera ruined, for me, by the removal of the electronic level gauge. I use this a LOT on my NEX-6 and would not want to give that up.

Yes, I have spirit levels I could use, but then, it's much easier to simply call up the electronic one vs fussing with a slide-one or screw-on, as I had to on my NEX-3n (but you expect it on such an entry-level model). Also, you can't see attached ones while using the EVF--and once you start using an EVF on the better models vs having to use the LCD, you don't want to go back.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 22, 2014 at 17:02 UTC as 38th comment
On Apple iPhone 6 Plus camera review post (205 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: No thank you. I have an NEX-6 that would just smoke this thing (and via Wi-Fi can still share quickly), and if I needed something really small I could always get an RX100. These sorts of cameras remind me of the junky Polaroid SX-70 candy cameras of yesteryear, I didn't care for those either.

(Jogger) Thank you. That is what REAL photographers do--they always have some sort of REAL camera with them, and by "real" camera I don't mean the 2014 equivalent of a Polaroid SX-70 or Kodak Instamatic. I mean a REAL camera, the 2014 equivalent of a Pentax K1000 and 50mm prime or the 35mm rangerfinders of yore.

It's pathetic that people whine about having to "lug" a camera around, when we have cameras like the RX100. If you fancy yourself a photographer, you DO it, no whining, period, especially with models like the RX100 available. I can see the "selfie" crowd using a smartphone for taking photos of their coffee-sipping and club-hopping exploits, but real photographers using one for their artistic exploits--give me a break.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 22, 2014 at 14:22 UTC
On Apple iPhone 6 Plus camera review post (205 comments in total)

No thank you. I have an NEX-6 that would just smoke this thing (and via Wi-Fi can still share quickly), and if I needed something really small I could always get an RX100. These sorts of cameras remind me of the junky Polaroid SX-70 candy cameras of yesteryear, I didn't care for those either.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 22, 2014 at 13:23 UTC as 28th comment | 29 replies
On Readers' Showcase: Documentary and Street photography article (108 comments in total)

When they say "click through," they mean it.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 20, 2014 at 16:25 UTC as 27th comment

Such is why I ultimately went with Sony E-mount.

Again, next, next, next, ne....--ugh, thank goodness for mobile view. Because (click) it's (next) nice (next) to (next).read (next) more (next) than (next) one (next) word (next) at (next) the (next) time.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 12:57 UTC as 34th comment
Total: 398, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »