sean000

sean000

Lives in United States Bellingham, USA, WA, United States
Works as a Technology - IT Support
Joined on Feb 16, 2005
About me:

35mm f/2.0D
50mm f/1.8D
90mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro (Tamron)
80-200 f/2.8D
300mm f/4 AFS
Kenko Tele Pro 300 1.4x TC
Speedlight SB-800 & SB-600 Flashes
Gitzo 1227 Tripod with Markins M10 Ballhead

Comments

Total: 78, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On Adobe launches Lightroom for iPad post (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

dlkeller: First a monthly payment to watch TV, at least if you want to see many sports programs. Fees to use my phone with a lot of extra fees for a smartphone with aps. Then fees to get on the internet through a provider. Photoshop is now on the cloud with a subscription basis, now LR on your tablet joins the necessity for cloud fees. Some Windows applications are now a monthly fee on the cloud and I suspect very soon the newest Windows will only be on a cloud subscription basis. These things are really starting to add up!

Now that we subscribe to Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Prime, Evernote Premium, Smugmug, and a broadband Internet connection... I definitely get what you're saying. However, our subscriptions still add up to significantly less than we used to pay for cable TV service (not to mention a landline). I am afraid we are actually in a sweet spot right now, where those of us willing to subscribe to small services like these are getting a pretty good deal. It won't be long before we have micro-subscriptions for everything. Companies like Comcast own so much, they will figure out how to get their money one way or another :-D

Direct link | Posted on Apr 8, 2014 at 21:25 UTC

Ever since Google bought Nik I've thought, "They're going after Adobe." Pretty soon Google photo tools like Google + with Picasa will be more powerful and competitive with Lightroom. For photography enthusiasts Lightroom has the edge for now, but Picasa and Google + are improving and becoming increasingly attractive to photography enthusiasts. Meanwhile Adobe's subscription based licensing is driving away some long-time customers. I still can't imagine leaving Lightroom, but I'm keeping an eye on Google. For people who don't need some of Lightroom's more powerful features, and who just want Snapseed like features and a free way to organize and share photos that look great online... why wouldn't they use Google +? Oh yeah, because all their friends and family are on Facebook ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2014 at 17:07 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply

The geek in me really likes stuff like this, but the photographer in me loves cameras. A dedicated camera is sometimes an elegant work of art that represents an ideal combination of form and function. This? Not so much.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 18, 2014 at 23:42 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

lolopasstrail: Quite innovative of Nikon. A camera with far more megapixels than the vaunted Olympus EM-1, weighing less than the Olympus EM-1, complete with a new collapsible zoom, all for less than half the price of the EM-1 body alone.

Add the advantage of direct SLR viewing, a wide range of low cost used lenses (save wide primes), fast autofocus, and this is a shot across the bows of mirrorless.

Look at the evolution of the DSLRs- they are becoming smaller, lighter, and retain their overall competency at an affordable price. It's no wonder they are gaining market share over mirrorless.

For the last few years we've constantly heard bloggers and forum posters proclaiming the death of the DSLR. The DSLR begs to differ, and wonders which segment is really dying.

This may not have the features of the EM-1, but it has gone beyond the 16MP ceiling, and arguably gives up nothing in picture-taking ability or photo quality, at a more attractive price point.

"Innovation?" What would that add?

I shoot both Nikon and Olympus. I would much rather use the EVF of the EM1 (or my E-M5) than the small OVF of this camera. The extra megapixels will be lost on the target market for this one. Most people don't need that many megapixels. I might actually consider one to use as a landscape camera. Too bad it won't AF with my AF-D lenses, but that won't matter for tripod use. As for many other advanced features, the EM1 is a lot more camera. There is more to a camera than megapixels, and more to a camera system than a single body and a kit lens. I own both m4/3 and Nikon lenses, and I can tell you there is a major difference in portability.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2014 at 10:26 UTC
On Want to remember something? Don't take a photo article (185 comments in total)

I'm not buying it. I have much more detailed memories of places I have been when I have photographed the place. I like to explore the places I go with a camera, and in the process I feel like I see things most people don't. Sometimes my wife will look at a detail shot of a place we went together, and she won't remember that detail. I always do. I remember it vividly. But photographers see in ways casual snap shooters do not. When a photographer takes a photograph, there is more thought put into it... so perhaps this study rings closer to true for casual snap shooters. I think there is also a time for photos and a time to be present in the moment. If you are too busy taking photos to be part of the scene instead of an observer, you won't remember as much.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 15, 2013 at 07:29 UTC as 45th comment
On High-end pocketable compacts 2013 roundup article (135 comments in total)
In reply to:

Piciul: For me, the best is Olympus XZ-10. None of those presented here has a bright aperture at the long end, and, at normal ISO, the IQ of the cheaper Oly is similar (from RAW), despite the sensor size.
But, again, Dpr ignored it. or maybe is the sixth hidden camera:

"Here are the six models that will make your smartphone jealous:
•Canon PowerShot S120
•Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100
•Fujifilm XQ1
•Nikon Coolpix P330
•Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1"

We have an XZ-10, along with an OM-D E-M5. Even with a pancake lens attached, the E-M5 is not truly pocketable (well... large coat pockets perhaps). The XZ-10 is, and it's a delightful camera to use. My wife loves it because it fits in her purse, has the same touchscreen features as my E-M5 (which is actually quite useful when photographing the kids), and it has that Oly JPEG engine that usually produces excellent results right out of camera. It's also extremely responsive and focuses quickly in low light. If you want a touchscreen in a camera this size, as well as a bright lens, it's the only game in town.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 26, 2013 at 21:35 UTC
On Autumn in Georgia . Still Life in the Pumpkins challenge (1 comment in total)

This is a lovely arrangement, but the shallow depth of field is distracting to me. I would have rated it higher if the watermelon, pumpkin, and pomegranate were in focus as well as the rest of the fruit. Maybe crop the upper left corner out of it as well.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 23, 2013 at 19:13 UTC as 1st comment
On Nikon video hints at long-desired 'digital FM' article (552 comments in total)
In reply to:

REDred Photo: Just to reiterate from another post:

Retro look is not the same as retro function. I love my OM-D but it is certainly NOT in the category of simple to operate like old school cameras. Manual control of a camera is not as simple as putting an M on the dial and letting the "poor old fools" muck about with whatever they want. A camera that is designed for manual operation is one that puts manual control at the very forefront of its design philosophy... With true manual focus that is actually a smooth mechanical helical coupled with a precision focus screen... Dedicated manual controls for key operations that never change no matter what mode the camera is in. When a wood carver picks up a chisel, he doesn't have to turn it on and make sure its in the right mode and set several settings before begining his work... A simple tool alows one to think about what he wants to do with it... and then simply do it...without interface barriers.

@T3 wrote: "So you're saying that you're currently using a camera that scrambles and resets all your modes and settings every time you turn it off and on again?"

I don't think he is saying that at all, and that is certainly not the case with the OM-D E-M5. It retains your settings just fine from power cycle to power cycle, and you can configure custom setting banks just like on my Nikon D200. My D200 certainly has more switches and dials dedicated to important functions than my E-M5 does, but once I got used to the E-M5 I found it to be an excellent creative tool that is very efficient to use. But I get what Redred Photo is saying. Even my D200 requires you to dive into the menus a bit, and the dials may change functionality depending on the mode. It is not designed to be a fully manual camera, and there is something wonderfully simple about dedicated dials for ISO, Shutter Speed, Aperture, a focusing split prism, and all that. Sometimes such simplicity would be welcome. Sometimes

Direct link | Posted on Oct 29, 2013 at 04:40 UTC
On Nikon video hints at long-desired 'digital FM' article (552 comments in total)
In reply to:

sean000: Interesting that they chose to use a moody video to market a camera that doesn't shoot video. Aside from that, I am intrigued as a long-time Nikon shooter. The price tag is going to keep me away though. I have wished for a digital FM for a long time, but I thought the idea would be that it could be a little smaller, just the basic features... and a LOT cheaper than their full-featured FF cameras. Now I'm scratching my head wondering, "How could I justify this when a D600 costs half the price?"

Perhaps the details will answer that question, but I have a feeling that this camera is intended for folks who have more money to spend on style than I. You would think that a camera that has a stripped down feature set, focused more on ergonomics and basic controls rather that high-performance features, would cost less than even the D600.

I'm sure you are right. There are a number of high-end cameras on the market these days that are expensive, stylish, and... while excellent for certain types of photography... are not as versatile as less expensive models. They are niche products, and some of them sell quite well despite competition from less expensive cameras that provide similar features and performance. If Nikon finds the market for the DF to be more limited than they thought, the price may come down. Or it could be that this is intended to be a limited edition collectible. Nikon and others have made those before. It's a good way for a brand to maintain legendary status for the future.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 28, 2013 at 00:08 UTC
On Nikon video hints at long-desired 'digital FM' article (552 comments in total)

Interesting that they chose to use a moody video to market a camera that doesn't shoot video. Aside from that, I am intrigued as a long-time Nikon shooter. The price tag is going to keep me away though. I have wished for a digital FM for a long time, but I thought the idea would be that it could be a little smaller, just the basic features... and a LOT cheaper than their full-featured FF cameras. Now I'm scratching my head wondering, "How could I justify this when a D600 costs half the price?"

Perhaps the details will answer that question, but I have a feeling that this camera is intended for folks who have more money to spend on style than I. You would think that a camera that has a stripped down feature set, focused more on ergonomics and basic controls rather that high-performance features, would cost less than even the D600.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 27, 2013 at 20:21 UTC as 59th comment | 2 replies
On Battle of the Wi-Fi Cards: Eye-Fi vs. Transcend article (178 comments in total)
In reply to:

DaytonR: Very informative review :)

I wish the review had included the E Z share card & the Toshiba`s Flash air card ....

I have a Toshiba Flashair card that I got for free with an Olympus rebate when I bought my wife an Oly XZ-10. It is the only WiFi card I have owned. Like the Transcend, it is a shoot now, browse later card. First you enable the card's Wifi using the camera settings, and then you open an app on your device (she uses an iPad) to browse and transfer files. So far it has worked really well. I think the Eye-Fi certainly gives you more connectivity options for automating transfers, but I usually transfer bulk files using a card reader (into Lightroom) and I only use the WiFi option when I just want to transfer one photo (shooting RAW+JPEG) so I can quickly share that photo on Facebook or Google+.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2013 at 19:25 UTC
On Facebook introduces shared photo albums post (15 comments in total)
In reply to:

neo_nights: One thing that facebook needs URGENTLY is a less agressive compression algorithm. It's impossible to post ANYthing there that it isn't affected by heavy compression artifacts.

I agree. I often complain to my wife about how some photos don't look as good on Facebook as they look on Smugmug or Google +. She doesn't really see a difference, and I'm sure most Facebook users don't either. As far as social networks go, Google + is much better for photographers. Unfortunately my family and friends refuse to leave Facebook's lame party :-p

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 05:45 UTC
On Facebook introduces shared photo albums post (15 comments in total)

Finally! Many may scoff, but I currently use Lightroom to Publish the same albums to both my Facebook account and my wife's Facebook account. These are mostly photos of our family that her friends want to see as well as my friends. Yes I have another site (Smugmug) where I regularly upload far more. There are also some photos I only put on my Smugmug site, that I will not post to Facebook. So only a subset of my photos get posted to Facebook, but they get posted twice. It's not a big deal for us since Lightroom does the work. It's just silly. This will make FB a little more usable, but they still suck. The photo sharing features on Google + are so much better (as well as the image quality), but I can't convince most of my friends and family to join.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 05:42 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

sean000: In other words... we can market only one technical specification number at a time to non-enthusiast consumers. After years of telling consumers that it's all about the megapixel count, we now want them to know that it's about the sensor size.

The larger issue that these companies face is that the market has reached a point when the current technology is good enough for most consumers, so it will be tougher to sell them on future upgrades. Enthusiasts will continue to get excited about what's new, but the general consumer market is much greater in number. For many of them, the image quality is already good enough... especially when you're just going to dirty it up with an Instagram filter and share it on Facebook. The biggest complaint my non-enthusiast friends have about their phones or P&S cameras is that they aren't responsive enough. They care more about getting the shot quickly (and in focus) than they care about the image quality.

@AndyGM: I think you're right... if you want to sell cameras to people who are usually fine using their camera phone, you have to sell them an experience that is familiar, convenient, and social. I know a lot of people who say they rarely use their "nice" camera anymore because they never get around to downloading the pictures to their computer so they can upload them to their favorite social networking site. They want a way to apply fliters and upload to social networking sites in camera. The EyeFi and Flashair cards help... but they can be too fiddly for many consumers. Just running Android OS would be better... especially if you have a phone that can provide Internet over Wifi to it.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2013 at 19:17 UTC
In reply to:

sean000: In other words... we can market only one technical specification number at a time to non-enthusiast consumers. After years of telling consumers that it's all about the megapixel count, we now want them to know that it's about the sensor size.

The larger issue that these companies face is that the market has reached a point when the current technology is good enough for most consumers, so it will be tougher to sell them on future upgrades. Enthusiasts will continue to get excited about what's new, but the general consumer market is much greater in number. For many of them, the image quality is already good enough... especially when you're just going to dirty it up with an Instagram filter and share it on Facebook. The biggest complaint my non-enthusiast friends have about their phones or P&S cameras is that they aren't responsive enough. They care more about getting the shot quickly (and in focus) than they care about the image quality.

The enthusiast end of the market is another matter, because know there is more to consider than just sensor size or megapixel count. Of course we know those are important factors to consider, but that there are trade-offs. We are more likely to own multiple cameras with multiple sensor sizes anyway.

The camera industry has doene well selling entry-level APS-C (and even FF) DSLR cameras to consumers, but I know a lot of people who buy them and discover that they are more camera than they wanted. They don't understand most of the features, they rarely change lenses (if ever) and they often leave the camera at home because of the size, weight, and complexity. They would be better off completely ignoring megapixels and sensor size, and focusing on getting a responsive and versatile camera that they will enjoy carrying and using.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 2, 2013 at 15:41 UTC

In other words... we can market only one technical specification number at a time to non-enthusiast consumers. After years of telling consumers that it's all about the megapixel count, we now want them to know that it's about the sensor size.

The larger issue that these companies face is that the market has reached a point when the current technology is good enough for most consumers, so it will be tougher to sell them on future upgrades. Enthusiasts will continue to get excited about what's new, but the general consumer market is much greater in number. For many of them, the image quality is already good enough... especially when you're just going to dirty it up with an Instagram filter and share it on Facebook. The biggest complaint my non-enthusiast friends have about their phones or P&S cameras is that they aren't responsive enough. They care more about getting the shot quickly (and in focus) than they care about the image quality.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 2, 2013 at 15:30 UTC as 57th comment | 3 replies
On 5 Reasons why I haven't used my DSLR for months article (591 comments in total)

I've been shooting mostly with m4/3 since 2010. I bought a GF1 as a walk-around alternative to my Nikon DSLR, but I kept buying m4/3 lenses and eventually the OM-D E-M5. I still have my DSLR, but it's strictly a specialty camera now. I mainly keep it because I have some nice Nikon lenses (like f/2.8 zooms) and several Nikon flashguns. DSLR cameras still have some advantages of course, but I think most people who buy entry level DSLR cameras would be happier with m4/3, Sony NEX, etc.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2013 at 23:32 UTC as 173rd comment
On Hands-on with Eye-Fi Mobi post (42 comments in total)

I currently use a Toshiba Flashair card with my wife's Olympus XZ-10. Like the Mobi the Flashair has its own SSID so she can connect directly to that from her iPhone. There is an Olympus camera app that can download JPEGs. The annoying step for her is that before she can transfer she has to go to the Menu and enable the camera/Flashair wireless before she can connect from her phone. That's not really a big deal when you are transferring a batch of photos, but it's a lot of button presses to transfer a single photo.

If I understand the Mobi, the only real difference is that it's always on and available for connections without having to enable the wireless in the camera menu? That would make things more streamlined for her.

As far as syncing images between devices: iOS users can use Photostream to sync photos between an iPhone and iPad (or even multiple users via a shared photostream). Users of different devices can use Dropbox or Google to sync.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 10, 2013 at 23:43 UTC as 18th comment
On Best Digital Cameras for Kids article (141 comments in total)
In reply to:

jtan163: My nephew is 5 and has been using my D7000 and EM5 since he was 3.
I put it in Aperture priory or auto and he is fine.
Actually now he chooses his own settings.
He likes the blinkies on
At the moment he doesn't understand wat they are but he insists on turning them on.

I require him to wear a neck strap to reduce the risk of dropping, and he is happy to do it.
The images aren't masterly, but he can shoot a focusses shot.

I bet by the time he is 10 they will be masterly.

My only mistake was assuming he'd stick to what I showed him.

He didn't. Kids mimic.
He attempted to out an SD card in my EM5. Backwards.

Now I need to use a key or other edge to remove SD cards, because the push to eject spring mechanism is seriously fritzed (he managed to get that SD card ALL the way in backwards).

He is now not allowed to open doors on the camera, so batteries, memory cars and USB etc ports are out of bounds.

So if you show your kids camera stuff, make limits.

I'm afraid to let my 3-year-old use my E-M5 even though she knows how to use it (while daddy is holding onto it) and she is quite careful for an almost-3-year-old. I would be more comfortable letting her use my Nikon D200 since it's a little more drop resistant, but it's heavy so I think I will get her a compact P&S off Craigslist for $25. I see a 12 MP Kodak EasyShare on there now for $30. That might just be a good 3rd birthday gift for her :-)

Good tips on setting limits and not showing them too much. Of course kids will explore and figure out a lot of it on their own, so it might take some coaching to get her to avoid messing with cards and batteries.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 22, 2013 at 16:13 UTC
On Best Digital Cameras for Kids article (141 comments in total)
In reply to:

sean000: My kid has the Vtech, and it is crap. Yes it is really designed to be a toy, but they could have included a better camera. The image quality is... probably worse than the first cell phone camera. It's that bad. I think my first VGA webcam produced better photos. It's also chock full of silly effects and games that my daughter has zero interest in, because they just aren't that fun. She does like looking through the dual-viewfinders. It's actually good for a 2-year-old who is more interested in looking through a viewfinder or just having a camera that she can hold and press the buttons for (as opposed to "Daddy's camera").

Now that she is 3 years old, she is starting to pay attention to the actual results of taking a photo, and she is starting to realize that the Vtech takes lousy pictures. Now she uses one of our old iPhone 3g phones in a drop-resistant case. You'd think for $40 VTech could have included a camera that is at least on par with a 2008 cell phone.

Oh...I should add that the VTech isn't really any easier to use than a real compact P&S. My daughter will turn 3 in two months, and she can figure out how to operate our "real" cameras. She knows where the shutter is, and what the Play button looks like for reviewing photos. She can also take photos and review them easily on an iPhone (has been able to do that for at least a year). So I think her next camera will be a compact P&S off Craigslist for $25. That should buy a better camera than the iPhone 3G, far better than the VTech. She will be able to get real results, and if she breaks it then it is no big loss...and will teach her how to treat things like that carefully.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 22, 2013 at 16:03 UTC
Total: 78, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »