ecm

ecm

Lives in United States OH, United States
Joined on Aug 16, 2004
About me:

Using cameras:
Canon T3i, 18-55 II and 55-250
Panasonic G5 with Panasonic 14-45 and 45-200
Pentax Q, 02 and 06
Panasonic ZS15
Olympus C-5060WZ with underwater housing.

Old equipment:
Oly E-PL1 with collapsable junk lens.
Oly E-300, 14-45, 40-150

Really old stuff:
Nikon FG-20 and EM 35mm.
Nikkor 28 f/2.8, 50 f/1.8
OM 50 F/1.4, 200 F/4, 300 F/4.5

Comments

Total: 69, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (604 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecm: So disappointing. As though bells and whistles will make up for spectacularly poor image quality. 76% is being charitable. And $900 for a fast 85mm equivalent? Please.

@Sixpm:
"I have made a 60" x 40" print from the V3 ...."
So you said in an earlier post.... and also about a Ricoh camera a few months ago. Printing a lot of those 40 x 60's are you? you'd think you would run out of wall space pretty quick. Followed up with a straw man argument and an ad hominem attack. Gotta love te interwebs.

@sandy b:
Why do you point out photos from a different camera? Is it the same sensor?

In all honesty, I don't care enough about it to pursue this further; you spend your money however you like. I find it interesting, though, that neither of you really directed your comments to me, but rather to the greater audience. Why is that?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 23:04 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (604 comments in total)

So disappointing. As though bells and whistles will make up for spectacularly poor image quality. 76% is being charitable. And $900 for a fast 85mm equivalent? Please.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 12:52 UTC as 79th comment | 8 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS40 Real-world Samples Gallery article (86 comments in total)

It's a bit early to judge, there's nothing at the long end at all; it's pretty much a random collection of shots, from someone who likes the immediacy of wide angle.

If these are truly representative, though, I'd sum it up as "disappointing". Soft corners, lots of CA at full wide; seems to be struggling with noise reduction even at relatively low ISO. I think I see posterization of the red peppers. There's rather extreme pincushion distortion as well, adding to the corner problems. ISO 6400 is for web photos only. Ugly.

As one of the previous commentators said, compared to my ZS15 it's a bust, not a worthy replacement at all. Too bad, too; Panasonic had me at "viewfinder".....

Direct link | Posted on May 28, 2014 at 01:41 UTC as 20th comment
On Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R real-world samples gallery article (272 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dimit: Now,that's a nice set of samples...for the first time in DPR!!!
Wish you all the best...from this and now on!!!

I think they took some pretty shots as well - looks like they had fun with that lens; it's defintely sharp in the middle. And I can see what they meant about the bokeh - still not that bad.

However.... show me a shot at f/1.2-2.0 with a corner (or even an edge!) in the plane of focus..... I didn't see one.

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2014 at 21:35 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (451 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecm: Are people really not interested in having a viewfinder any more? Or do Canon and Nikon think that "we don't need no steenkin' viewfinder" is the only take-home message from increasing mirrorless camera sales?

I bought a mirrorless because of the small size, and then went back to a dSLR because of the lack of an integrated viewfinder..... accessory viewfinders SUCK.....

@bobbarber - that's not my point, my daily driver is a G5. It's specifically NOT a GF3, NEX 3, PM-2, E-PL5, etc, etc - and it won't be a Canon G1X Mark II, either....

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2014 at 23:45 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (451 comments in total)

Are people really not interested in having a viewfinder any more? Or do Canon and Nikon think that "we don't need no steenkin' viewfinder" is the only take-home message from increasing mirrorless camera sales?

I bought a mirrorless because of the small size, and then went back to a dSLR because of the lack of an integrated viewfinder..... accessory viewfinders SUCK.....

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2014 at 23:27 UTC as 99th comment | 6 replies
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Review preview (484 comments in total)

Huh. A new-generation R1..... for $1300?? Nah.

For $820 I could get a Panasonic G6 kit plus the 45-150 and get better quality photos and videos in a smaller package, faster lens notwithstanding. If I was willing to go a bit larger I could get the Canon SL1 kit plus 55-250 for about $850..... Or the Nikon 3200, or, for that matter, Sony's own A58, and STILL kick this thing's #$$ for a lot less dollars.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2014 at 02:41 UTC as 102nd comment | 6 replies
On Am I missing something here? article (636 comments in total)

The viewfinder on the V3 is distressingly similar to the VF-2 viewfinder I was forced to buy for my Olympus E-PL1. I'm having flashbacks to an odd-shaped lump of a camera that wouldn't fit into any bag, constant worrying about whether the finder would get broken off, and losing the hotshoe to something that should have been integral to the camera.

I'm on my third mirrorless in 4 years - I will never buy one without a built-in viewfinder ever again.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 11:58 UTC as 176th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Poss: Can’t wait for the new enthusiast level Aston Martin...

@RKGoth:
Wow, those things must be selling in the tens of..... tens.

An excellent analogy to the new Hassy.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2014 at 15:35 UTC
In reply to:

ecm: Anyone else notice the "BUY ON GEARSHOP" tag just below the article title? Click on the $2,798.00 link and it takes you to the SLT-99.... Irony? from DPR?

@Devandra: I have "F like 17 Tweet 27 g+1 0" to the left of the "BUY ON GEARSHOP $2798.00 >" - what do you have?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2014 at 13:10 UTC

Anyone else notice the "BUY ON GEARSHOP" tag just below the article title? Click on the $2,798.00 link and it takes you to the SLT-99.... Irony? from DPR?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2014 at 03:10 UTC as 175th comment | 2 replies
On Adobe leaks 'Lightroom Mobile' app article (212 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecm: I wonder if this app will be a front end for a mainframe at Adobe actually doing the grunt work - then most of the processing overhead at the tablet or phone would be uploading/downloading and graphics rendering. It's the only way I can get my head around the price they've proposed.

I also wonder if Logmein or one of the other remote desktop programs could do something similar for less.

That's what is making it so confusing...... I dont understand what would make it worth so much. If you're not working on RAW files, whats the point in LR? You're going to spend $100 a year to manipulate and upload JPEGs to the cloud? I'm doing that right now for free with google+ (whether I want to or not, it seems.....).

All I can envision is that you'll upload your raw files some other way, through your computer, and then you will be able to edit them on your iPad -the processing would stay on the server while a representation would be on the tablet. But that seems trivial to me?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2014 at 15:56 UTC
On Adobe leaks 'Lightroom Mobile' app article (212 comments in total)

I wonder if this app will be a front end for a mainframe at Adobe actually doing the grunt work - then most of the processing overhead at the tablet or phone would be uploading/downloading and graphics rendering. It's the only way I can get my head around the price they've proposed.

I also wonder if Logmein or one of the other remote desktop programs could do something similar for less.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2014 at 14:00 UTC as 24th comment | 6 replies
On Adobe expands Photoshop and Lightroom offer article (628 comments in total)
In reply to:

newe: So...what is the best price for people to eliminate the complaints?

I have thought about this a bit...if I could get just photoshop cloud for $5 a month I would do that, with NO price increases. I may even sign a contract (like a cell) for 3 years.

Wonder why they don't do that?

Because after three years of paying Adobe, the first month you don't pay you lose access to three years of your edits. Free would be too much.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 22, 2013 at 13:03 UTC
In reply to:

jkoch2: The "pocket" appellative merits clarification. The camera is small, but not pocketable, but is suitable mainly for pros with lots of money and batteries in their pockets. The camera body is only a fraction of what one must buy to make proper use. People without time or incentive to edit h.264 MOV or AVCHD video won't need ProRes or CinemaDNG any more than a kid on the lap of Kris Kringle (or Edmund Gwenn) will need a real locomotive or a B-29.

It is possible to admire this camera, as one might admire an RJ Corman GG10B, without having any impulse to buy one.

Folks anxious to capture or edit CinemaDNG, and who have the requisite equipment, time, and fine eye to take advantage, may be disappointed when the fruits of their labors fail to register in the 3mbps 480p version most people actually see, or the absence of any incremental pricing they'll be able to pass on to clients to cover the costs.

@archiver:
"and big productions that can afford a dozen or more for crash cams." - which may explain why it's on backorder.... :)

Thanks for the info.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2013 at 01:45 UTC
In reply to:

jkoch2: The "pocket" appellative merits clarification. The camera is small, but not pocketable, but is suitable mainly for pros with lots of money and batteries in their pockets. The camera body is only a fraction of what one must buy to make proper use. People without time or incentive to edit h.264 MOV or AVCHD video won't need ProRes or CinemaDNG any more than a kid on the lap of Kris Kringle (or Edmund Gwenn) will need a real locomotive or a B-29.

It is possible to admire this camera, as one might admire an RJ Corman GG10B, without having any impulse to buy one.

Folks anxious to capture or edit CinemaDNG, and who have the requisite equipment, time, and fine eye to take advantage, may be disappointed when the fruits of their labors fail to register in the 3mbps 480p version most people actually see, or the absence of any incremental pricing they'll be able to pass on to clients to cover the costs.

Agree with you - a very specialized piece of equipment. Still, it's a very interesting object in and of itself - a lot like the locomotives and B-29s you mentioned. I've got to wonder what it's being used for, and by whom....

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2013 at 21:57 UTC
On Hands-on with the Olympus Stylus 1 article (47 comments in total)

I might have to give up my Oly C-5060WZ for this baby..... too bad it's not just a little bit more like a brick; it coulda been a contender....

Seriously, though, what a nicely thought out camera; if the images hold up (up to ISO 400 anyways) I might have to give it a go when the price drops a bit.

This camera typifies what I love Olympus for; it's fresh, original thinking, unafraid of those who will poo-poo it for it's modest sensor. It's like a Panasonic FZ-series for the modern age; it will certainly give Canikon a thing or two to think about.....

Direct link | Posted on Oct 29, 2013 at 21:47 UTC as 10th comment
On Samsung announces curved Galaxy Round post (144 comments in total)

It strikes me as a solution for a non-problem; I've never thought, "Jeepers; if only this phone was CURVED somehow I could get it in my pocket". If it's not comfortable or it doesn't fit in your pocket, perhaps a smaller phone? Or looser clothing? I dunno....

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2013 at 14:25 UTC as 30th comment

The real story is how few of us actually care WHAT happens to Adobe any more.....

Direct link | Posted on Oct 4, 2013 at 00:51 UTC as 80th comment | 4 replies
On iPhone 5s Studio Comparison article (263 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecm: Not one real camera to compare it to. I don't usually say this kind of thing but this article seems to be a waste of time on a photography website. I feel like someone is trying to sell me a Kodak Instamatic when I came here to buy a Nikon F100.

Nice straw man.

"It's not a real camera. It's a phone with a camera." vs. "If it's capturing still images, it's a camera, and it's photography."

So, which is it?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 28, 2013 at 15:34 UTC
Total: 69, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »