larrytusaz

larrytusaz

Lives in United States Tucson, AZ, United States
Works as a Database Design
Joined on Aug 20, 2005
About me:

Equipment:
Nikon D40 (6-2007), D200 (3-2009)
Nikon 18-55mm DX AF-S
Nikon 70-210 f/4-5.6 AF non D
Soligor pre-AI 135mm f/2.8 (11-2007)
52mm & 62mm Circular Polarizers (2004 & 2005)
72mm Polarizer (5-2008)
ML-L3 remote (11-2007)
WT(re)B: D40x

Comments

Total: 371, showing: 241 – 260
« First‹ Previous1112131415Next ›Last »
In reply to:

larrytusaz: Okay, not to grumble too much, but can someone PLEASE tell me what is wrong with "minors' being visible in the picture? Please don't propagate the silly myth that taking photos of kids at the park equals being a pervert.

(ConanFuji) Well when you put it that way, I can understand it. Most definitely. What you are describing is what you could call the "Full House Syndrome" (as in the TV show from the 80s-90s). My own wife just went through a phase of wanting to watch Full House DVDs every night for HOURS upon returning home from work, and it drove me crazy--anything a kid did was AUTOMATICALLY superior & of a higher priority than the adults' lives. Oh my goodness, I could hardly stand it.

If THAT is what you are trying to prevent, I couldn't agree with you more, and my apologies for not getting it the 1st time.

What I was talking about is the common scenario you see nowadays whereby if you are a male in the park with a camera snapping photos, people think you're a pervert. (Have they never heard of Henri Cartier-Bresson?) In one case (tinyurl.com/65qguv) a father was called that even when he was photographing his OWN kids. But that's another topic for another day.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2012 at 18:02 UTC

Okay, not to grumble too much, but can someone PLEASE tell me what is wrong with "minors' being visible in the picture? Please don't propagate the silly myth that taking photos of kids at the park equals being a pervert.

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2012 at 18:30 UTC as 3rd comment | 3 replies

So much for how locking out 3rd party batteries from their cameras prevents overheating/explosions and the like.

To wit: when oh when are the 3rd party manufacturers going to successfully clone the EN-EL15? It's been almost 2 years.

LRH
Motorola Triumph

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2012 at 01:05 UTC as 24th comment
In reply to:

Jogger: but, does it do 1080p?

HA HA HA HA, thank you so VERY much for that. So, to the videographers who want to corrupt our stills-only cameras with your video concerns, I give you the Archie Bunker raspberry.

If I could afford it, I'd buy it just based on that principle alone, to "vote with my dollars" how much I so approve of this.

(But I've got to admit, it's a whole different league of camera, but I've got to admit, the Nikon D5100 I own, it is giving me KILLER photographs. As long as you can ignore that red-dot movie button, easy to do if you don't use live-view--and I usually don't--it continues to amaze me how great it does, especially at high ISOs.)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2012 at 15:33 UTC
In reply to:

PaulSnowcat: An now we'll have a new class of "professional" photographers.

- Hi, who are you?
- I am a photographer!
-What kind of photographer?
-A professional! I am using losless pics from my Iphone!

Ugh :/

Total agreement. Enough of these "it doesn't matter what your tool is." Maybe I should take my kitchen butter knives & call them my "tools" & call myself a home improvement professional. C'mon now--even if "artistic" photos have been taken with a phone, if you're even half-serious about photography, why would you dumb yourself down using an inferior tool like that?

Smartphone photos are fine for FUN, heck, I've used mine for times when I was trying to match up a hardware supply store part for an appliance I needed help with, I took a picture of the relevant area of my appliance so the store clerk could look at it & say "oh yes, you need so & so for that"--for such things--sure.

But for REAL photos of QUALITY, only a REAL camera will do. Heck you can pick up an Olympus E-PL1 kit for barely $200 anymore, it's not even the latest-greatest technology by any means, yet even it will still easily smoke camera phone photos to bits.

And it's small enough to have with you too, by the way.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2012 at 13:32 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: I don't question why Canon is doing 4K video -- all video is headed there.

I'm less clear on why DPReview is giving so much coverage to Canon video when it has a long tradition of barely mentioning video from other companies. Could it be because Canon isn't doing much with stills that's interesting...?

If I'm overposting, forgive me. To me, I think painting vs photography is a good analogy. I don't doubt there is much overlap there, yet at the same I have heard of & even met persons who are into painting who are not into photography one bit. If you go back in time enough, it was once the case photographs didn't exist at all, paintings were IT. Can you imagine how puzzled artists of the day were once photography came to be, & especially when the Kodak Brownie made everyone a "photographer?"

Yet, painting survived, and what's more, people who don't disparage photography but just aren't interested in it because painting is what they do, we're totally okay with that. There are sites you can go to that deal with painting ONLY. No one is calling those sites or their fans "luddites." They like what they like, no disrespect to anyone else's interests. It's GOOD that you can be into painting & have no interest in photography & not be called a "luddite."

The same thing should apply here.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 20, 2012 at 19:11 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: I don't question why Canon is doing 4K video -- all video is headed there.

I'm less clear on why DPReview is giving so much coverage to Canon video when it has a long tradition of barely mentioning video from other companies. Could it be because Canon isn't doing much with stills that's interesting...?

I REALLY don't want to make anyone in authority mad, but I totally share the concerns of those who are scratching their head at all the video stories appearing on here lately. Even respected Nikon expert Thom Hogan has expressed concerns at photography progress being snowed under by an avalanche of video interest. The same applies with this site covering video every 2.5 nanoseconds.

It is one thing to acknowledge that SLRs can record video, it's another for every other story here to be video-video-video. I mean every-time I turn around, there is yet another video story. It's almost as if this has turned into a site mostly about video, with a little photography sprinkled here & there for old time's sake, but otherwise--this is a site fully dedicated to almost NOTHING but videography now.

After all of these years, it's really disappointing to see this. Photography is still very relevant. There are plenty of people here who are interested in STILLS even if they ARE okay with SLR video.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 20, 2012 at 19:03 UTC
In reply to:

larrytusaz: I would like it if the red-dot movie button could be re-mapped. I don't use movie-mode on SLRs & it would be handy to be able to remap it to ISO or white balance etc, just as you can with the Fn button.

I'm not going on a "SLRs shouldn't have movie modes" rant, it's been almost 4 years & whether I like it or not it's here, and I realize the target market absolutely wants it. Still, the Fn button can be re-mapped, on a model like this that has so few "hot buttons" it would be nice if the red-dot could be as well. (Obviously it would be mapped to movie-mode out-of-box by default.) Other "semi-serious" models like the Olympus E-PL1 I also own allow for this, as do the newer versions of m4/3rds.

And yes--why not Wi-Fi built-in? (One person said "different standards in different countries"--but then how did Samsung figure it out?) Why not have the Wi-Fi unit, or another one like it, that works with not-so-ancient models like the D5100 and D7000 etc?

Anyone around here have a can of Raid? There's a certain yucky cockroach scurrying about that needs to be sprayed.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 22:07 UTC
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: A number of observations:

(1) If I read the specifications correctly, this camera, which looks more like a stills camera than a video, nonetheless is video-only. I have no problem with that. Trouble is, good luck finding a stills-only d-SLR. That seems like a double standard to me.

(2) That aside, even if photography & video are "converging" (and I sure hope they aren't, and if they are, I will practically make it my very mission in life to make it not be so if I at all can), what is with dpreview's fixation on video gear of all a sudden? A little here & there is okay, but my goodness--it's like I woke up & Chick-Fil-A suddenly not only sold hamburgers, but forgot about chicken completely.

(3) Lastly--why a sealed-up battery? Something in me worried sooner or later cameras would jump on the "don't let users replace their own batteries" bandwagon. Why are all the electronics manufacturers so insistent on doing this?

I can argue what's in my heart all I care to. Further, one does not need to PROVE video is not photography--actual life experiences you've had, including mingling with others, are all I need to substantiate it. Others, maybe not, but me--I feel it in my heart that the 2 should not "cross-contaminate" each other, & that's it. Someone can argue all day, even with facts backing them up, to PROVE that, technically & even practically speaking, they're the same. My mind is made up, & that's it.

I have no problem with the existence of this product, although the non-replaceable battery design is stupid. I don't even object to dpreview making occasional mention of such products every now & then, even if I don't like so much "cross contamination." I just, like others who have posted here, don't care for their preoccupation with video lately. They seem to be going beyond just acknowledging it or touching on it here & there, and just all-out cramming it down our throats.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 17:52 UTC
In reply to:

larrytusaz: I would like it if the red-dot movie button could be re-mapped. I don't use movie-mode on SLRs & it would be handy to be able to remap it to ISO or white balance etc, just as you can with the Fn button.

I'm not going on a "SLRs shouldn't have movie modes" rant, it's been almost 4 years & whether I like it or not it's here, and I realize the target market absolutely wants it. Still, the Fn button can be re-mapped, on a model like this that has so few "hot buttons" it would be nice if the red-dot could be as well. (Obviously it would be mapped to movie-mode out-of-box by default.) Other "semi-serious" models like the Olympus E-PL1 I also own allow for this, as do the newer versions of m4/3rds.

And yes--why not Wi-Fi built-in? (One person said "different standards in different countries"--but then how did Samsung figure it out?) Why not have the Wi-Fi unit, or another one like it, that works with not-so-ancient models like the D5100 and D7000 etc?

(john--) I understand what you're getting at. I would say, though, the same thing would happen in many other situations, and with MUCH worse consequences. What if they put it in M (manual) mode by accident, very easy to do with the mode dial right therel. The custom functions of the re-map nature tend to be hidden by default as "advanced" & thus wouldn't likely be goofed up by accident.

(Christian) No, I have NOT changed my mind nor "proven you right." I'm merely trying to be civil. While I don't care for photo-video convergence, especially on DSLRs, I can TOLERATE it if it can be made to stay out of my way on the tools I use. The suggestion I made would do just that, & at very minimal expense--AND the video crowd would not have anything taken from them at all. Sounds to me like I'm trying to be reasonable. Given that models like the Olympus m4/3rds let you do that, and the Nikon D800-D4 etc as well as I understand it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 17:40 UTC

I would like it if the red-dot movie button could be re-mapped. I don't use movie-mode on SLRs & it would be handy to be able to remap it to ISO or white balance etc, just as you can with the Fn button.

I'm not going on a "SLRs shouldn't have movie modes" rant, it's been almost 4 years & whether I like it or not it's here, and I realize the target market absolutely wants it. Still, the Fn button can be re-mapped, on a model like this that has so few "hot buttons" it would be nice if the red-dot could be as well. (Obviously it would be mapped to movie-mode out-of-box by default.) Other "semi-serious" models like the Olympus E-PL1 I also own allow for this, as do the newer versions of m4/3rds.

And yes--why not Wi-Fi built-in? (One person said "different standards in different countries"--but then how did Samsung figure it out?) Why not have the Wi-Fi unit, or another one like it, that works with not-so-ancient models like the D5100 and D7000 etc?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 14:47 UTC as 99th comment | 5 replies

One small detail, if I am correct--unlike the D3100, it will work with the ML-L3 remote that almost all consumer-level Nikon DSLRs also work with. Notice the infrared receiver on the top-rear-left.

Yes, it's a small detail, but maybe worth pointing out?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 14:13 UTC as 103rd comment | 1 reply
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: A number of observations:

(1) If I read the specifications correctly, this camera, which looks more like a stills camera than a video, nonetheless is video-only. I have no problem with that. Trouble is, good luck finding a stills-only d-SLR. That seems like a double standard to me.

(2) That aside, even if photography & video are "converging" (and I sure hope they aren't, and if they are, I will practically make it my very mission in life to make it not be so if I at all can), what is with dpreview's fixation on video gear of all a sudden? A little here & there is okay, but my goodness--it's like I woke up & Chick-Fil-A suddenly not only sold hamburgers, but forgot about chicken completely.

(3) Lastly--why a sealed-up battery? Something in me worried sooner or later cameras would jump on the "don't let users replace their own batteries" bandwagon. Why are all the electronics manufacturers so insistent on doing this?

THERE new entry level camera? Been to grammar school lately?

I stand by what I said, and I do NOT need to PROVE they are DIFFERENT, I KNOW they are, in my heart, soul and my brain. Period. People who are serious about stills know it, too--as you browse this thread, you see I'm not the only one by any means. People like you disagree, they're WRONG and that's IT. Yes, that includes Nikon.

Resistance to ME is futile-I will NOT stop posting here until I have the last word. I will SEE to it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 13:25 UTC
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: A number of observations:

(1) If I read the specifications correctly, this camera, which looks more like a stills camera than a video, nonetheless is video-only. I have no problem with that. Trouble is, good luck finding a stills-only d-SLR. That seems like a double standard to me.

(2) That aside, even if photography & video are "converging" (and I sure hope they aren't, and if they are, I will practically make it my very mission in life to make it not be so if I at all can), what is with dpreview's fixation on video gear of all a sudden? A little here & there is okay, but my goodness--it's like I woke up & Chick-Fil-A suddenly not only sold hamburgers, but forgot about chicken completely.

(3) Lastly--why a sealed-up battery? Something in me worried sooner or later cameras would jump on the "don't let users replace their own batteries" bandwagon. Why are all the electronics manufacturers so insistent on doing this?

There is plenty out there that explains how the merits, aesthetics & qualities of a photograph are as different from a "series of stills in succession" as it gets. You're talking about a TECHNICAL specification. Saying a video is nothing more than a series of stills is like saying the human body and a lake are basically the same thing since the human body is 98% water.

I'm not arguing that TECHNICALLY a DSLR CAN record video, I'm arguing that DSLRs have always been about stills & the ergonomics should be tailor-made for stills as what's ideal ergonomically for photography vs videography is totally different, & DSLRs were photo-takers first.

Boundaries should be respected. This to me is like those that let their kids ride their bicycles on the basketball court at the park when I'm trying to shoot baskets & get mad at me when I tell them that they need to make their kids move because they're in my way. What part of "basketball court" don't they understand?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 02:51 UTC
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

nrojc: Don´t get me wrong.. I have nothing against cinematography.. but.. is this not Digital PHOTOGRAPHY Review? I understand that they mention the 1D-C, since it is a hybrid.. but this? Hmm.. you are geting off-topic with the whole concept of this page.. :)

Okay, smart aleck, I think we understand that 24 frames a second is NOT the same thing as a STILL conceptually or artistically-speaking even if it is TECHNICALLY that. I'm not going to explain it to you, if you're that ignorant that you can't understand the difference, obviously you're a lost cause. What do I care?

Luddites were a group of anti-industrialists who went around sabotaging plants. No one here is trying to sabotage a camera plant & use criminal force to MAKE video in DSLRs go away. This is about the corruption of an art form by another art form that is a totally legitimate art form but NOT the same ONE. If that makes me a "luddite," so be it. I say DPreview should be concerned with QUALITY and SCREW traffic levels. Yes McDonald's sells more hamburgers than somebody else that makes them slowly but better, but I didn't think DPreview was "dumbed down for the masses" that way.

LRH

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 02:35 UTC
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: A number of observations:

(1) If I read the specifications correctly, this camera, which looks more like a stills camera than a video, nonetheless is video-only. I have no problem with that. Trouble is, good luck finding a stills-only d-SLR. That seems like a double standard to me.

(2) That aside, even if photography & video are "converging" (and I sure hope they aren't, and if they are, I will practically make it my very mission in life to make it not be so if I at all can), what is with dpreview's fixation on video gear of all a sudden? A little here & there is okay, but my goodness--it's like I woke up & Chick-Fil-A suddenly not only sold hamburgers, but forgot about chicken completely.

(3) Lastly--why a sealed-up battery? Something in me worried sooner or later cameras would jump on the "don't let users replace their own batteries" bandwagon. Why are all the electronics manufacturers so insistent on doing this?

(tosvus) Maybe you are & a number of people are, but it does seem to me a lot of people aren't interested in anything other than photography & don't like seeing a formerly good site suddenly morphing into something else entirely. A little "branching out" maybe, just MAYBE, so long as you don't forget your CORE.

I do seriously hope I am being respectful, but I don't think it's DPreview so much "being with the times" as it is just losing their focus altogether. So many other aspects of life I see still handle photography & videography separately. I can say this for sure--in my house, there IS no convergence, & there won't be. I even told my wife (who isn't as SLR literate) that the D5000 we owned last year didn't record video, so that it wouldn't be used that way, not even if one of our kids did something cute & it was missed because our video camera wasn't around/charged at the time. Keep the video camera handy & charged & use THAT. I am THAT serious about NOT using a DSLR for video.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2012 at 22:14 UTC
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: A number of observations:

(1) If I read the specifications correctly, this camera, which looks more like a stills camera than a video, nonetheless is video-only. I have no problem with that. Trouble is, good luck finding a stills-only d-SLR. That seems like a double standard to me.

(2) That aside, even if photography & video are "converging" (and I sure hope they aren't, and if they are, I will practically make it my very mission in life to make it not be so if I at all can), what is with dpreview's fixation on video gear of all a sudden? A little here & there is okay, but my goodness--it's like I woke up & Chick-Fil-A suddenly not only sold hamburgers, but forgot about chicken completely.

(3) Lastly--why a sealed-up battery? Something in me worried sooner or later cameras would jump on the "don't let users replace their own batteries" bandwagon. Why are all the electronics manufacturers so insistent on doing this?

Several here BESIDES me have said things along the lines of "this is digital PHOTOGRAPHY review, what's up with this reporting on video cameras every other day of all a sudden" which indicates there are a number of persons troubled by the video fixation shown here as of late.

Because this is a photography site, NOT video--I don't care if James Cameron & George Lucas call it photography. It isn't.

I am well aware of all the different movies people have shot with a 5D II. So? I used a butter knife to loosen a screw once, does that make it a screwdriver? They have PLENTY of large-sensored video cameras to choose from, nothing stopping them other than themselves.

I would say that there are plenty of video-oriented sites you're free to visit, and I'm in favor of their existence totally--but this isn't a video site, so MAYBE the truth would be that YOU are the one bothering many of US. But please, continue. (Now would be a good time for someone else to post "enough you two," fine by me.)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2012 at 18:29 UTC
On 2012 Pulitzer Prize photography winners announced article (76 comments in total)

Thank you, d(p)review (I emphasis the P, as in PHOTOGRAPHY), now THIS is the kind of stuff I come here for, not for the endless video parade I keep seeing lately.

Anyway.

Photos tell a story. Photos evoke emotion. Photos speak of a world filled with love, peace, turmoil, lust, desire, anger, happiness, joy, optimism, hopelessness, despair, urgency, content--I could go on.

You look and you focus on all the details & come away realizing what a great large world we live in, and how complex and unpredictable yet exciting life can be, for however long enough we're fortunate enough to live it.

Money is beside the point--although if one is compensated for their excellence, great, what's the harm in that? Photographers do what they do, in whatever capacity hobbyist or professional, to create images that stun, stir the emotions, create ponderings in the heart--things no everyday "snapshot" will typically do. It's beyond merely preserving a memory, but evoking emotions in one's soul.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2012 at 17:11 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: A number of observations:

(1) If I read the specifications correctly, this camera, which looks more like a stills camera than a video, nonetheless is video-only. I have no problem with that. Trouble is, good luck finding a stills-only d-SLR. That seems like a double standard to me.

(2) That aside, even if photography & video are "converging" (and I sure hope they aren't, and if they are, I will practically make it my very mission in life to make it not be so if I at all can), what is with dpreview's fixation on video gear of all a sudden? A little here & there is okay, but my goodness--it's like I woke up & Chick-Fil-A suddenly not only sold hamburgers, but forgot about chicken completely.

(3) Lastly--why a sealed-up battery? Something in me worried sooner or later cameras would jump on the "don't let users replace their own batteries" bandwagon. Why are all the electronics manufacturers so insistent on doing this?

It doesn't matter how many customers liked video on the 5D II--it didn't belong there. I don't care if Canon make 5 zillion gazillion dollars from it--it was STILL wrong to do. Yes lots of people watch trash like Jerry Springer or the Steve Wilkos show & they make the network lots of money--does that make them good TV shows? I submit they're still trash I don't care how many freaks watch that trash, it's still trash.

Same here with YOUTUBE on a DSLR. It has no business here, I don't care if Nikon, Canon, Olympus and Pentax and every man-woman-child in the USA and UK and China all say it does. IT. DOES. NOT.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2012 at 17:01 UTC
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: A number of observations:

(1) If I read the specifications correctly, this camera, which looks more like a stills camera than a video, nonetheless is video-only. I have no problem with that. Trouble is, good luck finding a stills-only d-SLR. That seems like a double standard to me.

(2) That aside, even if photography & video are "converging" (and I sure hope they aren't, and if they are, I will practically make it my very mission in life to make it not be so if I at all can), what is with dpreview's fixation on video gear of all a sudden? A little here & there is okay, but my goodness--it's like I woke up & Chick-Fil-A suddenly not only sold hamburgers, but forgot about chicken completely.

(3) Lastly--why a sealed-up battery? Something in me worried sooner or later cameras would jump on the "don't let users replace their own batteries" bandwagon. Why are all the electronics manufacturers so insistent on doing this?

YouTube mode is responsible for the 5D III having image quality improvements? Oh get real. DSLRs have been leap-frogging their predecessors in image quality LONG before YouTube appeared on the scene.

YouTube does-not-belong-on-an-DSLR. Period. That is it. If DSLRs require video to be around, I'd rather they stop existing altogether. Video is TRESPASSING where it does not belong. Video does NOT belong on a DSLR anymore than a child molester belongs in a daycare center. It's perverted, it's disgusting, it's tacky, it's a violation of all that is decent.

I don't care if 10 billion YouTubers say it does--Nikon included. That only means 10 billion are WRONG. Period. Case close. YouTube on a DSLR is as tacky as ripping up a portrait of the Pope--in a Catholic church, on stage (not in the back), during Christmas Eve mass, on national television, AND your boss is Catholic.

We have GOT to keep some standards of decency in our society, or we're done for.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2012 at 16:53 UTC
Total: 371, showing: 241 – 260
« First‹ Previous1112131415Next ›Last »