NeilRW

NeilRW

Lives in United States San Francisco, United States
Works as a Professional Photographer
Joined on Oct 15, 2009
About me:

We do not photograph Weddings. I'd rather jump off the GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE. I am also an Ordained Minister and have performed Weddings but photographing Weddings is BORING. I don't do boring well because, well its boring! I know, I know, everyone says I could get rich shooting Weddings, but rich can get boring......I've been there. My Life has never been boring. Never has been, never will be. I've always had an exciting Life. Essentially, being bored would be boring.

Comments

Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

GiovanniB: I don't understand the complaining about a lack of portrait primes in the review, because there's the amazing SEL 50mm f1.8 OSS which I love (!!) for its pleasant bokeh and great overall optical performance - plus stabilization. Not to mention the very reasonable price tag. The A6000 is an APS-C camera - no reason to ignore this one.

@Richard Murdey I agree with you that
especially Nikon and Canon never made
the proper portrait lenses for crop body
DSLR cameras from the get go. Full frame
film cameras always had 85mm and
105mm fast primes going back to per
autofocus days. Neither Nikon or Canon
made the equivalents when digital came out. They should have made a 58mm 1.8 and a 70mm 2.8. When I have talked to Nikon reps and pinned them down they admit that I'm right. I know there are 3rd party 70mm lenses but I bought a Nikon camera so I could shoot with Nikon glass. I've never understood why Nikon never made the equivalents for a great pair of lenses that worked magic for 50 years.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 10:05 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

GiovanniB: I don't understand the complaining about a lack of portrait primes in the review, because there's the amazing SEL 50mm f1.8 OSS which I love (!!) for its pleasant bokeh and great overall optical performance - plus stabilization. Not to mention the very reasonable price tag. The A6000 is an APS-C camera - no reason to ignore this one.

http://m.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-a6000/comment?replyToId=9855465435

Post comment
e Post a comment
Sony a6000 Review
Đ¾Richard Murdey I agree with you that
especially Nikon and Canon never made
the proper portrait lenses for crop body
DSLR cameras from the get go. Full frame
film cameras always had 85mm and
105mm fast primes going back to per
autofocus days. Neither Nikon or Canon
made the equivalents when digital came out. They should have made a 58mm 1.8 and a 70mm 2.8. When I have talked to Nikon reps and pinned them down they admit that I'm right. I knew there are 3rd party 70mm lenses but I bought a Nikon camera so I could shoot with Nikon glass. I've never understood why Nikon never made the equivalents for a great pair of lenses that worked magic for 50 years.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 09:49 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

GiovanniB: I don't understand the complaining about a lack of portrait primes in the review, because there's the amazing SEL 50mm f1.8 OSS which I love (!!) for its pleasant bokeh and great overall optical performance - plus stabilization. Not to mention the very reasonable price tag. The A6000 is an APS-C camera - no reason to ignore this one.

http://m.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-a6000/comment?replyToId=9855465435

Post comment
e Post a comment
Sony a6000 Review
Đ¾Richard Murdey I agree with you that
especially Nikon and Canon never made
the proper portrait lenses for crop body
DSLR cameras from the get go. Full frame
film cameras always had 85mm and
105mm fast primes going back to per
autofocus days. Neither Nikon or Canon
made the equivalents when digital came

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 09:20 UTC
On Service lets you order prints of any Facebook photo post (115 comments in total)

I think I am going to either close my FB account or at least remove most of my photos.

I think a good CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT is called for here. If its a large enough class, then FB's legal team can have their back broken. Outfits like FB win lawsuits because they outspend their opponents, but enough people in a Class Action case giving a few bucks each could break FB's back once and for all. I'll be damned if I'll let FB make a profit off my copyright work!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 16, 2014 at 05:42 UTC as 10th comment
On Service lets you order prints of any Facebook photo post (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

zos xavius: F*** THAT! This company does not have permission to print my work. If they do it will be their lawsuit!

I think a good CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT is called for here. If its a large enough class, then FB's legal team can have their back broken. Outfits like FB win lawsuits because they outspend their opponents, but enough people in a Class Action case giving a few bucks each could break FB's back once and for all. I'll be damned if I'll let FB make a profit off my copyright work!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 16, 2014 at 05:33 UTC
On Service lets you order prints of any Facebook photo post (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

spqr_ca: I smell a lawsuit a brewin' here. I retain copyright, nobody may print my images without my consent and I will sue if necessary. I see, however, from their terms that they're trying to absolve themselves of risk in this area, but I suspect that a good lawyer would still nail them to the wall on this.

spqr_ca I think I am going to either close my FB account or at least remove most of my photos.

I think a good CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT is called for here. If its a large enough class, then FB's legal team can have their back broken. Outfits like FB win lawsuits because they outspend their opponents, but enough people in a Class Action case giving a few bucks each could break FB's back once and for all. I'll be damned if I'll let FB make a profit off my copyright work!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 16, 2014 at 05:17 UTC

So who ever heard of Ricoh? Bad mistake. Another example of superior Japanese products and complete misunderstanding of how to market in the US. Include Canon & Nikon in the "stupid column". They all seem to infuriate their customers.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 5, 2013 at 09:36 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

rich12: The 18-55 kit lens won't do any justice to the 24 MP, and contrary to Nikon's wishes, most entry buyers won't ever buy another lens.

... continued ... They just need a cheap telephoto lens, not the 70-300mm VR. I don't know if Nikon still makes the 70-300mm "G" non VR. In my opine they're pricing themselves out of the market in those on a limited income. For some, after you've saved and scrimped to buy a new or used Nikon body its difficult to spend almost as much for one lens to add to you basic 18-55mm kit lens (or maybe you had an older 50mm or 35mm). Perhaps Nikon is no longer interested in the market of people who recognize Nikon as a world class leader in DSLR but don't have lots of bucks. I suppose we're a breed thats dying off ... like the man who buys old Cadillac's, Benz, Lincoln because they are well made but can't afford a newer model and doesn't want to buy some new piece of junk that looks like a melted soap bar.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2012 at 06:38 UTC
In reply to:

rich12: The 18-55 kit lens won't do any justice to the 24 MP, and contrary to Nikon's wishes, most entry buyers won't ever buy another lens.

I think a significant number of DSLR beginners will find they need/want a lens longer than the 82mm equivalent on the 18-55mm kit lens. When I was in the buy/sell/trade Nikon business 2 years ago I was selling the 70-300mm "G" Nikon lens as fast as I could get them & at a rate of 1 a week on CraigList to new beginners who were realizing they were "running out of lens" with their 1 lens kits.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2012 at 06:14 UTC
In reply to:

Valiant Thor: I'm just a mid-grade prosumer and wanted to ask those posting here if this D3200 will most likely be on par with the Sony NEX-7 given the same or similar sensors? I have a few nice Nikon lenses and thought the D3200 would stack up pretty well against the NEX-7 for a nice carry-around camera and some video. Any constructive thoughts regarding the pros and cons of these similar cameras would be appreciated. Thanks!

@Valiant Thor none of us here know anything at all about digital cameras as we've been inside & on all the photo websites since 35mm film days. We don't actually go outside & take pictures anymore cause that would take valuable time away from reading about cameras so we can one up all our pals on this site.

That being said, if you're thinking of a D3200 make sure your Nikon lenses are the S or I versions that have an Auto Focus motor built into the lens, otherwise your lenses won't Auto Focus on a D3200 and similar cameras which need to use the motors on the lens and not built into the camera body.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2012 at 05:59 UTC
In reply to:

JPHickey: I've taken gallery quality photographs with my Nikon 5200 (12.1 MP), because I always have it with me. Convenient that it has image stabilization, of course.

On the other hand, I bought my first Nikon F Photomic in 1964 with the f1.4 lens, when visiting the Olympics in Tokyo. Over the years I enjoyed various Nikon cameras, and ever an Olympus now and then.

I've loved film photography, I migrated to digital around 2000, and I still use the original Fuji S2 in my studio. However, probably because I've enjoyed painting with acrylics for years (for enjoyment, not serious sales), a digital photo is the raw material to develop and satisfy some sort of intuitive vision. Most viewers see the result as being a fine, though I may have spent hours diddling around with it. Or sometimes I'll just go on ahead and create something more artistic. I may even end up with several versions (a labor of love).

Considering my approach, the more megapixels the merrier! Creativity breaks the rules!

I'd sure like to buy your 12MP Nikon D5200! I'll pay almost any price for one!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2012 at 21:09 UTC
In reply to:

Alizarine: Makes me wonder what Nikon will put in the successors for the D5100, D7000 and D300s.

@ Tee1up Just get a D90 while Nikon still makes them. You can't go wrong on this great camera that has almost as much as the D7000. Its one of the few Nikons that never has needed a software upgrade! You could even look for a good used one to save a few buck$. D90 also will use almost any lens Nikon has ever made. It also has a top view screen unlike D3*00, D5*00, D40x which leave off this valuable info screen & force you to go inside to the menu. That way for under $800 you can still LOVE your old Nikkor lenses and even get more if you choose.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2012 at 19:40 UTC
In reply to:

mbot: No Bracketing, so Nikon is "DICTATING" that we are not allowed to do proper HDR...a__holes. They put us in a corner and demand we pay "more" for the D5200, but they obviously are not thinking correctly, they don't seem to realize their competitors are offering bracketing in their entry level models. The Sony A57 is only $100 more and it blows this D3200 out of the water, it does not even have the now "essential" "standard" "ubiquitous" articulating screen, go shove it Nikon, the Sony A57 has all these essentials and more, plus FHD 60fps video at 28mbps, plus bracketing, plus super-quick full-time autofocus while shooting video with full manual control, and also a lower noise sensor with plenty of detail and better dynamic range; now tell me people, are you going to get a Sony a57 and do things properly for a good low price, or save $100 and get a kick up the ass from Nikon with a noisy sensor and lots of missing features. There you go, i've solved your problem for you, go buy the a57.

Do you work for Sony and they sent you over here to trash Nikon's new camera because it will be such a hot seller? It sure seems like it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2012 at 09:07 UTC
In reply to:

Nathaniel George Weir: So heres the mega pixel count for Nikon cameras.
clueless picture taker: d3200 24.2 Megapixels
amateur: d5100 16.2 Megapixels
semi-pro: d7000 16.2 Megapixels
pro: d300s 12.3 Megapixels
pro: d800 36.3 Megapixels
Very pro: D4 16.2 Megapixels

So why would nikon put an obsurdly large megapixels sensor in a $700 camera? Because Nikon know that people who buy these budget consumer cameras, shoot in the green box mode (auto), and are too stupid to understand that having so many megapixels doesn't make you take better pictures. Most people assume that if you have more megapixels, then your camera is better and you are a better photographer. 95% people that are in the market to buy a d3200 won't print photos that are bigger than 8x10. There's a reason that the D4 has 16 Megapixels. Because real pros that take great pictures don't need a camera that has 16 Megapixels. I have printed a 24x36 print from a 12 Megapixel and the print quality is fine. I doubt that people who will take

@ Ashley. Perhaps Mr. Weir, even though age 16, has more intelligence about photography than you.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2012 at 08:00 UTC
On Why make a small-sensor mirrorless camera? article (279 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nerak50: What is someone who is looking for a camera that takes great pictures to do??? Nearly every comment is negative on most every camera. I come to these sites for help. Is there ANY camera worthy of praise?? I just want to purchase a camera, point and shoot or DSLR that takes great pictures AUTOMATICALLY. I know nothing about aperatures or anything. Please help!!

The only way to get GREAT pictures consistently is to become a GREAT photographer! Did you think it was like a TV set and you just turn it on and get a great picture? Oh, to be constantly suffered fools in the Photo Arts field. They want instant greatness just because they have a little money.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 28, 2011 at 20:02 UTC
On Nikon V1 and J1 - hands-on first impressions article (245 comments in total)
In reply to:

IcyVeins: I've got to admit, even though I am unexcited about the camera itself, those awesome color choices almost make me want one. Think how cool it would look to have a red camera with a green lens! Or Teal with a pink lens!

Then you could have a yellow tutu with pink trim to go with your sweet camera.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 10:02 UTC
On Nikon V1 and J1 - hands-on first impressions article (245 comments in total)
In reply to:

psandham: So now I can put my 70-200 f/2.8 on a pink body and get into all of those sports and concert events!

FTH How do you know you couldn't bring in a 85mm 1.4G lens to a concert?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 09:55 UTC
On Nikon V1 and J1 - hands-on first impressions article (245 comments in total)
In reply to:

FJG3: They will sell like hotcakes on QVC and HSN.

QVC & HSN are where manufacturers DUMP their mistakes.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 09:47 UTC
On Nikon V1 and J1 - hands-on first impressions article (245 comments in total)
In reply to:

kewlguy: as someone who learned my photography basics using Nikon FM and have been using Nikon since that day until D3 today - I feel violated looking at those stupid colored toys!

Honey, don't worry about "being violated" on a Photography website.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 09:45 UTC
On Nikon V1 and J1 - hands-on first impressions article (245 comments in total)
In reply to:

dale thorn: I love this camera at first sight. Now instead of a half-a** pocket camera like the Canon S100 or Pana LX5, I can get a much bigger sensor and nearly the same size box, with the plus factor of interchangeable lenses, and colors. Most people don't like colors, which means they are truly a sad lot.

Enjoy life, people - buy the new Nikon in a day-glo color and change your outlook, before it's too late.

Not sure I'd buy a day-glo camera, but great advise about having a day-glo LIFE.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 09:39 UTC
Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20