TacticDesigns

TacticDesigns

Joined on Jun 23, 2011

Comments

Total: 207, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Ricoh expands Q series with Pentax Q-S1 article (352 comments in total)
In reply to:

SW Anderson: Back to the future with a much better and more appropriate classic retro look -- one of the original Q's enjoyable features. For me, the Q-S1 isn't a matter of whether, but when, I'll get one.

For the Q's sniping detractors, photography for many of us isn't all about big, slick-magazine covers and two-page spreads. We'll never do billboards and might never indulge in exhibition-size prints. We can enjoy on-screen and small-print images, along with using a good-looking, well-made camera that provides an amazingly feature-rich, flexible shooting experience with easy portability. Some of our best images are more about a memory captured or scene preserved than impressive resolution and amazing sharpness seen via pixel peeping.

My Q is fun and useful in many picture-taking situations where my big, bulky but technically superior DSLR would be as out of place as a semi-truck at a gymkhana. Some folks seem to enjoy the Q as a target for put-downs. I see that as their loss, not mine.

@SW Anderson

But then again . . . there are many iPhone apps that sport a Holga-ish or Lomo-ish filter. . . . Why?

:)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2014 at 03:33 UTC
On Ricoh expands Q series with Pentax Q-S1 article (352 comments in total)
In reply to:

SW Anderson: Back to the future with a much better and more appropriate classic retro look -- one of the original Q's enjoyable features. For me, the Q-S1 isn't a matter of whether, but when, I'll get one.

For the Q's sniping detractors, photography for many of us isn't all about big, slick-magazine covers and two-page spreads. We'll never do billboards and might never indulge in exhibition-size prints. We can enjoy on-screen and small-print images, along with using a good-looking, well-made camera that provides an amazingly feature-rich, flexible shooting experience with easy portability. Some of our best images are more about a memory captured or scene preserved than impressive resolution and amazing sharpness seen via pixel peeping.

My Q is fun and useful in many picture-taking situations where my big, bulky but technically superior DSLR would be as out of place as a semi-truck at a gymkhana. Some folks seem to enjoy the Q as a target for put-downs. I see that as their loss, not mine.

@SW Anderson . . .

RE: Toy Lenses.

The other potential reason for those lenses is to mimic the toy lenses like the Lomo or Holga lenses from those plasticky cheap cameras. So that might be a reference . . .

:)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2014 at 12:07 UTC
On Ricoh expands Q series with Pentax Q-S1 article (352 comments in total)
In reply to:

Raist3d: As a long time Q photographer, I must say I like this design. But I feel they should have included the built in wi-fi and would have been a nicer announcement if they had come out with the telephoto macro *and* a very fast prime (I keep asking Pentax/Ricoh for this, it's the only reason I am using a J4 at the moment).

The Q is indeed a very fun system with a very rich photographer centric feature set. For all the barking and bickering of some, it would be nice if those at least had a nice portfolio, but most if not all don't.

http://raist3d.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341dff1d53ef019affb048a8970d-800wi
http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/readingcollage.jpg
http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/thetower.jpg
http://raist3d.typepad.com/files/entertain.jpg

+1

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2014 at 01:40 UTC
On Ricoh expands Q series with Pentax Q-S1 article (352 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wallace Ross: Not sure why I bother, the Q doesn't need me to defend it but it's the most fun digital camera I own and if some people don't get it then what ever.

+1

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2014 at 00:57 UTC
On Ricoh expands Q series with Pentax Q-S1 article (352 comments in total)
In reply to:

SW Anderson: Back to the future with a much better and more appropriate classic retro look -- one of the original Q's enjoyable features. For me, the Q-S1 isn't a matter of whether, but when, I'll get one.

For the Q's sniping detractors, photography for many of us isn't all about big, slick-magazine covers and two-page spreads. We'll never do billboards and might never indulge in exhibition-size prints. We can enjoy on-screen and small-print images, along with using a good-looking, well-made camera that provides an amazingly feature-rich, flexible shooting experience with easy portability. Some of our best images are more about a memory captured or scene preserved than impressive resolution and amazing sharpness seen via pixel peeping.

My Q is fun and useful in many picture-taking situations where my big, bulky but technically superior DSLR would be as out of place as a semi-truck at a gymkhana. Some folks seem to enjoy the Q as a target for put-downs. I see that as their loss, not mine.

@Richard . . .

Yeah. On paper, the Q shouldn't be this much fun.

But I just spend way too much time using the Q.

Just doesn't make logical sense . . . LOL

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2014 at 23:12 UTC

I actually came across a book on his photography at our local book store and scanned through it . . . and I remember thinking to myself back then . . . man, this guy had the eye!

Thanks DPR for reminding me I want that book!

:)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2014 at 16:43 UTC as 18th comment
On Light Field Cameras - Focusing on the Future article (134 comments in total)

The more I think about this . . . the more I want one!

I'm thinking it would be cool to be able to 3D pan (like a 3D Ken Burns effect) of a photo and output as a video segment to incorporate into a slide show.

If video . . . being able to play with focus field during playback. Adding that story telling element after the fact.

And just for simple things like taking a group shot with people near & far from the camera in low light no flash allowed and being able to focus stack to get everyone's face in "focus" after the fact?

Who wouldn't want to add these creative bag of tricks to their toy box?

LOL!

:)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2014 at 12:20 UTC as 6th comment
On Lytro announces Illum light field camera article (347 comments in total)

Do Lytro cameras do video?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 22, 2014 at 22:39 UTC as 2nd comment

Was this shot on film or digital?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 21, 2014 at 18:00 UTC as 33rd comment | 4 replies

Can you program the change in focus / cropping and output it as a video file to incorporate into a video / slide show? Sort of like a 3D Ken Burns effect?

That would be cool!

:)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2014 at 15:14 UTC as 2nd comment
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (236 comments in total)
In reply to:

breth: It's about time one of the camera manufacturers puts out an environmentally sealed serious pocket-able compact with large sensor. For backpackers, rainy day streetshooters, and people working in tough conditions that want great IQ.
The more smartphones get better as cameras, and the more people tire of lugging their dslrs, this market should start to develop.

If we're tossing out hints . . . what about a Q-WR. ;)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 19:07 UTC
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (236 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: It might have been interesting to see how well the Nikon 1 AW1 performed against these cameras. Compared to the four cameras reviewed, the Nikon 1 has a "huge sensor."

@Jeff Keller . . . no disrespect meant. I remember the AW1 write-up.

I like the cameras and round-up idea. I thought the "Other Cameras to Consider" I great idea too.

IMHO this is a great resource.

'just thought that for potential customers that are not aware of the different options, it might be useful to show the less expensive models available as well as more expensive models as options.

:)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 18:34 UTC
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (236 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Serious underwater photography was always done with DSLRs tightly sealed in very expensive waterproof enclosures. But for underwater snapshots, these cameras are great.

This whole category ("underwater snapshot cameras") might disappear if the iPhone 6 is waterproof.

I suppose a waterproof tablet could be next?

@Marty4650 . . . IMHO you're absolutely right with the Kid thing. When my daughters want to grab a camera, I usually let them use the waterproof camera. Doesn't matter if we are at the beach, or in a canoe, or if there is chance of rain. No worries! :)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 14:51 UTC
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (236 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Serious underwater photography was always done with DSLRs tightly sealed in very expensive waterproof enclosures. But for underwater snapshots, these cameras are great.

This whole category ("underwater snapshot cameras") might disappear if the iPhone 6 is waterproof.

I suppose a waterproof tablet could be next?

@BorisK1 . . . "Which camera would you rather have in a bar brawl? A DSLR in an Ikeliete housing or a TG-3?"

Well . . . if in a bar brawl . . . and I wanted to use the camera as a weapon . . . I'd probably pick the DSLR in the case . . . LOL. ;)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 14:49 UTC
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (236 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Serious underwater photography was always done with DSLRs tightly sealed in very expensive waterproof enclosures. But for underwater snapshots, these cameras are great.

This whole category ("underwater snapshot cameras") might disappear if the iPhone 6 is waterproof.

I suppose a waterproof tablet could be next?

RE: Waterproof cellphone . . . for slight splashing, or very limited underwater use, yeah . . . ok, but for completely immersing the camera, I personally would prefer to risk a ~$200 camera vs. a ~$600 cell phone.

And for the time being . . . the ~$200 waterproof camera would probably take a better picture.

@Tobias . . . sure . . . these cameras are not going to give dSLR performance . . . but they are a lot more convenient and lets you get the shot from unique perspectives, without risking thousands$ of dollars worth of equipment. I'm not going to take one of my dSLR cameras into the water with me while I'm splashing around with my kids . . . but I'll toss a waterproof camera in my pocket, just in case. :)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 14:38 UTC
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (236 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: It might have been interesting to see how well the Nikon 1 AW1 performed against these cameras. Compared to the four cameras reviewed, the Nikon 1 has a "huge sensor."

Or at least add it to the "Other Cameras to Consider" page, along with the WiFi enabled Fuji XP70. :)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 17, 2014 at 14:04 UTC
On Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review preview (2300 comments in total)
In reply to:

TacticDesigns: It is marketess talk.

The statement . . .

"we were told they relied on optical corrections, rather than software to project the best possible image onto the sensor" . . .

does not exclude the use of software, but simply states that they try to make their lenses to project the best possible image onto the sensor. If software correction is applied to it afterwards, that's a separate issue.

So if that statement is marketess . . . then it really is a moot point from what I see.

If a company takes the time to take a holistic approach to camera design which integrates the lens, sensor and software to help the user get what they are after . . . we are to look down upon that?

Just saying.

:)

@bobbarber

Yes.

But I look at my Pentax Q, which I completely assumed was going to have some sort of correction available, and it does. And I'm completely happy with it.

If that's what it takes to have a small camera that I take around with me more, and not worry about PP afterwards, then I'm glad its available.

With my Q . . . I turn off highlight correction and shadow correction, but leave distortion correction on.

QED

Take care,
Glen
:)

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2014 at 13:10 UTC
On Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review preview (2300 comments in total)

It is marketess talk.

The statement . . .

"we were told they relied on optical corrections, rather than software to project the best possible image onto the sensor" . . .

does not exclude the use of software, but simply states that they try to make their lenses to project the best possible image onto the sensor. If software correction is applied to it afterwards, that's a separate issue.

So if that statement is marketess . . . then it really is a moot point from what I see.

If a company takes the time to take a holistic approach to camera design which integrates the lens, sensor and software to help the user get what they are after . . . we are to look down upon that?

Just saying.

:)

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2014 at 12:51 UTC as 202nd comment | 9 replies
On Pentax Q7 Review preview (240 comments in total)
In reply to:

Under The Sun: This is the kind of camera that does poorly on paper but works wonderfully in practice. Just borrowed a unit from a friend and was impressed with all the fun stuff you could do with it.

+1

Got my Q + 01 lens over my shoulder right now, about to go for a stroll. :)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 25, 2014 at 20:55 UTC
On Samsung NX mini First Impressions Review preview (563 comments in total)
In reply to:

TacticDesigns: Looks cool! The camera almost looks like a cell phone . . . imagine this lens mount on a phone? LOL.

Yeah . . . I guess I should have put a . . . ;) at the end of that comment . . . ;)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2014 at 17:48 UTC
Total: 207, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »