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: 299, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1454 comments in total)
In reply to:

stern: Since there is so little difference in IQ especially between the best "full frames" and APS-Cs (even FT/MFT have now caught up), I see no need to pay some USD 2000,- for a heavy and bulky "full frame" camera (in the end FF is just the eqivalent to the film-camera-era "small film format", only in a much larger body). I just read a couple of articles comparing the IQ of Nikon FFs and the Pentax K3 (currently the best APS-C on the market): the difference is negligeable. But then again, I have friends who just crave for the biggest optical behemoth they can get hold of...
;-)

I have shot E-M1 for a month and own the K5iis (no AA filter). I agree with Stern that the IQ in almost all respects between the two are negligible. Maybe a slight nod to the Pentax in high ISO. The Olympus has better colors (larger nod). There is much less of a difference between 4/3rd and APS-C than between APS-C and FF. Only if I pixel peep at serious magnification--and even then it's hard to factor out lens differences to see a difference in noise or sharpness. The K3 resolution would help the sharpness probably, but I am looking at 16mp compared with 16mp.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2015 at 22:22 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1454 comments in total)
In reply to:

stern: Since there is so little difference in IQ especially between the best "full frames" and APS-Cs (even FT/MFT have now caught up), I see no need to pay some USD 2000,- for a heavy and bulky "full frame" camera (in the end FF is just the eqivalent to the film-camera-era "small film format", only in a much larger body). I just read a couple of articles comparing the IQ of Nikon FFs and the Pentax K3 (currently the best APS-C on the market): the difference is negligeable. But then again, I have friends who just crave for the biggest optical behemoth they can get hold of...
;-)

Like you, I have friends who crave the biggest most professional feeling camera they can (or can't) afford. The problem is they have lines of faulty logic to make mountains out of mole hills regarding the superiority of their tiny margins. They also typically completely neglect convenience, budget, and individual priorities when preaching their FF message. It's like word problems in math books that throw out wind resistance, motion, practicality, and application, but are otherwise logically incontestable.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 14:05 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1454 comments in total)
In reply to:

kadardr: Difference between FF and APS-C:
In favor of FF:
One stop better DR. ISO 12800 with FF is fine, ISO 6400 with APS-C can be rescued if you have to.
Less than one stop better color sensitivity/depth.
Better subject isolation (bokeh is function of absolute not relative focal length, absolute and not relative aperture setting and subject distance.
In favor of APS-C: better reach (300mm FF lens = 450mm relative focal length in APS-C). In other words smaller lenses/focal length for the same angle of view.
That is all. FF and APS-C can coexist. A combo of Canon 7DMII/6D or Nikon D400/D750 (just a dream) are very viable options with well selected 5-8 lenses altogether (by combo). These are missing sorely from the article.

Good conclusion, kadardr, and I would say that if the luxery affords to completely separate your systems, going mirrorless and FF would be the best of both worlds. IMO, a D400/D750 would just be good backup, not the most versatile combo. They are just too similar. A Fuji XT-1/D810 or E-M1/D750 would be my dream combos.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 13:55 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1454 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gollan: Wonderful article and great timing. I recently watched a video by Tony Northurp about the issues surrounding the use of full frame lenses on crop bodies. It was very illuminating and convinced me that I really should be looking for lenses that will maximize the potential of my APS-C system instead of favouring lenses that will work well for the "some day" purchase of a full-frame camera. This article reinforces that point and answers the question about how I would eventually make the switch: with both feet! In fact, I'm happy with my current system and it will be a very long time before it presents any serious limitations to my development as a photographer.

I like Tony's videos though I don't always agree. He's a good presenter and pretty realistic.

If the luxury affords, I would say that a move to FF should be with two feet as you say, Gollan, and that in the meanwhile building a complimenting mirrorless system (as Lassoni said, outside of the big two) actually gives the best of both worlds. Canikon has seemed almost scared to jump the rails on their FF runaway train. We'll see if they become serious about mirrorless in the future.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 13:49 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1454 comments in total)
In reply to:

SirSeth: I think the article is well articulated. What I picked up is that many people think that buying FF lenses for a crop sensor will future proof them, but in reality as soon as those lenses are mounted on a FF, you're using "new" lenses that don't behave as they did and may be less useful (or more useful) on the new format. Meaning if you enjoyed the reach, now you need to add reach on the top end...

I think your perspective is exactly what Richard attempted to address. You seem to think that FF (or larger formats) should be everyone's end goal--at least everyone who "is really serious, not wanting to compromise, or professional." Perspective is the Achilles heel of the mind and even more so when privilege is showing.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 13:42 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1454 comments in total)

I think the article is well articulated. What I picked up is that many people think that buying FF lenses for a crop sensor will future proof them, but in reality as soon as those lenses are mounted on a FF, you're using "new" lenses that don't behave as they did and may be less useful (or more useful) on the new format. Meaning if you enjoyed the reach, now you need to add reach on the top end...

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 03:26 UTC as 263rd comment | 6 replies
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1454 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joed700: Major differences that really matter when it comes to choosing between APS-C or FF is the DOF. If shallow DOF is a must for you, FF is the only way to go. For example, my Fuji XF 56mm f1.2 can produce shallow DOF that's equivalent to an 85mm F1.8 only. Most people don't realize that 56mm f1.2 (85mm equiv) is somewhat misleading. It should be read as 56mm f1.2 (84mm f1.8 DOF in FF). A typical DX lens with an aperture starting at f3.5 at 16mm can give you max shallow DOF of a 24mm @ f/5 in FF. By the time you get to f5.6 at 55mm, you would have the same DOF as a FF 85mm @ f/9. Camera manufacturers should label their product as such: 16-55mm f/3.5 -5.6 (24-85mm f/5 - f/9 DOF in FF). Anyone who's serious about isolating their subjects will think twice when they see the DOF equivalent--f/5 - f/9....

How shallow one needs is the question. APS-C can deliver shallow unless you only consider paper thin DOF to count, but then wouldn't you be looking into medium format? A longer faster lens on bigger sensors minimizes DOF and people will pay and pay if that is their goal. But it can be a false goal for people thinking that they must have it in order to be good photographers. It's a false assumption that super thin DOF ability makes better photographs.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 03:21 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1454 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lanidrac: The "Upgrade path" was never like this in the film days. Corporations made the digital upgrade thing so expensive and repetitive. Sure there were better film cams back when, but the huge cost difference of getting a good digicam is still crazy. It's a scam. Why should the new 7DII be almost $2K ? It's ridiculous! Imagine what $2K would have bought in film cams just before digital caught on? I started reading about mirrorless on DPR and that option has wings it seems. Quality photography should not be so expensive.

What wildkat2 said. It's easy to forget how dang expensive and inaccessible film shooting was if you wanted to excel. Photography has become more and more accessible at all levels.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 03:08 UTC

No full frame! Well I'm going to be avoiding the Pentax forum for a while. I don't want to chewed on by all the gnashing of teeth.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 14:14 UTC as 15th comment | 5 replies
On Fujifilm announces XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR lens article (295 comments in total)

Pricey lenses that perform very good seems par for the course. I'm sure this is no exception. People don't buy Fuji or going further up--Leica and Hasselblad--because they are the best bang for the buck do they? There seems to be a lot of hurt feelings from people who think that Fuji should trump every format in every market segment and compare in all areas to very different systems.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 13:47 UTC as 26th comment
On Hands-on with Nikon's new D5500 article (288 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: So this camera at $899 will come to market when the prices of both the A77II and K3 is at $899 or less respectively, granted there're prices for bodies only. I expect a huge price drop in this camera soon.

ttran88. When recommending cameras I find out what people want in a body as well as in lenses/flashes..., what their budget is, and what their shooting priorities are. Also, if they have a brand loyalty built up. If they have the money, and want this sort of Nikon camera, sure, why not? I'd of course also let them know that last years cameras have a higher dollar value and may match their priorities just as well. But to never recommend a new camera because it's selling at MSRP when others are seeing discounts because they are at the end of their product cycle is ridiculous. People, even the ones I like, should make an informed decision based on what they want, not what makes the most sense to someone else's list of priorities. I have even recommend cameras to people that I personally don't like because it fits their list.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 04:23 UTC
On Hands-on with Nikon's new D5500 article (288 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: So this camera at $899 will come to market when the prices of both the A77II and K3 is at $899 or less respectively, granted there're prices for bodies only. I expect a huge price drop in this camera soon.

Yes, "last year's" models are usually great values. The two you mention are truly excellent values. They were not as high a value when they first were launched.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 03:35 UTC
On Hands-on with Nikon's new D5500 article (288 comments in total)

No, I don't think it will be god, even for three stops of stabilization. ;) Everything else looks heavenly for a D5300 update.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 03:33 UTC as 80th comment
On Panasonic releases trio of compact superzooms article (102 comments in total)

Considering the low MSRP of $200, $300, and $400 (street price will be less after a while) these seem to be good additions to the target market. While that may not be me, it's nice to see a reduction of MP and an EVF hit the consumer market--that's the one that's of most interest because of those two moves. Spanks Canon's consumer cameras announced today.

As far as cell phones are concerned--please folks--cell phones shine for convenience, but these are much more capable; especially the ZS50 with larger pixels, EVF, large zoom range, manual control, larger sensor, 5-axis OIS, uncompressed RAW, stereo sound, better video, and NFC and other wireless connectivity. You can use it as an extension of your phone.

Forgot to mention, that one can buy this camera without a 2 year contract to subsidize the exorbitant price of the hardware.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 03:24 UTC as 12th comment
In reply to:

BarnET: What i see.

Big viewfinder hump(probably a penta prism viewfinder hopefully the 0.95x mag)

A mono mic on top. still terrible in camera sound.

A tilt-screen (hinge on the side) This is a Pentax first as far as i know.
Considering it's hard to seal these it might be a K510?

AF/MF switch. The older pentax camera's had AFC there as well. Even the entry level k500.

Mic in on the side for proper audio. Another thing often missing on Pentax bodies. However no one shoots video with Pentax for good reason. So why did they bother. Which makes me hope and wonder:-D.

Last but not least the smallest Dslr kit-lens i have ever seen. probably makes this the smaller Dslr package. Probably not the lightest since Pentax often uses a better heavier build and heavy penta prism viewfinders. Which simply add weight but with a good reason.

Not common doesn't directly correlate to hard. Olympus had very good very sealed flip out screens on the E-3 and E-5, and if Olympus can do it at the same time as padding their corporate butts with fake buyouts, then I suppose Pentax/Ricoh who has a lot of experience sealing can manage with today's tech.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 02:21 UTC
On Editorial: 2014's Homepage Highlights article (70 comments in total)

Barney, this is the first time I saw your England in Color series. Really great stuff. My grandfather died just before I was born (1976) and I recently found slides of his and scanned them. Grandpa wasn't a great photographer, but I enjoyed seeing what sparked his fancy. Here's a shot from his time as a "missionary" doctor in Africa: http://wallygoots.smugmug.com/Family/Memory-Lane/i-npzBhDn/A

Happy new year. Oh, and I love the video reviews you have been doing.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 2, 2015 at 17:06 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
On Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review preview (2078 comments in total)
In reply to:

wsalopek: The EM-1 looks gorgeous...but it's only slightly smaller than the FULL FRAME Sony A7...that's a pretty serious jump in sensor capability for almost no increase in physical size.

I suppose if low light and maximum subject isolation does not matter, the Olympus is the way to go, but if those things DO matter, go with the Sony.

If you compare two cameras based on one factor it simplifies things considerably. Exit the overly simplified argument with a trump card like "you can't beat the physics of a larger sensor" and Ta Da you have a clear winner! Everyone should get the Sony.

If maximum subject isolation and low light trump everything else, no one would buy full frame 35mm. It would only be large format or for the poor masses--medium format. And of course the A5s would outsell every other since it's the best in low light. No one cares about resolution or for that matter, lens selection, price, or system size.

So yeah, in a world where we can take out all factors that don't support our perspective and no one has a budget,... where is this world?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 23, 2014 at 19:09 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1277 comments in total)
In reply to:

SirSeth: Valid points on its strengths as well as weaknesses. IMO, what we have here is the best APS-C camera Canon was willing to make.

One doesn't have to be a hater to realize there are valid reasons why some are complaining. Most certainly the 7Dii doesn't have all that every bird and sport photographer would want for the current technology and I don't see how you or anyone else can say this with a straight face unless you have blinders on. With this much time since the 7D came out and current market trends it's ridiculous to not have better base ISO, every WIFI advantage, more resolution... unless Canon is really more concerned about protecting their upgrade path to almighty FF. So while I agree that this is a fantastic wildlife and sports camera, I have a little more faith in Canon's ability to have produced a better camera than you do.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 22, 2014 at 14:19 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1277 comments in total)
In reply to:

SirSeth: Valid points on its strengths as well as weaknesses. IMO, what we have here is the best APS-C camera Canon was willing to make.

Exactly. No question there. But is it the best crop sensor camera Canon could have made? No way. It's a non-compete with their FF and Nikon won't play because they also want to protect their bigger more expensive camera. The only other player in crop DSLRs is Pentax and mirrorless of the likes of NX1 are creeping into this segment (even for sports). They are not there yet, but the march of improvement in AF shows not signs of stopping with mirrorless. In the areas of video and connectivity the mirrorless gang sweeps the competition. These are not inconsequential for many sports/wildlife shooters.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2014 at 02:16 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1277 comments in total)

Valid points on its strengths as well as weaknesses. IMO, what we have here is the best APS-C camera Canon was willing to make.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 04:26 UTC as 239th comment | 4 replies
Total: 299, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »