Douglas69

Douglas69

Lives in Australia Cleveland, Australia
Works as a Photographer/Editor
Joined on Aug 30, 2011
About me:

Old enough to be a fossil, intact memory and concentrating on Auto wrapping, wallpaper printing and Canvas masterpieces

Comments

Total: 22, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

What has me curious is how far away is this lens from the original release? Certainly it was reported as a "prime near equal" just like this one is but... That lens was reported as good to excellent but the one I had was terrible. The Zoom ring jammed and focus on anything but good to excellent contrast objects in normal day light was a real hit and miss thing... It spent far too much time hunting for focus. Not much different to any Sigma Zoom lens I've owned.None have been stellar performers at focusing when compared to camera makers lenses.

After reading reviews here and elsewhere praising Sigma lenses I'm finding it hard to duplicate the results and beginning to wonder if the lenses submitted for review are hand finished by factory technicians rather than the off-the-shelf stuff consumers have to contend with. How about it DP review? Have you ever compared your test lenses with oned found on the shelves of camera stores?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2013 at 19:05 UTC as 4th comment
On Cine System Tripod Dolly and Mount Review article (70 comments in total)
In reply to:

silyn: I would never buy this especially @ $450. As mounted on a car (suction cups) nothing unusual however supported load of 5lb is not enough. I would not trust 5lb equipment to this mount.

As a dolly, based on sample video, it really sucks. The movement it produces (again, based on video) does not look good - it's a toy, and there is no smoothness, and it moves like a toy. There may be some uses for this thing, why not, but $450? There are better ways to invest such money into video equipment. Obviously my personal opinion.

Hey mike... What happened to shoot it right and forget the edit? If your footage needs post production to make up for the shortfall in a $450 product, you seriously have to add the software to reach the true cost of the product, do you not?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 3, 2013 at 19:59 UTC
On Cine System Tripod Dolly and Mount Review article (70 comments in total)

The interesting part of these 'remarkable' new wheels and cups is that someone had already invented it 30 years ago. Now by adding a few over tight plastic ball sockets and suction cups this is the big rave on a wonderful new product.

I'm all for invention but FCS, let's invent something new for a change. The whole industry is overcrowded with too many people trying to sell too many re-inventions to too few people.

Sorry folks but this is just more of the past fancied up as an odd ball looking gimmick. Anyone remember the first ball joint tripod head from Manfrotto?

In 1977 I bolted a Canon VHS camera onto the side of my Landrover and went into to bush with it. Footage is yuk now but at the time it was AOK for 640 x 480. Stick an iPhone on the same bracket now and it would be way more robust and just as light as this one. Back then the tripod and a bit of welding cost $45 and did exactly the same. Nothing new here.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 3, 2013 at 19:56 UTC as 3rd comment

Curious that a German firm (DxO) has had its Gnomes busy in the background producing a version their excellent distortion correction software is claimed to rectify the optical problems camera integrated mobile phones create.

I can certainly testify to the ability of this software on HTC images. How a "digital camera in a lens" compares so far only demonstrates that Sony see a serious enough issue in lens quality to produce this object.

My personal opinion is that if you are becoming a serious enough photographer to shell out what is certain to be the generous amount of cash this stuff will cost, then surely a pocket size compact camera is a more likely choice?

A recent article in an Aussie Wedding magazine by a long time wedding photographer certainly gives credence to possibility of serious work being possible with camera phones. His article highlights lens quality as an important issue too. I can't wait to get my hands on a 'lens camera'.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2013 at 14:00 UTC as 17th comment
On Online images and copyright infringement news story (255 comments in total)
In reply to:

E Dinkla: It would be a very smart move if any copyright infringement is compensated by a donation for a good cause. The price to pay can be several times the normal photographer's image price and still hold in court. Greed is not an issue then and the level of shame is multiplied for the company that is not willing to cooperate.

Dinkla...
If you made your living from selling photos, would you still have the same opinion if instead of paying you for your work, clients gave money to charity?

This is a one off incident where the photographer decided to "fine" the company by making them donate a misappropriated amount of money to charity. He'd probably have gotten that much in a settlement had he gone to court.

Expecting "EVERY" instance of copyright infringement to follow with a charity payment will see some hungry photographers going under. A far better idea is to set up a challenge fund to help defray the cost of court action against those who should (and probably do) know better.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 10, 2013 at 01:54 UTC
On Adobe's Fujifilm X-Trans sensor processing tested article (144 comments in total)

As a long time Fuji faithful, mainly in Medium format but also S5 (Nikon Hybrid) I am bitterly disappointed that waiting years after the day they simply stopped making Professional cameras altogether, this 'new' sensor is all they have to offer professional photographers who used Fuji equipment, expecting something new before it was too late.

It's very sad that Fuji have abandoned professional photographers completely. The rumors that floated around were all lies. The only professional offerings in digital cameras come from Fuji's rivals. SO the wait is over. For me and some of my contemporaries the choice Phase one or Pentax.

Bye bye Fuji.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 8, 2013 at 01:36 UTC as 12th comment
In reply to:

john Clinch: I've skimmed this and I sort of agree with the comments below. LR for my Nikon camera offers a range of camera profiles that quickly achieve good colour off the bat.

Is LR the only one to offer selective adjustment? I use these alot.

I've never been a fan of saying DPREVIEW is biased but I think we should remember DXO is now a business partner

Very well put. As an editor of magazines (not potographic) I realise only to well the balancing act of comparative articles. We are all biased at times. Particularly when our existance is risked. Nothing I've trials matches Capture NX2 when it comes to processing Nikon images. The one ting DxO was good at (fixing lens anomolies) is now included with most of its competitors.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 17, 2013 at 16:01 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Wonka: surprised no one is missing darktable here...

Ever the day it works on Windows 64 bit and I'll trial it. Until then, Linux remains a play thing for me.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 17, 2013 at 15:53 UTC

After Shot Pro seems to be favoured by many photographers but... I am one of the fools who bought Bibble in the days before it was silently sold to Corel. Any support? Nah. I feel not only betrayed but very let down that there doesn't seem to have been any 'deal' done to provide an upgrade path for existing Bibble users... Just a hand full of bucks to the developers. Who cares about customers. Maybe why its been left out?

DxO? OK just so long as you don't own a Nikon. Only my experience mind you but I think Lightroom comes from an ethical company. Adobe gave me the first copy of Lightroom for free because I was a Raw Shooter Pro user (the origin of Lightroom). Like I said, Just my opinions.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 17, 2013 at 15:47 UTC as 36th comment | 1 reply
On Nokia's Lumia sales exceed expectations post (14 comments in total)

I bought my wife a Nokia to replace her old button Nokia. That makes 16 Nokias I've had or got for my family and business since 1998.

Battery life is reduced alarmingly if you don't switch off wi-fi search but other than that, it takes brilliant photos for such a puny little lens and Windows, which everyone thought wouldn't work is brilliant.

I'd buy another Nokia in a heartbeat if I needed another one.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2013 at 04:15 UTC as 1st comment
On beached_chevy photo in Douglas69's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Buried under the sand are 20 sheets of 3/4" ply to enable the car and its companion (A Camaro) to drive onto the beach as if it were a normal road.
Shot with a D700, Tone mapped with Luminance HDR.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 23, 2012 at 01:43 UTC as 1st comment
On DxO Optics Pro 8: What's New article (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

designdog: What is missing, unfortunately discovered by me after I purchased it, is support for the Fuji X Pro1...

I've used DXO Elite since version 1.0. That version worked wonders with 10D Canon images shot with the kit lens. Things change. I'm using Nikon (FF) and Pentax (MF) cameras now and although DXO has changed, some might say improved ...it does not handle Nikon D800 or Pentax Medium format files anywhere near as well as the instant improvement I found on 10D images that compelled me to buy the software in the first place.

I only bought the "Elite" version because of my D800. I should have chosen one of the many alternatives that not just handles Nikon files well but also works with the large files from a medium format camera.

We won't be updating it again and unless the company behind DXO changes its practice of charging for what should be a free incremental update, we won't be buying the software again, any time soon. This is a pity because I liked the way it automatically corrected lens anomalies.

Doug

Direct link | Posted on Nov 24, 2012 at 22:36 UTC

Since sketch artists took to using cameras to capture images of performers, those performers have tried to prevent the very people they rely on for publicity, making a living from photographing them.

I'm neutral on the issue, it reminds me of many actors who signed contracts when they were starting out and are now trying to force TV recording companies to pay them royalities that the original contracts denied them.

You'd think with the money these performers make, they wouldn't mind a photographer who promoted them making a few bucks too but greed is not just a word, it is a fact of life. I can't help wondering how many shooters will still sign the contracts knowing they might be working for free!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2012 at 20:17 UTC as 15th comment
On Lightroom 4 Review article (480 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jihn: I was really interested in LR4 because of some of the new features in the develop mode. Would have helped my workflow a lot.

In short - I would hold off on buying LR4.
Especially if you use Photoshop CS5 to do further editing.

When I try to edit in CS5 it tells me i need new Raw Plug-in 7.0
Which is not available for CS5.

If I ignore the warning and edit in PS any way- CS5 hangs.
I've tried all the "work arounds" short of using the beta of CS6. Most do not work or are unacceptability cumbersome.
Who wants to use a Beta of anything for production work?
Not me. Especially after the latest upgrade to LR4.
LR is suppose to stream line work flow not complicate it. This version is a DOG.

Check out the Photoshop family forums at photoshop.com to get an Idea of all the issues.
Some of which did not exist in the beta version.
On top of all that it's slower than LR3.
Had to go back to LR3 for production work. LR4 is just too unreliable.
My recommendation for now is DO NOT BUY.

I'm sorry you feel that LR4 is a DOG. A lot of people using AMD processors have voiced their opinion about slowness. Have you tried 4.01? You can get the beta of it from adobe Labs. You might find many of the problems you are facing have been addressed in this version.

Personally, I've used LightRoom since Adobe gave me a free copy because I had bought RawShooter, the forefather of LR. I haven't been a huge fan of the program but I do use it. Since trialing 4.1 I'm very impressed with it. Particularly the way it handles noise and mild HDR corrections. I guess no one is twisting arms to make users buy it. I'll upgrade when 4.1 is out of beta. I'm fairly sure I'll find a lot more use for it too. I'm not so sure about Photoshop 6 though.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 4, 2012 at 14:52 UTC

This is very curious. I remember in the dying days of Minolta that the local repair centre I have used for 20 years (Nikon authorised too incidentally) put a sign on their window "We no longer repair Minolta cameras and will no longer service Minolta cameras under warranty".

On further investigation it turned out Minolta had been dragging their feet in paying them and often supply of parts took months instead of days. Repairing Minolta cameras was getting them a bad name for service.

This firm has repaired my Nikons for nearly 10 years. I only use Nikon because I know I can get premium service from them. They don't have all the gear on Nikon's service recommendation list. If a job is out of their scope, they send it to Japan for repair. I dropped using the big 'C' because of their 2 to 3 week turnaround for repairs and insistence only their workshop could repair their cameras under warranty.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 14, 2012 at 05:21 UTC as 50th comment
In reply to:

alvaromorales: I live in the Miami, Florida area and I've been shooting weddings for about 4 years now. I charge half of what the lady in this post is arguing about and I provide the couple with a DVD of the images for an additional price. That being said, I also work full time to sustain myself because it would be great to be able to shoot a wedding every weekend, but that simply is just not so. Most of the time spent AWAY from shooting is processing and actually getting other bookings (marketing and promoting yourself). I believe the hardest part of being a wedding photographer is getting the booking, and then (fingers crossed) hoping that they don't cancel or the plans don't fall through or that they choose somebody else. Then all you have is the deposit.
A good service comes at a premium. I agree, $3,000 is A LOT of money. But so is going to the salon, hiring a plumber or hiring a mechanic. Bottom line: it's a choice to hire the service, don't make it your service to complain about the hiring...

The problem is always financial. Whatever happened to the concept "you only get what you pay for"? I've been shooting weddings for 40 years. It would have been longer but I took time out to try a different profession.

My first job (1961) was because the bride "couldn't afford" a main street photographer. My latest job (last weekend) certainly could and I'm it ...but I have a problem figuring out why someone with only 15 guests would want to pay $3k+ for wedding photography.

Someone told me once that poverty was dependent on your standard of living. Someone earning $10k per week will be poverty stricken if they miss a pay, just the same as someone on $100 a week will be.Put it all in perspective shooters.

Those people looking for a $500 wedding photographer are in a different income bracket to those prepared to pay $5000 for one. Target your market people. Don't offer the service everyone else offers and expect to charge big bucks for it. You only get the business a bad name.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 1, 2012 at 01:00 UTC
On DxO Labs announces Optics Pro 7 with faster performance news story (167 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alternative Energy Photography: I have been to the DXO website and I downloaded the V6 trial.

I have a couple of concerns:

Camera/Lens Inclusion:

I own a Nikon D7000 and a Panasonic DMC-FZ28. The former appears in your lists, but maybe not with the lenses I want to use. The latter still gets used due to its portability and convenience. The Panasonic is not in the DXO support list. It's a couple-year-old model that isn't made anymore, so I am not optimistic that it will be added.

How much can Optics Pro be used for pictures from either the Nikon (if the lens is not listed) or the Panasonic (since the camer is not listed)? Can presets still be made for cameras or camera/lens combinations not in the list?

Copy protection:

I don't like relicensing hassles I have to upgrade/reinstall Windows or build a new PC.

I also don't like the dongle needed for Pace and other methods, especially when I need to use a laptop. Dongles are easily lost or broken w/laptops!

What is the copy protection method for V7?

I don't think you'd find anyone who messes around with hardware changes and OS re-install than me. I haven't found DxO to be any worse at getting a new license key and a heck of a lot better than some other software vendors. I've never had to phone them, always getting a reset by mail in a timely manner. You can run in in trial mode for a up to 30 days. No... I don't like the present method of protection in software but as long as people think they can take what they feel like and never need to pay for it, it can only get harder for honest people.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 29, 2011 at 19:59 UTC
On DxO Labs announces Optics Pro 7 with faster performance news story (167 comments in total)
In reply to:

Janster: Last November there was an announcement for a DXO HDR program which was subsequently postponed... In the meantime Optics and the Film Pack have had a few releases. Any news on HDR besides the Single Shot HDR feature, Axel?

HDR means different things to different people. I've always used it to turn sunrise/sunset into evenly exposed pictures while others expect it to create highly modified pictures I personally don't like all that much. The current HDR feature - if you call it that, is capable of altering the contrast level to a higher dynamic range so in my opinion they done what they said but if producing unrealistic art is what you expected, I don't think DxO is into that area of imagery.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 29, 2011 at 19:50 UTC
On DxO Labs announces Optics Pro 7 with faster performance news story (167 comments in total)
In reply to:

LJohnK2: Olympus marketing staff must have gone top work for DXO Labs....GREAT WAY TO KILL NEW CUSTOMERS.

I bought ver6.6 DXO Optics Pro in mid July 2011 or less than 6 months ago and it has been buggy from the get go to say the least....you now want to hit me up for more $ for fixing the bugs....unbelievable.

Fortunately, I have Capture NX2 and SILKYPIX in my software suite, and the later has been more than fair with upgrade policies.

For customers that got at least a year of product use an upgrade cost is expected.... but the few nice tricks DXO has aren't worth putting up with this kind of underhanded marketing scheming.

Bye Bye

Stick with NX2. There simply is no better RAW developer for Nikon cameras. I updated to Elite when I bought a D700 and I've been disappointed ever since.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 29, 2011 at 19:43 UTC
On DxO Labs announces Optics Pro 7 with faster performance news story (167 comments in total)
In reply to:

OngNikon: DXO should reflect on these comments critically.

Why a new released of a much loved software is not greeted with wide open arms!

Browsing through the comments, no one really complain about the its image correction capabiltiies, if there is any, it is satisfaction.

DXO is a 'technical product'. Photographers are techies by nature.... Repackaging, with peripheral enhancement, or ór forced upgrading - as sameone put it' , or trying to chase that last corner of the market trying to suport the lastest cameras, with few user base - will not go well. Pls pay a little more attention to the needs of existing customers...., Polish up the glitches of exiting version...Give us the things that DXO is good at - the stuff that got me to buy and happy in the first place.

Happy customers is the best market team any companies can have! Happy customers will get many more new customers, many many more than any bean-counting-marketing division can get.

I couldn't agree more with this comment. Very well put!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 29, 2011 at 19:40 UTC
Total: 22, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »