Dazed and Confused

Dazed and Confused

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Joined on May 23, 2002

Comments

Total: 46, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

Does anyone know how he funds his trip? Is it based on savings, or does he make income from his blog/photos as he travels?

It's also great to see how positive most of the comments are on here - deservedly so.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 13, 2014 at 09:48 UTC as 22nd comment
On Samsung NX1 First Impressions Review preview (727 comments in total)
In reply to:

MonoSynth: Right now, there are serious mirrorless cameras from every manufacturer except Nikon and Canon. With decent EVF's and on-sensor phase detection AF, those flipping mirrors and bulky pentaprisms start to lose their advantage and a dSLR starts to look old-fashioned.

With an EVF I can:
- See exactly what the sensor sees, no focusing screen calibration needed;
- Zoom in to precisely focus my f/1.2 lenses;
- See the result of the white balance settings;
- See DoF instantly;
- Dial in every possible overlay, including focus peaking, zebra and histogram;

Lens manufacturers are freed from the burdens of flange focal distance and automatic diaphragms, resulting in more compact lenses and more diaphragm blades (better bokeh).

There are some fields where an OVF has an advantage (fast sports), but those problems will soon be solved too.

I have both, and I still think OVFs have the clarity and dynamic range advantages.

I like seeing all the possible details and opportunities in what I am trying to capture, rather than what the sensor and EVF are capable of relaying. (There might be something of interest in a blown highlight or too noisy an area, that I might miss due to my current chosen exposure values.) I guess it gives me a better understanding of the light that I have got to work with, which the EVF cannot display due to dynmaic range limitations.

EVFs are closing the gap, but for me hybrid viewfinders are the most exciting. An OVF with an EVF overlay for focus peaking, ultra-high ISO or a zoomed area would be great.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 10:44 UTC
On Zeiss introduces 'no distortion' Otus 1.4/85mm article (336 comments in total)
In reply to:

mike kobal: those Otus lenses would make so much more sense on mirrorless cameras with high def EVF, manual focusing one of these properly through the OVF - even on the best DSLR's - is going to be quite frustrating
not a problem for the lucky ones who actually can afford to buy one of these, they can surely afford to hire the best focus puller in the world ;) and a second shooter using an af lens as back up, just in case :)))

Why would it be any harder than any other 85 1.4s?

People have been manual focussing lenses like this on SLRs for decades with no problem. It's not as good as AF in some situations, but that's also the case on mirrorless systems.

A lovely big, bright full-frame OVF and a good focussing screen are still great for manual focussing. Mirrorless doesn't suddenly change that.

(For context, I have both DSLR and mirrorless systems. I miss quite a few MF shots with the OVF - although a lot less now I have a better focussing screen. I miss a similar number on my mirrorless. I don't have accurate numbers, and tests aren't equal due to different lenses and d.o.f.s, but neither stand out as massively better. EVFs and OVFs each have their advantages - but neither make the other redundant or obsolete. Personally, I hope that hybrid viewfinders are the future.)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 9, 2014 at 11:32 UTC

I wonder how many people will make knee-jerk reaction comments without properly reading the review?

Grabs popcorn...

Edited lots: Because I'm not good with brevity. Or spelling.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2014 at 13:17 UTC as 2nd comment
On Panasonic FZ1000: Not just another superzoom... article (158 comments in total)

404 - Page not found.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 07:03 UTC as 51st comment
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joe Coolpix: I'm not liking the trend for the RX100 to get thicker. As a guy who likes to throw his P&S in my front jeans pocket, the original RX100 at 36mm was appealing. But the ii and now iii have grown in thickness a couple mm each time. At this rate, the RX100ix in 10 years will be another inch thicker. I like the Canon S trend better, with each successor getting thinner until this last S120 bumping up to 1.14 but still thinner than the S90's 1.22 inches. We're talking pocket cameras here not cars and each new one should get smaller not larger.

My Canon S90 got destroyed in my jeans pocket, though. It totally filled up with dust and fluff. I'm not sure rubbing up against cotton all day is that good for a camera.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 10:14 UTC
On Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review preview (2302 comments in total)

If I had the money I'd be ordering one in black with the orange strap and cover purely to look at!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2014 at 13:29 UTC as 667th comment | 1 reply

Most of these comments make me sad.

Barney - next time just post some ridiculously sharp bird photos taken with whatever long lens is currently being raved about, or maybe an HDR landscape. (Just make sure those corners are sharp!) It'll make your life a lot easier. Because, as everyone knows, only a technically accomplished photograph can be a good photograph.

Personally, I find them very evocative. There's definitely something unsettling (almost a tension, if you will) in a lot of these photos - I think caused by the unorthodox composition, where at first glance they're often not even the main subject of the photo. Out of sight, out of mind.

Some have a real Cormac McCarthy feel to them.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 24, 2014 at 12:58 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Joe Pineapples: A photographer using the medium of photography to try to convey a message - a bit of a refreshing change from all the gear talk...

...IMO...

@Marty4650

"I suppose we could just turn violent criminals loose, so they could victimize the population again."

Ah, the old 'stifle any rational debate by intentionally misinterpreting the opposition's point and then ridiculing them for it'. Classy.

More than 92% of the USA prison population is locked up for non-violent crimes. (2009 stats.)

The USA's incarceration rate is approximately 7x higher than that of the average European country. Do you honestly think that Americans are 7 times as likely to commit crimes? Or, conversely, that locking peopl up works so well at keeping ciminals off the street that crime is now 7x lower in the USA than Europe?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 24, 2014 at 12:49 UTC
On Sony Alpha A7 / A7R preview (2372 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dazed and Confused: For those disparaging the Sony, it may be worth taking a step back, and looking at the bigger picture. Choice is a good thing. (The same goes for those revelling in the 'death' of the mirror. Some of us actually prefer a mirror. Why is having the option of either a bad thing?)

The first generation of any product is rarely perfect, but this is looking like it may well be a very good first attempt indeed, and it will spur on innovation across the whole industry.

Competition is good. Everyone who ows a Nikon or Canon will benefit as well. Look how far all DSLRs have come in 10 years.

I think the FF mirrorless camera of only a few year's time will be a very compelling product indeed, and while I personally still prefer optical viewfinders, the gap is closing, and I expect that one day I'll own a FF mirrorless camera.

Interesting times....

@Jogger

I think something can be more than simply the sum of its parts. Just because the individual parts are 'old' doesn't mean the whole cannot be new. It may not be revolutionary, but it is certainly more than the normal evolutionary steps that preceded it and will follow.

This is the first FF mirrorless, and is aimed at professionals or very serious hobbyists. The real world demands this will bring are unknown.

Will people settle for a comparative lack of performance in certain areas in order to benefit from mirrorless' other advantages? It will take time to discover this, and then all those various parts from all those different sources you list will need to evolve into something that will meet those demands.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 15, 2013 at 18:39 UTC
On Sony Alpha A7 / A7R preview (2372 comments in total)

For those disparaging the Sony, it may be worth taking a step back, and looking at the bigger picture. Choice is a good thing. (The same goes for those revelling in the 'death' of the mirror. Some of us actually prefer a mirror. Why is having the option of either a bad thing?)

The first generation of any product is rarely perfect, but this is looking like it may well be a very good first attempt indeed, and it will spur on innovation across the whole industry.

Competition is good. Everyone who ows a Nikon or Canon will benefit as well. Look how far all DSLRs have come in 10 years.

I think the FF mirrorless camera of only a few year's time will be a very compelling product indeed, and while I personally still prefer optical viewfinders, the gap is closing, and I expect that one day I'll own a FF mirrorless camera.

Interesting times....

Direct link | Posted on Nov 15, 2013 at 14:53 UTC as 184th comment | 2 replies
On Golden Temple square in the !!!Temples Of India!!! challenge (7 comments in total)

Did you mirror it just below the roof to hide the crowds?

I find the mirrored effect rather disconcerting - it look like the roof of the golden temple is leaning backwards and sinking into itself.

I'd love to see a version with a simple crop instead. I think that could look even nicer.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2013 at 11:11 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

MenM: I don't understand why this picture doesn't get more positive reactions. It's really stunning. Great composition and supurb colours. I really like the feel of it.
Bravo!

Thanks, and good point. I'll try straightening it up and see what it looks like.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2013 at 10:25 UTC
In reply to:

mypobox: I think separating the lens from the body is genius. I think this will do well.

Out of interest, do you think Sony is the first to do this? I'm getting the impression that a lot of people do.

I think this might be one of those 'Google was the first search engine' or 'the iPhone was the 1st touch screen phone' moments - i.e. Sony aren't the first to do it, but might be the first to do it well and really capture the public's imagination.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 4, 2013 at 17:45 UTC
In reply to:

Dazed and Confused: How does it differ from using a GoPro Hero 3 and the free app for remote viewing, release, etc on any Amdroid or iOS device?

Surely the Sonys can't be that different, apart from the fact they come with a little clip to attach to your phone.

But that's not a different concept, which is what everybody seems to think is the innovation here - it's just a slightly different design.

It's like people waiting until the second DSLR to come along with better image quality than the first, and then heralding it as the invention of the DSLR.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 4, 2013 at 17:39 UTC

How does it differ from using a GoPro Hero 3 and the free app for remote viewing, release, etc on any Amdroid or iOS device?

Surely the Sonys can't be that different, apart from the fact they come with a little clip to attach to your phone.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 4, 2013 at 15:20 UTC as 76th comment | 2 replies
On Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Review preview (333 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dazed and Confused: These comments have made me realise that lots of people don't understand what the 'standard' in standard zoom means....

@Shamael

"the Nikon 17-35/2.8 for example, the Tokina 11-16/2.8 is another one."

But that's my point - those aren't standard zooms. They're both wide zooms - the first for Full Frame, the latter for APS-C.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 3, 2013 at 16:05 UTC
On Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Review preview (333 comments in total)

These comments have made me realise that lots of people don't understand what the 'standard' in standard zoom means....

Direct link | Posted on Sep 3, 2013 at 12:19 UTC as 63rd comment | 6 replies
On Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Review preview (333 comments in total)
In reply to:

JDThomas: One thing I have to disagree with is two of the "cons"

"restricted zoom range". How can the zoom range be considered restrictive? Maybe if you compare it to a STANDARD zoom. But this is NOT a standard zoom. It's in a class of it's own. It's a super-fast zoom. You don't buy this lens for range. You buy it for low-light capability. If you look at it from that point of view it's not restricted. If you are going to lump it in the standard zoom category then ALL f/2.8 zooms must now have in the Cons column "restricted aperture setting"

"physically large for a standard zoom". Again, this lens is NOT a standard zoom. If you want speed you need big glass. To be perfectly honest. This lens a actually SMALL considering what it does.

@JDThomas

The Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 is a full frame wide zoom, not a DX standard zoom.

I do not understand why everyone is stating that the limited zoom is not a 'con'. It is. It just may not be one that is a big deal to you personally, but it's still a con compared to a 17-55 2.8. It's up to you to decide if you want speed or range.

The issue here seems to be that people do not understand that 'standard' in standard zoom means focal length - nothing to do with speed. Just like primes - wide, standard and telephoto.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 3, 2013 at 12:09 UTC
On Panasonic launches Lumix DMC-XS3 slimline zoom compact article (37 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: F6.9 is the new 16 Megapixels. It sounds great on paper but actually hurts the image quality more than anything else when you combine it with a really small sensor.

If they sold this camera for $2 I wouldn't even give it a second look.

Why does f/6.9 sound good on paper? Because it's a bigger number than f/2.8?

Do you really think that consumers are that stupid?

"I bought the car that's 0-60 in 12s, as it's a bigger number than 5s, so it must be faster!" said nobody ever.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2013 at 08:44 UTC
Total: 46, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »