Nuno Souto

Nuno Souto

Lives in Australia Sydney, Australia
Works as a IT damager
Joined on Jul 11, 2007
About me:

Nikon D80,
lots of F-series 35mm Nikon bodies, a Zeiss rangefinder and a few Leica and Voigtlander lenses.
SLR lenses mostly Nikkor - MF and AF/AFS, some Tamron.
Mamiya RB67, Pentax 6x7 and Fuji 645S rangefinder.
Scanner is a beaut 9000 ED and I use Neat Image, ufraw, Focus Magic and GIMP for post-processing.

Comments

Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

Nup, sorry, Nikon. 17 months to finally admit there is an issue and even then it's a service advisory rather than a recall?
I'm sooo glad I gave up on this company and went m4/3 all the way two years ago!
Sick and tired of the disaster Nikon has turned into, at my expense and others who have used their products for decades...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2014 at 07:33 UTC as 131st comment | 1 reply
On Waterproof Canon PowerShot D30 dives deep article (34 comments in total)

Psssst, Canon and other u/w camera makers:
for true u/w photography, be it film or digital, the flash MUST BE AS FAR AWAY from the lens as possible!
Nuff is nuff with these stupid designs of flash-against-lens!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2014 at 11:21 UTC as 4th comment

I know, it's childish.
But...
BWAHAHAHAHAH!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2014 at 10:24 UTC as 122nd comment

Way to go, Nikon marketing!
Grab loaded gun => take aim at foot => pull trigger.
Glad to see the old idiotic ways have not changed one bit...

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2013 at 11:53 UTC as 13th comment
On Swimming with the Nikon 1 AW1 article (199 comments in total)
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: Is it just me or does anyone else think it's just pure lunacy to take an ILC camera underwater without using a dedicated diving case?? Not in a million years would I trust the lens gasket to keep water out....or to submerge the camera in salt water...just crazy.

Yeah. But the Nikonos RS did it, easily. Why not a digital camera?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 5, 2013 at 22:19 UTC
On Swimming with the Nikon 1 AW1 article (199 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: Macro is one of my passions for underwater photography. Used to take a Nikonos for that, now I take a TG1.
Is there a way to produce/take underwater macro shots with this camera and available lenses?

Bugger! That closes it for me, then.
Without native lens macro, it's useless as an UW camera...

Direct link | Posted on Dec 5, 2013 at 22:17 UTC
On Swimming with the Nikon 1 AW1 article (199 comments in total)

Macro is one of my passions for underwater photography. Used to take a Nikonos for that, now I take a TG1.
Is there a way to produce/take underwater macro shots with this camera and available lenses?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 5, 2013 at 13:13 UTC as 51st comment | 5 replies
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: $2700 for a retro camera that isn't, without an EVF?
Thanks for helping me make up my mind, Nikon:
Sony A7R, here I come - just the thing to complement my OlyEM5.
Buh-bye, Nikon.

Exactly. The mirror is a left-over from the film era. Digital cameras do NOT need to be SLR. They can just be SL.
The R is completely redundant and harks back to the days of film when one could not see the ACTUAL image as it was taken through the lens.
With digital we of course can. And for morons who claim they don't want to see photos in tv screens, WTH are you doing then using a computer screen to show your photos?
Get on with the times instead of relying on dinossaur technology!
What, you never heard of the errors introduced into focusing by maladjusted reflex mirrors and prisms+focusing screens?
It's only BY FAR the biggest cause of OOF shots with film and DSLRs!
You haven't used classic cameras much, have you?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 6, 2013 at 03:34 UTC
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)

$2700 for a retro camera that isn't, without an EVF?
Thanks for helping me make up my mind, Nikon:
Sony A7R, here I come - just the thing to complement my OlyEM5.
Buh-bye, Nikon.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 6, 2013 at 01:05 UTC as 431st comment | 9 replies
On Roger Cicala investigates accuracy of lens adapters article (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: Here we go again with the insane "optical bench tests"...
When will this kind stop being taken for granted?
They are destroying photography!

Let me see: a lens adapter mount has a major effect on sharpness, but the entire flip-mirror assembly in a slr doesn't and never has done so?
Oh wait: that flipped up piece of gear is the one primarily responsible for focusing said lenses?

Something that gets flicked up and down at high speed, is "inherently" more exact in its sub-micron positioning than a flat ring of metal held firmly in place by 6 or more screws?

Yeah sure. And I am henceforth to be addressed as Santa Claus.

PS: to the "dear Santa" commentators: wake up and start taking photos of real subjects. Not optical benches!

Are you sure you do? Here is a hint: phase detection is the primary AF mechanism for dslrs. NO, they do NOT use only the imaging sensor, you are confused.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 1, 2013 at 10:12 UTC
On Roger Cicala investigates accuracy of lens adapters article (48 comments in total)

Here we go again with the insane "optical bench tests"...
When will this kind stop being taken for granted?
They are destroying photography!

Let me see: a lens adapter mount has a major effect on sharpness, but the entire flip-mirror assembly in a slr doesn't and never has done so?
Oh wait: that flipped up piece of gear is the one primarily responsible for focusing said lenses?

Something that gets flicked up and down at high speed, is "inherently" more exact in its sub-micron positioning than a flat ring of metal held firmly in place by 6 or more screws?

Yeah sure. And I am henceforth to be addressed as Santa Claus.

PS: to the "dear Santa" commentators: wake up and start taking photos of real subjects. Not optical benches!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 1, 2013 at 00:15 UTC as 15th comment | 2 replies
On Nikon 1 AW1 preview (587 comments in total)

Have any of the reviewers of these "underwater" cameras actually tried to change a setting while underwater? It's virtually impossible to read anything on a lcd screen while diving. That goes for just about all the "underwater" cameras I've tried so far. And of course, I've tried them underwater. Not in a hotel room...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2013 at 00:52 UTC as 63rd comment | 5 replies
On Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review preview (2143 comments in total)

The thing that baffles me is why don't the nay sayers and negative commenters go somewhere else? It's not like there is an obligation to use this camera, FFS!

Don't like it? Use something else, keep your idiotic uninformed opinions to yourself! Yes, that includes the diggloyds of this world!

And let those of us who derive a real advantage from using this system enjoy it, as we do.

Ah yes: we're all gonna give up on it because of your "opinions"?
GMAB!...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2013 at 06:00 UTC as 236th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

pdelux: The Galaxy S3 Camera dont look so dumb now... actually starting to look like a smart Idea. This however is ludicrous.

err... you put it back where you got it from?
(facepalm)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 5, 2013 at 10:22 UTC
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: Oh Sony, this is sooooo wrong! Where is the IBIS which you earlier claimed couldn't be fitted to the NEX series because of size considerations? Who the hell wants a mirrorless camera WITHOUT IBIS? Haven't you learned yet?

Couldn't care less about the price! I'm more than willing to pay top $$$ for a mirrorless with IBIS and a slr-like body. I've done so with my OMD and will do it again with Sony if they do it. Particularly when Sony were the first to claim they couldn't include IBIS in the NEX series due to body size considerations! As for if you can live without IS, that's your choice and problem, just don't make it everyone else's. Capice?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 28, 2013 at 00:05 UTC

Oh Sony, this is sooooo wrong! Where is the IBIS which you earlier claimed couldn't be fitted to the NEX series because of size considerations? Who the hell wants a mirrorless camera WITHOUT IBIS? Haven't you learned yet?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 07:59 UTC as 58th comment | 5 replies

Another one trying to make a name for himself by dissing film and its users.
Soooooooo boring...

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2013 at 00:37 UTC as 17th comment | 1 reply

When will a decent scanner be made to replace Nikon's failed ones? Rather than waste time and resources with this trash!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2013 at 22:19 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
On DxO releases FilmPack 4, with 65 new creative effects article (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

goloby: Or just shot film!!!
I have tried both earlier versions of Dxo Film Pack and current Nik Software and, as a film shooter, none came even close to the actual films. I used raw D90 files. I think it all boils down to 3 insurmountable things:
1. how can you create a plug-in that will make a D4 file and a D5000 file to look exactly the same. Only way to do that is to have different settings for different cameras and I have not seen that. And there are a few hundred digital cameras with raw capture. I would not even mention the others.
2. film captures light differently than digital. To mention a few differences: more tonality, wider dynamic range for professional films. For a digital sensor it is just not there to begin with.

continued in replies

Ignore that site. Most if not all info there is based on dinosaur film, scanned with dinosaur scanners, using antediluvian technique designed to make digital look better. And most of the images are from very bad quality originals, taken with dubious equipment. No, a 50yo clunker loaded with Kodak Gold200 CANNOT take better photos than a modern film/lens/camera combo!!!
Scan it with a modern scanner, apply proper post-processing and outside of a 24MP dslr nothing gets anywhere near. Add-in the excellent dynamic range and the fact it handles over-exposure like no digital sensor can ever hope for and you got a good approximation of reality.
Using digital with filters to emulate the "colour handling" of film is basically ridiculous "touchy-feel" nonsense by pseudo nostalgics who never used quality film workflow to start with!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 7, 2013 at 01:18 UTC
On DxO releases FilmPack 4, with 65 new creative effects article (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: So if film is such an inferior product, why waste time and $$$ making digital look like it?

One example does not a rule make...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 7, 2013 at 01:08 UTC
Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »