acidic

Lives in United States San Francisco, CA, United States
Joined on Nov 23, 2003

Comments

Total: 280, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: Leica will soon be coming out with a PATCH for older models of their cameras...

It is a sturdy tough black tape to PATCH over your existing LCD screens.

A bargain at $857.99 on line stores only, while supply lasts.

.

I will wait for the Chinese knock offs to show up on eBay, for $2.99.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 03:32 UTC

How will the chimps survive?

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 18:32 UTC as 269th comment | 2 replies
On article Swirly bokeh: Lensbaby announces Twist 60 lens (118 comments in total)

OMG, I'm going to get one of these

if I see it on sale for 99 cents.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 00:02 UTC as 14th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

brazzy: DO NOT FLY DRONES ABOVE CROWDS. NEVER.
I do not know about FAA rules, as I don't live in the US, but this is the first unwritten requirement that every operator should have in his mind.
Mr. Johnson did something very good by going at dawn on Friday to take his footage, then something very wrong by flying above people on Saturday afternoon. He has been unlucky he couldn't get what he wanted on the very first time, but hey, this happens to all landscape photographers.
I am not against drone photography and I appreciate his work. I fly my Phantom 4 in Tokyo area and I get the same smooth videos - it works just great. But it's just too dangerous, you never know what may happen: Phantom 4 is reliable but the unexpected is always behind the corner.
I do hope that watching this beautiful video and picture won't stimulate other people to do the same. Dpreview should be careful about promoting this kind of footage.
DO NOT FLY DRONES ABOVE CROWDS.

"...drones are so scarce in relation to cars that the risk factor also drops significantly."

The risk of any one person being involved in a motor vehicle incident is much greater...

But how about the risk of any one drone being involved in an incident vs any one vehicle?

Again, my point was mainly about the public benefits of autos vs drones.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2016 at 01:03 UTC
In reply to:

brazzy: DO NOT FLY DRONES ABOVE CROWDS. NEVER.
I do not know about FAA rules, as I don't live in the US, but this is the first unwritten requirement that every operator should have in his mind.
Mr. Johnson did something very good by going at dawn on Friday to take his footage, then something very wrong by flying above people on Saturday afternoon. He has been unlucky he couldn't get what he wanted on the very first time, but hey, this happens to all landscape photographers.
I am not against drone photography and I appreciate his work. I fly my Phantom 4 in Tokyo area and I get the same smooth videos - it works just great. But it's just too dangerous, you never know what may happen: Phantom 4 is reliable but the unexpected is always behind the corner.
I do hope that watching this beautiful video and picture won't stimulate other people to do the same. Dpreview should be careful about promoting this kind of footage.
DO NOT FLY DRONES ABOVE CROWDS.

" 'Idiot operators' are the risk, not drones or anything else."

http://www.chasejarvis.com/blog/dji-drone-fail-over-iceland-waters-chasejarvistech/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/empire-state-building-drone-crash_us_56b48080e4b08069c7a6cb32

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QURn0uH6nbM

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/general-news/20150915/falling-drone-injures-11-month-old-near-pasadena-city-hall

Many more if you bother searching for them.

A while back, when I was reading reviews of one of the DJI units on various websites. There were enough stories about drones that have gone rogue and the drone + GoPro were lost forever (and they have to come down or fall down somewhere). Not sure if this is all due to "idiot operators" or faulty hardware, but it seems to be enough of an occurrence that drones should generally not be operated over people.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2016 at 23:57 UTC
In reply to:

brazzy: DO NOT FLY DRONES ABOVE CROWDS. NEVER.
I do not know about FAA rules, as I don't live in the US, but this is the first unwritten requirement that every operator should have in his mind.
Mr. Johnson did something very good by going at dawn on Friday to take his footage, then something very wrong by flying above people on Saturday afternoon. He has been unlucky he couldn't get what he wanted on the very first time, but hey, this happens to all landscape photographers.
I am not against drone photography and I appreciate his work. I fly my Phantom 4 in Tokyo area and I get the same smooth videos - it works just great. But it's just too dangerous, you never know what may happen: Phantom 4 is reliable but the unexpected is always behind the corner.
I do hope that watching this beautiful video and picture won't stimulate other people to do the same. Dpreview should be careful about promoting this kind of footage.
DO NOT FLY DRONES ABOVE CROWDS.

"Don't see them trying to outlaw motor vehicles anytime soon though..."

Think about the public benefit that motor vehicles provide.

Now think about the same with drones.

Risk–benefit analysis, something many photographers don't understand.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2016 at 23:47 UTC
In reply to:

brazzy: DO NOT FLY DRONES ABOVE CROWDS. NEVER.
I do not know about FAA rules, as I don't live in the US, but this is the first unwritten requirement that every operator should have in his mind.
Mr. Johnson did something very good by going at dawn on Friday to take his footage, then something very wrong by flying above people on Saturday afternoon. He has been unlucky he couldn't get what he wanted on the very first time, but hey, this happens to all landscape photographers.
I am not against drone photography and I appreciate his work. I fly my Phantom 4 in Tokyo area and I get the same smooth videos - it works just great. But it's just too dangerous, you never know what may happen: Phantom 4 is reliable but the unexpected is always behind the corner.
I do hope that watching this beautiful video and picture won't stimulate other people to do the same. Dpreview should be careful about promoting this kind of footage.
DO NOT FLY DRONES ABOVE CROWDS.

"According to US statistics 4500 people were killed last year just crossing a street."

You should be comparing probabilities between the likelihood a drone will injure someone below vs an auto injuring a pedestrian. Absolute numbers don't make for a good argument here. auto-pedestrian-incidents/auto-hours/day vs drone-incidents/drone-hours/day.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2016 at 22:06 UTC

I will get this and then get a custom Moto X with matching leather. Then I can control one with the other.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2016 at 02:51 UTC as 52nd comment
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1092 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hasa: Beautiful design! I need a Nikon version, please FF & mirror-less, 20-24 Mpix. 4K "HDR" video downsampled from fulll size sensor. Adapters for any FF Nikon with AF and other glass, Canon, Minolta etc..

You should send Nikon a wish list of features for the Df MkII,

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 01:35 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (623 comments in total)
In reply to:

ByronP: Obviously, the reviewer is trying to find something wrong. There was a picture of pros at the recent super bowl game where about 70% of them were using Canon lens. These are professionals and they can pick whatever camera system that fits their needs. They make their living taking images. If they or their gear does not capture money making photos, they starve. I trust their judgments more than any review, good or bad.

Bp

If I'm not mistaken, another benefit for Canon sports shooters is that CPS is on site at most major sporting events.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 09:11 UTC
In reply to:

Camera Joey: So, does the 80D focus better than my brother with ADD?

nice one

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 08:41 UTC
On article Pride and joy: shooting the Olympus PEN-F in Austin (285 comments in total)

I have a catalog of film scans of out of focus gray cards taken with various film stocks. Back in the earlier days of digital, I often added real film grain to some of my images by layering on one of these scans in photoshop. The reason was that a low-ISO digital image looked way too smooth and artificial and sterile.

So I see film grain is back in fashion. Is it just a retro/hipster thing?

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2016 at 02:20 UTC as 39th comment | 5 replies
On article Corbis Images content to be distributed by Getty (29 comments in total)

The photo that illustrates this article at the top of the page is very fitting. Those men, sitting precariously on a beam, reading what I assume are their unfavorable contracts. Thank you Getty Images.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2016 at 01:23 UTC as 13th comment
On Connect post Panasonic to launch Lumix DMC-CM10 without phone functionality (132 comments in total)

All of the haters of this product:

- don't live in Japan where this product will be offered,

and/or

- are too old to realize many people communicate just fine on a day to day basis without using their voice minutes on their cell phone plan.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2016 at 23:18 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply

"The New York Public Library has released more than 180,000 digitized items into the public domain, making them freely available for anyone to use for any purpose."

Any purpose? Even commercial ones (i.e. advertisements)? Even of those containing living persons? Just because images are in the public domain doesn't mean that model releases aren't required for certain uses.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2016 at 01:50 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

acidic: "It also includes a retractable hood like the one found on the M.Zuiko Digital 50-150 F2.8 IS Pro."

M.Zuiko Digital 50-150 F2.8 IS Pro

I've never heard of this lens. 50-150mm f/2.8 with OIS sounds like a dream of a tele-zoom. Please tell me more.

Are you sure? Because that's what I suspected, that they were talking about the 40-150mm 2.8. But then the inclusion of "IS" caught my attention, which the 40-150mm does not have.

In any case, I'm sure you're right. Just a case of poor editorial review.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 02:13 UTC
In reply to:

Johannes Zander: My Olympus ED 150 mm f/2.0 with EC20 is just as good. Only AF might not be as fast as with the new lens.
I don't see any super sharpness!
Bokeh is average.

"Granny 43 crashed our hipster m43 party..."

Hipsters love retro stuff, just like grannies. Give it a few more years, the hipsters will migrate from Lomos to 4/3.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 01:39 UTC

"It also includes a retractable hood like the one found on the M.Zuiko Digital 50-150 F2.8 IS Pro."

M.Zuiko Digital 50-150 F2.8 IS Pro

I've never heard of this lens. 50-150mm f/2.8 with OIS sounds like a dream of a tele-zoom. Please tell me more.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 01:25 UTC as 8th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

thx1138: LOL at the price. Seriously delusional. The mirrorless fanbois would be in hysterics if Canikon released a 300 f/4 that cost $2500. Hell the Nikon with DO technology is only $2K and has to be corrected for a 4x larger sensor.

300mm f/4
= 600mm f/4
= 600mm f/8
= 450mm f5.6
= ?
So these are all essentially the same?

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 01:19 UTC

I didn't hear any mention of refrigerators. Pffff, typical Nikon.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 00:55 UTC as 18th comment
Total: 280, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »