ajendus

Lives in United States Chicago, United States
Works as a Film & TV, Director and Cinematographer
Has a website at www.adriangalli.com
Joined on Mar 12, 2010
About me:

Director and cinematographer, foodie, tech guru with a love of travel and photography.

Comments

Total: 30, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

matthew saville: Too bad this "sharpest lens ever" is probably sharpest at its wide-open aperture and maybe ~1 stop down, thanks to diffraction on the 2x crop sensor.

Pentax is finally making a full-frame camera, will Olympus seriously spend the rest of its days dedicated to the 2x crop sensor size? Seems a shame... But then again there's a whole new generation coming that has never stopped down their lenses more than one stop, since they're obsessed with bokeh. Too bad 2x crop is counterproductive to that as well. 'Round in circles the debate goes...

What is your MO, Matthew?

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 14:07 UTC
In reply to:

thx1138: LOL at the price. Seriously delusional. The mirrorless fanbois would be in hysterics if Canikon released a 300 f/4 that cost $2500. Hell the Nikon with DO technology is only $2K and has to be corrected for a 4x larger sensor.

And you have something constructive to say? Or just spew out more sophomoric nonsense?

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 14:03 UTC
In reply to:

Serious Sam: Spends 1.5k $AU on ONE lens on a 16mp APSC system? PLEASE!!!

Add a $AU100 and That the ENTIRE cost of my new Nikon D5500 system. Body + Kit lens(only use at 18mm) and the three 1.8G(s)....

I know some people has money to burn but at least spend it on something has high retain value like Leica lens....

I am speechless.....

Your fervid comment show more a sophomoric perspective than valid opinion.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 01:47 UTC
On article Go wide! Hands-on with Canon's 11-24mm F4 L (229 comments in total)

That's an impressive lens. I'm looking forward to seeing it in action.

For those who balk at the f4 aperture, while I would love to see it at 2.8 or whatever, I think Canon had to make a very important decision. The Nikon 14-24, which I dearly love, is not a small lens. This 11-24 is even bigger. I'd venture a guess that an 11-24 f2.8 would be massive... maybe beyond a functional lens for most photographers. Not to mention, it would likely make it prohibitively expensive. ($3000 is already a very pricey lens.)

Nikon, Canon, Sigma, etc. could make a 14-200 f2.8 lens or a 24-70 f1.4 but I think we all know the same scenario unfolds; huge, expensive, heavy, etc. Lens manufacturers must give way to physics and the economy; law of diminishing returns.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2015 at 23:40 UTC as 16th comment
On article Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path (1592 comments in total)
In reply to:

CaPi: I am told be dealers that it is a completely different shooting experience with a fullf rame. Dont know what to think really. AM I missing out on something or is my APS-C not that different?
hm

Don't worry about it. The differences are mostly in weight and cost. The advantages start getting into nearly philosophical discussion that no one can win.

I'll shoot with anything you put in my hands. Most the advantages and disadvantages I run into are either cause by my ignorance of something the camera can do or can not or design limitations of the camera (ergonomics, for example.)

As an example, I shoot a lot of low angle perspective shots. My Olympus (micro four thirds) is sooo much better at shooting that than my Nikon FF simply because of the articulating screen. I'd have to lay on the ground with my Nikon to achieve the same shot. So are the qualities of my Olympus photos better than my Nikon? Yes, cuz I can get the shot.

Forget the dealers. Go out and shoot!

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2015 at 23:25 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1980 comments in total)
In reply to:

scehotch: DOn't see the point. If you want a video camera, buy one. I can only assume tha the 800E didn't sell and they can make this cheaper than either the d800 or the 800E. No other reasons to have it. And 36mp is still too many

That's an interesting statement. I'd love to know what "proper video" is. That's not a term I'm acquainted with in film/TV. You'll need to qualify your statement.

I don't follow, "Then use 2 systems." I use many systems. Nikon, m43, Alexa, Red, Sony, Canon, etc. There is no real reason to use only one or two systems in cinematography. I wouldn't shoot a documentary with an Alexa and I wouldn't shoot a scifi film with a Canon DSLR. Use the right tool for the right job.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2014 at 15:45 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1980 comments in total)
In reply to:

scehotch: DOn't see the point. If you want a video camera, buy one. I can only assume tha the 800E didn't sell and they can make this cheaper than either the d800 or the 800E. No other reasons to have it. And 36mp is still too many

One of two still systems I frequently use is Nikon. Just because I'm a cinematographer, doesn't mean I don't do anything with photography. The industry is filled with photographer who shoot for film/TV and vice versa.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 15:37 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1980 comments in total)
In reply to:

scehotch: DOn't see the point. If you want a video camera, buy one. I can only assume tha the 800E didn't sell and they can make this cheaper than either the d800 or the 800E. No other reasons to have it. And 36mp is still too many

I don't think we are the one's with the burden of proof as you've made the assertions. Then again, it is hard to prove a negative; really the issue with the argument(s) to begin with. But the D800/E has proven itself and I suspect the D810 will too.

But I am a cinematographer. You've likely seen my work. And while I prefer to shoot with cameras other than DSLRs, they are widely used in film/TV, and when used properly, an effective system for cinema and definitely have their purpose.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2014 at 22:01 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1980 comments in total)
In reply to:

scehotch: DOn't see the point. If you want a video camera, buy one. I can only assume tha the 800E didn't sell and they can make this cheaper than either the d800 or the 800E. No other reasons to have it. And 36mp is still too many

"DOn't see the point."
But there is a point, so...

"If you want a video camera, buy one."
It is a video camera.

"I can only assume tha the 800E didn't sell and they can make this cheaper than either the d800 or the 800E."
Baseless assumption and incorrect conclusion.

"No other reasons to have it."
Reason 1: Take photos. Reason 2: Shoot video.

"And 36mp is still too many."
Baseless statement.

With false assumptions aren't founded on facts, actual data, observations or they are based on subjective data and only applies to a specific person(s). The best way to discuss your point of view is to use qualifying statements.

For example: Assuming the moon is made of cheddar cheese, I would eating it.

While the moon isn't made of cheese, the statement is valid.

So, to expand of this, perhaps a better wording for your assertion: While I don't need the 36mp, I don't think I'll need this camera.

It is a generally neutral statement rather than an inflammatory statement that isn't valid.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2014 at 00:18 UTC
In reply to:

Cane: What's the purpose of going with such a small body if the lens sticks out this much? If you of manage to get it in a pocket, people are gonna think your too happy to see them.

Far too many assumptions, my friend. Are you assuming that because someone has a small camera (and may also have small lenses) that they wouldn't want to have or ever use a larger lens that are faster, better, zooms, etc.? Or does one have to have a big camera to have a big lens? And small cameras are only for small lenses? Or small lenses are only for small cameras? It sounds like the point in having an interchangeable lens system would be rather pointless if that were the case.

The purpose of a large lens is to accommodate the glass required for big apertures, proper image reproduction, etc. While the GM1 is probably for those in need of compact cameras, there could be a time when they need a super zoom lens, fast primes, etc.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2014 at 18:04 UTC
On article Nikon D4s First Impressions Review (1038 comments in total)
In reply to:

JPR.lda: This is an amazing camera, it is all that D4 should have been from the start,

BUT

No Wi-Fi
No Dual CF cards
No 4K video

I will keep my D3s, until D5 or D6 has these features

How exactly do you come to the conclusion that this is what "the D4 should have been"?

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2014 at 23:40 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4: a quick summary (471 comments in total)
In reply to:

jorden mosley: "Shut up and take my money!"

This is my dream camera. I never thought I see the day that a manufacturer would make such a thing, but by god they did it. Everything on my most wildest and unrealistic wishlist my imagination could come up with, this camera has and more.

Welp, Panasonic, you pulled me back in. I should have never left you for Sony. "Please take me back baby, I can change!" lol.

@jkoch None of what you said is needed. You do not need a special computer to edit 4K, you need proxy media. You do not need a 4K monitor, you need a 4K future. You do not need 100TB of storage for 100Mbs 4K footage (this bitrate is pretty low compared to most 4K cameras). This can all be done on a MacBookPro, Final Cut Pro X, and a 4TB Thunderbolt drive, and use proxy media (about 20Mbs).

Source: Me, professional director/cinematographer; having shot with Alexa, F55, C500, Scarlets/Epics, and more.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2014 at 23:10 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4: a quick summary (471 comments in total)
In reply to:

ArchiDeos: Nice Camera.. but still a comparable size compared to DSLR rig. Well this is just only the first quarter of the year, expect new Camera will be release soon and this model will be the least to consider. CANIKON new model will rock the show as always.. Happy shooting guys..

The Canikon version of this 4K camera (Canon's 1Dc) is $12,000.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2014 at 22:42 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4: a quick summary (471 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cristian Mihai: My Macbook Pro ( not that is important here! 16Gb RAM with 2 SSD SATA 3 linked at 1Gb/s ) but with the normal Graphic card CANNOT play the 4K sample videos normally. 4K will force high end computer sales, storage, cloud space, etc...I

Use proxy media and you'll be fine.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2014 at 22:39 UTC
In reply to:

Ed555: He should have been ask why no printed manual was included with the RX100 -- and for that matter any high-end Sony camera. And the answer to "it's green" should have been answered with "how much would it have cost."

Manuals aren't included with a lot of devices anymore. The Internet and PDFs have made the possibility a reality.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 02:42 UTC

I wonder if by 'new' that includes the outrageously priced 35mm f2.8 lens that he wants people to buy. Haha

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 02:37 UTC as 53rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

tkbslc: Honestly it seems like a nice lens, but created for an already crowded focal length range. They should have gone for something wider or longer to make it more interesting. I mean are there really many m43 shooters that were dying for a fast wide prime that didn't already buy one of the 12, 14 or 17mm options?

The 20mm 1.7 is a great lens. Anyone who says otherwise has no idea what they are talking about.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2013 at 23:45 UTC

Interesting story but unless this thief kept opening Dropbox, this story is false. Dropbox for the iPhone will only upload photos for 10 minutes, and only over wifi unless said setting is changed, before it stops the camera upload. Only does it resume the next time the user opens Dropbox again.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2013 at 00:15 UTC as 19th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

goshigoo: From Dof prespective; it will act like 85 f/2.4 on 35mm FF

a 6D + 85 f/1.8 will have shallower Dof
Also, IQ wise, 6D + 85 f/1.8 @ f/2.4 could be better than this lens

35mm FF still has it's value when shallow Dof is needed

Please cite your source regarding image quality of this lens.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2013 at 17:02 UTC
Total: 30, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »