Rick Knepper

Rick Knepper

Lives in United States Fort Worth, TX, United States
Works as a Computer Consultant
Joined on Oct 8, 2003
About me:

I think of myself as a hiker/traveler first, photographer second. The initial idea behind taking up photography was to record the details of my travels/hiking which fade from memory over time. One never knows when the next visit to a National Park or other interesting location will be the last. Photography keeps these memories fresh. Hiking especially allows me to better understand my place in the natural world on a practical as well as spiritual basis. Hiking alone, seeking solitude in remote areas has enhanced this experience.

Maintaining this order of priority admittedly has become a bit of a struggle. Being a gearhead, the activity of making images during a hike has its own appeal but can be disruptive to the meditative aspects of the hiking/communing experience. However, viewing and studying well made images after the hike is long over allows me to see detail that I didn't see or notice with my own eyes while I was actually on location. It can also bring back spiritual thoughts I had while I was there without actually being there. I use the best camera equipment I can afford in order to record these places with as much clarity and preservation of detail as possible and to make studying the images a more pleasant experience.

I primarily compose images in a way that documents a scene as I am naturally viewing it at that time. Of course, I also allow myself the freedom to compose in ways that I feel are interesting beyond simple documentation. What I like about photography as a pursuit of pleasure is that I can compose freely and that I am not confined to composing for what may be attractive to a tourist in a gift shop. I am committed to improving my skills and talent as a photographer so that my actions do not counteract the clarity and resolution this fine equipment provides.

By the way, turning professional isn't an option. At my age, I am seeking to retire, not begin another career.

EOS 5D mkIII
EOS 6D
Nikon D800E
Nikon D3x
Pentax 645Z
EOS M3
TS-E 17mm f4L
EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
smc Pentax-D FA 645 55mm f/2.8 AL[IF] SDM AW
EF 100mm f2.8L Macro IS
smc Pentax-A 645 120mm f/4 Macro
smc Pentax-FA 645 200mm f/4
EF-M 11-22mm f4-5.6 IS STM
AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED
AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED
EF 24-70mm f2.8L II
HD PENTAX-DA645 28-45mm f/4.5 ED AW SR
smc Pentax-FA 645 45-85mm F4.5
EF 70-200mm f4L IS
Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD
Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 18mm f3.5 ZF
Contax Zeiss Distagon T* 21mm f2.8
Leica Elmarit-R 28mm f/2.8 (E55)
Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 25mm f2.8 ZF
Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm f2 ZF
Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 35mm f2 ZF
Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 50mm f2 ZF
Canon 1.4x Teleconverter
Kenko 2x Pro 300 DGX Teleconverter
550EX Flash
EF 18-55mm kit lens (shelved)
EF 24mm f1.4L II (sold)
EF 35mm f1.4L (sold)
EF 16-35mm f2.8L II (sold)
EF 24-105mm f4L IS (Sold)
EF 50mm f1.2L (Sold)
EF 85mm f1.2L II (Sold)
EF 135mm f2L (sold)
EF 200mm f2.8L II (Sold)
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L (sold)
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L (sold)
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS (sold)
Canon 2x Teleconverter (sold)
Sigma 14mm f/2.8 (returned)
Olympus Zuiko 21mm f2 (returned)
Carl Zeiss 25mm ZF (returned)
EF 24mm f1.4L (returned)
EF 50mm f1.2L (2 returned)
Olympus H.Zuiko OM 24mm f2.8 (returned)
Nikon 14-24G (returned)
Nikon D700 (returned)
EOS 5D (Sold)
EF 100mm f2.8 Macro (Sold)
EF 17-40mm f4L (Sold)
EF 24-70mm f2.8L (Sold)
EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS (Sold)
Olympus OM 24mm f2 Zuiko MC (Sold)
Leica Elmarit-R 35mm f2.8 (E55) (Sold)
TS-E 24mm f3.5L (Sold)
Contax Zeiss Planar T* 50mm f1.7 (Sold)
Contax Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm f2.8 (Sold)
Contax Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 35-70mm f3.4 (Sold)
EOS 5D mkII (Sold)
EOS 5D mkII backup (Sold)
EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS USM (Returned)

Comments

Total: 235, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: Dear Mr. Maki. Please hear this [potential] customer. I was looking forward to my first light-weight, mirror-less, high-resolution FF camera. 42 MP isn't enough resolution. I see from your comments that 42 MPs work out well for video shooters but there are still some of us who shoot stills. I'd take 4k video with slightly less quality.

Two brands have surpassed you in sensor resolution, one with your own sensor and hopefully, Nikon will follow too. Also, I would have thought that 6-7 fps would have been doable in a 42 MP camera by now.

I am looking forward to the A7r SP (still picture).

By the way, I am eager to use your camera with native lenses.

Speaking of passive-aggressive. Insulting me so, nice. You seem to understand that I own multiple brands of camera, and I am sure by now you have checked my profile. Try to take your understanding of me and my experience to the next level. I don't buy Sony's marketing riff nor the fanboys' defense. My experience tells me this upgrade could have been much better. In Canon-land, an 8 MP and 1 fps upgrade would been denigrated as 'incremental' at best.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2015 at 15:05 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: Dear Mr. Maki. Please hear this [potential] customer. I was looking forward to my first light-weight, mirror-less, high-resolution FF camera. 42 MP isn't enough resolution. I see from your comments that 42 MPs work out well for video shooters but there are still some of us who shoot stills. I'd take 4k video with slightly less quality.

Two brands have surpassed you in sensor resolution, one with your own sensor and hopefully, Nikon will follow too. Also, I would have thought that 6-7 fps would have been doable in a 42 MP camera by now.

I am looking forward to the A7r SP (still picture).

By the way, I am eager to use your camera with native lenses.

Read my original post. Only a fanboy could get angry about that post - which they, of course, did. I aggressively (dictionary definition) stated my opinion. It wasn't until said fanboys' aggression towards me was manifested, that I responded with like aggression.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 27, 2015 at 12:24 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: Dear Mr. Maki. Please hear this [potential] customer. I was looking forward to my first light-weight, mirror-less, high-resolution FF camera. 42 MP isn't enough resolution. I see from your comments that 42 MPs work out well for video shooters but there are still some of us who shoot stills. I'd take 4k video with slightly less quality.

Two brands have surpassed you in sensor resolution, one with your own sensor and hopefully, Nikon will follow too. Also, I would have thought that 6-7 fps would have been doable in a 42 MP camera by now.

I am looking forward to the A7r SP (still picture).

By the way, I am eager to use your camera with native lenses.

There's always Nikon. They are at the threshold for 50+ MP and have 5 fps at 36 MP already. On the Nikon forum, the next high rez camera has been dubbed the D900. I am hoping a D900 trims weight from that of the D8xx series.

After writing this, I realized I needed to look at the original A7r specs, and I see that the specs indicate 4 fps for the A7r. To Sony users, this may seem like an upgrade. I am a multiple brand user. This is a middle of the pack spec. I expect all of the brands to leap-frog each with every release. :)

Yes, I will have to wait on Sony to clear a couple of hurdles. I was poised to buy the A900 back in the day (in order to use the Zeiss 24-70) but it's lack of LV killed the enthusiasm (and eventually I became aware of that lens' less than stellar edge/corner performance). Next generation brought SLT and I said no thanks!. Then the A7s were released with the associated problems and I waited patiently. Now the A7r II. So, I have some practice waiting on Sony. :)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 27, 2015 at 12:07 UTC
On Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II article (952 comments in total)
In reply to:

mr_landscape: CaNikon say bye-bye to most of your trusty fanatics;)

Also, you also seem to be denying the impact of varying amounts of sensor resolution on an image at capture.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2015 at 10:27 UTC
On Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II article (952 comments in total)
In reply to:

mr_landscape: CaNikon say bye-bye to most of your trusty fanatics;)

"Take it to it's logical extreme - downsize the image to a 640x480 image - you think you'll still see the difference between a 50MP vs. 36MP camera when viewed at 640x480?"

Of course not. That's a logical extreme that is also a ridiculous extreme.

You seem to be laboring under the false impression that I do not understand digital imaging. I do. I wonder if you do but I give you the benefit of the doubt. The crux of the matter is when 'detail' "disappears" for you vs. when it "disappears" for me. That's variable, subjective and not math dependent. Diminishing Return means just that, diminishing return, not 'No Return'. Here's a new thread on the Canon forum regarding monitors and 50 MP you may be interested in:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56049174

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2015 at 10:22 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: Dear Mr. Maki. Please hear this [potential] customer. I was looking forward to my first light-weight, mirror-less, high-resolution FF camera. 42 MP isn't enough resolution. I see from your comments that 42 MPs work out well for video shooters but there are still some of us who shoot stills. I'd take 4k video with slightly less quality.

Two brands have surpassed you in sensor resolution, one with your own sensor and hopefully, Nikon will follow too. Also, I would have thought that 6-7 fps would have been doable in a 42 MP camera by now.

I am looking forward to the A7r SP (still picture).

By the way, I am eager to use your camera with native lenses.

...as you said, it's my own personal preference, one that I am entitled to, without harassment from the fanboys.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2015 at 11:10 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: Dear Mr. Maki. Please hear this [potential] customer. I was looking forward to my first light-weight, mirror-less, high-resolution FF camera. 42 MP isn't enough resolution. I see from your comments that 42 MPs work out well for video shooters but there are still some of us who shoot stills. I'd take 4k video with slightly less quality.

Two brands have surpassed you in sensor resolution, one with your own sensor and hopefully, Nikon will follow too. Also, I would have thought that 6-7 fps would have been doable in a 42 MP camera by now.

I am looking forward to the A7r SP (still picture).

By the way, I am eager to use your camera with native lenses.

The whole world is in motion at various speeds. So is a photographer if he/she handholds his/her images. When bracketing nature/landscape shots, for exposure insurance or HDR (or some other reason), there is minute motion in the scene as well as the motion of the photographer's sway. HDR already reduces resolution as a major manipulation of pixels, but if the software has to align images further due to sway and reduce ghosting, then the resolution is further reduced.

Faster fps rates reduces alignment issues due to motion 1.) in the scene and 2.) of the photographer's sway. If not doing HDR,then a finely honed framing could be off when bracketing. Of course, a tripod could eliminate one of these issues but then the typical DPR member seems adamantly opposed to such uncool and geeky contraptions.

I can feel the difference between 3, 4.5, 5 and 6 fps.

With $1800 cameras sporting 10 fps rates, I was hoping for faster which isn't a proof for why Sony should have sped things up....

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2015 at 11:08 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: Dear Mr. Maki. Please hear this [potential] customer. I was looking forward to my first light-weight, mirror-less, high-resolution FF camera. 42 MP isn't enough resolution. I see from your comments that 42 MPs work out well for video shooters but there are still some of us who shoot stills. I'd take 4k video with slightly less quality.

Two brands have surpassed you in sensor resolution, one with your own sensor and hopefully, Nikon will follow too. Also, I would have thought that 6-7 fps would have been doable in a 42 MP camera by now.

I am looking forward to the A7r SP (still picture).

By the way, I am eager to use your camera with native lenses.

However, it seems, when Sony produces a sensor for a competitor, they will not compete directly, at least for some time period, so maybe I should have managed my expectations. Edit: My new 4k editing monitor also doubles as my viewing medium.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2015 at 10:48 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: Dear Mr. Maki. Please hear this [potential] customer. I was looking forward to my first light-weight, mirror-less, high-resolution FF camera. 42 MP isn't enough resolution. I see from your comments that 42 MPs work out well for video shooters but there are still some of us who shoot stills. I'd take 4k video with slightly less quality.

Two brands have surpassed you in sensor resolution, one with your own sensor and hopefully, Nikon will follow too. Also, I would have thought that 6-7 fps would have been doable in a 42 MP camera by now.

I am looking forward to the A7r SP (still picture).

By the way, I am eager to use your camera with native lenses.

Alpha Jack, I'd be more than happy to reply to serious inquiry.

IMO, in general, 100 MP may not be enough. That's just my take on MPs. More MPs resolve ever smaller detail as sharper, clearer and when the image is reduced, and a tiny detail seemingly disappears, the whole image as a whole still has a sharper look. This doesn't even address deep cropping. I have actually stopped using a major sharpening step in my workflow as no longer being needed. Of course, if your viewing medium remains fixed, you will experience a diminished or perhaps even a negative return (speculating on this last bit). Upgrading to 50 MP, I also recently upgraded to a large 4k editing monitor from NEC.

I recognized in my first post here why Sony settled on 42 MP but as a still photographer, the more MPs the merrier, hence the qualification, also appearing in my initial post(s). I am not really focusing on 50 MP. I was hoping Sony would jump well beyond 50 given that they produced a 50 MP sensor for Pentax.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2015 at 10:45 UTC
On Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II article (952 comments in total)
In reply to:

mr_landscape: CaNikon say bye-bye to most of your trusty fanatics;)

1.) Relevancy, out of the two of us, I am the only one looking at the images on a 4k monitor and because of various pixel pitch and screen sizes, not all 4k or HD monitors are created equal. Essentially, you are trying to say that an 4x6 print equals a 16x24 print because the same number of pixels were used.
2.) Yes, same principal although noise and detail do not completely disappear at 8 MP reductions (they didn't even at 2 MP reductions). Again, critical viewing must be employed. Every pixel is a detail and when every pixel is sharper (or is part of a finer resolved image [for lack of a better way to put it]), the whole image is sharper. Whether or not you personally can recognize a given detail as sharper or better resolved, the whole image is more sharply resolved. Works for capture, works for viewing. Anybody running a copier at work knows this.
3.) Yes, now we are getting somewhere. So, why equate the effect of a 4k monitor to an 8 MP reduction?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2015 at 10:22 UTC
On Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II article (952 comments in total)
In reply to:

mr_landscape: CaNikon say bye-bye to most of your trusty fanatics;)

1.) I maintain that simulating a 4k view to be viewed on a HD monitor (the vast majority of monitors out there being HD) doesn't do 4k monitors justice in the minds of folks with no experience viewing on such monitors.
2.) Even so, the notion that detail captured by varying amounts of resolution can not be seen at 8 MP downsizing is a disturbing one.
3.) Viewing a full size image reduced to 8 MP is not the only way to view a 50 MP image or its parts.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 01:44 UTC
On Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II article (952 comments in total)
In reply to:

mr_landscape: CaNikon say bye-bye to most of your trusty fanatics;)

Rishi, it you who should try to understand a knowledgeable member with experience with the actual equipment in question no less.

The size of a monitor holds no relevance? That is tantamount to saying the size of a print does not matter.

And no, my viewing distance has not changed. You failed to ask that although I believe I mentioned it. 18"

Again, you appear to have failed to understand my plain talk. The 'piece of crap' comment was certainly crass but it referred to the lack of a 32" 4k monitor at DPR and not the comparison itself on which I am sure my points would be undeniable which were and are:

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 01:43 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: Dear Mr. Maki. Please hear this [potential] customer. I was looking forward to my first light-weight, mirror-less, high-resolution FF camera. 42 MP isn't enough resolution. I see from your comments that 42 MPs work out well for video shooters but there are still some of us who shoot stills. I'd take 4k video with slightly less quality.

Two brands have surpassed you in sensor resolution, one with your own sensor and hopefully, Nikon will follow too. Also, I would have thought that 6-7 fps would have been doable in a 42 MP camera by now.

I am looking forward to the A7r SP (still picture).

By the way, I am eager to use your camera with native lenses.

Go! anyone else?

1.) Why do you feel 42 MP is enough?
2.) Why do you feel 5 fps is enough?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 00:59 UTC
In reply to:

lhkjacky: "if we just did the same thing as Canon and Nikon we’d lose".
This was the statement that they told us, when they stopped making OVF camera.
SLT is a unique camera, it is something that Cankon does not have.
SLT combine the advantage of DSLR's level AF + EVF.

Everyone talking about A7Rii, because it have a new 42mp sensor, world first BIS Full Frame sensor, 4k video in FF, 5-axis IBIS, etc.

If they put this new sensor & technology in A99ii first, everyone will talk about it as well.

"if we just did the same thing as Canon and Nikon we’d lose".

Very telling and wise.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 00:47 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: Dear Mr. Maki. Please hear this [potential] customer. I was looking forward to my first light-weight, mirror-less, high-resolution FF camera. 42 MP isn't enough resolution. I see from your comments that 42 MPs work out well for video shooters but there are still some of us who shoot stills. I'd take 4k video with slightly less quality.

Two brands have surpassed you in sensor resolution, one with your own sensor and hopefully, Nikon will follow too. Also, I would have thought that 6-7 fps would have been doable in a 42 MP camera by now.

I am looking forward to the A7r SP (still picture).

By the way, I am eager to use your camera with native lenses.

The biggest trolls on DPR are the fanboys of every brand mindlessly defending features that could have been better. My plea to DPR to rid the forums of this plague was deleted. This is why folks flee this site in droves.

So, can anyone actually discuss intelligently and maturely:

1.) Why they feel 42 MP is enough?
2.) Why they feel 5 fps is enough?

Go!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 23:25 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: Dear Mr. Maki. Please hear this [potential] customer. I was looking forward to my first light-weight, mirror-less, high-resolution FF camera. 42 MP isn't enough resolution. I see from your comments that 42 MPs work out well for video shooters but there are still some of us who shoot stills. I'd take 4k video with slightly less quality.

Two brands have surpassed you in sensor resolution, one with your own sensor and hopefully, Nikon will follow too. Also, I would have thought that 6-7 fps would have been doable in a 42 MP camera by now.

I am looking forward to the A7r SP (still picture).

By the way, I am eager to use your camera with native lenses.

I just paid $8k for a Pentax 645z so my price tolerance is a little higher than $1k. I don't know why I get these hostile, sarcastic and quite frankly, ridiculous responses. Expecting 50 MP + in a digital still camera today isn't unrealistic seeing as how I am using a Sony based 50 MP senor now. Canon got 5 fps from their 50 MP camera. The Pentax is much slower and I can feel it. I do not see why Sony couldn't edge them out at 6. Owning cameras that operate at 3, 4.5, 5 and 6, I guarantee you there difference in feel as well as result as the speed increases. I am not even talking about action/sport shooting.

In the end, it's a personal preference for certain specifications and a message to Mr. Maki. If you are okay with the specs, good for you.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 02:33 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: Dear Mr. Maki. Please hear this [potential] customer. I was looking forward to my first light-weight, mirror-less, high-resolution FF camera. 42 MP isn't enough resolution. I see from your comments that 42 MPs work out well for video shooters but there are still some of us who shoot stills. I'd take 4k video with slightly less quality.

Two brands have surpassed you in sensor resolution, one with your own sensor and hopefully, Nikon will follow too. Also, I would have thought that 6-7 fps would have been doable in a 42 MP camera by now.

I am looking forward to the A7r SP (still picture).

By the way, I am eager to use your camera with native lenses.

Xavius, I've flagged your post as inappropriate. Let's see if DPR does the right thing and deletes your message.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 00:43 UTC
On Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II article (952 comments in total)
In reply to:

mr_landscape: CaNikon say bye-bye to most of your trusty fanatics;)

Dear anonymous troll, like the other anonymous troll, I will click the flag as inappropriate and see if DPR does the right thing.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 00:37 UTC
On Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II article (952 comments in total)
In reply to:

mr_landscape: CaNikon say bye-bye to most of your trusty fanatics;)

There's my post above not hiding behind a link. What part are you taking personally? I thought I was giving DPR a little shot. But, I gave DPR or you or whoever props for the DPR studio comparison which I have used many times to determine the amount of detail captured by a given camera, and ultimately have made some buying decisions based on it. Thought that was a compliment. In fact, thank you for steering me in the direction of the Pentax 645z.

The Print exercise doesn't really make any sense to me but if you view the images critically, there's certainly enough detail to discern between a 36 and 50 MP capture, which was the point of the original discussion.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 00:32 UTC
On Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II article (952 comments in total)
In reply to:

mr_landscape: CaNikon say bye-bye to most of your trusty fanatics;)

There is a difference viewing a resized (normalized?) 8 MP image (or any size for that matter ) on a 32" 4k monitor vs. whatever piece of crap DPR gives you.

Secondly, I have studied your studio shots many times, downloaded the RAWs, and those images along with many others on the internet helped me to make the decision to move to 50 MPs. One has to have a refined and educated sense of detail and a well-developed critical viewing regime to appreciate the differences. But what is new? One has to be a connoisseur to appreciate a Zeiss Otus over a typical run of the mill $125 50mm lens. I have been in the middle of this argument since Canon first released the 5D2 with all manner of Canon and Nikon fanboys. If one cannot see the difference (on any piece of crap monitor), that person will most likely remain a mediocre photographer."

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 00:26 UTC
Total: 235, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »