W5JCK

W5JCK

Lives in United States Arlington, United States
Works as a retired Technical Writer
Has a website at www.w5jck.com
Joined on Dec 10, 2011

Comments

Total: 88, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Great Bustard: And yet not one on "Photographic Equivalence". What has become of MIT? : )

That would be Physics 101. Buy a science book, maybe you will learn something...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2014 at 22:39 UTC
On Ricoh announces Pentax XG-1 superzoom article (194 comments in total)

Super yawn....Another camera with a small sensor and little to offer. Putting a long zoom on a lackluster camera doesn't make it good or make it worthy of being on this site. This kind of cheap camera is going to be bought by people who don't read sites like this, or they would know better. I'm not sure why DPReview still brings us information on these little sensor cameras or for that matter smartphone cameras. Maybe their newest members have been dumbed down to that level. This used to be a site for enthusiasts and professionals, not so much now...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2014 at 15:13 UTC as 21st comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

citizenlouie: CC is fine for professionals who can expense their subscription fee. For vast majority of photographers who upgrade their cameras every two years, and Lightroom's current price at $80, the max a person would shell out for an annual subscription of CC is $40. For people like me who can only afford to upgrade the camera around 5 years, the CC is only valued at $16/year, not the $99/year Adobe is charging.

This means most people would either stop upgrading to newer cameras that Lightroom 5 can no longer support or stop using Lightroom all together. It looks like I would be using my current cameras until they break. This move would indirectly slow the camera sales by a bit, and probably start making people with new cameras more likely to accept out-of-camera JPEGs, instead of processing RAWs using a software.

Jogger most of us have not climbed up Adobes backside and call them "momma" like you apparently did. there is no DRAMA here at all. there is only fact. The CC BS is just that, marketing BS that is extremely overpriced. For those of us who happily updated PS and LR every two or three versions, and only then because we bought new cameras, the CC is a huge effing ripoff. For people like you, well maybe momma takes care of you...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 11, 2014 at 18:47 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1740 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thomas Kachadurian: The one clarification that is missing is that this does not hold with exposure.

If I expose a photo at f4-1/125-iso400 with my Canon 6D and a 50mm lens, and it is the correct exposure, then make second photo in the exact same conditions f2-1/125-iso400 with my Olympus EM-10 and a 25mm lens the second photo will be 2 f stops over exposed.

Exposure for that scene will be f4-1/125-iso400 with any lens camera combination a Sony RX100II, a Panasonic GH4, A Nikon d7000, a Canon 5D3, or a Hasselblad film camera. Crop factor does not change exposure.

I cannot tell you how many of my students come to me confused about their photos because they read about equivalency on the web and adjusted their exposure accordingly.

Not much of teacher then if you cannot accurately read that article. And the students must be really terrible if they don't have the sense to look through the viewfinder or at the liveview in the LCD to check their exposures.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 20:15 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1740 comments in total)

Darth "M4/3" Vader, "Luke, come to the Dark Side of digital photography."

Seriously though, a good article that correctly backs up the physics and true life usage.

Will this change the minds of the M4/3 and 1" crowds? Nope. They are religiously devoted to their noisy, little cameras and quite content to believe the fanatics among them who proclaim the laws of physics to be untrue and evil. They will remain in the Dark Ages of digital photography. No Renaissance awakening for them.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 18:51 UTC as 235th comment | 7 replies
On Getting off the ground: Cheap drones for photography article (140 comments in total)
In reply to:

Red G8R: They should be licensed based on power and range.

People claim they hate government regulation, and yet if a drone keeps pestering you in your quiet neighborhood you will be the first to call for stricter regulations! People or such hypocrites...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2014 at 16:33 UTC
On Getting off the ground: Cheap drones for photography article (140 comments in total)

These drones are little more than a nuisance in residential areas. Plus the whole issue of privacy comes to mind. Way out in the countryside away from other people they are okay I guess, but not in our cities. I suspect that as the numbers of urban drones increases, so will the numbers of BB and pellet guns, at least I hope so. I don't even like photographers walking the streets taking my photo, much less a drone spying on me from above. I'm seeing and hearing a lot of opposition to even PD using these.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2014 at 16:29 UTC as 38th comment | 5 replies
On Surf's Up: Clark Little's incredible wave photography article (54 comments in total)

Finally I really great gallery of photos instead of the bland stuff we usually get here. Great job!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2014 at 19:49 UTC as 20th comment
On Hands on with the Pentax 645Z article (648 comments in total)

Good grief, this morning the WHOLE damn DPReview website is about Pentax. I wonder how much that advertisement cost Pentax. Pretty obvious this website is more in the interest of Amazon sales now than in bringing us a wide range of camera reviews and news.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2014 at 14:48 UTC as 12th comment

I just saw these images in a sidebar article on CNN.com. Personally, this seems like the kind of stuff a young person who is new to photography might do while they are exploring the world of photography. It certainly isn't new and innovative as I've seen this kind of thing a lot in TV and photo ads. As many others have pointed out, the backgrounds are extremely boring. While this kind of stuff might look cool on someone's personal Facebook page where Uncle George and Aunt Sally are easily impressed, not so much here....

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2014 at 15:17 UTC as 41st comment | 1 reply
On Apple to cease development of Aperture article (423 comments in total)
In reply to:

DotCom Editor: Here's the question no reporter has yet asked, so I will: What incentive did Adobe offer to Apple to get Aperture killed off?

Apple used to own about 10% of Adobe way back in the early 1990s. I wonder if maybe they are still invested in Adobe. Either way, Aperture was a half hearted try at developing a profession image editor. Apple never got it right and never put much effort into trying to get it right.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 27, 2014 at 19:34 UTC
On Apple to cease development of Aperture article (423 comments in total)
In reply to:

D1N0: Isn't this simply a name change and will photo's for os-x be as capable as aperture?

I think Photos will be a POS in the league of iPhotos. Fine for users who take selfies with their iPhone, but worthless as a professional image editor. I'm not surprised, Apple hasn't had a major Aperture update in years. I long ago quit hoping for it to improve and never abandoned LR or PS. So my workflow will see no interruption.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 27, 2014 at 19:31 UTC
In reply to:

sneakyracer: I see very little difference between these cameras all the way up to iso 6400. Given that the A7R has 3 times the MP of the A7S that is amazing. The R would still be my choice. The 5D3 performed very well too. Yes the A7S has a slight edge at iso 12800 and above but even the A7S, at those ISO's, does not exactly produce a clean image.

Id love to see long exposure performance. Maybe there is more of a difference there.

I would like to see 30 second exposures of star fields. But given you are in Seattle, that is going to be a challenge. You need darker skies without pesky rain clouds! I'm curious at how the a7S will perform for astrophotography, but given these tests I don't think it will be a better choice than a A7, or a7R, or 6D.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 22, 2014 at 14:50 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7S added to test scene comparison tool article (269 comments in total)
In reply to:

katy C.: Where is the GH4? Can't find it on the comparison list.

DPR hasn't reviewed it yet, so no image tests. Not that it matters. The M43 sensor is only 1/2 the size of the full frame, so there is no way the GH4 can compete in low light.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 21, 2014 at 15:55 UTC

Good quality images, but too contrived for my tastes. I don't really care for posed shots. I much prefer to see people caught being themselves. Number ten was good though.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2014 at 14:57 UTC as 66th comment
On Panasonic FZ1000: Not just another superzoom... article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

W5JCK: Bridge cameras like this one and the RX10 or still what I consider to be sub-enthusiast level. The 1" sensor is too small to deliver quality IQ at any low light level. That f/2.8 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/5.0 lens on an APC-S camera. Pretty darn slow for wide open, and thus rather lacking in low light capability. A f/4.0 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/7.1 lens on an APC-S camera. So this camera basically has a f/4--f/7.1 zoom lens compared to APS-C DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. Meh! For the price of the RX10 you would be better off with a a6000 and a few good lenses. This one is cheaper, but still not worth the price for anyone who wants an enthusiasts level and above IQ. This is a mom/dad camera used to take little pictures to post on the internet. Again, meh!

Okay, here is a comparison. If you take a photo with a FF camera where the lens is 24mm and ISO is set to 800 and aperture is set to f/2.8, to duplicate that exposure on this camera will require 24mm equivalent (8.8mm) and ISO 6000 and of course an aperture of f/2.8. Which camera has the least amount of noise level for this photo? FF of course. Which camera has the best low light ability for this photo? FF of course. Which camera has a BS f/2.8 aperture setting that is totally meaningless when compared to larger sensor cameras? This 1" sensor camera. Anyone who thinks this little sensor camera can be set to f/2.8 and duplicate the photo exposure, low noise, an IQ of FF or even a APS-C using the same settings is quite delusional and extremely confused.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 21:38 UTC
On Panasonic FZ1000: Not just another superzoom... article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

W5JCK: Bridge cameras like this one and the RX10 or still what I consider to be sub-enthusiast level. The 1" sensor is too small to deliver quality IQ at any low light level. That f/2.8 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/5.0 lens on an APC-S camera. Pretty darn slow for wide open, and thus rather lacking in low light capability. A f/4.0 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/7.1 lens on an APC-S camera. So this camera basically has a f/4--f/7.1 zoom lens compared to APS-C DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. Meh! For the price of the RX10 you would be better off with a a6000 and a few good lenses. This one is cheaper, but still not worth the price for anyone who wants an enthusiasts level and above IQ. This is a mom/dad camera used to take little pictures to post on the internet. Again, meh!

You guys need to get a physics book and read it.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 16:07 UTC
On Panasonic FZ1000: Not just another superzoom... article (158 comments in total)

Bridge cameras like this one and the RX10 or still what I consider to be sub-enthusiast level. The 1" sensor is too small to deliver quality IQ at any low light level. That f/2.8 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/5.0 lens on an APC-S camera. Pretty darn slow for wide open, and thus rather lacking in low light capability. A f/4.0 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/7.1 lens on an APC-S camera. So this camera basically has a f/4--f/7.1 zoom lens compared to APS-C DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. Meh! For the price of the RX10 you would be better off with a a6000 and a few good lenses. This one is cheaper, but still not worth the price for anyone who wants an enthusiasts level and above IQ. This is a mom/dad camera used to take little pictures to post on the internet. Again, meh!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 14:52 UTC as 32nd comment | 23 replies
In reply to:

W5JCK: It's hard to believe today is the 70th anniversary of the D-Day invasion into Normandy. A good day to remember all the sacrifices that were made on this day so long ago, and all the sacrifices that were made throughout the war on so many beaches throughout the SW Pacific Islands, the Far East, North Africa, Sicily, and Italy. Most of the veterans are now gone including my Dad all my uncles who fought during WWII. May they rest in peace. We should be so thankful that they sacrificed so much to stop the world from destroying itself.

I meant no disrespect for the eastern allies, but they did not take part in the D-Day at Normandy. That is why I didn't mention them. But on the other hand, the western allies treated their share of Europe as liberated, whereas the eastern allies treated their share as conquered territory. And when all was said and done, Stalin had killed more Russians than the NAZIs.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 7, 2014 at 20:06 UTC

It's hard to believe today is the 70th anniversary of the D-Day invasion into Normandy. A good day to remember all the sacrifices that were made on this day so long ago, and all the sacrifices that were made throughout the war on so many beaches throughout the SW Pacific Islands, the Far East, North Africa, Sicily, and Italy. Most of the veterans are now gone including my Dad all my uncles who fought during WWII. May they rest in peace. We should be so thankful that they sacrificed so much to stop the world from destroying itself.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2014 at 14:46 UTC as 5th comment | 5 replies
Total: 88, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »