jhinkey

jhinkey

Lives in United States Seattle, WA, United States
Works as a Aerospace Engineering Consultant
Has a website at www.hinkey.zenfolio.com
Joined on Dec 27, 2005

Comments

Total: 313, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Your last full paragraph above is what frustrates me about Nikon sometimes - poor implementation of a great feature. What camera expert at Nikon OK'd the EFCS implementation on the D810? The EFCS on the D810 is one of the killer features, but it's so poorly implemented that it's just not worth it to upgrade from my D800.

Regarding other systems - the same happens with the A7r and the 70-200/4 OSS - completely unusable with OSS on.

And regarding the statements below that this was not seen with 12 or 16MP FX sensors - true it will be less noticeable, but it will very much be there and noticeable. From 16 to 36MP is only a 50% resolution increase and this OSS/shutter-induced blur seen is far more than 1 pixel at 36MP.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2015 at 23:42 UTC as 17th comment | 1 reply

I see nothing inherently wrong with citizens photographing/making video of public servants performing their duties as long as:
(1) They do not interfere with the police action
(2) They, while photographing/making video, do not shirk their citizen responsibility to act if needed to assist the situation if necessary - meaning don't stand there with a camera while someone is getting beaten, abused, needs medical assistance, etc.
Though I'm an avid supporter of the police in general, they are human too and bad apples need to be rooted out. Here in Seattle there have been multiple incidents where the police clearly have gotten out of control or behaved inappropriately - as well as many equal incidents where the people the police are trying to arrest are out of control. Taking images of police goes both ways - both supporting the police AND supporting those being arrested, etc. by the police.
People tend to "behave" better when recorded - and that's a good thing.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 7, 2015 at 16:56 UTC as 20th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Ben O Connor: Cheapest set achieved for landscape photographers (architecture, various engineering, etc.)

EM-5II + 10,5 F O.95 Voightlander+ Dead steady tripod!

Total of 2.500€, worth every dime.

One of the real issues with ultra-wides is how it deals with ghosting and flare since invariably for many many images this lens will be used for there will be some sort of bright light in the frame - sun, lights, etc., etc.
The other is distortion - it it gets out of control it can be a real problem even for landscape-type shots.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 5, 2015 at 00:03 UTC
In reply to:

JhvaElohimMeth: Still waiting for a compact and moderately fast ultrawide fixed lens for 4/3

+1
Don't need utra-fast 10mm, just give me f/2.8 (heck even f/2 would be great) and excellent wide open performance in a reasonably compact/light design.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 5, 2015 at 00:00 UTC

All I wanted for my m43 bodies was a 10mm f/2.8 that was excellent wide open and did not weigh 500+ grams . . . .

Still, this could be pretty cool . . . if it really is very very good wide open.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2015 at 23:50 UTC as 12th comment
On DPReview Recommends: Selfie-Sticks article (136 comments in total)

Now we know how Allison broke her arm - someone objected to her taking a selfie with it!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 1, 2015 at 21:12 UTC as 57th comment
In reply to:

jhinkey: The patent office these days will grant just about any silly patent. If GP wanted to protect this they should trademark the specifics of the shape so no one can make an exact duplicate.

The claims consistently and repeatedly call out a square camera or a cube. It's an integral part of the claims and patent.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 1, 2015 at 20:39 UTC

The patent office these days will grant just about any silly patent. If GP wanted to protect this they should trademark the specifics of the shape so no one can make an exact duplicate.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 1, 2015 at 19:32 UTC as 20th comment | 5 replies
On Sony Alpha a7 II Review preview (796 comments in total)
In reply to:

jhinkey: "All the size/weight advantages of not having a mirror mechanism are negated the second you try to squeeze an IBIS system inside the body."

Hardly. It's still smaller and lighter than the D750.

Who is the editor of these articles?

"The point is simply this: the a7 II has the feel and heft of a DSLR. Yes, it isn't as large as a Nikon D750 (or any full frame DSLR) but, it is substantially heavier than the original a7. If you're coming from just about any other mirrorless camera, you'll likely find the a7 II to be chunky and hefty."
But that's NOT what you said in the article. Semantics count.
It's still significantly lighter and smaller than a D750. Mirrorless is not all about the size and weight. I would gladly take a mirrorless version of my D800 even if it had the same size and weight.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 1, 2015 at 01:57 UTC
On Sony Alpha a7 II Review preview (796 comments in total)
In reply to:

jhinkey: "All the size/weight advantages of not having a mirror mechanism are negated the second you try to squeeze an IBIS system inside the body."

Hardly. It's still smaller and lighter than the D750.

Who is the editor of these articles?

But the author's statement is definitive - and it most certainly is not.
I weighs 28% less (nearly half a pound), is 26mm shorter, 19mm less wide, and 17mm less depth than the D750.
That is not a negation, not even close in my book.
Put an IBIS system in the D750 and see how much more it will weigh and how much thicker/depth it will have.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 31, 2015 at 22:55 UTC
On Sony Alpha a7 II Review preview (796 comments in total)

"All the size/weight advantages of not having a mirror mechanism are negated the second you try to squeeze an IBIS system inside the body."

Hardly. It's still smaller and lighter than the D750.

Who is the editor of these articles?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 31, 2015 at 22:38 UTC as 155th comment | 12 replies

Wow, it is a tough crowd.
How many of you have tried to shoot such a fast moving subject in such dim lighting? This would be a challenge with FX gear and you'd have to resort to full on f/2.8 FX primes.
Yes, I agree the pics are not museum of fine art worthy, but for what they are or are meant to be they seem just fine.

I think most are reacting to the large DOF and are expecting more OOF backgrounds. That's just a limitation of the format and available lenses.
Would have liked to seen the 42.5/1.2 Pany being used (why just Oly lenses?).

Direct link | Posted on Mar 30, 2015 at 22:40 UTC as 8th comment | 11 replies

I've seen Allison in person and would have never thought of her doing roller derby . . . good for her!

Nice video.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 29, 2015 at 02:09 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

sierranvin: An aside on "sunbursts". Wowie, zowie. Is one style or rendering of this totally fake artifact of current era equipment configurations seriously supposed to rock the photography world's boat??? What will their relative merit or meaning be when someone adds artificial intelligence to a future (5yrs? 10yrs?), vastly more powerful microprocessor, allowing the menu option to subtract them every time they appear, seeing as they are mere phoney baloney artifact to begin with?
Always imagining a better world...

+1 Rishi

Direct link | Posted on Mar 7, 2015 at 01:41 UTC
In reply to:

jhinkey: As a wide angle junky, this was a pretty good review - one of the better ones.
With these wides you can only really analyze them the way DPR did - by taking images outside.

My only issue is the flare/ghosting/sun star test was difficult to do because of the rapid change in the sun position - they really should have used three separate D810's to take the images simultaneously.

I'd like to see the same comparison done with the sun at noon in the bright clear blue sky - we'll have that weather next week . . . .

Flare and ghosting comparisons would be great too . . .

Yes, flare/ghosting is very sensitive to light source location and the background image (dark/light, uniform color/patterned, etc.).
Hopefully you can do this kind of test. If you need someone to help out contact me . . . I'm 10 minutes from your offices!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2015 at 17:38 UTC

As a wide angle junky, this was a pretty good review - one of the better ones.
With these wides you can only really analyze them the way DPR did - by taking images outside.

My only issue is the flare/ghosting/sun star test was difficult to do because of the rapid change in the sun position - they really should have used three separate D810's to take the images simultaneously.

I'd like to see the same comparison done with the sun at noon in the bright clear blue sky - we'll have that weather next week . . . .

Flare and ghosting comparisons would be great too . . .

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2015 at 05:55 UTC as 68th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

jhinkey: Here I was hoping that this would have even higher capacity than the 405 - which is just barely adequate for my uses and could use having the gearing re-designed to be even stiffer.

The 410 is too light weight and this is even less capable than that.

Heavyweight gear may a**.

It looks cool and that's about it.

The 400 is only geared in one axis - not applicable here.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2015 at 02:12 UTC

Here I was hoping that this would have even higher capacity than the 405 - which is just barely adequate for my uses and could use having the gearing re-designed to be even stiffer.

The 410 is too light weight and this is even less capable than that.

Heavyweight gear may a**.

It looks cool and that's about it.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2015 at 23:54 UTC as 21st comment | 3 replies

For more information visit the Tokina website . . . . and there is nothing there to be found on this. Nice.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 27, 2015 at 02:27 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Vobluda: I have give a try to Olympus 45/1.8 two times but evenutally sold it as I was not satisfied with its optical performance.
It is plain glass with no asph or ed and it is visible on the pictures (and that is the reason why it is so cheap). For now I have Panasonic 45/2.8 that is slightly more expensive than Olympus 45/1.8 but optically superior.
From what I can see googling new Panasonic 42.5/1.7 will have asph element (s) and that is the reason why I think that it will be much better then Olympus 45/1.8 though a bit more expensive.

I thought the Oly 45/1.8 had to ED-like elements and no aspherics while the new Pany will have no ED elements, but one aspheric.

The one sample of the 45/1.8 Oly I tried was fine in the center, but not quite sharp off-center - I went the 42.5/1.2 route instead, but it's pretty heavy.
If the new Pany is a bit better than the Oly I'm in.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 15:43 UTC
Total: 313, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »