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: 33, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
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 (362 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 (2072 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 (2072 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 (2072 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 208th 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 (79 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

For that price, it better be wrapped in Unicorn testes.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 22:47 UTC as 13th comment

I remember the days when graduation photo proofs were printed on paper that wasn't properly fixed. After about three months, the proof would just fade away or blacken.

Meh, school photography is about as interesting as pond scum... Companies like Jostens still hold the student ransom for stuff like this. Graduating university, some students are so deeply in debt that they can't afford the 8x10 matte grad photo anyway.

Besides, it's clearly evident that the photo is done by a garden-variety school-contract portrait taker. I don't think anyone, after removing the watermark, would ever readily admit they had anything to do with taking the picture, other than that they had to sit for it.

Direct link | Posted on May 31, 2014 at 22:01 UTC as 14th comment | 2 replies

It's a bankruptcy. Employees didn't get paid.

Direct link | Posted on May 10, 2014 at 23:05 UTC as 2nd comment

This is NOT good news. Chaim Pikarski has been around for years. He was one of the people behind the original bait-and-switch camera stores in NYC. He's been subject to lawsuits for fraud and racketeering. Perhaps this is a cheap way for him to get back into the business outside of NYC.

Run, do not walk, from any Calumet store that opens back up in the US...

Direct link | Posted on May 4, 2014 at 19:31 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply

So is this AE compatibility actually licensed from Canon, or is this "Sigma lens in the 80s and 90s" style compatibility?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 29, 2014 at 16:30 UTC as 2nd comment
On Sony Alpha 7S in low-light: See video at ISO 409,600 article (244 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: People are amazed. However, this is something EVERY recent Nikon or Sony full frame camera with Sony sensor is capable of in still. Just push ISO from 6400 by 6 EV in post, apply heavy NR and downscale to video resolution.

The thing new is the missing line skipping which doesn't loose you anymore 2 EV or so in video mode. And the gradation options help overcome the limitations of the missing raw file.

Here's an interesting question... What happens to ISO409k after you've been holding the camera for a few minutes and your own body warmth begins to raise the thermal noise in the sensor through the camera body?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2014 at 02:36 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7S in low-light: See video at ISO 409,600 article (244 comments in total)

Great, now we have a camera that takes photos in practical darkness. Here come the thousands and thousands of flickr entries showing dark rooms, dark corners, and general darkness without any attention to lighting technique. Why? Because you can now do that, and it will be good because those photographers will call themselves "pro".

Direct link | Posted on Apr 11, 2014 at 16:38 UTC as 92nd comment | 4 replies
On Fujifilm teases upcoming SLR-style X system camera article (919 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joed700: Fujifilm has done an excellent job with the X-series camera, especially with the X100s and the XE-2. I think it would be nice if the X is a full frame camera. I'm kind of getting tired of the Canikon cameras only because they both lack the feel and the look of a classic camera....

So get a medium-format back and body and be done with it. You could probably find a medium format back under 25mp relatively cheap on the used market now.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2014 at 00:59 UTC
On Fujifilm teases upcoming SLR-style X system camera article (919 comments in total)
In reply to:

M DeNero: I see comments like "Wonderful controls!" and "Great ergonomics!" Pardon me for asking, and I'm not trying to be a wise guy, but is there really any benefit to these retro designs other than aesthetics? Modern SLRS have precision, customizable controls that mostly lie right under the finger tips of one hand. You can make adjustments without even thinking about it, while keeping the other hand on the zoom or focus ring. These retro designs seem to have nicer industrial design, but after handling several they seem very clumsy to me operationally. Please enlighten me.

I don't know what sort of physical limitations you guys have with your hand-eye coordination. People have been operating modern SLRs in the dark since they came to be the defacto control methodology in the 90s.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2014 at 00:53 UTC
On Samyang offers lens kits for videographers article (22 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: You know, on the outset these sound like great lenses, and I'm sure they are. But I think I will pass. The 16 2.0 for example sounds FAST. But on APS-C it's equivalent to 24 3.2 35mm. Meanwhile, I can get a Lens Turbo and an old 24 2.8, which would translate to a 16 1.8, for less money. A lowly 50 1.8 becomes a 33 1.2. Etc. etc. Plus I would be getting 2 lenses in 1 with each lens. Not saying these lenses are worthless or that the speed booster combos would be a match in IQ, but for me right now, ehhh. I mean a 24 2.0 an 50 1.4-1.8 would cover the span of a standard zoom with max apertures reaching 1.0 depending on the combo. Plus it's all MF anyway.

...but these are measured in T stops, not F-Stops. So their stops are calibrated to the amount of light they transmit.

Are you worried about DOF?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 1, 2013 at 16:34 UTC
Total: 33, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »