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: 421, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
On Am I missing something here? article (623 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!

I added a Panasonic DMW-GWC1 .79X wide adapter to it, worked like a dream. Sadly you need to tape it to the 10 (to stabilise it I put a 48-52mm step ring in between, as the lens, the adapter, and the step ring are all 52mm), as the adapters supplied are just too wobbly, and the wide adapter ends up too far out from the front of the 10. So not pretty, but very good!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2014 at 23:32 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2962 comments in total)

I am totally thrilled by all the supposition about Sony's grip on DPReview.

Just because a camera is better than most it makes it suspect, evidently!

I own an old Sony, or two, but in no way are they my favoured tools, but that sensor in the RX cameras, that's really something extra, Nikon and Aptina can't do something remotely like it, nor do Canon.

That is very impressive, I must say!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 2, 2014 at 21:43 UTC as 186th comment
On Am I missing something here? article (623 comments in total)
In reply to:

Saxon Liw: Possibly useful for birders who can opt to use a cheaper and lighter 300/4 lens instead of a 600/4 on an APS-C body.

If I am worried I'm going to miss some shots I use my D600 with the 80-400 for birds milling about in the air, or the V2 plus the 30-110. Hopefully the new Nikon 1 70-300 will prove to be the fantastic lens we hope it will be ;-!)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 2, 2014 at 18:58 UTC
In reply to:

Peter CS: See what happens, if you post a blog somewhere about how to circumvent Facebook copyrighted material! You would have a firestorm of legal action rain down on you the size of a huge volcano! This information posted by a "barely 21 year old" basically gave away the formulas for circumventing the copyrights on most digital images. At 21, this obviously intelligent and educated individual,should have thought twice about his actions. He was "of age" to vote, enlist, drink, be tried as an adult, etc. All adults most certainly need to contemplate the scope of their online actions. Professional photographers do not give up their weekends, family time, etc. to photograph graduations for fun! Friends and families of new graduates are always welcome to produce their own photographs, as mine did, documenting this significant event/special day! Thanks to good and cheap, fully automated, digital technology, there is no reason or excuse to resort to such bad behavior...

Yeah, Facebook is very active in persecuting infringements, but employ this guy in a leading position themselves — how come?!

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 23:24 UTC

On his Facebook page he is telling how great it was to go to Singapore " to host our first ever FB hackathon in Asia".

So now he's in charge of FB's hacking efforts?!

I bet they hack other people's software, not Facebook's own!

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 07:31 UTC as 72nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

absentaneous: a theft is something that causes someone real damages not fictional ones.

if I take your car then in order for you to have a car you'll have to get another car. that will cost you money.

if from your website I copy a photo you took of your car and use it on my website it won't cost you a penny because the photo of the car will still remain on your website. all you might lose is fictional income that is based on the presumption that I would buy that photo if I couldn't just copy it for free.

of course it's still morally wrong but it's not a theft but more like improper use.

That is definitely theft, no matter if I have another copy of it! I have friends who are illustrators, and they run into this, again and again, that smart guys like you pay for one publication, and then reuse it over and over.

I am glad to say it always costs the culprit a lot, not just due to the compensation and damages he has to pay the original artist, but also the cost of the lawyers, the judge, bailiffs, and so on, lands in the culprit's lap. Rightly so.

There have even been cases where bloggers, by just linking to a picture on another site, have been forced to pay the full price, plus damages.

So indeed it is a theft, no matter what you think!

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 07:20 UTC
In reply to:

Mirrorless Crusader: This is not image theft, you are transforming an image with a watermark into an image without a watermark.

EH?! There have been examples of artists, who have used copyrighted photos as base for their own illustrations, and had been taken to court for doing just that!

So the amount of transformation have to be quite substantial, to avoid legal worries, like writing (in essence adding a watermark) across a copyrighted photo, that is, surprisingly, OK!

The problem is actually (with illegal copying) that it affects the photographer who makes a living from selling the photos — only rich guys can live by working totally for free.

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 07:10 UTC

Encouraging others to steal copyrighted pictures is still a criminal offence, I bet, not only in the US.

And why would this seem to be applauded by Facebook is not that surprising, as that company tell you explicitly that Facebook have the right to freely access your uploaded photos, to do what they want with them! And they always strip the EXIF from your photos for that reason only, I bet!

If anyone here believed the water-stamp on your pictures was fraud-proof, then you have a very naive conception of the world around you!

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 06:56 UTC as 76th comment | 3 replies
On Am I missing something here? article (623 comments in total)
In reply to:

Saxon Liw: Possibly useful for birders who can opt to use a cheaper and lighter 300/4 lens instead of a 600/4 on an APS-C body.

It is more than that for us birders: a 300/4 becomes a 800 on a full format, with its orginal DOF, thus far better than any 800, I ever heard of!

And a 800 is humongous big lens to carry around while the 300/4 is not nearly that big!

And a more typical lens is the AF-S 80-400/4.5-5.6 VR II N, which becomes a monster 216-1080/4.5-5.6, and still weighing just a little over three pounds, a kilogram, and a half!

Closest lens I can think of for full format users is the Sigma 200-500/2.8 with a 2.0X TC, that's over 16 kilograms!

Direct link | Posted on May 27, 2014 at 08:02 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (623 comments in total)

If only Nikon had thanked Aptina for their efforts, and bought the Sony 1" sensor instead. A far better sensor, which had transformed the V3 to a winning concept, in no time!

Direct link | Posted on May 24, 2014 at 00:43 UTC as 18th comment | 1 reply
On Am I missing something here? article (623 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)

Hope the tongue-in-cheek problem soon is solved. The camera these ladies should be looking for are the Hasselblad's versions of the Sony NEX cameras, extremely expensive, and just as crap!

Direct link | Posted on May 24, 2014 at 00:39 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (623 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!

Yeah, the 32 is a f/1.2, although Aperture reads it as a f/1.0!!!

Direct link | Posted on May 22, 2014 at 11:01 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (623 comments in total)
In reply to:

lorenzo de medici: There are so many opinions about the 1 system. Let me just say that I own the original V1 with all the lenses, flash etc, and they lost me from the outset. There are so many amazing camera systems now, mirror and mirrorless, varied size sensors, that are a pleasure to use and that generate fantastic images. Nikon's implementation of the 1 system has been, for me, completely uninspiring. Maybe the cameras sell well on the world market. The do nothing for me. I'm a Nikon shooter and use two Nikon DSLRs as my primary cameras. For me the 1 system was a total fail.

Sad to hear your total lack of harmony with the Nikon 1 system. For me it began with FT1 and a few select zooms, and a few cheap primes, like the 35/1.8G DX.

Now I have a V2 as well, and that's even sweeter!

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2014 at 18:42 UTC
In reply to:

James Pilcher: This is the future with Adobe and any other company that forces you to use "the cloud" in any fashion. Can you say "Office 365?"

Oh, and don't think that Lightroom is going to remain separate from Creative Cloud all that long.

I like Adobe's products, I no longer care for it's business practices and policies.

I love LR, but I agree totally! Was I earning my livelihood the cost for the software, and the cloud, would be deductible, but I don't.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 21:34 UTC

I love it, when big new ideas tumble and fall, because the big corporations think their technology is perfect, and will never fail! And are happy to make the customers pay through their noses, no matter if they use their 'toys' as a hobby, or as a pro.

I bought my Adobe programs, spending a few thousand dollars over the years, but now I am very happy with the other software I use (no names to avoid being called a troll), and the Adobe stuff gets less and less used!

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 21:28 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

Alpha Whiskey Photography: I don't know anything about wildlife photography, but I always find that getting closer to one's subject makes for a more engaging, and thus more endearing, image. And if the viewer can connect with the animal they are more likely to care about it. Hopefully wildlife photography will encourage more conservation.

http://alphawhiskey.slickpic.com/photoblog/post/WildlifeCalendar

http://alphawhiskey.slickpic.com/photoblog/post/FloridaWildlife

My experience with wild animals is that if you stay in your hide they are much less affected than if you try to surprise them in nature, say going by car, or on foot. Or, horror, coming in a low-flying aircraft!

So not being seen, is very important, and to avoid interaction as much as possible is equally important.

Those who do the most damage are those well-meaning people who try to befriend the wild animals, as then the animals get just too used to people.

No matter if we're talking wild deer, domesticated tigers or grizzlies - if they get used to people they'll become a threat, and society will react with just anger and go on a killing spree!

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2014 at 21:50 UTC
On DSC_4175 photo in Wu Jiaqiu's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

A bee eater! Nice shot!

Direct link | Posted on May 12, 2014 at 10:23 UTC as 1st comment
On Am I missing something here? article (623 comments in total)
In reply to:

BurkPhoto: Nikon and Canon are both missing the mirrorless boat. The Olympus and Panasonic offerings are much more ingenious and mature.

Even Sony, with their a7 series, has a better approach. Why haven't Nikon and Canon seen the light and given us mirrorless full frame cameras that are a cut above everything else?

The SLR design was never right for digital. I even hated it the first time I picked up a Canon SLR in August, 1968. That stupid mirror blacked out the finder during exposure, and I've been ticked off about it ever since...

The Sony A7 variants suffer quite a bit from shutter shock, according to the experts, and it doesn't have any VR, or SR, or whatever you prefer as anti-shake system.

To me a SR system built into the camera would be the perfect addition to a camera like the the A7. Then it would really be ground-breaking! Probably would fix the shutter shudder, too!

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 10:13 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (623 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 (623 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
Total: 421, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »