SirSeth

SirSeth

Lives in United States Hagerstown, United States
Works as a Teacher
Has a website at wallygoots.smugmug.com
Joined on Feb 8, 2004
About me:

My plan is to ever improve my trade, my hobbies, and my relationships with family, friends, and my God. My trade is teaching Math and Computers. My primary hobbies are lutherie (guitar building) and photography. My God is slow to anger and abounding in love. He will not always accuse, nor will he harbor His anger forever; He does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us for our iniquities. For as high as the heavens are above the earth so great is His love for those who fear him. As far as the east is from the west so far has he removed our transgressions from us. If you have questions or gripes about my God, I always enjoy talking with someone who is a seeker. Rock throwers are rarely convinced of anything spiritual and I can respect their desire to believe differently than myself.

Comments

Total: 416, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

SirSeth: I mourned the passing to RawShooter and RawShooter Pro when Adobe bought them out. It was the fastest and most intuitive platform I've used. Using LR since, I've never felt like it couldn't be replaced and I really hate Adobe subscription "service" model. ON1 looks more like RawShooter and it looks like they understand that offering a standalone or subscription is essential. I'm looking forward to trying it out. Curious to see what the standalone will cost. But anything that challenges LR is good for me.

That's why I liked it. Super fast to simply develop and nothing more. RS Pro had more options. Also, it used the folder structure I set up myself which I prefer. I don't like LR catalogs. Anyhow, I'll check out Capture One, but I have hopes for On1.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2016 at 04:02 UTC

I mourned the passing to RawShooter and RawShooter Pro when Adobe bought them out. It was the fastest and most intuitive platform I've used. Using LR since, I've never felt like it couldn't be replaced and I really hate Adobe subscription "service" model. ON1 looks more like RawShooter and it looks like they understand that offering a standalone or subscription is essential. I'm looking forward to trying it out. Curious to see what the standalone will cost. But anything that challenges LR is good for me.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 12:49 UTC as 8th comment | 2 replies
On article Readers' Showcase: Phil Garcia (71 comments in total)

Really great images!

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2016 at 13:31 UTC as 52nd comment

Not everyone's dream camera, but size and features in that price range strike an attractive balance imo.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2016 at 15:28 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

J A C S: Sony: 68.6 x 59.5 mm, 186g
Canon: 69.2 x 39.3mm, 160g, half the price

So a smaller body means a larger lens with the same design?

The A7II is actually deeper (!) with that lens than the 6D with the 50 STM.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#634.580,380.471,ha,t

And it goes round and round. One can cherry pick examples all the live long day to either minimize or maximize the difference in their heads. The reason why this isn't really helpful, is that size/weight is usually not the only item on ones priority list. For some it might be a very high priority and then they can absolutely get a smaller and lighter kit with mirrorless. Of course someone else can buy large mirrorless lenses for their cameras.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2016 at 22:32 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: It's been a while and my memory on this is fuzzy, but wasn't the first TTL implementation of this concept demonstrated on the Olympus E-300?

I had a couple of E-330 cameras. They were very useful for macro work and the viewfinder wasn't that compared with other entry level DSLRs of the time. Canon seems to be trying to reinvent the wheel in a different way than Olympus, Fuji, and Sony has already patented to death. That's tough. There are only so many versions of round.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2016 at 01:39 UTC
In reply to:

J A C S: Sony: 68.6 x 59.5 mm, 186g
Canon: 69.2 x 39.3mm, 160g, half the price

So a smaller body means a larger lens with the same design?

The A7II is actually deeper (!) with that lens than the 6D with the 50 STM.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#634.580,380.471,ha,t

Arguments minimizing the size difference between DSLRs and mirrorless in general always sound to me like trying to rope a steer with a wet noodle. Maybe the size difference is much more noticeable to some than others. My FF mirrorless system is so much smaller and lighter than my previous DSLRs (even those with pint sized sensors). But I agree, it's also about a shift in thinking. Maybe part of that is noticing how much a difference in size makes.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2016 at 01:27 UTC
In reply to:

Old Cameras: 50/1.8 = good, $249 = great!
70-300/4.5-5.6 = good, $1199 = are you out of your minds?

The price is all in line with what I would expect from a G class lens, Canon L, or other premium level performer. There not many lenses like this designed for mirrorless and with silent zoom for photography and video. It's size may be an advantage and I'll be keen to see the IQ. I expect it to be very good indeed. The price does not surprise me. The price on the nifty fifty does. Great to have a mirrorless nifty fifty. Well done!

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 16:21 UTC
In reply to:

PPierre: Almost everyone on Sony FF has the 55, and they release an 50f1.8... Had they released a cheap 85f2.0 (like, sub $500), they would have made both FF owners and aps-c owner happy.

Even though I think Sony is moving in the right direction with some cheaper primes (28 and 50), I really think they're making a mistake. However, this 50 could come as a kit lens, which would be a good move :)

It may come as a kit lens. Why not? Also, not everyone owning a Sony FF has a 55mm. Far from it. (and not everyone buying a Sony FF in the future will opt for the 55mm over the 50mm). I think it's the right direction without qualification. Of course I wouldn't be opposed to a longer prime that is priced for entry level FF at sub $500. It wouldn't surprise me if they brought out a FF between the A7 series an the A6300 in price as well. Then suddenly the 50mm f1.8 makes even more sense.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 16:14 UTC
On article Sony may split off its imaging products business (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

SirSeth: I wish I knew more about business. Would this enable Sony Imagining to be more competitive because the leaders of the company would be focused on imaging rather than general overall corporate strategy? Would they still answer to Sony corporate? It seems that diversification is helpful for companies to continue to be financially viable over the long term. Many companies have come and gone or been bought out and absorbed by other companies because they had a narrow niche. Why would you want to split your diverse company into several smaller companies? Is it just more options for investors with the result that 3 smaller companies end up making more money than 1 conglomerate? I assume they would continue to share resources under the Sony name, so Sony imaging would get a good rate on Sony chip and video technology from Sony Video. Basically, what problems does restructuring solve and are those problems par for the course when companies become large enough? Anyhow... that's what I wonder.

That makes sense. Thanks for the perspective. It seems it would attract buyers if the company was split into areas of interest and if it makes it easier for investors, while making money for the parent company, then everyone wins. I hope there will be more efficiency too. If Sony imaging, being smaller is able to focus their vision for the company, it will be better for everyone as well.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 16:08 UTC
On article Sony may split off its imaging products business (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: This is great news. Now, call the new subsidiary "Minolta".

"Minoltony"

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2016 at 18:22 UTC
On article Sony may split off its imaging products business (71 comments in total)

I wish I knew more about business. Would this enable Sony Imagining to be more competitive because the leaders of the company would be focused on imaging rather than general overall corporate strategy? Would they still answer to Sony corporate? It seems that diversification is helpful for companies to continue to be financially viable over the long term. Many companies have come and gone or been bought out and absorbed by other companies because they had a narrow niche. Why would you want to split your diverse company into several smaller companies? Is it just more options for investors with the result that 3 smaller companies end up making more money than 1 conglomerate? I assume they would continue to share resources under the Sony name, so Sony imaging would get a good rate on Sony chip and video technology from Sony Video. Basically, what problems does restructuring solve and are those problems par for the course when companies become large enough? Anyhow... that's what I wonder.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2016 at 18:19 UTC as 18th comment | 3 replies

For practical use ISOs should be capped at just more than usable results. But for bragging rights, let's hear it for ISO 6 million.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2016 at 12:32 UTC as 151st comment
In reply to:

noflashplease: Why is Nikon still wasting time and resources on point and shoot cameras? This sort of segment should be serviced by the Nikon 1/CX-mount.

Since Nikon can't really commit to their 1 system for fear of stepping on their own toes, then squeezing it out of existence may be wise. DSLRs on one side and DLs on the other. Maybe they are leaving it open for the 1 system to grow up into APS-C or FF with serious video appeal? I don't know.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 21:01 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 First Impressions Review (972 comments in total)

Super aggressive pricing!

I also love the comment about the LCD being compared to two deck chairs mating. Bonus points Richard!

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2016 at 16:47 UTC as 71st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

MFiftysomething: They played it safe with the design ...spot the difference; effective but not sexy!

The sensor sounds good but the 16:9 lcd and EVF, no touch screen or IBIS makes it look expensive

My opinion is that technology doesn't lead everyone to name calling, arrogance, and rudeness. But the anonymity of the internet does reveal a piece of who someone really is without social convention that would cause them to appear quite nice in real life.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2016 at 20:32 UTC
In reply to:

MFiftysomething: They played it safe with the design ...spot the difference; effective but not sexy!

The sensor sounds good but the 16:9 lcd and EVF, no touch screen or IBIS makes it look expensive

Well anyhow, sexy metaphor you spun there. Dry water. Ha! ;) Carry on then.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2016 at 06:02 UTC
In reply to:

MFiftysomething: They played it safe with the design ...spot the difference; effective but not sexy!

The sensor sounds good but the 16:9 lcd and EVF, no touch screen or IBIS makes it look expensive

I stand by my comments above. I am not offending your intelligence--and for you to choose to turn it on me is just deflection. Also, I'm certain that that no one is breaking the rules or "abusing" figurative language by personifying an object as "sexy."

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2016 at 23:57 UTC
In reply to:

MFiftysomething: They played it safe with the design ...spot the difference; effective but not sexy!

The sensor sounds good but the 16:9 lcd and EVF, no touch screen or IBIS makes it look expensive

I appreciate that you are trying not to be offensive now. I will also say on the level that building an ultra literal argument for a word used figuratively is not serving you well in understanding others' perspectives.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 05:40 UTC
In reply to:

JT26: I really do struggle with the quality of the test shots on this site at times. The ones of the bearded chap are good but some of the others are just no help at all. I dont mean to moan but just wish more thought would go into what viewers want to see from a sample shot.

What I struggle with is the lack of imagination, logical understanding, and creative vision of critical users on this site. This is a press event with who knows how much time and how may people are wanting to get their hands on the lens. The photographer didn't set up the lighting. Furthermore, they are not processed by a professional. What people seem to be clamoring for and criticizing is not what DPR staff does for a living. There is a difference between a pro. reviewer and a pro. photographer. The latter would never pick up a new piece of equipment, shoot an event that they have no control over, and then upload unprocessed shots like this. But a reviewer should at events like this. I'm glad they put out these untouched clutch series for new equipment. If one can't imagine from the results what they could do with the equipment given good circumstances, good processing, and time, then it's their lack of creative vision that should be questioned.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 05:29 UTC
Total: 416, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »