ecm

ecm

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

Using cameras:
- Panasonic G5, 14-45 and 45-200, Oly FL36. Really good all-rounder system. My go-to mostly due to size and silent electronic shutter.
- Canon T3i, 18-55 II and 55-250, Yongnuo YN565EX. Excellent system, too bulky, too loud for everyday use.
- Panasonic ZS15 & LF-1 - Panasonic does pocket cameras right. I get more keepers from these cameras.
- Pentax Q, with 02 and 06 lenses. Intriguing camera system, can't find a suitable flash. Better output than any other small sensor camera I've ever had.

Old equipment:
- Oly E-PL1 with trashy collapsible lens. Good riddance.
- Oly E-300, 14-45, 40-150. RIP my trusty old friend.
- Olympus C-5060WZ with underwater housing. Retired but not forgotten.

Really old stuff:
- Nikon FG-20 and EM 35mm. Still round here somewhere.
- Nikkor 28 f/2.8, 50 f/1.8. Still great on my G5 with adapter.
- OM 50 F/1.4, 200 F/4, 300 F/4.5. Keep meaning to pick up an adapter.
- Koni-Omega Rapid 6X7 with 90mm, Voightlander Bessa 6X9, Ansco 6X6. Dipping toes in medium format; toes burned.

Comments

Total: 85, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

I'm sorry, but.... you've got the right time, the right light and the right location.... however, clearly, you have the wrong tool for the job.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2013 at 21:04 UTC as 75th comment
On Just posted: Our Canon EOS 70D hands-on preview article (355 comments in total)

Interesting changes. Its the first update from Canon that actually makes me think about upgrading my T3i.....

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2013 at 09:21 UTC as 69th comment
On Adobe releases subscription-only Photoshop CC article (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecm: I do think that DPR's news writers should make it more clear - $19/month only applies if you buy a year at a time. Photoshop is $29/month if you buy month-to-month.

If you're an amateur as I am, there's the silver lining in this "creative cloud" - if I have any desire to use Photoshop I can rent it for a month when I need it, rather than having to buy the whole $600 package. I imagine that's why Adobe made the month-to-month so much more expensive.

I can't see myself doing any such thing, mind you; there's many good, relatively inexpensive (or free) stand-alone tools for blemish correction, unsharp masking, color management, HDR and printing now available. Perhaps Adobe is right (gasp!) - only the pros should want/need Photoshop.....

@SemperAugustus - too true, that was a point I was thinking of but decided to not elucidate - and one of the main reasons that I wouldn't want to have to rent PS CC.

I learned CS1, slowly and painfully, only to have to abandon it when Adobe stopped ACR updates for my version. Subsequently, however, GIMP was a snap to pick up - once you've got the gist of a top-end photo editor with layers, masking and so forth you know what to look for. I would assume it works both ways, and since I'd probably only be renting it for a single specific proprietary tool I wouldn't have to learn the whole program.

@dbateman - the 16-bit thing has been dogging GIMP for a lot of years. I'm not keeping my fingers crossed; last I heard it was on hold, now I hear the 16 bit project is alive again..... too bad I'm from the Pascal and Fortran era, can't be much help to the C++ crowd.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2013 at 20:28 UTC
On Adobe releases subscription-only Photoshop CC article (398 comments in total)

I do think that DPR's news writers should make it more clear - $19/month only applies if you buy a year at a time. Photoshop is $29/month if you buy month-to-month.

If you're an amateur as I am, there's the silver lining in this "creative cloud" - if I have any desire to use Photoshop I can rent it for a month when I need it, rather than having to buy the whole $600 package. I imagine that's why Adobe made the month-to-month so much more expensive.

I can't see myself doing any such thing, mind you; there's many good, relatively inexpensive (or free) stand-alone tools for blemish correction, unsharp masking, color management, HDR and printing now available. Perhaps Adobe is right (gasp!) - only the pros should want/need Photoshop.....

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2013 at 15:28 UTC as 146th comment | 3 replies
On Pentax announces Q7 with larger 12MP BSI CMOS sensor article (232 comments in total)

I'm reasonably happy with my Q with 02 and 06; it's better than any pocket camera I've ever had. Nice to know that there's a true upgrade path, not that I feel the need to actually fork over the money right now... I kind of wonder how far this can go - a 2/3 sensor like the one in the old Olympus C8080 could be awesome with today's technology.....

Direct link | Posted on Jun 13, 2013 at 23:40 UTC as 24th comment | 1 reply

Wow. Just..... wow. I don't know whether to laugh or cringe. It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion, you know that people are dying but you just can't look away.....

Direct link | Posted on May 31, 2013 at 19:20 UTC as 106th comment

I just don't believe you any more, Adobe. You've shown your true stripes.

I suspect it's not going to be all that long before we'll be given a choice - between "Pro" LR CC that has all the bells and whistles, and standalone "LR Elements" for us amateurs you said you don't want using Photoshop CC.

Good thing I'd already started to move away from Adobe products - the only one I use with any regularity any more is LR 3.6. Don't worry, it'll soon be replaced; no more non-pros getting their dirty little fingerprints on YOUR products, right?

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 14:45 UTC as 74th comment
On Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction article (1853 comments in total)

On the upside, we should see the verb "to photoshop" disappear fairly quickly.....

Direct link | Posted on May 10, 2013 at 19:17 UTC as 120th comment | 2 replies
On Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction article (1853 comments in total)

I have to say I hate this trend to rental software and the gross profit-mongering I'm seeing by not only Adobe but also some of the other big players. It's forced me out of MS Office, now it'll force me to leave LR and PS. I will own the right to use the software I require for as long as it suits me, thank you.

I'm hearing quite a few saying they'll "stay with CS6" - but you know that's not going to be an option for long, don't you? Adobe will stop ACR updates from working with the older versions in a couple years - and that's only if "ACR updates" exist at all.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2013 at 02:06 UTC as 754th comment

Just so you know, "Low-end garbage" isn't a prestigious market segment, Nikon. Looks like you forgot that in the last several years.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2013 at 02:29 UTC as 11th comment
On Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix S800c Review article (79 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chev Chelios: How can a camera that has, according to its reviewer, "Mediocre photo quality" with photos that are "soft and noisy" and has "Terrible battery life" and has "buggy" and "outdated" software, and whose wi-fi "has very poor reception" with "occasional connection problems" score...

67%??????

How bad does a camera have to be to score an average 50%? (let me guess, probably unable to take a photo at all!)

:)

A block of wood with a lens drawn with crayon would get 60% on this scale.

50%? I can't even imagine.... Perhaps a little robot that leaps out of your hands and gouges your eyes out so that you'll never take a photo again?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2013 at 11:53 UTC
On Dpreview Users' Poll: Best Camera of 2012? article (1511 comments in total)

I didn't get through all 1200+ comments but I'd like to say, it's like DPR set out to troll with this article - brought a lot of fanboys out to play, that's for sure. What fun!

I ended voting for a camera that I thought was the game-changer this year, the Oly EM-5 - even though I would never buy one, it wouldn't suit me at all and it's way out of my price range. I love seeing this kind of fresh thinking - it'll definitely prod the big three and inspire some great things in the future; competition is a wonderful thing.

If the question was, 'Money no object, which one of these would you like to own", I'd never say no if some nice person were to gift me a D800 or 5D MkIII.... anyone?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 26, 2012 at 17:06 UTC as 80th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

ecm: Pretty good for a small sensor camera.

HOWEVER.....The thing that differentiated this line of Nikon cameras - the viewfinder - is gone.

And I'm left with the question, why would I buy this? There's much better image quality to be had for about the same price, size and weight in the micro-4/3 and NEX camera ranges, if I'm willing to buy last year's tech - up to 50% cheaper, actually - look at the Oly E-PL1 or Panny GF-3.

@pcworth:
Nope, not comparing it to a superzoom - different beast, different uses.

And yes, I checked the prices of the cameras I mentioned. The NEX 5N with 18-55 kit lens is now running $499 on Amazon. The Olympus E-PL1, which is about as good as the P7700 at ISO 100, spanks it soundly at ISO 400-1600. It costs $268 with it's folding kit lens; when folded it's not much thicker than the new Nikon (when off - how far does that lens extend when you turn it on?). The Panasonic GF3, about as good IQ as the E-PL1, costs $300, with a better kit lens but it doesn't fold.

Since we mention lenses, there are choices - The Panny 40-200 (80-400 effective - $230) will work for a lot of folks, as will the Oly 40-150 (80-300 effective - $180); if you want you can also get premium lenses. Is choice bad?

Anyways, don't miss my point - without the optical viewfinder, what does this camera have to differentiate itself?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 18, 2012 at 12:53 UTC

Pretty good for a small sensor camera.

HOWEVER.....The thing that differentiated this line of Nikon cameras - the viewfinder - is gone.

And I'm left with the question, why would I buy this? There's much better image quality to be had for about the same price, size and weight in the micro-4/3 and NEX camera ranges, if I'm willing to buy last year's tech - up to 50% cheaper, actually - look at the Oly E-PL1 or Panny GF-3.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2012 at 11:59 UTC as 13th comment | 6 replies
On Accessory Review: Manfrotto Solo VI DSLR Holster Bag article (96 comments in total)

Nice to see another type of photography review at DPR - I hope we see a lot more of these quickie accessory reviews. Just the right length; not a lot of BS; the "like-dislike" part is golden.

That said, this Manfrotto bag has been done, and done better, a decade ago. Check out the Tamrac Velocity sling series if you want something that'll actually be your "go-to". My Velocity 6 is on it's third dSLR in 8 years, no signs of stopping yet.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 29, 2012 at 13:52 UTC as 34th comment | 1 reply
On Hasselblad responds to Lunar criticisms article (628 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cytokine: Luca,

The problem here is that the camera has no market placement:

1) Not A DSLR
2) Not a compact of any of the current types.
3) Too heavy and standoutish for a street camera.
4) Not a Pro camera.

When NASA commissioned H'Bad for a camera that would work in space it was the best camera for the job. To even mention NASA with this camera that exists for no other purpose than to pose, is an insult to the brand name.

Please, Please, use professional marketing and PR people in future.

"The pointless and shoot"!

Man, I'm really getting my jollies from this topic tonight.... Lovely humor here! Too much!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2012 at 00:23 UTC
On Hasselblad responds to Lunar criticisms article (628 comments in total)
In reply to:

cgarrard: Already a Lunar competitor:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/09/product-announcement-lensrentals-looney

:)

Carl

"it is genuine plastic grown on our own trees. The plastic beans are hand picked and carried by mule to our processing plant where they are carefully selected and roasted to create a smooth, creamy plastic"

OMG...... I can't breathe.....

As for Hasselblad.... I predict bankruptcy within 24 months - really sad; an icon of uncompromising quality has just sold their soul.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2012 at 00:15 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix S9300 Review article (56 comments in total)

"the Nikon Coolpix S9300 represents an excellent value and offers a nice point-and-shoot feature set, its photo quality is poor relative to the competition, with mediocre low light shooting and below-par battery life. "

THAT is a 69% camera? It offers a few bells and whistles, but can't take a picture worth a damn? The Panasonic FZ15 got 73% - despite indicating it "produces better-looking images, while maintaining the robust performance, competitive feature set, and ease of use...". So, it's easier to use, faster, with similar features, and above all gives you DECENT photos and videos - and that gives it a 4% lead??

I wonder what a 50% camera would be - a block of wood that's painted to look like a camera?

Bah humbug, DPR. Since when does feature creep trump image quality? The details in the review spell it out; the 9300 is a miserable excuse for a camera, just like it's predecessor was. 69% suggests it's in the vicinity of the SX260 or ZS15... but it's not.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2012 at 02:16 UTC as 16th comment | 1 reply
On Sony DSC-RX100 preview (544 comments in total)
In reply to:

ecm: I like the specs; can't wait to see the full review.

I'm hoping that this is an indicator of things to come; instead of the cynical hypocrisy of the megapixel race, I'd like to see a sensor-size race - let's see who can fit the biggest sensor in the smallest body, with the fastest lens!

Sorry, I managed to edit it before I saw your comment - I meant I'd like to take a look on the "comparometer" in a review....

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2012 at 04:56 UTC
On Sony DSC-RX100 preview (544 comments in total)
In reply to:

fta: ARGH! I don't get it why they call this a 1" sensor?

Pythagorean theorem for a sensor 13.2mm x 8.8mm = 15.864mm

15.864mm = 0.624 inches? What am I missing?
I'd be grateful if someone could clear this up for me.

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=sensor%20sizes

This answers your question - it's based on the naming of archaic television tube sizes....

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2012 at 04:50 UTC
Total: 85, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »