Tord S Eriksson

Tord S Eriksson

Lives in Sweden Gothenburg, Sweden
Works as a busdriver/journalist
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: 403, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

AndyGM: One part of the Nikon 1 system design that is pretty much guaranteed to put enthusiasts off? Not having a focus ring on the lenses. Although it looks like the 32mm prime and the supertelephoto zooms have rectified this, but really most of the other existing lenses need a redesign to add a focus ring, especially the other primes. It always gave the impression that Nikon expected the 1 system to be used by "auto everything" types.

Adding a focusing ring would be very nice, but probably make them all as expensive as the 32!

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 10:08 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

GlobalGuyUSA: The criticism about it lacking lenses is fair. Its at least $400 overpriced (you can get a state of the art D7100 at its price level) and yet there are NO wide angle lenses to go with it or any serious wide bright primes.

If Nikon made a 14mm/f4, a 16mm/f2.8, a 20mm/f2, and a 24mm/1.8, a 28mm/f1.4, and a 35mm/f1.2 special, these cameras would be flying off the shelves like hot cakes.

But Nikon is failing because its not investing a PROPER lens system! What is Nikon known for??? Extremely good wide angles! It should lead with its strength!! Nikon execs are so dense sometimes!

A 14/4.0 is equal to a 50/8 on my D600 - who would want such a lens?! My widest Nikon 1 lens is a 8/2.1 (a modified 10/2.8, equal to a 21 on my D600), and that's wide enough for me!

And why on earth would anyone need a 16/2.8, when there is several lenses to choose from (at least four) when covering that focal length, with, or without, VR?! Or a 35/1.2 when there already is a 32/1.2?!

The 6.7-13 beats most wide lenses as it is, a pure delight in every way!

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 10:06 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

ennemkay: the argument that 1-inch-sensor ilcs are for teens and soccer moms is getting old and is obviously false, since I still see a proportionately higher number of teens and soccer moms with dslrs and not ilcs. the same thing was said of m43, originally. milcs are more popular among the gadget geeks who love the endless miniaturization of machines and devices. yes, that is a different crowd from hardcore photographers, but it is a pretty well-informed (and overlapping) one, nonetheless. (not to mention it's not clear why it would be surprising for a consumer electronics company to change and adapt its products, in any case)

Sport and nature photographers love their V1/V2/V3 cameras with the FT1 adapter and lenses like the AF-S 80-400! Not what the soccer moms use, agreed!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/tord55/sets/72157644102054587/

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 09:58 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)

I have to agree with most of your conclusions about the V3 - Steve Huff, who loved his V2, and V1, thought it to be plastic crap (including the new kit lens).

I hope the J4 is a better camera, sharing the things that make me interested in the V3 (the new sensor & the new processor), at half the price!

Seems there is nothing basically wrong with the new V3 — stunning images have already been posted by owners — but it is definitely not a built like a brick like the V1!

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 09:55 UTC as 19th comment
In reply to:

rfsIII: The 23rd rule of journalism is "Never make your readers do math." Would you please provide imperial equivalents if you insist on showing off your pretentious familiarity with metric measurements. Please try to remember that DPReview started as an English website and it is the English who formalized the Imperial system.
And, in the future, please convert prices to proper English denominations: farthings, pence, crowns, and guineas.

You forgot leagues, sir!

Focal lengths in leagues, preferably in Imperial snouts, the well known sub-unit, being a 1/123th of a league, as the basic measure, is what I prefer, sire!

Direct link | Posted on May 2, 2014 at 09:55 UTC
On 1939: England in Color (part 1) article (218 comments in total)

Thanks, Barnaby, for sharing a world I'll never experience, as it is long gone! My dad took a lot of 6x6 slides, but most of them just faded away, no matter if they were sealed in glass frames, or not.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2014 at 09:02 UTC as 149th comment
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)

Just tested the studio tool with the D4s and the NEX-5T (a fairly modern APS-C/DX camera), and found that their ISO capacity did vary that much:

I selected incandescent light, and the patch of greenery in the upper right corner. Set the ISO to 102400, which the 5T can't follow, so stopped at 25600, and as far as I can see (I use a calibrated iMac) there was little difference in noise, at that setting. Menas a camera that costs maybe a tenth of the D4s can deliver almost the same image quality, just two ISO steps behind!

Tried the D610 as well, but that doesn't go any further either, but seems to be just one ISO step behind, at less than half the cost! Lowering the D4s to 51200 gives a very similar result, if not the same color balance!

An amazing camera in many ways, this new D4s, but had I the money to buy one, I'd buy a RX1R, and throw a party!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 5, 2014 at 10:23 UTC as 69th comment | 4 replies
On Pentax K-3 preview (961 comments in total)

Seems the K-3 is a giant step forward, especially compared to my K-5, long gone.

Even the reds in pictures look quite natural now, impressive!

But, as someone wrote, you get a K-3 for the same amount of money as you get a V3. Although I am a Nikon 1 lover, the Nikon seems extremely overpriced!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2014 at 08:11 UTC as 109th comment | 1 reply
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)

I see no need of a powered 10-30, as I hardly ever use my 10-30, but the rest of the camera is very much up my alley of photography.

Could I choose freely, I'd get the V3, the 70-300, an RX100 II, a RX1, FT1 adapter, and a AF-S 80-400 VR II N, and I'd be happy ever after!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2014 at 07:25 UTC as 64th comment | 1 reply
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

EcoPix: I see this as a very significant camera. It shows Nikon are serious about the future of the small format camera system and are prepared to take the lead, as they were in 1959. Film shooters preferred medium format, but most of us shot most of our work on 35mm because it was good enough for most uses, including double-page spreads in glossy publications.

That's about where CX is getting now. DX struggled to be as good as 35mm film at first, now it's equalling medium format film. We now need a smaller format that's good enough. The advantages aren't cost per shot now, they're portability, speed, quietness and discretion, and focal length (angle of view/depth of field/physical lens size). Nikon and Sony are the only ones taking this seriously, and Nikon are playing the game for higher stakes than anyone.

I too think the V3 is showing the way, although, like all the Nikon 1 cameras, a mix of a Point & Shoot, and enthusiast, camera.

Which, come to think of it, is exactly how I use my V1:
Either using it as totally point and shoot camera, often with my 8mm wide lens attached, not using either display, nor EVF to aim, just holding in my hand, using my right thumb to press the shutter. Very clandestine street photography, or shooting animals, like crabs, from minimal distances.

Or with the 30-110, and 70-300, with close-up lenses attached, if needed, to shoot shy animals, like dragonflies, rodents, or birds.

For portraits I use the 32, an amazingly sharp lens. The 18.5 get's too little use (not exactly the angle of view I like), as does the excellent 6.7-13, as I think it is a gem, that I would hate to damage in any way. So ften I end up with my 8mm (a modified 10).

In short the arrival of the V1 killed my need for APS-C, and rekindled my interest in FF, for landscape, and low light!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2014 at 07:17 UTC

Illustration # 19 is not a helicopter, it's a hexacopter, a variation of a quadrocopter!

These expensive devices do away with a lot of the complexities of helicopters, by having no cyclic control, nor any in flight adjustable propellers. It simply uses finely adjustable power to control heading, altitude and pitch (in this case pitch meaning nose down, or nose up. Much steadier than a helicopter, but can't be scaled up easily! Small ones are agile, big ones fairly slowly moving!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 7, 2014 at 12:37 UTC as 10th comment | 4 replies
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 First Impressions Review preview (618 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: Another mirrorless camera featuring a DSLR Envy Design. :-) Since you can't beat them, try to look like them.

If any cameras suffering from envy it is all the DSLRs, and most acutely so, the Nikon Df, as they all try to look like a classic SLR!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2014 at 12:46 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 First Impressions Review preview (618 comments in total)
In reply to:

bzanchet: Canon g1xII, fuji xm1 or olympus em10? Hard to decide! I have a sony rx100 and I am considering to replace it.

Sony made NEX cameras, Samsung made the NX100!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2014 at 12:41 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7R Review preview (797 comments in total)

I seem to recall that the shutter in the A7 shook the camera quite a bit, and the one in the A7R was worse?! In my book that would be a huge con, no matter which camera we're speaking about.

Not a mention in the Con list — has the shutter noise/shake been eliminated, or what?!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2014 at 21:08 UTC as 202nd comment | 4 replies
On Fujifilm X-E2 Preview preview (454 comments in total)
In reply to:

stern: travel companion? why would i choose an ILC for travel? My travel camera is the pentax mx-1. compact, rugged plus incredible IQ. IMHO IQ of the mx-1 is on par or better than the Sony RX, which is probably due to the mx's better lens (sharp!). travel = compact.

The Pentax Q7 uses the same sensor as the MX-1, thus gives better images than the MX-1, as you can attach any K Mount lens to it with the right adapter (seen lovely shots with the DA*300 attached to a Q)! Even the native Q lenses have given thumbs up by the testers!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2014 at 11:14 UTC
On Fujifilm X-E2 Preview preview (454 comments in total)
In reply to:

stern: travel companion? why would i choose an ILC for travel? My travel camera is the pentax mx-1. compact, rugged plus incredible IQ. IMHO IQ of the mx-1 is on par or better than the Sony RX, which is probably due to the mx's better lens (sharp!). travel = compact.

The MX-1 is a very stylish camera, but can't be compared to any RX camera, but more to its twins: the XZ-1, and the XZ-2.

These three are not really in the same league as any RX camera. Evidently you have not seen any RX1 images, on a high resolution monitor. Even the tiny RX100 is a star performer, as long as you keep the ISO down under 1600.

I tried the http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-mx-1/10 and exchanged the other cameras to Nikon V1 and RX100, while kept the XZ-2, which uses exactly the same optics as the MX-1.

Even this, the least impressive of the RX range, the RX100, beats the MX-1/XZ-2 twins, if not with a big margin. The V1 wins, not surprisingly ;-)!

And, if you think I am biased, let me tell you that I used to own a XZ-1, which also share the same optics, if not sensor, and I do not own a RX of any kind (my wife owns a RX100, so I have pixel-peeped her images a lot.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2014 at 10:30 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T1 First Impressions Review preview (1657 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photographer Jonathan: to ad on to my first comment, ( and the Sony A7r is real nice, and the price is ok, but having to pay $1000 dollars for a 35 lens that's f2.8, or a 55 that's 1.8 is crazy, it's twice the price of a Canon 50 f1.4, so there lens prices I think are going to kill there sales, along with the fact that they aren't even available yet wear I live, go fuji

Fairly normal lenses for the Nikon 1 and the NEX range can cost around $1000 dollars as well, depending on the material they are made from, so there isn't anything exceptional with a metal-barrelled lens costing more than a plastic wonder from Canon, or Nikon! You'd find a lot of Pentax lenses costing around $1000, and so is true for Olympus as well! Good lenes tend to be costly, and if they are made out of metal the more so!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2014 at 11:24 UTC
On 10 essential time-saving Photoshop tips article (88 comments in total)

Well written, and informative!

I've also been around since Photoshop 3 as well, but I seldom use it any more!

My normal editing aid is Aperture, occasionally GIMP, and Lightroom. Have a few more specialist tools, but never use them!

I like the feel of the free — if you register yourself — Phocus, Hasselblad's own photo-editing software, but I am in no way a master of it!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2014 at 09:31 UTC as 40th comment
In reply to:

JaimeA: Dear Mr. Britton,
Apologies for my tirade of today. At the time of Phil Askey (yes, we go that far back) it was possible to get a prompt review of new cameras. Even at that time, those reviews were unique, as they not only gave actual figures and comparisons, but also commented and instructed on aspects of the use of the cameras and, crucially, discussed their quirks. They were, as today, an invaluable decision and teaching aid. Of course, the reviews were not as sophisticated as they currently are. DPR is still our favorite site for the thoroughness of the analysis and the friendliness of the approach. On that count, our circle feels that certain groundbreaking new equipment needs to be addressed in a more timely fashion. You see, we have grown dependent of the very high quality of your reporting and the sincerity of your advice. Thank you.

I do indeed remember when Phil made this site stand out a mile! And the reviews came in a fairly prompt fashion. Now, at times it takes ages (some cameras are just dropped like hot potatoes — prompting comments about Amazon breathing down DPR's neck from us readers). The staff is far bigger than ever before, and there are far fewer players in the camera business, but something seem to be amiss. Too many staff meetings interfering, I'd say, like all corporate behemoths of today!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2014 at 05:11 UTC
On Fujifilm teases upcoming SLR-style X system camera article (921 comments in total)
In reply to:

Greg Lovern: Looks very interesting and promising.

I don't understand why they still call their cameras "Fujifilm". That was a good name for their film, but not for cameras, and especially not for digital cameras.

Why not "Fujica", as they called their cameras when they were making film SLRs?

In my world we talk about Fuji, no more, no less!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 20, 2014 at 12:42 UTC
Total: 403, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »