Erick L

Erick L

Lives in Canada Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Canada
Has a website at http://www.borealphoto.com
Joined on Aug 17, 2006

Comments

Total: 48, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On Price released for Brikk's 24k gold Nikon Df article (301 comments in total)

Will it get a gold award?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 30, 2014 at 22:24 UTC as 130th comment
In reply to:

skanter: The photographer left the horizon tilted in #1 because the horizon's curve and slight angle obviously adds to the composition. Adherence to "rules" in photography leads to mediocrity, which is usually what you see from "enthusiasts" who follow the rules too much.

I was not impressed with these, they seem staged.

Is this The Museum of Natural History in NYC, or another organization that is trying to sound like the famous institution?

It's the London Museum. I think it's famous enough.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 28, 2014 at 03:45 UTC
In reply to:

Jogger: Slight correction:

"...which delivers a similar angle of view to an 85mm focal length and a DOF of f2.4 on full frame cameras."

Why would someone using m43 care what it looks like in terms of FF? I haven't used FF since film. Most people don't use FF. This lens won't be used on FF. There's no point referring to it.

It reminds me of a newbie asking about a lens for his camera (which was APS). Someone said "get a 18-70 because it's like a 28-105". Problem is, the newbie doesn't have a clue what a 28-105 looks like on FF. It's irrelevant to him.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 27, 2014 at 18:50 UTC
In reply to:

Jogger: Slight correction:

"...which delivers a similar angle of view to an 85mm focal length and a DOF of f2.4 on full frame cameras."

They could just stop refering to FF altogether.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 27, 2014 at 17:39 UTC
In reply to:

Timur Born: The lions shot strikes me as quite wide angle, is it not? How fracking close did the photographer have to get for that shot? Two of the lions are *looking at him*!

The horizon is tilted because of the lower left lion, that is quite nicely aligned, by the way. Either he'd have to cut him off in post or shoot more of nothing in the lower right. Or maybe there was some disturbing object in the lower right that he wanted cut out while keeping the left lion in. Or maybe the whole damn pack noticed him and got up, so he decided to call it a day and save his life?

Who knows... but lions on a rocky beach look pretty wildlife to me. At least I don't see any fences or zoo signs there.

He shot it from a vehicule.

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/wpy/gallery/2014/images/black-and-white/4873/the-last-great-picture.html

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2014 at 08:08 UTC
In reply to:

Timur Born: The lions shot strikes me as quite wide angle, is it not? How fracking close did the photographer have to get for that shot? Two of the lions are *looking at him*!

The horizon is tilted because of the lower left lion, that is quite nicely aligned, by the way. Either he'd have to cut him off in post or shoot more of nothing in the lower right. Or maybe there was some disturbing object in the lower right that he wanted cut out while keeping the left lion in. Or maybe the whole damn pack noticed him and got up, so he decided to call it a day and save his life?

Who knows... but lions on a rocky beach look pretty wildlife to me. At least I don't see any fences or zoo signs there.

It's not water behind but a plain. For all we know, the camera could've been level and this is just how the plain looks. It was shot at 32mm. You can read details on the website.

Personnally, I don't like animals looking at the camera because it puts the photographer between the viewer and the photo. I'm also tired of lion pictures. :p Still a great shot though.

Interesting that in big contests and publications like Nat Geo, you rarely see the kind of pictures praised on photo forums: an uber sharp subject with a blurry background. Those pics look like stuffed animals in front of a backdrop. They're lifeless.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2014 at 07:59 UTC
In reply to:

Dan Wagner: Plants and Fungi -- my fave!

It's underwater.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2014 at 03:10 UTC
On Pentax launches K-S1 Sweets Collection article (233 comments in total)
In reply to:

digiart: Wow!, so many colors. Pentax is the Ben & Jerry's of DSLR's :)

Pentax isn't overpriced though.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2014 at 20:18 UTC
On Canon introduces new $78K 50-1000mm cine lens article (171 comments in total)
In reply to:

Avobanana: This one is really meant for cinematographers who make feature length films composed mostly of birding sequence.

Even Planet Earth "team" doesn't have unlimited budget. I've seen one using a Sigma 50-500. I think they'd rather keep the extra 77 000$.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 14:58 UTC
In reply to:

JanePete: 'With a bicycle and a humble attitude you can travel to the heart of a culture."

I wouldn't call it "humble" to think you can actually "travel to the heart of any culture" just because you are on a bike. I'd call that naive and rather arrogant.
The photos, I'm sorry to say, are also nothing really special.

Travelling by bike does put you in the heart of a culture... wether you want it or not. Try it sometimes. Just commute by bike one day, you might discover your own neighborhood.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 12, 2014 at 16:03 UTC
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1666 comments in total)

Full Frame endoscope.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 6, 2014 at 09:13 UTC as 839th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Paul Amyes: My my a lot of people are getting very worked up here. I've read through the press releases and it sounds like what they're proposing is what we've had here in Australia for a long time. Basically huge production with big budget and crew to be distributed on a large scale pay for a permit. Solo operators doing fine art and media won't.

Here I shot material in many national parks for books, cardsand print sales and I've never had to pay a cent. Lat time I applied for a permit I was in the office at the same time as a small crew from a German TV production unit they paid a small fee. I chatted to the guy on the desk and he said the biggest fee charged was for feature films with international releses.

You'll probably find that there has been an adhoc arrangemnt for years where film and TV companies pay fees and all this is about making it formal and consistently applied.

Paul doesn't mention US bureaucracy anywhere in his first post. And if you actually read the article, he's right.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2014 at 05:08 UTC
In reply to:

Turbguy1: I wonder how much the "Naming Rights" for Yellowstone would raise....

Hmm... three years for the "Coca Cola Yellowstone National Park", then they could switch to Nike...then...

Jasper National Park in Canada is about to be renamed Brewster Commercial Park.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2014 at 03:05 UTC
On Hands-on with Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 article (433 comments in total)
In reply to:

photo nuts: Was all excited about the LX100 until I read this little blip:

"The original version of this article stated that the LX100 has a touchscreen, which is not the case. We are very sorry for any confusion caused." - http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-lx100

So, out of the 3 competing cameras, Sony RX100 III vs Panasonic LX100 vs Canon G7X, only the G7X has a touchscreen which is very important for changing AF in a small format camera.

Sigh.

T3, having an EVF doesn't mean you have to use it all the time. And Panasonic allows AF selection while using the EVF on other cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 08:12 UTC

4 pounds isn't "extreme lightness".

Direct link | Posted on Aug 12, 2014 at 21:47 UTC as 5th comment

They could cut cost by reducing the ridiculous amount of packaging.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2014 at 16:52 UTC as 25th comment | 3 replies
On Travel tripods: 5 carbon fiber kits reviewed article (85 comments in total)

I have an older Feisol 3441 and CB-30 ballhead. The rubber feet always come out so I do without them. Dirt and water gets in and a section has become very hard to pull out (a bit of cleaning on my part would help though). One leg has come unglued after a couple of years. I've lost two knobs in the wilderness (screws aren't captive) but miraculously found one back otherwise the tripod would have been useless. The legs won't "close" in a reverse position with the short column because the ballhead gets in the way. It's a piece of crap.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2014 at 05:23 UTC as 9th comment
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2064 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sven44: Heh, I've just spotted the following on a review of Fuji's new lens (which I'm just a little bit excited by....):

"We've been shooting with the Fujinon XF 56mm F1.2 R - the fast 85mm equivalent prime lens for Fujifilm's X mount mirrorless cameras. Its F1.2 aperture means it gives similarly shallow depth-of-field to an 85mm F1.8 lens on a full frame body, making it an useful portrait lens"

Makes 100% perfect sense to me, and a great opening paragraph to the review. Does anyone not see it that way? How else should hey have described it?

Nigelht? Maybe a "56mm 1.2 lens which you're going to mount on a normal camera but then you're going to take a crop of it so you have the FOV of an 85mm lens, but let's not talk about the depth of field or sensor gain for that matter because no-one wants to have to multiply anything by 1.5..."?

If you have 30 years of experience, you should be able to find out by yourself.

It's confusing to newbies because reading that a 56/1.2 on APS is like 85/1.8 on a FF means absolutely nothing.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 13, 2014 at 15:41 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2064 comments in total)

Total light on sensor affecting noise doesn't make sense to me. Don't smaller sensors appear more noisy simply because the image needs to be enlarged more, noise included?

Seems to me that saying a FF sensor has less noise because it gathers more light is akin to saying a telephoto lens "compresses perspective".

Direct link | Posted on Jul 13, 2014 at 13:48 UTC as 105th comment | 14 replies
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (451 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donnie G: Alright, who's the comedian who came up with the term "mirrorless" cameras? Who the heck walks into a Costco, Walmart or Best Buy and says "Hey, can I buy a mirrorless camera? Or, Hey, can I buy a stepless ladder?" Sounds like something important has been left out of the product, doesn't it? I mean I understand what those folks are trying to say: "Mirrors! We don't need no stinking mirrors." I get it. But they need to come up with a new product description or catch phrase to help sell these cameras they claim to love so much. And please no, don't use E.V.I.L. either, unless you want to continue to have warehouses full of "marketless, SLRless" cameras for sale. :)

Cyclists clip in clipless pedals.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2014 at 03:20 UTC
Total: 48, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »