Rob Bernhard

Lives in United States IL, United States
Joined on Jul 8, 2002

Comments

Total: 128, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article The price is right: Canon EOS Rebel T6 / 1300D Review (288 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rob Bernhard: I have family for whom this would be a familiar and positive upgrade from their much older Canon DSLRs. But I'd recommend that they wait until the T6 shows up on Canon's refurbished site for a discount. (For example, the T5 was running on sale near $200 with kit lens recently. )

Oh I'm sure one can find good deals on camera equipment that, on paper, is much better than the T6. But if you're already just shooting JPGs and a camera system switch would involve buying a new (consumer) telephoto zoom and an external flash this is a different conversation. Consumers are not photographers, in the sense that they care less about the sometimes subtle (sometimes not so subtle) differences between sensors of various generations. What they care about is: 1. Will I understand how to use it? 2. Will it still be easy to use? 3. How much will it cost me? (Not in that order, necessarily.)

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2016 at 21:21 UTC
On article The price is right: Canon EOS Rebel T6 / 1300D Review (288 comments in total)

I have family for whom this would be a familiar and positive upgrade from their much older Canon DSLRs. But I'd recommend that they wait until the T6 shows up on Canon's refurbished site for a discount. (For example, the T5 was running on sale near $200 with kit lens recently. )

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2016 at 19:40 UTC as 59th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

ecm: My concern about USB C audio is that it HAS NO STANDARD YET - Intel and others are working on it as we speak, nobody even knows where the DAC and amp are supposed to be - the phone? Adaptor? In the headset itself? So whatever native USB C headphones you buy, they're likely not gonna work in a couple years.

Your concern about USB C headphones should not be about where the DAC and amp are located. Your concern should be about DRM. This move is designed to lock users out of their own audio. USB C for audio is a a solution looking for a problem. It does nothing to help the consumer.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2016 at 13:59 UTC
In reply to:

Androole: Probably the only suitable lens in the Fuji system for this is the 90mm/f2, giving you a 180/f4. Not really much better then the 50-140/2.8, and no better when you as the 1.4x to that lens, but a little bit smaller, anyway.

2x TCs just degrade quality so much, I don't really know why they've introduced this other than to say "we have one."

But hey, maybe it signals the intro of a 200 or 300mm/2.8 soon enough?

[[You're right, Rob. Maybe Fuji has accomplished optically what no company in the history of photography ever has, at any price. I will give them the benefit of the doubt from now on.]]

If making fewer assumptions before trying this (or any) product yourself is the end result, then everyone wins here.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2016 at 13:52 UTC
In reply to:

Androole: Probably the only suitable lens in the Fuji system for this is the 90mm/f2, giving you a 180/f4. Not really much better then the 50-140/2.8, and no better when you as the 1.4x to that lens, but a little bit smaller, anyway.

2x TCs just degrade quality so much, I don't really know why they've introduced this other than to say "we have one."

But hey, maybe it signals the intro of a 200 or 300mm/2.8 soon enough?

[[I'd normally agree with this statement, but Fuji has released a sample photo already and it's....well it's awful. Does not bode well at all for this TC.]]

Does not bode well for measurbaters you mean?

Link | Posted on May 23, 2016 at 13:51 UTC
In reply to:

Androole: Probably the only suitable lens in the Fuji system for this is the 90mm/f2, giving you a 180/f4. Not really much better then the 50-140/2.8, and no better when you as the 1.4x to that lens, but a little bit smaller, anyway.

2x TCs just degrade quality so much, I don't really know why they've introduced this other than to say "we have one."

But hey, maybe it signals the intro of a 200 or 300mm/2.8 soon enough?

[[2x TCs just degrade quality so much, I don't really know why they've introduced this other than to say "we have one."]]

I'm curious how you have been able to get an advanced copy of this Fuji 2x TC and already completed testing?

Link | Posted on May 19, 2016 at 14:58 UTC
In reply to:

zeratulmrye: Hmm... After reading this post I got the feeling that a 600mm equivalent lens is quite useless for landscapes, you just couldn't get a shot with good clarity and details because of the atmospheric distortion.

Telephoto focal lengths are fantastic for all types of landscape photos.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2016 at 13:18 UTC
On article Miggo wants to 'DSLR your iPhone' with the Pictar grip (135 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rob Bernhard: This is an interesting idea. I don't see a mount point for a camera strap though, which I think you'd want with this type of format/design. I could see a wrist strap being particularly useful when carrying the camera around.

Never mind. I should have clicked through to the website where they show a wrist strap.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 13:53 UTC
On article Miggo wants to 'DSLR your iPhone' with the Pictar grip (135 comments in total)

This is an interesting idea. I don't see a mount point for a camera strap though, which I think you'd want with this type of format/design. I could see a wrist strap being particularly useful when carrying the camera around.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 13:36 UTC as 66th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

dlb41: Pretty soon, the photographer will aim the camera in the general direction of the subject, and Adobe programmers will take care of producing a photograph.

What? I still have to pick up the camera and physically move it? Pass.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2016 at 20:08 UTC
In reply to:

raztec: Pardon my ignorance, but what can these cameras and lens combination do that a Nikon D810 with a pro lens can't for 1/4 the price?

(removed)

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2016 at 16:52 UTC
In reply to:

Steve in GA: I was attracted to this article because I am a Nikon DSLR owner, even though I'm not an owner of an 18-55 lens, and I was interested in reading about Nikon's use of new (to Nikon, at least) tech.

But, as I read the comments on this article, I felt like I had fallen into an alternate universe of video, live view and Nikon's glacier-like movement toward mirrorless.

I have about 1,200 exposures on my Nikon DSLR, I have shot video twice, I believe, and I have used live view three times, including those times I used it for video. Am I the only person left who likes using a viewfinder and shooting stills?

@Josh152 I've not tried that before, mostly as I am out in "the field" (my yard or nearby parks) with a limited number of hands (2!). But I could see having a tablet mounted to the tripod as being an option for a larger screen (though then you have another device to worry about keeping powered).

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 20:32 UTC
In reply to:

Rob Bernhard: Does the Elph 180 actually not have optical IS? There's no IS in the name, unlike the 190, which leads me to believe that they released a camera that reaches to 224mm equiv at f/6.9 with no physical stabilization system.

Canon, it's not 2003 anymore. Your R&D for IS in compacts has been covered for a long time now.

[[wait.. you know that? ]]

But, you of course, know it can't possibly be so, because you've done the same, right?

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 19:33 UTC
In reply to:

Rob Bernhard: Does the Elph 180 actually not have optical IS? There's no IS in the name, unlike the 190, which leads me to believe that they released a camera that reaches to 224mm equiv at f/6.9 with no physical stabilization system.

Canon, it's not 2003 anymore. Your R&D for IS in compacts has been covered for a long time now.

You can add IS at $119. The cost to Canon is effectively zero. This is shelf stuffing and has nothing to do with manufacturing costs. There is no reason for Canon to not include IS in all of their point and shoots at every price point. This is the move of a company who has lost their way.
Panasonic and Sony both offer optical image stabilization at the $70 price point.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 17:33 UTC
In reply to:

Steve in GA: I was attracted to this article because I am a Nikon DSLR owner, even though I'm not an owner of an 18-55 lens, and I was interested in reading about Nikon's use of new (to Nikon, at least) tech.

But, as I read the comments on this article, I felt like I had fallen into an alternate universe of video, live view and Nikon's glacier-like movement toward mirrorless.

I have about 1,200 exposures on my Nikon DSLR, I have shot video twice, I believe, and I have used live view three times, including those times I used it for video. Am I the only person left who likes using a viewfinder and shooting stills?

[[ Am I the only person left who likes using a viewfinder and shooting stills?]]

When talking about stills, (and I recognize that this is a bit specialized) live view for shooting macros is so much better than a viewfinder.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 16:07 UTC

[removed. i misread the original sentence]

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 16:01 UTC as 24th comment

Does the Elph 180 actually not have optical IS? There's no IS in the name, unlike the 190, which leads me to believe that they released a camera that reaches to 224mm equiv at f/6.9 with no physical stabilization system.

Canon, it's not 2003 anymore. Your R&D for IS in compacts has been covered for a long time now.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 15:53 UTC as 30th comment | 4 replies
On article DPReview recommends: Best Cameras for Kids 2015 (105 comments in total)

[[For kids that are on the go - or have the tendency to drop expensive pieces of electronics, the Olympus TG-4 is a good choice]]

It's not even just for kids who are "on the go" (which nearly all kids are) or ones that drop anything. Cameras like this allow them to explore a variety of environments without worry. Even simple stuff like "it's raining outside" or "we're going to the beach."

I've recommended the Olympus Tough series to a number of families since we purchased ours. It's wonderful to watch the children explore photography in their own way in a multitude of environmental conditions.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2015 at 22:02 UTC as 26th comment

I immediately thought of the wonderful work QT Luong has done already in all the US National Parks, with a large format camera no less.

http://www.terragalleria.com/parks/

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2015 at 14:42 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Konstantin Mineev: Most of the people who are buying entry level DSLRs can only dream about costly toys like 11-24F4L, 24-70F2.8LII or 70-2002.8LII and traveling to Alaska.
Nice promotional video by the way.

[[You argued above: "renting these lenses is so . . . inexpensive," but you didn't give a number. ]]

Woe is me for assuming that anyone visiting this thread would recognize that renting lenses is less expensive than owning them.

[[OK, so what *exactly* is "inexpensive?"]]

11-24mm - $3000
24-70mm II - $1800
70-200mm II - $2000
Total cost: $6800

Let's see if $290 is less than the total cost of all three lenses combined. Hmm. Yep. It is. By a factor of 23.

So, one can spend $290 and use 3 lenses for 4 days for a photo shoot instead of paying $6800. And one could do it again, and again, and, in fact 23 more times, before it would equal the cost of the lenses. How many trips to Alaska does one take as a hobbyist?

You have difficulty reading what people actually write and instead seek to invent things for them to say so you can argue against them. This is known as a strawman. You can stand up as many as you wish, but they are easy to see right through.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 22:11 UTC
Total: 128, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »