Joined on Mar 29, 2013


Total: 3, showing: 1 – 3
On Sony SLT-A77 II First Impressions Review preview (685 comments in total)
In reply to:

Abuelo Paul: Having owned my A77 for 18months, and fired off almost 30000 frames, I won't be upgrading yet. There appear to be very few benefits in this markII version.
My main criticisms of the A77 are:
Poor high ISO results
Constant problems with sensor spots after changing lenses
Poor after sales service ( lost the rubber eyepiece and can't get a replacement)
But on the plus side:
Easy to use
superb results
EVF previews the shot
Minolta glass compatibility
All in all why change when I'm happy with what I've got. I had the EOS 500D before.

Just the sea of Minolta legacies at cheap prices
is worth staying with Sony, hey and no image stabilisation with in every lens, sometimes less is more.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 00:57 UTC
In reply to:

40daystogo: That's an outrageously high proportion of "keepers" from one 36-roll of Kodachrome. Shows the quality of Steve McCurry's ability to see -- although, I guess, using the last roll of Kodachrome might have heightened the sense of gravity before clicking the button.

Using a digital camera as a light meter/chimp device, wow! who wouldn't!, the ultimate light/ hindsight meter, sorry! supposedly only 30 shots left in the known universe, tick,tick,tick

Direct link | Posted on Mar 29, 2013 at 04:58 UTC
In reply to:

tarnumf: So much about lenses sharpness, high ISO and bokeh - no, they don't really matter.

We are not happy unless we can see the micro detail, with virtually no noise, at an Iso of 64million(or soon will be). It disappoints that technology can be stealing the power to make us all better photographers.
The film images, didn't have image stabilisation, didn't have variable iso, and didn't have the luxury of bracketing. They weren't taken into Lightroom, or Photoshop, or had there contrast, colour or range played with, to the point where they look nothing like what was shot on the day. The "chromes" were filled with additional light to help exposure, framed well, developed and stuck on a digital scanner and converted.
To sum it up, the camera was put on a tripod, metered, previewed (albeit) digitally and processed. We have come so far with digital photography, but the urgency to get it right up front, has been diluted to the point where it is, I feel, making us less capable to get the best out of photographic skills and slaves to fixing everything in post.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 29, 2013 at 04:03 UTC
Total: 3, showing: 1 – 3