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: 93, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Rare Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM goes on sale in UK article (218 comments in total)

I'm thinking at that price it also comes with a second mortgage! :) Looks like something the military or NASA would have bought, as they overpay for everything. But seriously, who was it actually designed for? I cannot think of any commercial application where it would have been cost effective. You can get a damn good 1200mm telescope, even at f/5.6, for a fraction of the money. I cannot believe AF would justify the extra 95% of the cost! :0

Direct link | Posted on Aug 15, 2014 at 16:48 UTC as 84th comment | 2 replies

I guess the GoPro is good at what it does, and what it was designed to do. But how many people really need to strap a camera to their body and take action shots and video? And how many TV shows need to attach a camera to a vehicle for action shots and videos? The GoPro is for a niche market that really isn't that large. The guys at Mythbusters probably represent a large part of the GoPro market. You and I, average Joe or Jane Public, not so much. We don't need or want a limited, one trick pony of a camera.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2014 at 16:59 UTC as 23rd comment | 2 replies
On Photographing Thailand with the Nokia Lumia 1020 article (155 comments in total)

I'm guessing that after the photographer showed them the photos, the monkeys threw pooh at him. They should have thrown a real camera at him along with a tutorial on how to use it.

Up next for DPR, an elementary school child's photo essay on what s/he did for summer vacation, with the Crayon Creative mode engaged.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 2, 2014 at 14:33 UTC as 60th comment

Bwahahahahaha!!!! Sadly I think the days of Canon being innovative are pretty much over. I don't expect much from them any more, and that is good because they certainly don't deliver much! Their one attempt at a mirrorless camera was pathetic. Their DSLRs are good, but they are too many years behind in design to be considered innovative. And their bridge cameras are just downright boring. I used to be a huge fan, but not now...

Direct link | Posted on Aug 1, 2014 at 18:17 UTC as 73rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Kitschi: every 2 weeks a new ACR but no words about next LR Version, seems that there won't be a stand alone LR anymore only CC crap

LR 5.6 is not a NEW verision, it is a minor update. A new version would be LR 6. I too suspect Adobe will eventually stop offering the stand-alone LR at some point, and I fear that point will be sooner rather than later.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2014 at 20:36 UTC
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 (195 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 22nd 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 (2004 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 (2004 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 281st comment | 7 replies
On Getting off the ground: Cheap drones for photography article (141 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 (141 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 | 6 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 (655 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 15th 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 (424 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 (424 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 (272 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 67th comment
Total: 93, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »