iae aa eia

iae aa eia

Lives in Brazil Recife, PE, Brazil
Works as a EFL Teacher
Joined on Jan 13, 2011
About me:

The first camera I have ever shot with was my mother's Kodak Instamatic 177XF. It happened to me to work as a photographer in the 90's, but I always had problems working by myself (not having the skills to do that marketing thing; socializing and stuff; and thus, feeling discouraged) and I didn't care to find a partner. What I needed was someone to promote my work, or to have learned how to deal with people.

After a long period of time having different and unsuccessful jobs, I started teaching English. It happened by chance, but many opportunities were quickly showing up, and I decided to move on with it. It's not photography, but I can say I still do something I love. I have always liked English, so it never gets old. And most things I've learned through reading, including photography, were written in English.

The first contact I've ever had with photography literature was in the 80's. The husband of a distant relative of mine gave me a photography guide composed of two magazine-sized and four less-than-A4-sized books. Each one of the magazine-sized books was divided in many sections, like cameras, lenses, flashes, framing, darkroom, techniques, pro-photographers' galleries, etc; and the other four books focused on specific photo subjects. Only photos and commentaries on them. One was about people, another was about women, another one, about nature, and one more about architecture. I loved that kit. Later on, when I was able to understand some English, I could compare them with many other guides and I realized that they were quite complete and technically accurate. Really good stuff for Brazilian standards. It was probably the translation of an American guide.

Now, the first contact I've ever had with photography literature, in English, was in 1993. I lived in a city called Natal, RN. I was riding my bicycle when I decided to stop at a newsstand located at a supermarket for a quick look at the magazines as I used to do. I wasn't looking for anything in particular and didn't intend to buy anything, but while I was browsing, I saw that beautiful red glossy cover magazine with lots of SLRs on it, standing on the top shelf. It was the December's 1993 edition of Petersen's PHOTOgraphic magazine. I was in awe, thinking, "Wow, look at this!" I had never seen such an appealing cover (uncommon to Brazilian magazines at that time) and that rich content in terms of equipment. I decided to buy a compact Collins Gem Eng-Port Port-Eng dictionary and a calculator in the same week I bought that magazine, and spent the whole month trying to translate most of the magazine's content and converting feet to meters, inches to mm and cm, and pounds and ounces to kgs, and even dollars to royals (our currency, or 'real/reais' in Portuguese). I continued to buy issues of that magazine for the next 6 months. At first, equipment ads, camera and lens guides and articles, and shopping catalogs where the sections I read the most.

In 1996, I was living in Guarabira, PB, and the owners of a photo shop in Natal called me and invited me to move back there and work as a minilab operator. That was my first job. I got to know the folks there because they didn't have access that kind of magazines and I used to go there and take mine and talk about photography, and we enjoyed that a lot and we became friends. While I was working there, I had the chance to handle some very nice cameras like the Nikon F3, FM2, Minolta Maxxum 9xi, and some others from Pentax. Canon was rare.

Comments

Total: 174, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Windows XP is dead. Long live Windows XP 'Bliss' (119 comments in total)

Not my favorite background, but I really thought it was photoshopped. The color rendition and the latitude of the film were enough trick.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 00:00 UTC as 41st comment | 1 reply
On article Sony Alpha 7S in low-light: See video at ISO 409,600 (246 comments in total)

Jaw dropped

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2014 at 23:11 UTC as 51st comment
On article Canon PowerShot G1X Mark II real-world gallery (132 comments in total)

In my opinion no brand beats Canon when it comes to natural color. They only need a Foveon-like sensor to complete the perfectness.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2014 at 20:39 UTC as 56th comment | 3 replies
On article Sony A3000 First Impressions Review (681 comments in total)

Just bought it! I wish I had a little more money to buy the A65, but... At least the sensor quality is very good. The LCD is not that bad, but I would rather prefer a 3:2 one, because I don't like 16:9 for photos.

The EVF is really really bad, but not that bad because of the resolution per se, but the eyepiece. Small opening, all plastic eyecup, short relief, and the lens quickly loses a lot of quaily if you don't look very in the center. Practically unusable for long time.

The other things (including the lens [18-55]) and qualitywise, it is exactly what to expect at this price point. Not good not bad. Acceptable and useful.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2014 at 15:52 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

Shamael: Tomorrow, Sony will officially announce the new A7S, 12 mpix FF, speedy AF like on a6000, 4k video. After that, let's see how fast Nikon will lose it's shoes with it's hyper expensive stuff when the first ISO 250000 clean shots appear on this forum.

Sony is not the same Sony, man. They incorporated K-M, didn't destroy it. May never be the best, but not respecting Sony as (now) a truly photographic and video tool is ignorance. Nikon being a respected photographic brand and letting their costumers take advantage of all their lenses for decades will always play a psychological advantage.

Sony (as Minolta was) is a brand that plays on the other side of the game, betting on innovation, pushing conservative brands like Nikon ahead. Not that Nikon development depends on brands like Sony, but I'm sure Nikon wouldn't update their products quickly without brands like Minolta, I mean, Sony.

Maybe one having a less superior impression on Sony is due to the fact it chose (for now) to play in the upper-lower (and below) category, avoiding competing directly against D4's and 1D's, but that, in my opinion, doesn't make Sony any less good. What is Nikon doing in the superzoom and mirroless premium segment? Not better than Sony is, for sure.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2014 at 15:14 UTC
In reply to:

digilux: I still don't get the point of this vid....

Yeah, man, me neither. It sure is worth watching, the guys are very good and that dolphing jumping really caught my attention, but there is something else.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2014 at 21:37 UTC
On article Sony A3000 First Impressions Review (681 comments in total)

Once, we (including DPR) wondered if a brand could launch a camera that consisted of basic features but with a big sensor and good image quality in an SLR body for people who wanted to step up but can't pay much, or simply don't need, want, or care about many features, and, well, Sony just did it!

But I understand DPR's criticism on the LCD and EVF, because 400 k LCD's and higher than 200 k EVF's were already in the market in 2010, so I guess we all were kind of not expecting anything below about 400 k in low budget DSLR's and mirroless these days.

But, there's a rumor of an A3500 coming, and its specs say it'll keep the same LCD and EVF resolution. My guess is that Sony wants to have a camera in everybody's hands but letting it clear (specially in markets in developing countries, like mine) this doesn't mess with the other cameras, because most people here wouldn't recognize the true value of a cam with a 900 k (or more) LCD and EVF over one with 400 k.

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2014 at 23:51 UTC as 19th comment
On article Mockups emerge of new Olympus OM-D 'OM-G' (333 comments in total)

Hahaha, April Fools'! Even if it were true, I couldn't believe their first attempt into FF would be so ugly.

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2014 at 00:57 UTC as 83rd comment
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Review (499 comments in total)

Only Canon I see can deliver an alternative I would choose instead (if I could afford), even if it were 90 % of the RX10's capabilities in all aspects (for the same price), including the lens range and aperture (a 24-200mm, ƒ/3.5, or a 30-200 2.8, or 24-160 2.8). Canon's new 1.5-in sensor has an area 126 % larger than the 1-in sensor's and this latter has a crop factor of 1.47 x related to Canon's, which means that, even if Canon stick to a 24-200 3.5, this aperture would be equivalent to 2.4 if it were the RX's lens.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2014 at 13:15 UTC as 62nd comment
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Review (499 comments in total)

What a lens! What a sensor-lens integration! What an output! What a camera! A masterpiece. Is the price high? Depends. I don't think it's cheap, but considering the reviews and the lack of direct competition...

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2014 at 17:37 UTC as 71st comment | 2 replies
On article Kodak reborn: A look at JK Imaging's 2014 lineup (201 comments in total)

I don't remember Kodak ever wanting that much to compete with Canon and Nikon, for instance, at least in terms of IQ. It was mostly about cheap and average products. Their appealing, as I remember, used to be about offering something different, interesting, trendy, but average image quality. If we look at Kodak with the right eyes, these offers seem adequate and make all sense. I had a V570 and it had just average IQ, but it was an very interesting camera featurewise, designwise, and even constructionwise. The problem is that Kodak wasn't keeping up in the average and was playing mostly in the cheap and very cheap market. These products may put Kodak back where they belong. I hope they go into production.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2014 at 01:26 UTC as 57th comment | 3 replies
On article Nikon D4s unboxing: It's arrived! (258 comments in total)

I was skeptical if an unboxing slideshow would work nice as videos do, but I liked it. Took less time, the text is concise, and the pictures chosen give you a good look of it.

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2014 at 01:43 UTC as 69th comment | 1 reply

"Digital cameras have been following film cameras to catch up with the quality of film. We've reached that point now, so going forward, the voyage will be undertaken without a chart to guide us." (Wow! What an end!)

"Maybe if someone invents a potion for eternal life, that will be the day that people will stop wanting to record events. But as long as our lives are limited, I believe that people will continue to want to capture memories." (Yeah, that's true!)

Quite rare to find brainy-quote-like statements in the these CP+ 2014 interviews.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 04:15 UTC as 57th comment

Although there weren't as many (at first glance) appealing products, I think Canon is in the right direction, and they do not sound that much conservative to me. Well, kind of, when it comes to their low grade compacts, but there's not much to do about it and it could be risky to invest more having not that bad smartphones playing around. Integration sounds better.

Regarding mirrorless, I have mixed feelings. Thinking as a consumer, it seems they're wasting time not being agressive in this market. Business-wise, though, seems like they're (re-)working on something very nice but being quite cautious not to harm their preciou$ DSLR business.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 03:52 UTC as 58th comment
On article CP+ 2014: Things we found that had been cut in half (107 comments in total)
In reply to:

qwertyasdf: Always wanna know, how did they do it?

Yeah, me too! I looked for this process on YT but nothing until now. If anyone has anything about it, please, show us. The interesting thing is that it is not a new process. I remember already seeing pictures of cameras and lenses cut in half in my childhood in the 80s. My guess is they use a very thin line coated with, I don't know, diamond perhaps?, and this line runs in a loop and very fast, as a chain in a chainsaw. Am I tripping too much? Or a water jet cutter as mentioned?

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2014 at 16:24 UTC
On article CP+ 2014: Things we found that had been cut in half (107 comments in total)
In reply to:

completelyrandomstuff: A Canon 200-400mm cut in half is a lot of waste. Makes me sad just looking at it.

You must not like Canon, because all lenses about the same focal length range and aperture have nearly the same amount of complexity.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2014 at 16:14 UTC
On article A look inside Sigma's lens factory (89 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThomasSwitzerland: The Sigma factory tour reminds me of our German and Swiss machinery industry. Very similar people and dedication. But a high level of still basic handwork at Sigma and outdated installations.

I admire Sigma and use their cameras and great lenses.

Nevertheless, this video reminds me when working in German machinery engineering about 25 years ago.

The only one manufacturer of lenses in Germany now is Leica. But Leica has not got innovation, runs unclear “Mythos” niches, and their capital basis is weak. Presently, they invest into factory automation. Sigma has got better foundations and outlook by serving the markets of the future. They got vision and produce innovation.

If Sigma make smart investments into top factory automation and process flows, they get the chance to conquer the markets as dominant quality and innovation leaders. I will support them as consumer, buying unique Foveon cameras and their outstanding art lenses.

Continue smart and courageous, Sigma, you will win.

Sigma is a winner already. Its one of the best lens makers, has a good reputation, innovates, and sells well, but just as happens to any other, some lenses do not do great and some do. So, I don't agree with your "Sigma, you will win."

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2014 at 18:37 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II: a quick summary (533 comments in total)

Canon just started a sensor size of its own and I'm very glad to see this. Investing in sensors in the 1-in and 4/3 size range is just the way to go when it comes to anything but a phone camera. Canon hit it right on. The only thing in didn't like about this camera is its design. Not that it's bad designed or ugly, but I don't like the top plate having the same looks of Olympus mirroless, and the lens to body looks a bit of a Frankestein operation. I wonder if the very same camera were designed by Panasonic. Well, congratulations to Canon. This is a very nice launch and a favorite of mine already.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2014 at 14:34 UTC as 30th comment
On article Sony a7R teardown! Roger Cicala gets his hands dirty (135 comments in total)
In reply to:

new boyz: Some say Sony or Samsung will never be able to make a good camera because they are electronic based companies, not photography based like the big two. This article reminds us that maybe an electronic company actually makes better camera, from hardware point of view. Now, where's the firmware update, Sony?

Those 'some' probably don't know (or remember) Sony has been partnershipping with photography company for almost two decades now, that even before that they already made nice video cameras (hardware-wise as well) and that, most recently, they bought Minolta. Or maybe those 'some' know but continue to ignore the facts. Sony has coming a long way. Truly investing in being a real competitor. It wasn't overnight.

But, there's something curious about that being (probably) cheaper to produce, because it means Sony's been making a heck of a profit out of their mirroless full-frame line. But, they're alone. What can they do but overvalue this category "of theirs"?

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2014 at 01:46 UTC
On article Pictures emerge showing widely-leaked Fujfilm 'X-T1' (372 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: Wow-wow-wow!, but... More fullframes, pleeeeease! The more APSs, the less expensive FFs are kept from being, and I'm tired of that. I can't stand the fact 20 years ago the poorest of the poor could have an FF and nowadays is this funny situation. And yet, some people, not the poor of the poorest nor even the poor, but the middle-class, debate over and get proud of their 8-mm to 16-mm (equiv) sized-sensor cams. Pff! What a heck!

It's not only about the DoF. There are other interesting things about FF. For example, substancial body and natural toy effect. Once again, I'm not against smaller sensors. They have their merits and they'll always be the majority (they—M4/3s, for instance—are obviously much more convenient and versaltile). I just don't understand makers making FF cams to be sitting in the premium price range. Though smaller are preferred, I bet with you that if they sold FF cams starting at, let's say, 750 bucks, man, believe me, the sales would be huge. Maybe never surpass smaller sensor cams, but they would be enough to justify lower prices. And that Leica S2?, with that—wow!—56 % larger sensor than FF?, but still TWO TIMES SMALLER than the widely used (and quite accessible; compared) 645 format? Ha! What a joke. Only Santa can buy that.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2014 at 11:54 UTC
Total: 174, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »