Tord S Eriksson

Tord S Eriksson

Lives in Sweden Gothenburg, Sweden
Works as a bus driver/retired
Joined on Jul 3, 2003
About me:

Like to draw, paint, and photograph nature, and identified
flying 'objects', like the moon, bumblebees, aircraft, and, not least, birds!

Comments

Total: 446, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On DSC_6285,1200 photo in windsprite's photo gallery (2 comments in total)

Lovely shots, Julie!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 00:39 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

Frank C.: I think curved sensors is the best way to simplify lenses

Indeed! A close copy of animal (especially vertebrae) vision, but probably useless for zoom optics (or rather, not a boost for zoom lenses, rather a complication)!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 14, 2015 at 08:17 UTC
In reply to:

MrTaikitso: It's always amazing when man outsmarts nature, that still uses curved 'mechanical' optics. Our first outsmarting was the telephone - therefore, unlike the birds and the bees, we can tweet to one another across the world.

Mr Taikitso must be an engineer, as he has so faint understanding of nature. That tweeting would be the pinnacle of human endeavour is pitiful, as whales and elephants been doing it for millions of years.

We still do not know how an insect sees the world, or how a spider uses his four, six, or eight, eyes, nor can we see such a wide spectrum as some animals do, nor as sharp.

Nor is there a single self-repairing mechanical device around, nor any that modifies itself after their surroundings. that develops itself to something more refined.

In software a lot of this exist, but not even in electronics (which is surprising). Self-healing electronics, that would be something the military would love to have!

My guess is that this type of optics will first and foremost be a military matter, not spread to the masses for many, many years!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 14, 2015 at 08:12 UTC
On *** in the - Scenery Composition with a Cat - ( Full colours Only + Border) challenge (13 comments in total)

Lovely shot of a red tabby, by the way!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 12, 2015 at 17:37 UTC as 1st comment
On *** in the - Scenery Composition with a Cat - ( Full colours Only + Border) challenge (13 comments in total)

Snowcat! The best vehicle in snow, ever!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 12, 2015 at 17:36 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply
On Synchronized Flight photo in VanGabriel's photo gallery (6 comments in total)

Never seen it shot before! Fantastic!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 9, 2015 at 07:45 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On Evening Flight photo in VanGabriel's photo gallery (2 comments in total)

Superbly taken youngster!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 9, 2015 at 07:41 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Tord S Eriksson: Loved the video!

My wife's instant question was: Have they tried the same using a Nikon V3 and the glorious 70-300CX?!

Same qualities that make the Nikon V2/V3 outstanding, applies to the a6000: small MILC camera, with outstanding AF, and brilliant lenses.

OOps! I didn't check, just believed what I read elsewhere. Chris is sponsored by Nikon, so they must have given the OK! This from Wikipedia, the often correct source!

Egg on my face.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 20, 2015 at 13:47 UTC
In reply to:

fakuryu: Nice video real world review of Sony A6000. It never did feel like a product advertisement since they are reviewing guess what? A Sony camera!

It is also refreshing that a professional who knows what to do with it reviewed the camera and came back with excellent results in contrast to the keyboard warrior posts who probably don't know half the capabilities of their own system. There I said it! :p

Anyway, I hate the horrid EVF of the A6000.

It was almost entirely (for practical reasons, Barnaby tells us) filmed with a7s, which were used to take all those love video snips, not the a6000!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 20, 2015 at 13:36 UTC

This video is a lovely one, very professionally made, and made almost entirely with a7s cameras.

But that was not the impression it gave silly ol' me.

It, sadly, gave me the impression that it was made with the help of the a6000, the camera the movie was about. But that was not so, Barnaby tells us. Now.

How easily we are fooled.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 20, 2015 at 13:32 UTC as 32nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Tord S Eriksson: Loved the video!

My wife's instant question was: Have they tried the same using a Nikon V3 and the glorious 70-300CX?!

Same qualities that make the Nikon V2/V3 outstanding, applies to the a6000: small MILC camera, with outstanding AF, and brilliant lenses.

I know that the DR of the V3 is supposedly worse, and that the a6000 is a DX camera, but the reason DPReview used said camera and said photographer is that he is paid by Sony, thus wouldn't touch a V3, ever, nor give it a fair test.

Guys like Joe Marquez, aka 'TheSmokingCamera', is not paid by anyone, and does very well with his V3:

http://www.thesmokingcamera.com/nikon_1_v3_photographs

DPReview wouldn't use him as he costs money to employ.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 20, 2015 at 13:21 UTC

Loved the video!

My wife's instant question was: Have they tried the same using a Nikon V3 and the glorious 70-300CX?!

Same qualities that make the Nikon V2/V3 outstanding, applies to the a6000: small MILC camera, with outstanding AF, and brilliant lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 19, 2015 at 15:24 UTC as 41st comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Biowizard: I wonder whether DJI will source its camera technology from Olympus? Might even be able to do away with the expensive and cumbersome external 3-axis gimble, if they employed Oly's E-Mx 5-axis IS sensor!

It makes a lot more sense to jiggle a sensor about, than to jiggle the entire camera (as at present on, for example, the Phantom Vision +).

And I would LOVE to be able to use rectilinear lenses with normal fields of view (say 35mm in full-frame terms), rather than the omnipresent fish-eye lenses of today's "action" cameras.

Brian

Let us hope DJI and Olympus starts to cooperate!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 21:02 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1445 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tord S Eriksson: Nikon have definitely put the DX lens production on idle, as they continue to produce new full-frame lenses, and CX lenses in great numbers.

And for me DX DSLR cameras are dead, or nearly so (still got one or two), but DX lenses work very well on the CX range, so I have a few DX lenses, some of which works OK on my FX camera.

In low light the FX does wonders, not possible with a DX, or CX, camera, but in good light I love to use the CX cameras, as they are tiny, have excellent DOF, and correctly treated can take almost noise-free shots. Their dynamic range isn't wonderful, but good enough in most circumstances.

For me, APS-C/DX and similar formats, are dead, while FX is thriving, and MF is the ultimate goal!

Naturally, but a 1:1 shot with a CX is not the same as doing it with a FX camera, as the crop factor comes into play here, too!

So in real life it is easier to take nice, good, macro shots with a camera with small sensor, say a 1/2", than one with a big one!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2015 at 20:11 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1445 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tord S Eriksson: Nikon have definitely put the DX lens production on idle, as they continue to produce new full-frame lenses, and CX lenses in great numbers.

And for me DX DSLR cameras are dead, or nearly so (still got one or two), but DX lenses work very well on the CX range, so I have a few DX lenses, some of which works OK on my FX camera.

In low light the FX does wonders, not possible with a DX, or CX, camera, but in good light I love to use the CX cameras, as they are tiny, have excellent DOF, and correctly treated can take almost noise-free shots. Their dynamic range isn't wonderful, but good enough in most circumstances.

For me, APS-C/DX and similar formats, are dead, while FX is thriving, and MF is the ultimate goal!

The micro-Nikkor 40 works great with my CX cameras, which then becomes a lens very comparable to the 105 on my FX camera, but its best aperture is far bigger than that you can use to get the same DOF, thus much easier to use in real life.

Bigger aperture means more light reaches the sensor, means shorter exposure speeds, and lower ISO can be used, a delightful situation!

I'd never use f/8 on my CX cameras, unless by mistake, and I loved to use f/22 on the Hasselblad!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 20, 2015 at 23:15 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1445 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tord S Eriksson: Nikon have definitely put the DX lens production on idle, as they continue to produce new full-frame lenses, and CX lenses in great numbers.

And for me DX DSLR cameras are dead, or nearly so (still got one or two), but DX lenses work very well on the CX range, so I have a few DX lenses, some of which works OK on my FX camera.

In low light the FX does wonders, not possible with a DX, or CX, camera, but in good light I love to use the CX cameras, as they are tiny, have excellent DOF, and correctly treated can take almost noise-free shots. Their dynamic range isn't wonderful, but good enough in most circumstances.

For me, APS-C/DX and similar formats, are dead, while FX is thriving, and MF is the ultimate goal!

Problem is, if you want a huge DOF, as in most macro situations, with a big sensor camera, say a 645D, you need f/22, or smaller, and then you need a hell of a lot of light (Daylight is not enough, unless the insect you're photographing is dead).

So it isn't practical for outdoor macro photography, thus cameras with small sensors, with many pixels, are far easier to work with. Like a mobile phone, but they have other disadvantages, of course.

So I use FX (excellent for landscape, and portraits), and CX (for all the rest), using lenses from 8 to 400mm focal length. Plus TCs. And spotting scopes (about 800mm, or over 2 meters equivalent focal length).

Direct link | Posted on Jan 20, 2015 at 10:55 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (626 comments in total)
In reply to:

J S Lima: NO hotshoe = dealbreaker

Many use their Nikon 1 cameras with flash using the optional flash as a trigger (manual mode).

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2015 at 12:36 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (626 comments in total)
In reply to:

CHEAW HON MING: My 2 V1s' LCD monitors are out after a year and repair costs a bomb. Luckily I can still use the EVFs. Bye-bye Nikon quality.

We have four Nikon 1 cameras (two V1, and two V2) and none have had any problems of any sort over the years.

I do know LCDs may be harmed if the cameras are stored somewhere in direct sunlight (been there, done that).

Considering the cameras originally cost about $1,000 (at full price, like I paid), I'd not be surprised if a LCD, including installation, cost around $200?!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2015 at 12:29 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1445 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tord S Eriksson: Nikon have definitely put the DX lens production on idle, as they continue to produce new full-frame lenses, and CX lenses in great numbers.

And for me DX DSLR cameras are dead, or nearly so (still got one or two), but DX lenses work very well on the CX range, so I have a few DX lenses, some of which works OK on my FX camera.

In low light the FX does wonders, not possible with a DX, or CX, camera, but in good light I love to use the CX cameras, as they are tiny, have excellent DOF, and correctly treated can take almost noise-free shots. Their dynamic range isn't wonderful, but good enough in most circumstances.

For me, APS-C/DX and similar formats, are dead, while FX is thriving, and MF is the ultimate goal!

Yes, I know, that DOF is dependent on the focal length, so a 13mm lens is always the same, no matter what camera you mount it on, but I do like the excellent DOF you get from a 13, which is the CX's equivalent to a 50 on a FX.

I wish Nikon would make a 13/1.2-1.8 (in that range), then they have superb normal for the CX range ;-) !

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2015 at 11:43 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1445 comments in total)

Nikon have definitely put the DX lens production on idle, as they continue to produce new full-frame lenses, and CX lenses in great numbers.

And for me DX DSLR cameras are dead, or nearly so (still got one or two), but DX lenses work very well on the CX range, so I have a few DX lenses, some of which works OK on my FX camera.

In low light the FX does wonders, not possible with a DX, or CX, camera, but in good light I love to use the CX cameras, as they are tiny, have excellent DOF, and correctly treated can take almost noise-free shots. Their dynamic range isn't wonderful, but good enough in most circumstances.

For me, APS-C/DX and similar formats, are dead, while FX is thriving, and MF is the ultimate goal!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2015 at 00:47 UTC as 79th comment | 11 replies
Total: 446, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »