madmaxmedia

madmaxmedia

Lives in United States Los Angeles, United States
Works as a Marketing
Joined on Jun 27, 2002

Comments

Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (432 comments in total)
In reply to:

quezra: Nikon's main problem is demographic: Its biggest N1 fans are those who got extremely good value price-slashed V1 bodies that allowed them to fall in love with the camera. Unfortunately, each new model in the line appears to want to hike the price back to their original market strategy, thus alienating their supporters, who simply won't buy the camera until it comes down again.

They also appear to be oblivious to what the competition is doing. No one is selling EPL-5s or NEX-5s or NX200s or EOS-Ms in this price bracket. If you want to compete in this price bracket, EVF comes standard, usually fixed on. That also means a full feature set with enthusiast level controls: all standard, not additional add-ons that bring the entire kit into the price range of FF cameras. Clearly it is designed to drop in price but by splitting off accessories they hope they can retain some margins elsewhere since their bodies can't sell except at throwaway prices.

@wkeller- the fast normal (50mm equivalent) Nikon 1 lens is actually the 18.5mm f/1.8, which costs under $200 and is a great lens.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 8, 2014 at 19:57 UTC
On A look at the Lomography Petzval 85mm F2.2 lens article (156 comments in total)

Reading the article does give me more appreciation for this Lomography lens. It seems to me that the appeal is only partly about the imaging characteristics (which can be achieved in other ways for less), and more about the history and heritage of this lens (which I was not previously aware.)

It should come with a top hat and matching overcoat.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2014 at 19:28 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply
On Nikon 1 V3: Real-world Sample Images article (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

nerd2: I am really puzzled who Nikon is aiming this system at with that sky high prices.

V3 body - $1200
32mm f1.2 portrait lens - $899 (which works like 85mm f3.5 on FF)
10-100 f4-5.6 VR - $549 (which works like 27-270 10x zoom)
30-110 f3.8-5.6 - $249 (which works like 80-300 zoom)

This system may make sense for outdoor sports shooting if nikon released lightweight, affordable f2.0 or f2.8 telephoto lens but all the zoom lens they have is SLOW f5.6 ones!

There are looking to cannabilize Leica T sales.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 9, 2014 at 19:30 UTC
On Light Field Cameras - Focusing on the Future article (133 comments in total)
In reply to:

samfan: I think I understand what it's about, I just don't think it's interesting. Sure, you can interact with the photos in a way, but I just didn't find it very engaging on those um, living pictures on the Lytro site (both samples and from users).

Maybe someone will find ways to make this interesting, but so far, I'm not seeing it. And yes, I know, I may sound like someone who dismissed photography for not being a painting. It doesn't mean that everything new has potential. When we get actual holography, that will be interesting. I find even 3D much more interesting than most people (for videos). Lytro - not really. At least their first camera was cheap.

Also, so they sacrificed angular resolution for linear resolution? Maybe that depth information isn't such a big deal after all. Maybe in the 3rd version we'll end up with 'normal' resolution and only 2-3 focal planes.

I think the interactivity could be interesting on a large HDTV display, where the somewhat lower effective resolution won't be an issue. I wish there was a little more perspective shift.

The panning/focusing/perspective shift are all reminisecent of how still photos are presented in documentaries to make them more 'alive'. This technology has the same sort of effect.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 15:49 UTC
On Light Field Cameras - Focusing on the Future article (133 comments in total)

I like the perspective shift, in combination with the re-focusing ability. I think images from this camera will ideally be presented on a big HDTV, not on a computer screen or in print. And for most general consumers, this actually could work well.

The price is very high, if they can eventually get the next version down to $600 I think it has potential as a new medium.

Direct link | Posted on May 15, 2014 at 17:44 UTC as 51st comment
On Lytro announces Illum light field camera article (346 comments in total)

There's a good article at The Verge about the Illum. It looks very interesting to me, and really cannot be compared spec-wise to normal digital camera. This seems like the first 'real' Lytro product, the original Lytro was more proof of concept than anything.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2014 at 20:16 UTC as 48th comment | 4 replies
On Get the story behind the photograph article (11 comments in total)

Don't worry nunatak, it's coming ;-)
http://newcameranews.com/2014/04/02/royal-society-of-pixel-peepers-proposes-truth-in-exif-act/

Direct link | Posted on Apr 8, 2014 at 15:25 UTC as 3rd comment
On Mockups emerge of new Olympus OM-D 'OM-G' article (332 comments in total)

I would love to see this- basically a digital SLR optimized for manual focus. The viewfinder of the OM cameras is amazing, still unmatched by any digital body. The sensor would have to be full frame to give a big optical viewfinder. Ditch the EVF as it would add a lot of unnecessary cost. Everyone got all excited by the Fuji cameras' phase detect aids, may as well just do it old school for much cheaper.

This would be an interesting Kickstarter for someone (if not an actually practical business idea), if you designed the mount so that adapters could be used for a variety of older lens mounts. Use a somewhat older sensor to save money, keep the controls simple and body small (just like an OM). If any camera maker actually did this, it would be Pentax since their current bodies even have M42 compatibility (I have a Pentax MX which is very similar to OM.)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2014 at 15:24 UTC as 17th comment
On Am I missing something here? article (636 comments in total)
In reply to:

GRUBERND: i think the point the author and most of the commenters are missing:

this camera was not built for you.

not for your use-cases, not for your demographic, not for your culture, not even for your country. drop some expectations and biases how a camera is supposedly to work or be used and we all might be in for a treat.

@kadardr- a bunch of people who bought older bodies at $200-$300 firesale prices is probably not best target for a $1200 camera.

The V3 is even more niche than the V2 and V1 due to its price, even though it is significantly improved over the older models. We'll see how it goes.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 16:43 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (636 comments in total)
In reply to:

brownie314: The price strategy from Nikon is truly baffling. But the good news is that we will probably be able to pick up V3's on fire sale in about a year with kit lens for about $350. I have a V1 - bought on fire sale - really cheap. It is good, but IQ doesn't compare to other mirrorless systems. If Nikon is going to make me compromise on IQ, then they had better give me a system that is at least price competitive with some of the cheaper mirrorless systems that have much better IQ.

The 18.5mm is a good buy on Amazon for under $200, the 10mm and 30-110mm are good buys on the used market (under $150 each).

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 16:40 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (636 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sorin Vacaru: I am afraid the answer to your question is a resounding "Yes".

Before offering expert opinion, one should make sure to read and understand the specs.

For example, exposure compensation can be programmed to one of the Fn1-3 buttons and used in conjunction with the command dial, if you so choose. We complained about the V1 lacking programmable function keys. Now we complain about having too many.

Even the V1 can be a one-of-a-kind tool in certain situations (used properly, of course). At first glance, the V3 might be a huge improvement. If you disagree, please feel free to shoot 20fps with full AF tracking and exposure at 800mm with your preferred cameras.

The cliche applies more than ever: the photographer counts first, second his understanding of the available tools.

That cliche is used more than ever, that's what makes it a cliche. This is primarily a gear site that is also about photography, rather than vice versa. It's okay for someone (or lots of people) to not like a camera.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 16:23 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (636 comments in total)
In reply to:

rrccad: Personally I think Nikon got it right.

If the goal of MILC is to provide a small travel / working kit with reasonable image quality, then over time, the Nikon 1 will do it better than certainly APS-C and full frame sensored kit - which will be burdened down by it's much larger almost DSLR sized lenses (for normal and above focals)

the Nikon 1 system system will produce the smallest kit of any of the MILC's - and for most cases, the performance and quality outside of a few raging camera geeks is more than good enough.

Are you buying it? If not you, then you is paying that much? It's a nice camera, but the price makes it very niche.

For them to have fully 'gotten it right', that has to included an appropriate target customer base. Otherwise plenty of companies are capable of over designing a camera that looks great but costs too much.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 16:18 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (636 comments in total)

Hypothetical question- could Nikon have introduced a Micro 4/3 body with al the features/performance of the 1" Aptina sensor? That could have been a pretty compelling M43 body IMO. Superfast AF with good tracking, high FPS, silent shutter with no jello and 1/16,000 sec...weather seal it and it's a great sports/outdoors camera IMO.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 16:17 UTC as 141st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Samuel Dilworth: This rampant kitsch (which runs amok on sites like 500px) is destroying our ability to see. It’s like the ‘loudness war’ in music: everything is turned up to eleven to attract attention. More is without exception more in this world.

So it follows that if a dog is good, and a pot-bellied toddler is good, putting the two of them together at sunset on a misty farm is even better. (Duh!) If you formulaically combine:

• fluffy pets
• children
• sunsets
• snow
• backlit mist
• flowers
• bucolic artefacts
• fabrics blowing in the wind
• blurred backgrounds
• very warm, highly saturated colours

… you arrive, as Shumilova did, at the apogee of this aesthetic – the equation can’t be denied! – even though you’ve truthfully created an absurd parody of beauty.

As this garish view of the world becomes normalised, it becomes harder for people to see other, better possibilities.

B craw, just for discussion sake. These photos probably don't impact your appreciation for other photography, actually these photos don't really bother me at all. But look at the horrible lowest-common denominator trash that goes in most movie theaters today. Sure it's just entertainment, a way to pass the time. But people end up forgetting that movies can be so much more, and anything remotely different or challenging is rejected.

I actually enjoyed the photos for what they are. Some of the discussion around it has actually been more interesting. ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 19:05 UTC
In reply to:

Samuel Dilworth: This rampant kitsch (which runs amok on sites like 500px) is destroying our ability to see. It’s like the ‘loudness war’ in music: everything is turned up to eleven to attract attention. More is without exception more in this world.

So it follows that if a dog is good, and a pot-bellied toddler is good, putting the two of them together at sunset on a misty farm is even better. (Duh!) If you formulaically combine:

• fluffy pets
• children
• sunsets
• snow
• backlit mist
• flowers
• bucolic artefacts
• fabrics blowing in the wind
• blurred backgrounds
• very warm, highly saturated colours

… you arrive, as Shumilova did, at the apogee of this aesthetic – the equation can’t be denied! – even though you’ve truthfully created an absurd parody of beauty.

As this garish view of the world becomes normalised, it becomes harder for people to see other, better possibilities.

I may or may not agree with Samuel's comment, but his is a legitimate post of artistic criticism. You can debate his point, but he's making an esthetic point which has nothing to do with being a pixel peeper, a jealous hater, or necessarily even about post-processing.

These photos are not reality, regardless of the post-processing. I'm personally okay with that though. I enjoyed the photos for what they are. I understand why he doesn't.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 27, 2014 at 19:28 UTC
On Fujifilm X20 Review preview (26 comments in total)

@inspireddan- I don't think the smudging is due to the lack of AA filter, it's due to increased noise reduction. The X20 RAW files are great. But the JPEG's are worse than the X10 in the opinion of many who have used both. It's too bad, I really like my X10 and would otherwise upgrade to the X20 (I mostly shoot JPEG).

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2014 at 22:35 UTC as 6th comment

So let me try to get this right- This company Sakar has licensed the basically defunct Polaroid brand name, to produce a vaguely Micro 4/3-ish camera 'system', running off an Android OS, and cosmetically resembling a Nikon 1?

Did I get it all in there? Is there any other company I have not credited?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 9, 2013 at 23:33 UTC as 4th comment | 2 replies
On New anamorphic adapter lens for iPhone 5/5S post (37 comments in total)

Um guys, we're talking about an anamorphic adapter here, not some sort of standard zoom or tele attachment. You can't do this with any pocket camera. You can do it with adapters mounted on mirror less cameras and DSLR's (typically on rails because the adapters tend to be big and heavy), but its not cheap or easy.

For around $100 this is a pretty cool adapter to mess around with, if the image quality is decent. You can't really tell from the video, but my guess is that it's a mirror adapter (to get the price low.)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2013 at 00:06 UTC as 16th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Dennis: A strong blow to Hasselblad; camera manufacturers start releasing cameras with wooden grips on their own! How did this happen? No one saw it coming...

Wait, I thought this was the Hasselblad GR re-badge camera...

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2013 at 17:55 UTC

Can someone answer me this- are any of these apps able to save images without the default built-in image processing (sharpening, noise reduction, increase contrast, etc.)?

I am guessing not, but just want to be sure. If any of them could, then that would be potentially a great improvement over the built-in app.

I get it would be better to go 1-step further and get actual RAW data, but to be able to strip out noise reduction, etc. would be plenty.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2013 at 17:51 UTC as 3rd comment
Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »