brumd

brumd

Lives in Netherlands Netherlands
Works as a Web developer
Joined on Feb 8, 2012

Comments

Total: 62, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II Review preview (673 comments in total)
In reply to:

dave: In the age of cheap full frame cameras, the quarter sized sensor will always hold Olympus back. All of the bells an whistles can't makeup for the small sensor.

The cheap price doesn't make a FF camera system less bulky and heavy, especially the lenses.

Choosing a M43 system was never a price issue for me, I would choose it again, even if FF and M43 were the same price.
I do a lot of traveling; If I only had a FF camera, I wouldn't be able to take 80% of my shots.

M43 is here to stay, like it or not, simply because there is a demand for it. Maybe not for you, but for others like me.

If FF prices keep dropping I might consider using it as my 2nd camera, but I wouldn't ditch my M43 cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 21:15 UTC

When you are a 'traveling photographer' you tend to carry around a lot more things than just camera gear. Therefore, a backpack dedicated to taking only camera gear isn't particularly helpful for traveling photographers. At least, in my experience.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2015 at 21:50 UTC as 25th comment | 4 replies

I read the title of this article and my 1st thought was: Iceland!!
It's so true: never, ever trust the weatherforecast, at least no forecast for more than 2-3 hours away.

Just like they experimenting with a gorilla who is active on the stock-market, and who isn't doing a much worse job than most 'financial specialists', they should do an experiment with weather-forecast-monkeys. Or for Iceland, maybe use puffins. I predict they will be exactly as trustworthy as the vedur.is or (the much used) yr.no.
No joke! :)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 15:16 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

Zaax: Actually I prefer crappy weather for landscape photography.

@cantanima bis
actually it's fifteen minutes. Have some patience, please!! ;)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 15:11 UTC
On Making 'Art': We go inside Sigma's lens factory article (190 comments in total)

Great article! It really helps me appreciate the amount of work and care that is put in making these lenses, not only Sigma, but in general.

It would be nice to be able to compare this production process with the Leica factory and their "handmade lenses": http://blog.leica-camera.com/leica-news/the-leica-manufacturing-process/

In what ways do these production processes actually differ?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 9, 2015 at 09:45 UTC as 75th comment | 1 reply
On World Press Photo revokes prize from Giovanni Troilo article (99 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aur: I think there is more to this story. This person diliberately misrepresented that city, lied about where the shots were taken, lied about setting things in scene.

Interestingly, Charleroi used to have coal mines, many italians used to work there decades ago, it wouldn't surprise me if this Italian photographer is in some way connected to charleroi and has some deeper unresolved problems.

More interestingly, I believe that pipeline above is associated with the mining. Also, he says "dark heart", just like coal is dark.

This whole story and his actions are just too weird, he intentionally went out to attack that city, fully aware of his narrative, I think it has nothing to do with artistic expression, but everything with his resentment towards that city.

I think it has everything to do with artistic expression, not so much with journalism.
As far as I have seen the photos in this series I like them, I like the narrative, but it's mostly an artist's view, not so much a representation of a real situation.
It's simply the wrong category.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2015 at 08:17 UTC
In reply to:

brumd: "On first use the filter needs about four hours of sunlight to create the hydrophilic characteristic"

What does that mean exactly? 4 hours of bright light on a sunny day? How long would it take on a cloudy day, for example in Iceland?
And how long does it take on second and third use?

Giklab: it says that the filter stays active for 48 hours, so they need to be "charged with UV light" everytime you intend to use them, not only before first use.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 18:15 UTC

"On first use the filter needs about four hours of sunlight to create the hydrophilic characteristic"

What does that mean exactly? 4 hours of bright light on a sunny day? How long would it take on a cloudy day, for example in Iceland?
And how long does it take on second and third use?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 17:51 UTC as 20th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

nerd2: 85mm f3.5 portrait prime? Not interested at all.
Oh and it's priced $399... you can get the excellent nikkor 85mm 1.8G at only $50 more.

nerd2: again, you are simply not able to look beyond your own priorities. You don't HAVE to use a M4/3 system, you don't even have to like it.
But that doesn't mean that for others the M4/3 has more advantages than disadvantages to use either as their only system or as their secondary system.

It's so useless to keep screaming in every M4/3 topic how much you don't like it. We know you don't like it. You have different priorities. That's ok. Try a little open-mindedness to see why others have different priorities.
I wouldn't be able to do 80% of my shots with a FF system, simple as that.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 09:13 UTC
In reply to:

nerd2: 85mm f3.5 portrait prime? Not interested at all.
Oh and it's priced $399... you can get the excellent nikkor 85mm 1.8G at only $50 more.

First: it is not only a portrait lens. Personally, I use a 45mm lens for events/ theatre shoots. If you want to have enough DOF on a FF camera you need to stop down to 2.8 or 3.5
Second: you can shoot excellent portraits with a FF eq DOF of 3.5. Just because your style is different doesn't mean it is the only way to shoot a portrait.

Again: you have an inability to look beyond what ÝOUR priority is. M4/3 users KNOW they gain extra DOF when using their lens wide open (it's a feature not a disadvantage, for others).

If m4/3 is not your thing: that's fine. But try to have an open-minded for people with different priorities. m4/3 users KNOW this is not the system to achieve the shallowest DOF. You need Medium Format for that.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 23:24 UTC
In reply to:

nerd2: 85mm f3.5 portrait prime? Not interested at all.
Oh and it's priced $399... you can get the excellent nikkor 85mm 1.8G at only $50 more.

well, the "excellent nikkor 85mm" doesn't fit on a m43 camera.
Your comment doesn't say anything about the quality of the lens, nor anything about the m43.
Your comment only shows your inability to look beyond your own priorities in what you are looking for in a lens. You like the shallowest DOF? Fine, buy a MF camera, or a FF if that is shallow enough for you.

People that buy M4/3 systems KNOW that they don't offer the shallowest DOF, so obviously that is not the top priority if you choose m43.
It is completely pointless to keep on repeating your same mantra that their DOF is less shallow than when using FF. We KNOW that. YOU find that the most important, others don't

You don't go on a car forum, commenting on every pick-up truck model saying "but it isn't half as fast as my Porsche". People that buy pick-up trucks don't care about that.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 23:08 UTC
In reply to:

duckling: A bit of conspiracy theory:
The 42.5/1.7 was obviously designed to kill the Olympus 45/1.8, one of the few M4/3 classics. Perhaps a revenge for Oly's 40-150/2.8 which buried Pana's 150/2.8 project.

@duckling:\
similar price? The 45mm is €250 in Europa, the 42.5 is set at $400 (which usually means €400 in EU).
The 45mm is an amazing lens for that price. What would the incentive be to choose the 42.5, other than the included IOS (which is only needed for cameras without IBIS).
Edit: in Sweden the 45mm is even cheaper: 2200 SEK = ~€225

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 11:34 UTC
In reply to:

duckling: A bit of conspiracy theory:
The 42.5/1.7 was obviously designed to kill the Olympus 45/1.8, one of the few M4/3 classics. Perhaps a revenge for Oly's 40-150/2.8 which buried Pana's 150/2.8 project.

The 42.5/1.7 has IOS, the 45/1.8 hasn't. Obviously it is a nice addition for those who shoot a M4/3 camera without IBIS.
Since my E-M5 has IBIS I am going to stick with my Olympus 45mm (which I use to my full satisfaction), but that doesn't go for everybody. One won't kill the other.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 10:51 UTC
In reply to:

ogl: 42.5/1.7 = 85/3.4 for 35 mm system.....It's slow lens.

again, the word 'slow' refers to speed, not DOF. There is no such thing as a slow DOF. It's simply wrong to say this lens is 'slow'.

Having a wider DOF at maximum speed is an advantage for some people.
If the narrowest DOF is your priority, then m4/3 is not your system of choice. Simple as that. That is regardless of the lens, that is regarding the sensor size.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 10:23 UTC
In reply to:

ogl: 42.5/1.7 = 85/3.4 for 35 mm system.....It's slow lens.

Since this same false argument comes up on EVERY crop sensor lens thread, wouldn't it be a good idea to dedicate a special page on DPreview where this issue is explained, so this pointless discussion can be avoided by referring to this page?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 09:29 UTC
In reply to:

ogl: 42.5/1.7 = 85/3.4 for 35 mm system.....It's slow lens.

*sigh*
DOF is NOT speed. You are referring to it as a 'slow lens'.
It is NOT slower than a F1.7 35mm equivalent.

Is it really really necessary to have this old boring discussion in every thread?

For you a small DOF may be an advantage, for others like me it is actually an advantage to have more DOF at the same speed.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 09:21 UTC
In reply to:

ogl: 42.5/1.7 = 85/3.4 for 35 mm system.....It's slow lens.

*sigh*
how many times do we have to read this?
In terms of speed 1.7 = 1.7.
Educate yourself!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 08:51 UTC
In reply to:

brumd: Somehow, the Panasonic m4/3 lenses never look even half as sexy as the ones from Olympus.
Yes, it's important! :)

Sure, it's a matter of taste, and it's good to have the choice.
I recently bought a 25mm, and I would have chosen the Panasonic F1.4 over the Olympus F1.8 to gain the extra 2/3 stop if only I thought it looked good on my OM-D E-M5.
Somehow, the quality of the Panasonic lenses (my 20mm/F1.7 is definitely sharper than the 17mm/F1.8) isn't really reflected in their appearance.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 23, 2015 at 19:34 UTC

Somehow, the Panasonic m4/3 lenses never look even half as sexy as the ones from Olympus.
Yes, it's important! :)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 23, 2015 at 18:31 UTC as 52nd comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Iloveaircraftnoise: The article misses the mark.........Until a manufacturer can make a mirrorless camera which can shoot over 900 frames on one battery charge ( weddings anyone?) and whose electronic viewfinder doesn't turn into a slow motion replay in poor light, forget about it...

"Until a manufacturer can make a mirrorless camera which can shoot over 900 frames on one battery charge"

Yesterday night I shot 891 pictures in a theater with my OM-D E-M5. The battery was ~70-80% drained, and this is a $5 chinese copy, not the "official" Olympus one.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 20:20 UTC
Total: 62, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »