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: 208, showing: 121 – 140
« First‹ Previous56789Next ›Last »
In reply to:

VadymA: The majority of Nikon customers are still waiting for D400... Hopelessly?

Hardly the majority . . . not even close.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 8, 2013 at 23:58 UTC

IQ came first - that was the no compromise issue.
Size, weight, (cost?) secondary within reason.
Today's best performing lenses are highly telecentric and thus are much longer in physical length than their film-lens ancestors and have much more complex optical designs.

I doubt I'd ever own one of these lenses - I hope that uncompromised IQ includes:
- Very good sharpness across the frame (into the extreme corners) wide open
- Excellent sharpness across the frame stopped down just a bit before diffraction starts kicking in
- APO-like performance
- Very good bokeh
- Very low residual spherical aberrations wide open so that it can used to shoot stars with fast shutter speeds/low ISO

As a landscape lens the weight is an issue for me unless I'm not far from home. It also appears to be pretty large so it takes up a lot of space either in the bag or while mounted on the camera thus limiting it's appeal in some circumstances.

Hope those that buy it are pleased with it's performance!

Direct link | Posted on Aug 7, 2013 at 18:22 UTC as 37th comment | 4 replies
On Nikkor 18-140mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR hints at mid-range DSLR article (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

Neodp: A. Beside overly costly(now), it's too slow. You don't just make/buy slow lenses; because you might be able to do higher ISO. We need both, fast, wide aperture, and cleaner, higher ISO. Clean up ISO 3200, and give us f/1.8, and now you're talking. How much money is wasted on "kit" lenses? How is that a value?

B. It not fast lenses, or the color depth of sensors, that can be beat back(in design balances), it's having ultra-wide, and ultra-tele, in the same lens. Until, tiny sensor somehow improve. The (current) necessity, and showing up under all photography types, is the good light (color & B&W) tonality! Also, including the better DR, and lower noise. Camera's are light gatherers. Make them so.

On the contrary - most people I know that have an APS-C DSLR love the all in one super zoom lenses because they never have to take it off.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2013 at 21:57 UTC
On Nikkor 18-140mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR hints at mid-range DSLR article (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

KGP: Well lets see what DX lenses has Nikon introduce the last 3 years:

1) 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6
2) Micro 40mm f/2.8
3) 18-300mm f/4.5-5.6
4) 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6

Is that a serious support for DX system?
Where is the wide pancake fast primes?
A serious ultra wide zoom?
A dedicated portrait lens @ ~60mm f/1.4?
An upgrade to the old 17-55mm f/2.8?
A tele zoom @ 50-150mm f/2.8?

Nikon has left DX unsupported, just aiming to the entry level target group. The game is on the FX right now, and maybe in the mirrorless segment if something better than the 1 series finally breaks through.

My opinion is that Nikon knows that DX will go mirrorless soon and hence has not put a significant effort into DSLR-DX-specific lenses.
A mirrorless DX Nikon will need a whole new set of lenses (plus an adapter to work with the old).

We'll see what happens in the next couple of years.

As a D800 user I've started putting together a m43 system because Nikon did not have a serious contender in the Nikon 1 system compared to m43 or even the APS-C mirrorless cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2013 at 21:52 UTC
On 17 signs that you were alive before digital photography article (149 comments in total)

I'm glad you only limited it to 17 items since I'm sure I would have know the next 17 more that you could have come up with and you didn't really go all that far back (I'm 49 years old).

I still have some film stuff left over, not because I'm collecting it, but rather I just haven't bothered to get rid of it yet.

My kids look at some of my old slides on a slide table and they can't understand how you make a big picture of them on a computer.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 2, 2013 at 16:46 UTC as 62nd comment | 1 reply
On 5 Reasons why I haven't used my DSLR for months article (591 comments in total)
In reply to:

NancyP: Different cameras for different uses? Fine.

Yep, I'm with you. I'm in the process of pairing down my DSLR gear to the minimum and investing in m43 bodies and lenses due to the size, weight and IQ they have which is very much good enough for about 1/2 of what I do. It won't replace my D800 in many situations, but now my D800 doesn't need to come out all that often.

Now I'll have my FX gear for when focusing speed and IQ are a must and a m43 kit for everything else.

It's nice to have good options and be able to exercise them when appropriate.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 1, 2013 at 01:46 UTC
On Nikon Coolpix AW110 preview (91 comments in total)
In reply to:

jhinkey: I tried the Panasonic and the Nikon waterproof cameras and bought the Panasonic.
That being said it was certainly the lesser of two evils. Neither gave very decent image quality and the autofocus was pretty bad. Battery life is terrible.

I wish someone would make a waterproof camera that I would be the intended target audience for - i.e, someone who owns a DSLR and m43 camera and knows what fantastic and horrible image quality and af performance is.

I would not expect DSLR or m43/APS-C mirrorless quality from these ruggedized cameras, but at least give me LX-7 like image IQ, OIS, and AF performance in a waterproof/rugged package. These cameras are barely one step above smartphone image quality.

Yes I know it will not be inexpensive to produce such a thing, but that's OK as I'm willing to pay for the convenience of a small form factor over the hulking behemoth that is putting a DSLR or m43 mirrorless is in a waterproof housing . . .

It's not the casing, but the electronic components that they use which bring these cameras down.
Slow AF, slow lenses, poor OIS, poor battery life, lack of RAW support, etc.
We're not talking about a dive quality casing where you can take it 10 meters underwater, but just as they've advertised it's usage - near the surface pressure capability and drop-resistance.

I think they've made them poor performing to make up for the increased cost of making it water proof and damage resistant to keep the price point low.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 6, 2013 at 15:29 UTC
On Nikon Coolpix AW110 preview (91 comments in total)

I tried the Panasonic and the Nikon waterproof cameras and bought the Panasonic.
That being said it was certainly the lesser of two evils. Neither gave very decent image quality and the autofocus was pretty bad. Battery life is terrible.

I wish someone would make a waterproof camera that I would be the intended target audience for - i.e, someone who owns a DSLR and m43 camera and knows what fantastic and horrible image quality and af performance is.

I would not expect DSLR or m43/APS-C mirrorless quality from these ruggedized cameras, but at least give me LX-7 like image IQ, OIS, and AF performance in a waterproof/rugged package. These cameras are barely one step above smartphone image quality.

Yes I know it will not be inexpensive to produce such a thing, but that's OK as I'm willing to pay for the convenience of a small form factor over the hulking behemoth that is putting a DSLR or m43 mirrorless is in a waterproof housing . . .

Direct link | Posted on Jul 6, 2013 at 04:07 UTC as 50th comment | 3 replies
On Roundup: Digital Cameras for Kids article (64 comments in total)

Don't underestimate the ability if today's kids to adsorb and master complicated things. My two 9 year olds constantly surprise me in their ability to quickly become proficient with electronic gadgets of any sort.

Heck, one of my girls frequently asks for my D800 (with 50/1.8G or 50/1.2 AIS attached) and takes very respectable images (of course under strict supervision) - the only issue is that it's too big/heavy for her hands.

I've been thinking of getting her a used Panasonic G3 and kit lens for a few hundred $$ - it's small, light, has a viewfinder (I find it's tough for kids my girls age to hand-hold a point and shoot very well), and takes very decent video.

She currently has a Nikon S30 which is fine, except the image quality sucks and she can clearly see that.

This list is a good start, but there are plenty more kid-friendly cameras out there for sure and even used last generation m43 cameras can be a great camera for a kid that is proficient with electronic stuff.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 22, 2013 at 17:48 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply
On Roger Cicala gets inTouit with a new Zeiss lens article (46 comments in total)

Very cool to see - thanks Roger!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 13, 2013 at 23:40 UTC as 17th comment
On Samsung introduces 10mm F3.5 Fisheye for NX article (101 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nikonworks: Such an announcement should have the 35mm equivalency mentioned.
( or am I just dating myself? )

With fisheye lenses it's hard to define a FF equivalent due to the choices in the design of the fisheye. For instance Nikon has made both at 16/2.8 and 16/3.5 fisheye and even though they have the same focal length the f/2.8 covers 180 deg. while the f/3.5 version covers 170 degrees.

So it depends on entirely on the projection used in the design of the fisheye.

It also depends on the sensor format diagonal dimensions.

So, yes you are just dating yourself a bit. Everyone really should be talking diagonal Field of View (FOV) or something like that to have an equivalent between lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2013 at 17:17 UTC
In reply to:

jhinkey: Hardly a thoughtful piece - it's completely emotional.

One has to approach this event with wide open eyes regarding the realities of how people access and consume information in today's digital age where almost everyone has an imaging device on them and swiftness reigns supreme over accuracy and quality of reporting and imaging.

I don't like the way things are going in the news business, but that's the way it is.

We'll see if not having these 28 photographers on staff, but instead having images come from elsewhere will improve their bottom line - time will tell.

Therein lies the problem - a lack of rational thought in opinions.

When I saw the word "thoughtful" in the article description I thought I would read a thoughtful opinion, not emotional ruminations.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 7, 2013 at 23:39 UTC
In reply to:

jhinkey: Hardly a thoughtful piece - it's completely emotional.

One has to approach this event with wide open eyes regarding the realities of how people access and consume information in today's digital age where almost everyone has an imaging device on them and swiftness reigns supreme over accuracy and quality of reporting and imaging.

I don't like the way things are going in the news business, but that's the way it is.

We'll see if not having these 28 photographers on staff, but instead having images come from elsewhere will improve their bottom line - time will tell.

"Opinion page is there for the addition of emotion to a news story."

Opinion does not equal emotion nor vice-versa.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 7, 2013 at 23:19 UTC

Hardly a thoughtful piece - it's completely emotional.

One has to approach this event with wide open eyes regarding the realities of how people access and consume information in today's digital age where almost everyone has an imaging device on them and swiftness reigns supreme over accuracy and quality of reporting and imaging.

I don't like the way things are going in the news business, but that's the way it is.

We'll see if not having these 28 photographers on staff, but instead having images come from elsewhere will improve their bottom line - time will tell.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 7, 2013 at 22:41 UTC as 20th comment | 7 replies
On Gifty concept camera produces instant flipbooks article (30 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Why would anyone want one of these things?
Would they actually pay money to own one?

My 9 year old girls would love one of these . . . . especially if reasonably priced and rugged enough to dropped occasionally

Direct link | Posted on May 23, 2013 at 15:46 UTC

Compared to the 50/1.8G FX and 35/1.8G DX lenses this seems overpriced. Granted it's not that simple, but a 4x price factor?
2x at most seems appropriate.

Direct link | Posted on May 14, 2013 at 23:21 UTC as 44th comment

Nice, but not $900 nice . . . .

Although an avid Nikon user for some time now - I've recently added some m43 gear to my kit because Nikon came out with a very anemic 1 system. I couldn't wait anymore for a compact, high IQ system with non-dumbed down bodies and a decent lens selection.
The V-2 was a step in the right direction, but it was too little too late as it lacks features that I think should have been there. Plus the lack of anything seriously wide or a fisheye or other fast primes aggravates the situation.

Nikon is playing catch-up to m43 and needs to get serious real fast with high quality glass that's not outrageously costly nor larger than the m43 equivalent.

Part of me wishes they would build something to compete with the Fuji XE-1 offerings.

Direct link | Posted on May 14, 2013 at 22:13 UTC as 46th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

sjvr11767: Look, I think Adobe could make this work if:
(1) They lowered the price. (It should be cheaper than it would have cost you to upgrade CS over the same period of time as between different versions.)
(2) Allowed you to pay, at a reduced cost, for the entire year's subscription in advance. (They might very well do this.)
(3) Gave greater freedom in picking which products you subscribe to.
(4) Provided a program that would, even after you stopped your subscription, allow you to at least view and export your files.

If the price was right, and they had a Lightroom + Photoshop CC package then I might actually go for it.

Yes, have a stand alone version as now and a cloud version.
Also, a version of Photoshop geared JUST to photographers as opposed to graphic artists would be a great option.
Allow me the option to pay more for the stand-alone version of PS if that's what I prefer (I'll pay for the perpetual use capability).
Allow me the option of paying for the creative cloud version if that works for me.

Don't force me into the CC option when that doesn't make sense for me (aka you lose my business).

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2013 at 22:24 UTC
On Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction article (1879 comments in total)

Since many photographers (not graphics artists who heavily modify their images and still call it photography) don't use most of Photoshop, why not split Photoshop into a full version and a stripped down version with the features that most photographers only need.

I personally only use a handful of Photoshop features - I could use LR, but I absolutely detest the workflow that I'm forced to use - and would love to have a perpetual license version of Photoshop for Photographers option. Leave the CC version on subscription for those who need full PS capabilities and the latest and greatest feature releases.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2013 at 15:16 UTC as 389th comment | 4 replies
On Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction article (1879 comments in total)
In reply to:

DotCom Editor: This is horrendous reporting. Not a single tough question. No meaty follow-up questions. Nothing pithy.

-- How many users does Adobe expect to lose as a result of this strategy? How was that figured in?
-- What about longtime loyal users who can't afford this scheme?
-- What is Corel's reaction? Does it plan to step up marketing Paintshop Pro? What about other competitors with photo-editing programs?
-- Has anyone chased down former Adobe executives for their opinions?
-- What about the Wall Street analysts who follow Adobe?
-- What about Edelman, Adobe's PR agency? How are they handling the backlash?
-- And many more...

I've been doing technology journalism for decades and knew the founders of Adobe -- Chuck Geschke and John Warnock very well, writing numerous stories about them over the years. Who's chasing them down for their reaction to their company's arrogant, money-grubbing scheme?

This is very big news, people are outraged, and no one is chasing the REAL story.

More of a press release for Adobe propagated through DPR than an actual interview.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2013 at 15:05 UTC
Total: 208, showing: 121 – 140
« First‹ Previous56789Next ›Last »