ManuelVilardeMacedo

ManuelVilardeMacedo

Lives in Portugal Portugal
Joined on Mar 1, 2012

Comments

Total: 1045, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Readers' Showcase: Steve Badger article (72 comments in total)
In reply to:

Altruisto: Technically ok but no "vision" , no "personal touch". Though everything has been already photographed , there's "uniqueness" in the true artistic photos that convey the photograph universe. I'm sorry to say that there's no such a thing in these photos. They look like technical photos in "gear review websites". Oh, Goodness!
With all the good amateur photographers revolving around Dpreview, why choosing this one, and why no series of photos instead of this constellation of different takes?

I agree with Altruisto. Marvellous landscapes almost reaching technical perfection... what's new about it? There are zillions of pictures like these ones out there! Where's the will to convey something new, or to express a personal viewpoint?
It's fair to except picture #7, though: that picture says something about life and stimulates imagination (to a certain degree at least).
Oh, by the way - horizon in #4 is unlevelled.

Direct link | Posted on May 4, 2015 at 09:58 UTC
On Massive $33,500 2450mm f/8 NASA lens surfaces on eBay article (216 comments in total)
In reply to:

Digitall: Something that torments me and wonder why that NASA does not keep these objects to the museum itself, or has more units?
Or is in need of money to fund projects?:)

Neither. They just wanted to have fun reading our comments.

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2015 at 15:11 UTC
On Massive $33,500 2450mm f/8 NASA lens surfaces on eBay article (216 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hugo808: What's the EQV focal length on micro 4/3s?

No, Vermeero, that's in absolute terms. With micro 4/3 you multiply everything by x2: focal length, aperture, ISO, shutter speed, battery life, price, silliness of comments. Only bokeh is divided by :2. I have an Olympus E-P1 and found its neck strap to be twice as strong as the one bundled with the Canon 5D.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 10:13 UTC
On Massive $33,500 2450mm f/8 NASA lens surfaces on eBay article (216 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hugo808: What's the EQV focal length on micro 4/3s?

You're welcome ;)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 29, 2015 at 09:27 UTC
On Massive $33,500 2450mm f/8 NASA lens surfaces on eBay article (216 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hugo808: What's the EQV focal length on micro 4/3s?

And let's not forget it will be equivalent to an f/16 lens on a micro 4/3 camera. But then again the prodigious IBIS in the latest Olympus cameras might allow you to shoot it hand-held.
Hopefully Mentalbones is already working on a Speedbooster for this.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 29, 2015 at 08:57 UTC

Interesting pictures but lacking artistic content. The world needs a new W. Eugene Smith.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 21, 2015 at 11:48 UTC as 6th comment
On Readers' Showcase: Rodger Kingston article (52 comments in total)

Rodger, I know you from the always fascinating comment columns of 'The Online Photographer'. I had the chance to take a look at your pictures previously. They're great. Congrats. Hope there are many more to come.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2015 at 17:53 UTC as 25th comment
On Sony FE 28mm F2 samples gallery posted article (97 comments in total)

And I thought my poor old Zuiko OM 28mm-f/3.5 had too much barrel distortion...

Direct link | Posted on Apr 5, 2015 at 18:55 UTC as 21st comment
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: I don't see the need for this kind of aperture on an ultra wide-angle lens. It might be useful for shooting in dimly lit locations with no tripod or flash, but aren't wide-angle lenses supposed to keep everything sharp? I surely need good depth of field when I shoot landscapes and interiors. I'd trade f/0.95 for f/22.
The bokeh mania is driving people nuts.

Astrotripper: "It's pretty clear that the only person here suffering from bokeh mania is you."
Sorry to say it so plainly, but you've crushed the end-stops of stupidity.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2015 at 17:03 UTC
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: I don't see the need for this kind of aperture on an ultra wide-angle lens. It might be useful for shooting in dimly lit locations with no tripod or flash, but aren't wide-angle lenses supposed to keep everything sharp? I surely need good depth of field when I shoot landscapes and interiors. I'd trade f/0.95 for f/22.
The bokeh mania is driving people nuts.

"Sorry if you have a limited imagination..." This from someone whose only interest is gear. Oh well.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2015 at 10:15 UTC
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: I don't see the need for this kind of aperture on an ultra wide-angle lens. It might be useful for shooting in dimly lit locations with no tripod or flash, but aren't wide-angle lenses supposed to keep everything sharp? I surely need good depth of field when I shoot landscapes and interiors. I'd trade f/0.95 for f/22.
The bokeh mania is driving people nuts.

...Because all of you would use this lens for astrophotography, right? Oh, those stars with creamy bokeh... Spare me!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2015 at 07:58 UTC

I don't see the need for this kind of aperture on an ultra wide-angle lens. It might be useful for shooting in dimly lit locations with no tripod or flash, but aren't wide-angle lenses supposed to keep everything sharp? I surely need good depth of field when I shoot landscapes and interiors. I'd trade f/0.95 for f/22.
The bokeh mania is driving people nuts.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 2, 2015 at 22:55 UTC as 29th comment | 18 replies
On DPReview Recommends: Selfie-Sticks article (137 comments in total)
In reply to:

aftab: Some elitist comments here. Not surprising.

Because people need selfie sticks, right?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 1, 2015 at 23:18 UTC
On DPReview Recommends: Selfie-Sticks article (137 comments in total)
In reply to:

Paul Guba: Is this an April Fools joke? Really DP Review recommends selfie sticks. We come a long way baby and its all downhill from here.

It was just an excuse to crack the *your arm* joke. Let it go.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 1, 2015 at 20:25 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Review preview (649 comments in total)
In reply to:

maxnimo: If this camera had a 50mm equiv. lens I'd be far more likely to buy it.

I guess I'm an old-fashioned, outdated oddball.

Alexis, you win. 35mm have no distortion and are the perfect tool for street photography. Are you happy now?
(I keep forgetting I should never counter a troll...)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 19:32 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Review preview (649 comments in total)
In reply to:

maxnimo: If this camera had a 50mm equiv. lens I'd be far more likely to buy it.

I guess I'm an old-fashioned, outdated oddball.

Alexis, I was talking about street photography, not portraits. I have done lots of 'street photography' (or rather 'photography in the streets') with a 34mm efl lens and with standard lenses, so I think I know what I'm talking about.
I cited HC-B not because I'm trying to emulate his photography - that'd be pretentious at best - but because he'd feel uncomfortable imposing himself on people - which would be mandatory if he'd used a 35mm lens. Some people don't enjoy having a lens pointed at their nose, that's all. Sometimes it's better not to get too close.
The Fuji X100's ethos was to be the perfect tool for street photography, but I think otherwise. Of course you are free to disagree with me, but I believe I'm entitled to an opinion.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 10:36 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Review preview (649 comments in total)
In reply to:

maxnimo: If this camera had a 50mm equiv. lens I'd be far more likely to buy it.

I guess I'm an old-fashioned, outdated oddball.

I'm with maxnimo. I never understood the myth that you need a 35mm lens - or equivalent - for street photography. You have to get uncomfortably close to people, which may cause the distortion inherent to wide-angle lenses to settle in. Besides, objects in the background can appear too small. And - not that I'm a 'bokeh' fanatic, but it's a factor - you get too much depth of field. I'd say 35mm is terrible for street photography. Curiously, Cartier-Bresson thought that too: he used standard lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 00:16 UTC
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: Not really my thing. Of course the picture of the fat guy and the seagulls is hilarious, but the digital manipulation in some pictures reminds me of the appallingly kitsch pictures (if we can call them that) by Dave Hill.
It is far to say, however, that the samples chosen for this article are far from being the best pictures Mr Bradshaw ever made. The 'Venice' and 'Navajo' series, as shown on his website, say much more about his mastery than the pictures on display here.
I understand 99% of DPR readers are curious about gear, but I find it unnecessary to post a picture of the photographer's equipment everytime an article of this kind is published. For professionals like Dean Bradshaw the cameras and lenses are nothing more than tools that help them accomplish their job the way they want.
Anyway, it's always a great thing to expand one's knowledge about the state of today's photography and its masters, so I think a thank you to DPR is called for.

(*) It is FAIR to say. Sorry for the typo.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 22, 2015 at 14:32 UTC

Not really my thing. Of course the picture of the fat guy and the seagulls is hilarious, but the digital manipulation in some pictures reminds me of the appallingly kitsch pictures (if we can call them that) by Dave Hill.
It is far to say, however, that the samples chosen for this article are far from being the best pictures Mr Bradshaw ever made. The 'Venice' and 'Navajo' series, as shown on his website, say much more about his mastery than the pictures on display here.
I understand 99% of DPR readers are curious about gear, but I find it unnecessary to post a picture of the photographer's equipment everytime an article of this kind is published. For professionals like Dean Bradshaw the cameras and lenses are nothing more than tools that help them accomplish their job the way they want.
Anyway, it's always a great thing to expand one's knowledge about the state of today's photography and its masters, so I think a thank you to DPR is called for.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 22, 2015 at 12:56 UTC as 24th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Boss of Sony: Would this lens be good for photographing birds in flight? I'm thinking the wider angle will enable me to photograph birds with a larger wing span?

Hi, Boss of Sony. This is me, the president of the Silliest Comment Of The Year (SCOTY) award committee. I am honoured do announce you this comment is now no. 1 in our ranks. Congratulations.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2015 at 23:12 UTC
Total: 1045, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »