pavi1

pavi1

Lives in United States GUN BARREL CITY, TX, United States
Works as a CPA
Joined on Jul 29, 2005
About me:

CP5000
Fuji X100
D300S
Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6D EX DC HSM
Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6
Nikkor 35-70 f/2.8 D Macro
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM
Nikkor 20mm f/2.8 AF
Nikkor 35mm f/2.0D
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D
Nikkor Macro 60mm f/2.8D
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D
Nikkor 180mm f/2.8D AF ED-IF
Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR
Nikkor 105 f/2.8 Micro AIS
Rokinon 85mm f1.4
Sigma 500 f7.2 (doorstop)
Kenko Extension Tubes
2XSB-800
SU-800
Alien Bees

Comments

Total: 25, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Boss of Sony: TWO REASONS WHY CAMERA COMPANIES ARE LOSING MONEY: 1. Capitalism is dying (finally), because it is based on faulty mathematics, so it has to end at some point. 2. NOBODY CARES ABOUT PHOTOGRAPHY ANYMORE. The only people who care are the obsessives who think looking at an inferior 2-D representation of something on a screen is better than appreciating the real thing with your eyes in real time. Now that everone has a camera, people are waking up and thinking, what the hell is the point of photography? Why don't I just look at the world with my eyes and stop wasting valuable resources and valuable time doing a pointless activity?

Clueless or trying to be funny?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 8, 2014 at 00:04 UTC
In reply to:

dr8: if by "losses" they figure 'em like the rest of corporate America, then that simply means - 'Hey, we did not make as much PROFIT as we thought/planned/hoped/told our investors/ we would.' - It does not mean that actual $$$ left their pockets....as is pointed out that profit was 1 cent MORE per share than what "analysts" THOUGHT it would be.

GAAP loss. Do you know what that is?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2014 at 23:29 UTC
On Samsung announces curved Galaxy Round post (144 comments in total)

Wow. Just what I have been waiting for.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2013 at 22:00 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

BlueBomberTurbo: Considering Apple's quote during the speech:

"It used to be that to take better pics, you just learned to become a better photographer."

Apparently Apple doesn't think much about professional photographers. At all. They're certainly not getting my money.

Why would a professional photographer care what kind of camera a cell phone has. The best are barely good enough to take a picture of a grocery list.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2013 at 20:46 UTC
In reply to:

Mahmoud Mousef: It's really simple.
Social networking sites are a marketer's wet dream and a dream for central planners and profile-building global spying agencies.

You (and your kids) are the product. Make no mistake about it. You are exploitable to the maximum extent of the law. In case you haven't noticed, there is no law. EVERYTHING you do online is being recorded, including your phone calls and Skype calls.

Your details, pics and associations are shared with many companies in back-room deals; you have agreed to this. If you are OK with your associations and content being exploited by marketers and shared with government, insurance and god-knows-what-else, continue using these 'free' services.

If you're OK with these spies spying on you, that's fine. Just don't say anything critical of your so-called leaders or you may find yourself on the receiving end of a big stick real quick.

You are not in charge of your content. Your content and activities are there to be sold and exploited.

You are having a really difficult time are't you?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 9, 2013 at 13:44 UTC
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: The company is addressing several issues with authorship and original image content being abused by other users, other than Facebook.

Facebook is washing their hands off with being blamed by third party thieves who inadvertently are existing Facebook partners. They don't want to be dragged in the quagmire of lawsuits.

It is almost impossible for Facebook to monitor theft by 3rd party users.

They want to cover their ass.

.

If you publish it on the internet, it is published forever and anywhere someone wants to repeat it.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 9, 2013 at 00:07 UTC
In reply to:

Mahmoud Mousef: It's really simple.
Social networking sites are a marketer's wet dream and a dream for central planners and profile-building global spying agencies.

You (and your kids) are the product. Make no mistake about it. You are exploitable to the maximum extent of the law. In case you haven't noticed, there is no law. EVERYTHING you do online is being recorded, including your phone calls and Skype calls.

Your details, pics and associations are shared with many companies in back-room deals; you have agreed to this. If you are OK with your associations and content being exploited by marketers and shared with government, insurance and god-knows-what-else, continue using these 'free' services.

If you're OK with these spies spying on you, that's fine. Just don't say anything critical of your so-called leaders or you may find yourself on the receiving end of a big stick real quick.

You are not in charge of your content. Your content and activities are there to be sold and exploited.

Correct and we dont care. I dont do crime so it does not matter to me that all my movements are tracked by my cell phone, cameras at every intersection in town and license plate readers everywhere I go. The only thing that bothers me is everytime I google something, my email gets bombed with spam about whatever I did a google search for.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 9, 2013 at 00:06 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: I'm not sorry I never joined Facebook, and I don't plan to join anytime in the future.

thanks

Direct link | Posted on Sep 8, 2013 at 19:31 UTC

You are some really ignorant people. Did you really think that was your "Aunt Sally" suggesting that you might be interested in purple widgets. Facebook has been posting on my friends news feed on my behalf for a long time. Nothing new.
Not sure why anyone would post anything of value on a public web site. If you do, then you deserve what ever abuse they heap upon you.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 8, 2013 at 15:28 UTC as 49th comment
In reply to:

pavi1: No viewfinder, think I will stick to my iPhone and D300S for now. When will they learn?

Problem is it is a pitiful camera that requires reading glasses and extended arms to take a picture. iPhone camera is for taking pictures of things you need to pick up at the grocery store so no real need for a viewfinder,

Direct link | Posted on Sep 8, 2013 at 02:37 UTC
In reply to:

MarshallG: My first camera was a Fujica SLR, which I bought in 1978 for $120. Fuji has been a low-end camera maker for a very long time, and I think it's fantastic that they've busted out with cameras that beat the offerings of Canon/Nikon/Olympus/Sony/Leica. In this day and age, it's a very impressive feat of engineering and understanding the customer. I'd love to buy a cost-reduced Fuji that keeps enough of the enthusiast features for serious photography. This model might do, if they offer some kind of viewfinder option.

And what info is displayed in that hot shoe view finder? That's what I thought. And then when you want to use hot shoe for cord or flash you are back to arms length and reading glasses to take a picture. Do people in Japan not loose their close range vision when they turn 40 like we do in the USA?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 8, 2013 at 02:34 UTC

No viewfinder, think I will stick to my iPhone and D300S for now. When will they learn?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 7, 2013 at 00:20 UTC as 46th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

siberstorm27: For less than half the price, you can get yourself a Lumia 920, which isn't that far behind in image quality, has the same OIS and night performance, has far better camera app speed, and won't have an unsightly camera hump. The fact that each individual pixel of the 41MP sensor isn't any bigger than your typical 13MP cell phone camera means you can't expect a drastic difference ebetween it and the other cell phone cameras out there. Resampling from a large pool of pixel data has its limitations, especially when so much of it is nothing but noise, and digital zoom is still digital zoom. It's a mild benefit that starts getting noisy and ugly halfway in. There will be more than a couple of new camera focused phones coming out in Sept, to rival or beat the Lumia 1020, while not having to be bogged down by Windows Phone or Nokia's archaic hardware.

Sorry but it is a great camera in a really bad smart phone

Direct link | Posted on Aug 31, 2013 at 14:28 UTC

Too bad such a nice camera is housed in a smart phone that is not all that smart.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 30, 2013 at 19:42 UTC as 87th comment
On Is the snapshot dead? post (70 comments in total)

Babel, the difference between the great and the also ran.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 20:30 UTC as 41st comment

Beautiful cameras, great lenses. When I win power ball I will buy one of each. But lets be real, a Leica is a lot like buying a 200 hp Ferrari.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 02:23 UTC as 39th comment | 3 replies

Who told you medium format was dead? It is expensive, but certainly not dead.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 2, 2013 at 17:24 UTC as 50th comment | 7 replies

Ficker is and always has been the worst photo hosting site. Extreamly slow.
Zenfolio.

Direct link | Posted on May 22, 2013 at 22:53 UTC as 74th comment | 1 reply
On US Judge rules for Eggleston in dispute with collector article (300 comments in total)

Evidence that marketing skill is much more important than photography skill.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2013 at 22:15 UTC as 105th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: Not so sure about Sigma. I bought a 24mm 1.8EX DG back in 2000 for my Canon Elan II. The lens worked great on that and my EOS 3, but when I went digital it didn't work properly on my 20D nor my 5D, or later on my 1DS2. Now that I have a 5D2 the lens seems to work again but all the previous DSLR's the AE didn't work properly.

I sent countless emails to Sigma over the years to get the lens rechipped but they never responded to any of my emails. I think I'll stick with Canon thanks.

You should have sent the lens for calibration.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2012 at 16:52 UTC
Total: 25, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »