faterikcartman

faterikcartman

Lives in United States San Diego, United States
Works as a Consummate Slacker
Joined on Jul 25, 2008

Comments

Total: 12, showing: 1 – 12
In reply to:

faterikcartman: Going over most of these comments I get the impression a lot of people have no idea how much money serious hobbyists put into the gear for astrophotography nor what kind of results are achievable in one's backyard. Which is not to say this will replace an STX-16803 from SBIG, but some of the comments here are inane. I suppose there's people over on a Ford forum complaining that Ford shouldn't have bothered to build their new GT supercar because it is too expensive and has a tiny market. Sigh.

My hat is off to you for actually taking the time. And you clearly understand. The one negative I see against astrophotography is the cost of entry for top-tier results. We all joke about lawyers, doctors, and dentists, keeping Leica alive all these years. But those cameras don't make them better image makers. With some of the astro stuff you really need to be wealthy or committed financially to go for gold. But as I've noted in other posts, little is plug-and-play and there is a steep learning curve as well. Throwing money at it alone won't get you anywhere.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 04:03 UTC

Going over most of these comments I get the impression a lot of people have no idea how much money serious hobbyists put into the gear for astrophotography nor what kind of results are achievable in one's backyard. Which is not to say this will replace an STX-16803 from SBIG, but some of the comments here are inane. I suppose there's people over on a Ford forum complaining that Ford shouldn't have bothered to build their new GT supercar because it is too expensive and has a tiny market. Sigh.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 03:37 UTC as 25th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

maverick786us: Why would someone spend 3300$ for just taking stellar photography, when its not meant for normal phorography?

Huh? Two nights ago I was looking at an astrophotography camera -- and it cost $10,000.00.

If you're at the point where you're serious about astrophotography none of it is cheap, and little has plug-and-play simplicity. If you're balking at $3,300.00 for a camera it's not likely a hobby you'll ever pursue as the mounts and glass run much more.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 11:03 UTC
On Canon EOS 5DS / SR First Impressions Review preview (2357 comments in total)
In reply to:

faterikcartman: I was a Canon film shooter beginning in the 1970s. And I thought they were the bang-for-the-buck leader. I held off on digital but finally went Nikon. I've been unsure about that decision off and on over the years. And I've even regretted it from time to time. I'm fully vested now. But still check out new offerings as many have happily sold everything to jump ship (financial loss notwithstanding). I have an IPF8100 and IPF8300 so I can actually make use of more pixels.

But, I'm sorry to say, the first thing this camera makes me think of is "keep the Nikon gear and buy that Pentax 645Z. I'm not sure there's more quality pixels to be squeezed out of FF. I suppose there may be some who still buy based on pixel count alone. But are there really that many left who would into a large SLR system like this?

IMO, if Canon (or Nikon) wish to move into the 50+ megapixel game it is time to roll out a new lens mount. Beat that 645Z price and you'll get people interested.

Maybe they need to start asking why that is? I think with the move to CMOS I think the market can open up. But they'll have to educate buyers -- here's pixel count, but here's why that isn't the whole story... Then provide, relatively light weight, weather sealing, GPS, built in WiFi, Zeiss quality glass but with a high-quality and fast focus system and leaf shutters, and a consumer friendly service bureau for large prints (doesn't Costco even do that now?), and I truly believe you could attract the serious hobbyists who are well funded along with a variety of pros. I think a big reason the medium format market is small is crazy money prices and features that limit flexibility. If Nikon or Canon were to keep their controls familiar and install their top shelf focus and metering systems with a nice Sony CMOS sensor and new lens lines I think wallets would open all over the world.
Then again, I've always been a dreamer.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2015 at 03:15 UTC
On Canon EOS 5DS / SR First Impressions Review preview (2357 comments in total)

I was a Canon film shooter beginning in the 1970s. And I thought they were the bang-for-the-buck leader. I held off on digital but finally went Nikon. I've been unsure about that decision off and on over the years. And I've even regretted it from time to time. I'm fully vested now. But still check out new offerings as many have happily sold everything to jump ship (financial loss notwithstanding). I have an IPF8100 and IPF8300 so I can actually make use of more pixels.

But, I'm sorry to say, the first thing this camera makes me think of is "keep the Nikon gear and buy that Pentax 645Z. I'm not sure there's more quality pixels to be squeezed out of FF. I suppose there may be some who still buy based on pixel count alone. But are there really that many left who would into a large SLR system like this?

IMO, if Canon (or Nikon) wish to move into the 50+ megapixel game it is time to roll out a new lens mount. Beat that 645Z price and you'll get people interested.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2015 at 00:34 UTC as 221st comment | 2 replies
On Hasselblad unveils pixel-shifting 200MP H5D-200c MS article (230 comments in total)

My only concern is whether or not my cat can sit still long enough during those multiple exposures...

Direct link | Posted on Aug 24, 2014 at 00:09 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply

The greater the likelihood a comment will make you look stupid or foolish, the more you're going to dislike comments.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 17:46 UTC as 18th comment
On 17 signs that you were alive before digital photography article (149 comments in total)
In reply to:

showmeyourpics: I've been photographing for 50 years now (what?! I started when I was VERY young!). I recognize all these items and still own most of them. I remember with great fondness the nights in the darkroom developing/printing b&w and then Cibachrome. I also used to produce double-projector, fade in/out slide presentations with synchronized music and voice. I began playing with digital cameras in 2000 and converted completely in 2004. All the good memories and love for film are still there. I gave it up because, as a fine art photographer, the quality of my prints is my main priority. I have seen Canon comparison color prints of the same subject done state-of-the-art on film and in digital and the difference is significant in favor of digital (processing power and personal interpretation freedom are awesome). I also love the choice of lovely inkjet substrates including canvas which I can frame without glass (I still do all by myself from shooting to processing, printing and framing). Just me.

I too still have a functioning dual projector set-up (unused for a looong time so maybe I should say "was functioning when last boxed up". Then again, I still have a dichro darkroom in boxes sans sinks and chemistry. I got started in the 70s and don't feel that old, but it looks like we're dinosaurs. I've held on to all my film gear for the most part and it is my wife who forced me into digital. While I am nostalgic, and some looks are inherent to film and tastes are subjective, I agree the quality of prints from my iPF8300 are superior. Anyway, I haven't logged in for a long time but your post really brought me back. Thanks
P.S., I must admit I missed #11 :(

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2013 at 08:58 UTC

The places in Africa where trophy animals are in the most stable numbers are where they're legally hunted. It seems the profit motive in an impoverished country motivates the stewardship of hunted animals. Where hunting is banned their is no incentive to protect the animals and poachers are decimating their numbers -- sometimes to extinction levels. Of course, many Left leaning people are more interested in how a position makes them feel about themselves rather than results. So they'll bash Nikon and big-game hunting -- regardless of whether or not that position actually helps preserve the animals they claim to love.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 4, 2013 at 09:34 UTC as 61st comment | 3 replies
On Accessory Review: Kata Revolver-8 Backpack article (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

faterikcartman: Joe, I know Kata has an optional waist strap for other packs and wouldn't be surprised if it is available for this one as well. Sure, I know, then it's even more expensive. I own three Kata bags and love them all.

And if I didn't make this clear -- the optional waist strap is heavy duty and well padded.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2012 at 02:41 UTC
On Accessory Review: Kata Revolver-8 Backpack article (71 comments in total)

Joe, I know Kata has an optional waist strap for other packs and wouldn't be surprised if it is available for this one as well. Sure, I know, then it's even more expensive. I own three Kata bags and love them all.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2012 at 01:03 UTC as 39th comment | 1 reply

I have Ansel Adams' "The Camera", "The Negative", and "The Print". Does the book offer anything "The Negative" doesn't cover? I spent most of my photographic life shooting positive slide film. I'm really not a post-processing digital expert so I'm not sure if this sort of work is really helpful today. Personally, I regularly get properly exposed shots right out of the camera, or have a good sense what needs correction/adjustment. But I'm not sure if that's from reading about Adam's zone-system, or years of experience shooting slides and their tight range.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2012 at 20:53 UTC as 27th comment
Total: 12, showing: 1 – 12