PIX 2015


Lives in Canada Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Works as a Network Service Operations
Joined on Dec 29, 2007
About me:

Wow, I haven't heard the term 'plan' since the Unix days!
Anyway, I've got a modest kit - a Canon 7d, 17-40L, 10-20 EF-S, Sigma 30mm 1.4, 100-300 (the cheap one without IS), 580EXII, and some gadgets like flash bracket, remote cords and such. I've been lurking on here for years. So I guess you could say that my 'plan' is to contribute more to the discussions here.

I'm always looking to learn...


Total: 43, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On Lens Rentals Canada closes its doors article (178 comments in total)

There are other camera and lens rental services in Canada that don't appear to have issues with shipping like LRC did. I wonder if someone like Vistek kind-of muscled him out of the business...

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 23:20 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

obsolescence: The obsolescence of film has not been fully addressed in the digital realm, particularly with regard to large and medium formats. Although there are excellent medium format digital camera systems and digital backs, the prices for most of this equipment is stratospheric -- unnecessarily so. Mirrorless FF cameras are beginning to fill the void of affordable high-resolution capture, but they fall short in some important areas such as lack of camera-lens movements for perspective control and focus distribution. The abandonment of the view camera's many imaging capabilities leaves some photographers grasping for adapters and other non-native devices that are often expensive, clumsy and imprecise. There once were companies dedicated to refining products for a small market based on their love of photography, but now it seems the drive for mass market sales and short term profits dominates the whole business. Photography both as a profession and as an amateur pursuit has been devalued by that.

What are you talking about? In the film days a Hasselblad or a Mamiya 67 was extremely expensive. Untenable by many enthusiasts and reserved for studio leases and professionals who could write off the purchases.

Look at cameras like the Alpa; sure the digital model is very expensive, but a film Alpa was just as expensive. Factor in the additional need for 70mm film or cut-sheet film and one might say that current digital medium-format and adapted large-format digital systems are a bargain.

View cameras have been a niche product since 35mm took hold.
None of the view cameras have really come down in price, especially if you're looking at a Kardan or a Technica, or a Sinar mono-rail.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 21, 2015 at 00:05 UTC
On Sony rides wave of US Mirrorless sales surge article (732 comments in total)
In reply to:

yod4444: This says one thing: People want Full Frame Mirrorless ILC's. Unbelievable that Nikon & Canon don't even seem to care about this segment.

That's not really true. The Pen camera did not make 35mm Full frame. In fact, the Pen wasn't really the first camera to use a frame size less than the standard 36x24 frame size. 16mm cameras existed long before the Pen series - and the Pen was not the first half-frame camera anyway.

Also, the first Canon and Nikon digital cameras weren't really "half frame" either. They had VERY small Kodak sensors. The AP cameras slowly got bigger sensors as time went on, until they became largely irrelevant once Nikon D1 was made available.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 12:41 UTC
On Sony rides wave of US Mirrorless sales surge article (732 comments in total)
In reply to:

yod4444: This says one thing: People want Full Frame Mirrorless ILC's. Unbelievable that Nikon & Canon don't even seem to care about this segment.

Decades? In the film days 35mm was NEVER a professional standard for anything but sports or run-and-gun photography. The Medium Format guys have been laughing for years at all those people toting 35mm. Only 35mm people who looked down at 110 and 126 formats were running around calling it "full frame".

Where do people come up with this stuff about 35mm being the golden standard. It wasn't. It was just cheap to use and easy to make.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 5, 2015 at 12:33 UTC
On Sony rides wave of US Mirrorless sales surge article (732 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photoman: Can you hear your profiles dropping Canon & Nikon??? Will you take mirrorless seriously NOW Canon & Nikon. DSLR's are dying and so are your profits...do you want to be another Polaroid or Agfa?!

I beg to differ. In the film days the vast majority did NOT use an SLR. They used Point and Shoots... You can't really compare... There was no mirrorless consumer camera in the film days. Rangefinders don't count - they were about as niche then as they are now.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 5, 2015 at 12:28 UTC

In Toronto I don't see a lot of people carrying around bags like this taking photos. Most carry their cameras in those typical ballistic nylon branded bags or backpacks.

I don't see many "hipster-retro" bags like this around the city.

The bag looks fairly rigid. That would get uncomfortable fast.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2015 at 16:14 UTC as 7th comment

I'm pretty sure Canon did this in the early days of the EOS system around 1986... They put out two cameras with virtually identical specifications, but some major differences. The price difference was about $100... I believe it was the EOS 750QD...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 23, 2015 at 05:18 UTC as 157th comment
On Canon's Q4 earnings report shows camera sales are down article (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aroart: Real pros have been sticking with canon for photography because of there glass..a few might switch to Nikon for the d810...videographers is a different story ..yea yea 4 k is we're its at.. And sony a7s is a marvel...But I'll bet a c100, 300,500,1dc will look more cinematic and organic...sony fs7 is only close... oh and there's no mirrorless that can keep up with a high end dslr in sports and low light auto focusing ...canon will get on the ball when there feel they are truly threatened ..... It all comes down to best image quality at the end..

That's not true at all. The "measurebators" sit around and talk about the "quality of the glass" but truthfully, Canon EF is relatively young. They abandoned millions of pros when they dropped the FD mount and brought out the EF mount in the mid 80s.

It wasn't the lenses that made pros stick with them, it was the SUPPORT. Canon put cameras and lenses in the hands of every photographer, wire service and news room they could just to get those cameras in there. Leasing agreements were signed, deep discounts were provided, and demonstrations were done everywhere by Canon staff.

Then they coddled those photographers as they learned those new cameras. It didn't take Nikon long to realize that they also had to have a huge support system for the pros. By then, the AF abilities of Canon cameras had been so deeply entrenched, Nikon had a very hard time catching up and working around Canon, Minolta, and Leitz (yes Leitz) patents for their own AF system.

Eventually Nikon caught up.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 30, 2015 at 01:28 UTC
On Canon's Q4 earnings report shows camera sales are down article (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

57even: This is not altogether surprising - the market has matured after soaring increases in sales from the early 2000s. The market levelled out after the recession in 2008/9 and started declining.

Yes, phones have taken over from point and shoots, but they were mostly outsourced anyway. Most camera makers probably earn more selling camera modules to phone companies.

The decline in high-end sales is a reflection of the lack of real improvement in successive models. High replacement rates were previously driven by sensor improvements, but that strategy has now switched to packaging - trad SLR vs CSC, mod vs retro, fixed lens vs interchangeable, big vs small. stills vs. video.

Cameras are now like cars - all good enough that brand identity, features and styling matter more than actual physics or image quality. Most will swear blind that 'their' camera is better whatever testing reveals, and most folk are happy with an iPhone. Who cares about sensor quality? (OK I do, but most don't)

"The decline in high-end sales is a reflection of the lack of real improvement in successive models. High replacement rates were previously driven by sensor improvements"

How so? People bought the cameras they needed to do the things they need to do. By your logic, everyone should be pony'ing up for a PhaseOne. Truthfully, only a small group of people bought with the upgrade cycles. There are still LOTS of 20ds, 30ds, 40ds, and even 10ds out there being used every day. The main problem is the low end. Those people aren't buying ANY cameras now - because their cellphone (as bad as you want them to seem) is now their camera. Add carrier subsidization to the circumstances, and people are getting 10+ "megapixel" cameras for $50 on a data plan and that includes a way for them to share those photos.

You're right though. For hobbyists and amateurs, cameras are mostly good enough. You can get a great large print out of nearly any camera now.


Direct link | Posted on Jan 30, 2015 at 01:20 UTC
On Canon's Q4 earnings report shows camera sales are down article (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

papa natas: Now, are you all going to stop the whining and cussing about Canon not reinventing itself with a better new model that won't lack this or that feature?
Look at the BIG picture. Let me share an anecdote:
Eons ago, a friend of mine who was the General Sales Manager for Hasselblad was invited to visit the Zeiss Manufacturer. I asked him about the temple of the lens manufacturer. The Mecca of our so high priced lens. Surprisingly, he answered that the lens section of the company was a small section of the plant. Zeiss invest most of his money and research on precision instrument's technology.
Do Sony REALLY need to surprise us with a new toy every six months, when they own about 90% copyrights of music market?

Wow, DSD... I haven't heard that in a while. Wishing for DSD to rise as a viable sound-file standard is like wishing that the Digital Betacam format supplants H.265. It's just not going to happen. Sony doesn't care about DSD in some of it's largest international recording studios. You can have bitrates through the roof, and sampling rates running in the multi-megahertz, but if the chips are mounted on lousy substrates, with cheap power supplies and poor quality analog components on the front, it isn't going to make any difference. Pono, quite frankly, is a solution looking for a problem. The hipsters will no doubt eat it up because they can get their players in "banana yellow" and it's shaped like a Toblerone.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 30, 2015 at 01:10 UTC
In reply to:

fmian: The 3-4 Metz flashes I have handled recently (modern models) felt incredibly bad. Poor component fitting. Loose door covers. Cheap feeling external materials. High price though.
If that's the first impression I got after using YongNuo and Canon flashes, then I'm sure other potential customers got the same impression.

Having said that, I've seen some old Metz flashes that were quite nice.

I have a 50 year old Braun flash that still works and still charges. It's dangerous compared to todays electrical standards, but still works. All this talk of how Metz flashes from 40 years ago are still working is really meaningless. There are Miranda cameras out there still working too. My 20 year old Metz 40MZ-3 works with my m43 cameras as a great automatic flash. That's not making Metz any money. It's probably not the products, but the execution decisions that got them where they are now. Besides, aren't some of their cheaper flashes made in China anyway?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 22, 2014 at 18:09 UTC
In reply to:

Andreas M: Shooting film requires a certain discipline, born of limited frames and undeveloped images, something that is lacking in digital photography. Can't say I really miss that, but keeping a film factory open and producing does keep some options open.

I do miss getting a significantly higher ISO by buying a new roll of film rather than buying a new camera.

35mm film was never about "discipline". The whole point of 35mm was long film loads and the cameras were designed to operate quickly. 35mm cameras, especially pro-oriented and high-amateur models emphasized speed and motor drive-repeatability. How does that give you discipline? In fact, since you couldn't chimp on an 35mm film camera, you tended to take MORE shots. People got film rewinding and loading down to a science!

This whole "discipline" thing only became topical once digital photography matured enough to let nearly everyone machine-gun photos. People did that with 35mm all the time!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2014 at 12:41 UTC
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: Am I on the right website? Wasn't this DIGITAL Photography Review? ;)
Jokes aside, last year I decided to buy a film camera after some years of digital photography. I chose an Olympus OM-2n because I had OM lenses that I used on my E-P1 via an adapter. To cut a long story short, I haven't used the E-P1 for months now.
Last June I decided to give the Ferrania Solaris 100 colour film a try. I was overwhelmed by the beauty of its colours. It's not perfect - I wouldn't advise to use it for long exposures -, but the sheer joy those colous convey make it worth it. Especially because it's so cheap. So I became quite enthusiastic about this project - especially after I learnt that those people were intending to resume production of these inexpensive, cheerful film rolls. And, as many have pointed out, you can't have too many options when it comes to film.

Cheerful! I like that. That suits what these films did.
I always found Agfa and Ferrania colour film to be exactly that. The skin tones were a little more on the grey side though but what I'm really looking forward to is a very high-speed negative film. A kind of 'invincible' film, if you like. I'm looking forward to my four rolls of the new E-6 film to try though!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2014 at 12:28 UTC
On Ricoh expands Q series with Pentax Q-S1 article (365 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.

There's no reason at all this camera can't produce competent (if not lovely) large sized prints. It should make fine 8x10 prints and should make very good larger prints without too much trouble. Perhaps the toy lenses may not demonstrate the abilities of the camera optimally, but the better ones should have no trouble.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2014 at 01:35 UTC
In reply to:

Combat By Design: Can someone tell me what the point of Hasselblad is?

Honesty. Can anyone tell me what purpose this company serves (other than catering to the Trumps of the world) by existing?

Malarky. I knew many, many pro photographers in the 80s and 90s who's Hassys were in constant use. They each had multiple cameras and lenses because at any given time ONE of them was off to service because something failed. It's fun to romanticize these mechanical cameras but they were problematic - at least the bodies and backs were.

Believe it or not, but Mamiya made inroads because their 67 and 645 systems was more reliable and offered a more versatile negative.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2014 at 03:17 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2132 comments in total)
In reply to:

DoctorJerry: Aperture equivalence
I ran a test using my Panasonic LF1 and selected sensor sizes of 12MP, 8MP, 5MP 3MP and 0.3MP. I can select those sensor sizes by using Panasonic’s EZ Zoom which trims off pixels on the perimeter of the sensor to arrive at a smaller sensor. As I read your article, I should have been needing either a higher ISO, slower shutter speed, or faster aperture as I trimmed pixels from the sensor. I found NO difference my test shots, all shot at 1/80sec, F2.0 and ISO 200, they were the same REGARDLESS of the size of the sensor I used.

Where I think you went wrong is in talking about how much less light reaches the sensor as the sensor gets smaller. What you overlooked was that the same quantity of light reached the plane of the sensor but since the sensor was smaller, it captured less light. It did NOT need all the light reaching the plane of the sensor, only enough to cover the sensor itself. According to my test f2.0 is 2.0 regardless of the sensor size.

Richard, F-Stop numbers do not guarantee light intensity. Where did you get that idea? Only T-Stops guarantee light intensity by guaranteeing transmission.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 02:43 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2132 comments in total)
In reply to:

fortwodriver: This is absolute BS... The f-stop is a measure of the ratio of the diaphragm opening to the focal length of the lens. Nothing more, nothing less. If you want to talk about light transmission, please do your research on T-Stops and stop making this stuff up.

So you have no real idea why T-Stops are used. T-Stops and F-Stops are not equivalent. An F2.8 lens is not a T2.8 lens unless it is designed to be. The whole point of T-Stop measurement is to eliminate the differences between lenses when changing them scene to scene. You need to know the light transmission value of the lens, not the F-Stop.

Most cine optics put your little hobby-lenses to shame.

Talk about ignorance...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 02:25 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2132 comments in total)

This is absolute BS... The f-stop is a measure of the ratio of the diaphragm opening to the focal length of the lens. Nothing more, nothing less. If you want to talk about light transmission, please do your research on T-Stops and stop making this stuff up.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 8, 2014 at 22:37 UTC as 219th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

chris_j_l: Not understanding the commercial rationale behind this. Olympus has 1 that covers this range, Panasonic has 2 that cover this range. Now we have Tamron wanting to cover this range.
I'm all for choice and that, but there is a phenomenal amount of me-too bunching of glass focal length in u4/3 with little or no differentiation between them bar the manufacturer name.
Tamron does have 1 jump on Oly and Pana in this - the announcement of the lens appears to be followed by sales 1-2 months later. Pana/Oly seem to be in the "announce this year, available 2 years later" which may as well be "available for sale on the 16th of Neveruary"

The difference between this and the Oly and Panny offerings is that this lens will likely drop in price after the first wave of buyers.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 14:35 UTC
On Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Lab Test Review preview (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jogger: They should just use the Sony A7r as the standard platform for all FF lens tests.

"By using the meter..." Really? Do you have any idea how a G lens works? It's got no mechanical control for aperture. You would need an adaptor with a mechanical aperture ring which converts the dialled in aperture to the electronic signal that G lens requires to set it precisely.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2014 at 01:21 UTC
Total: 43, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »