Teila Day

Teila Day

Lives in United States FL, United States
Has a website at www.teiladay.com
Joined on Apr 5, 2005

Comments

Total: 237, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: From mock-up to teaser site, to mock-up behind a glass, to teaser photos...
There's no limit to what Pentax can do.

... unless it has to do with bringing leaf lenses to fruition or at least a high sync speed option at the camera, like their medium format counterparts ;) (ribbing Pentax with my elbow)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2016 at 20:02 UTC
In reply to:

nathantw: Who pays the tax on that wonderful high-end medium format camera? The photographer, of course.

Tim, you'd be smart to do so too! Another smart move would be to let whatever family member has the best tax position by virtue of where they reside in the world, to (technically) enter contest/claim the prize ;)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 20, 2016 at 18:48 UTC
In reply to:

Lan: Anonymous prizes? I hope that doesn't mean a handful of Hasselblad Lunars they had rotting in a cupboard somewhere ;)

... nope, they're just ugly. :)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2016 at 02:19 UTC
In reply to:

nathantw: Who pays the tax on that wonderful high-end medium format camera? The photographer, of course.

I don't play either, but spending a few bucks for a ticket, then subsequently winning a billion (powerball), and getting about half that in a lump sum I can't consider a "trap" :)

But if i'm ever on a game show, keep the cars, trips, and over priced prizes... just give me cold hard cash!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2016 at 02:18 UTC
In reply to:

Sarge_: I just don't understand, with all the boundaries Sony has pushed, do they not have a lineup of faster f2.8 zoom lenses (11-24, 24-70, 70-200). F4 just seems like amateur kit on a camera that seems to have professional capability.

The 100mm on FF and MF is one of my favorite. Don't get me wrong, I'm not at all against primes! If you don't need the convenience of zooming, get a high quality prime! :)

It just depends on what tool is best for the job. When it comes to getting paid, and not having all the time in the world to zoom back and forth with my legs, the (fast) bread and butter zooms (e.g. 17-35, 24-70 and 70-200) are often the best tools for the job.

If the shoot is totally on my terms, I'll usually pick up a fast prime.

edit: Androole, sound like you already know all the great benefits of using a premium prime lens! (thumbs up)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 18, 2016 at 17:38 UTC
In reply to:

Sarge_: I just don't understand, with all the boundaries Sony has pushed, do they not have a lineup of faster f2.8 zoom lenses (11-24, 24-70, 70-200). F4 just seems like amateur kit on a camera that seems to have professional capability.

Regarding f/4 vs. f/2.8 zooms. The elephant in the room is that many shots at f/2.8 look absolutely nothing like shots taken at f/4 when can make all the difference in the world when shooting on other people's property where the background is objectionable.

Objectionable or not, I much more prefer a fast wide angle zoom because when you're shooting a subject / portrait that's relatively close to the camera, the background is rendered considerably smoother at f/2.8 compared to the same shot taken at f/4.

Focus: Irrespective of the aperture you have selected, when it comes to shooting in low ambient light indoor or outdoors; faster aperture zooms really come into their own allowing the camera to focus (or even manual focusing) better with more light coming into the lens (or viewfinder if you're manually focusing); making focusing more expedient with less "hunting".

Studio: fast lenses often negate having to use ir assist or modeling lights to assist with focus.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 18, 2016 at 17:20 UTC
In reply to:

lawamainn: This roundup is bad news for Pentax 645.... Guess they have to do something, fast!

((chuckle)) ... I think medium format is safe for now. But in many areas, you're right; for so many uses the common dslr has really given MF an excellent run for the money. But when it comes to shooting on location and not having to deal with blown whites, I'll take medium format every time.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 18, 2016 at 17:10 UTC
In reply to:

G L: I do not know.
But often by such photo contests I think the most unusal photo wins.
Not often that I think "Wow that is really a great picture".
It has just to be unusual that seems to be the most important thing to win a competion.

And no I don´t participate at any competions, I just like it to take pictures as I like it to go for a walk in the morning sun.

I agree, the contest should just be called "digital creations".

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2016 at 14:43 UTC
In reply to:

nathantw: Who pays the tax on that wonderful high-end medium format camera? The photographer, of course.

@Nathantw... frankly, if a photographer is struggling to get clients AND to get those clients to pay (I'm not sure how other photographers do it, but if a client hasn't paid me anything, they're not my client yet); then that photographer should have another line of work as their primary source of income.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2016 at 14:35 UTC
In reply to:

nathantw: Who pays the tax on that wonderful high-end medium format camera? The photographer, of course.

Tim, yes, you are supposed to pay taxes on prizes which is why many people who win a brand new Corvette or two week trip to some exotic place, on a game show are in a pickle of sorts. I've always thought it was best to just win cash ;)

I'd gladly pay the taxes on the new Phase body/back combo without thinking twice though.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2016 at 14:29 UTC
On article Nikon fills in the blanks on professional grade D5 DSLR (554 comments in total)
In reply to:

vFunct: These are real cameras, for real photographers.

Let the amateurs, the poseurs, the untalented, the beginner, the retiree, and the frail and weak pathetic girly-men carry their laughable mirrorless to occasionally play photographer with.

Meanwhile, actual photographers will go ahead and use a real camera like this.

If you're going to use a mirrorless camera, and not get laughed at in the face, it better be a large-format 4x5 or 8x10.

@Armandino-- you are very correct, strobe tech has come a long way indeed. Relatively soon, sync speeds as we know them today will no longer be a consideration when shooting in the daylight using strobes. I'll be very happy when we can shoot 1/2000 sec and sync with virtually any strobe on the market.

Einsteins have a good reputation. I keep hearing people saying that they won't give theirs up! I've been looking for a wireless solution like the Profoto B1; but even though Profoto claims fast sync speeds, I'm not yet convinced; the low power (500 ws) is also an issue.

There's no way I'm going to get a fast sync speed + a decent amount of light + short duration, when I turn that thing to half power in effort to get a really short flash duration. Maybe if the strobe is dialed down to 1/10th power.. :)

@HB1969 ... Thumbs up!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2016 at 06:23 UTC
In reply to:

maximme: just had a thought,
Canon 50 mp camera is half the resolution of this
BUT you only just begin to see the difference between them.
Its there BUT not as much as you would imagine.

so i think Canon had a re-think about medium format and decided
the cost of an entirely new system is not worth their while...

Well Done Canon

There is a obvious difference between a 50mp Canon 5DSr and pretty much any medium format camera on the planet. While I waited with anticipation for the Canon, it didn't even remotely measure up to the larger medium format sensors. Do not be misled, the Canon isn't in the same ball park. Had the 5DSr had much better a much better (wider) colour range, to stave off how fast it blows whites, then the camera would've been far more compelling.

That said, it can be used in many cases as a medium format replacement in many cases.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2016 at 18:23 UTC
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Can someone explain to me what's the difference I will see beside higher resolution between this camera + 80mm f/2.8 and a A7R II + 55mm Otus.

Max print size would be different but what else? Thanks

I'd guess how quickly the colours blow out to white wouldn't be the same or how quickly and smoothly the in-focus area transitions to out of focus. That's what I still notice between Canon and medium format. I assume the A7RII would perform in the same overall manner as the Canon when compared to medium format.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2016 at 18:15 UTC

Hmmm... so what I'm wondering is whether or not Phase will follow suite 2-3 years from now, and drop the price of their 100mp, XF by 40%... at least then I'd feel as if I'm getting something more than just 'ripped off' (looking at you Hasselblad 50c) for the money spent. ;)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 00:15 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Nikon fills in the blanks on professional grade D5 DSLR (554 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bhima78: That camera is a BEAST. Definitely only for commissioned work because, who the hell wants to lug around a camera like this if they weren't getting paid to?

I haven't found any camera "easily" usable at iso 25800 outside of printing on canvas or b/w conversions. iso 25800 for the high school football game where the b/w shots are destined for the local paper? No problem. 25800 iso for natural light colour portraiture against various background in and outdoors? Not even a realistic option in most cases even with 1/128th of flash used up close.
Medium Format doesn't fair much better either.

I fancy useable high isos... but for me, once 6400 or so is reached, it's grit-my-teeth unless I'm shooting with the intention of printing on a relatively rough substrate.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 18:49 UTC
On article Nikon fills in the blanks on professional grade D5 DSLR (554 comments in total)
In reply to:

vFunct: These are real cameras, for real photographers.

Let the amateurs, the poseurs, the untalented, the beginner, the retiree, and the frail and weak pathetic girly-men carry their laughable mirrorless to occasionally play photographer with.

Meanwhile, actual photographers will go ahead and use a real camera like this.

If you're going to use a mirrorless camera, and not get laughed at in the face, it better be a large-format 4x5 or 8x10.

Jonathan... probably because "equipment" can, and very often does, make a lot of difference. The results from a $500 studio strobe, is a world away from what can be done using a $15,000 pack/strobe. What one can capture at 14fps/ 20mp using a $15k pack/studio strobe usually can't be done without countless bouts of trial/error, multiple layers in photoshop and hours at the computer...

"just go out and enjoy the images you make..." isn't realistic if your main reason for holding the camera up to your face is to get paid doing what others can't do, or have too much trouble trying to do in the same amount of time you can do it.

The bottom line for many photographers is; getting equipment that makes 'making money' easier, supersedes the idea of just having fun with the camera.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 18:36 UTC
On article Nikon fills in the blanks on professional grade D5 DSLR (554 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bhima78: That camera is a BEAST. Definitely only for commissioned work because, who the hell wants to lug around a camera like this if they weren't getting paid to?

Homan is generally correct; and whether or not the 1Dx was announced 4 or 5 years ago doesn't take away the real-world point Homan is making. The stratospheric isos are practically non useable for most photographers shooting for pay.. or otherwise.

This is the first (in a long time) pro body from Nikon that I'd actually consider buying if I wasn't holding out for Canon to do what it should've done with the 1Dx in the first place. 20mp, 12/14fps, radio flash (what took so long!)... I think Nikon has done a fine job with this camera based on stats alone.

Nikon D5, D810, D500... Good Job Nikon.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 18:13 UTC
In reply to:

riman: I plan to buy one and a few lenses to go with it and stick them in the back of my Ferrari...when I hit the lottery!

Psssst... let me guess.. you don't own a Ferrari. Do you believe there are no mid engine Porsches too? ;) Best of the new year to you!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 03:29 UTC
On article DPReview recommends: Best Cameras for Kids 2015 (104 comments in total)
In reply to:

Teila Day: Articles like this make me gag. It's essentially saying "hey, your kid is dumb as a bag of rocks, so instead of getting your kid a camera s/he can learn shutter speed, aperture, iso relationships and change lenses, let's let them be cute and amuse us as they wallow in ignorance with their new toy..."

The best camera for kids to use are cameras like an old Pentax K1000 if they're the type of kid that wants to experiment and be surprised later after the film is developed, and old DSLR and a lens or two. Even an old used cheap view camera is an option.

This article demonstrates the same mentality that makes public schools so behind the times.. The take away here for me is that this article should demonstrate to parents that you have to take charge of your kid's life; as opposed to being directed by those who are clueless.

@mcshan, I never mentioned "you" as in you personally, I used "you" as a general term. Great to hear that your kids/grands are doing well. I didn't make a parallel between kids not using advanced items and kids not doing well, but rather a parallel between parents having low expectations of their kids, and those same kids having their learning experiences throttled back because of it.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 1, 2016 at 19:07 UTC
On article DPReview recommends: Best Cameras for Kids 2015 (104 comments in total)
In reply to:

Teila Day: Articles like this make me gag. It's essentially saying "hey, your kid is dumb as a bag of rocks, so instead of getting your kid a camera s/he can learn shutter speed, aperture, iso relationships and change lenses, let's let them be cute and amuse us as they wallow in ignorance with their new toy..."

The best camera for kids to use are cameras like an old Pentax K1000 if they're the type of kid that wants to experiment and be surprised later after the film is developed, and old DSLR and a lens or two. Even an old used cheap view camera is an option.

This article demonstrates the same mentality that makes public schools so behind the times.. The take away here for me is that this article should demonstrate to parents that you have to take charge of your kid's life; as opposed to being directed by those who are clueless.

Many people/parents think like you do; and some think like I do. I don't believe in toy cameras, tools, ovens, etc.. My kids could cook meals at 10years of age using a real stove, oven, and microwave. If you treat a child like a half-wit, and have low-expectations, then that's your influence on that child.

If you treat a child like a human with a brain capable of rapid learning, and great dexterity, then you get a "learned" child in return. It has *everything* to do with parenting... Then again, I expected my kids at 10 to have a decent command of trig and chemistry. I suppose if I treated them as if they were dumb as a stump; I'd have trouble trusting them with a point-n-shoot too...

Can't trust a kid with a point-n-shoot camera... you people are killing me. I remember when a 10 year old could build a shed or outhouse, but with today's parents it's amazing that they can wash their own hands and wipe their own glasses! without help from their parents. (shakes head)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 30, 2015 at 12:16 UTC
Total: 237, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »