sdyue

Giottos: look to UK, not Italy, for current webpage:

NEW*:
http://www.giottos-tripods.co.uk/index.php?page=new

New Silk Road Series - YTL tripods:
http://www.giottos-tripods.co.uk/index.php?page=products&cat=50ec1218ae834

NEW YTL 3D Column Tripods:
http://www.giottos-tripods.co.uk/index.php?page=productpage&cat=50ec1218ae834&product=50ec39504d3d2

YTL 9353
YTL 8353
YTL 8354

YTL 9383
YTL 8383
YTL 8384
_________________________________________________

NEW YTL Vertical Column Tripods:
http://www.giottos-tripods.co.uk/index.php?page=productpage&cat=50ec1218ae834&product=50ec2875c1fbf

YTL 9253
YTL 8253

YTL 9283
YTL 8283

YTL 9213
YTL 8213
_________________________________________________

YTL Model# Key:

9000 Series (Aluminum Material)
8000 Series (Carbon Material)

0300 Series (3D Column TRIPOD)
0200 Series (Vertical Column TRIPOD)

0050 Series (5kg Wt Capacity)
0080 Series (8kg Wt Capacity)
0010 Series (10kg Wt Capacity)

0003 Series (3 Leg Sections)
0004 Series (4 Leg Sections)

Tools.

Some tools are far more effective than others.

If one is doing a lot of pp after using the tool, then the initial tool either isn't so good or the tool user isn't so good.

D600 and D800... 'may' have ExpSim LV, at least 'partially' (restricted to +/-5 EV live preview)

Canon has no such restrictions... normal at: 0 - 20EV (ISO 100) 'live preview'

Anyone seasoned/mastered direct 'digital image' sensor exposure determination in the last 12-13 years (PowerShots since 2000, or EOS LV dSLRs since 2005) with Full M/M ISO will be very familiar with 6D's 'digital era' ExpSim LV (or 'digital era' ES-LV of PowerShots) with its EOS-1 Dual controls... and non-interrupting menuless exposure determination creative adjustment controls... 'live preview'... aka (2012/2013)... Canon's "Final Image Simulation" (new name for Exposure Simulation 'ExpSim' LV (Metering Mode/Range: Real-time Evaluative metering with the image sensor); but a longstanding feature since 2005-EOS-LV-dSLRs and 2000-PowerShot dcams)

repeat, reiterate, improve... continue...

PowerShot users who are Full M/M ISO-Savvy will be comfortable with any EOS LV dSLR, including the ExpSimLV 6D... ExpSimLV XXXD/XXD/M, ExpSimLV 7D, ExpSimLV 5D, ExpSimLV 1D...

none of the Nikons even have EOS-1 Dual controls, never mind the 'odd few' that have Full-Time ExpSim LV... (D3/D4)

thx for review of Canon 'super-zoom'... all the better, one that offers super-broad wide-long 24-1200... (had asked/ponder a 24-1200 before... glad it's finally here)

no doubt 'super-zooms' wiill never compete with 'prosumer bridge' dcams (PowerShot G is Flagship Canon prosumer, not the SX), but super-zooms remain the pinnacle of pushing BOTH small sensor tech and wide-to-long lenses... i'm happy to see each next gen are better both areas than previous

now all Canon has to do is stop stalling on offering a '24' WA FoV on their PowerShot G series... '28' just doesn't meet my needs

already have their EF24 f1.4L II and TS-E24 f3.5L II for my FF 5DMkII dSLR... what more do they expect... restrict me from having a suitable 'carry around' PowerShot G lacking the '24'???

the screen IS the viewfinder...

the EVF is just a smaller version (albeit 'restricted to your face' like conventional OVF/Optical Tunnels)

i'm more interested in HYBRID-OVF-EV BINOCULAR-Finders... NOT MONOCULAR-Finders still currently dominating dcams...

So we could have true binocular-stereo 'ViewFinding' in Natural 3D (dual mode optical-electronic viewing), not UNNATURAL 2D monocular viewing.

of course I'm not talking about 'cheap monocular 2D dcams tacked onto a binocular'... not the same thing.

none of their tests account for optimal jpeg engine setup (default vs custom) where default settings are clearly NOT optimal for lit conditions being shot in, and such non-optimal 'defaults' VARIES widely from model to model (within a mfr) as well as VARY widely from other mfrs (mfr-to-mfr).

their approach is as flawed as the assumption everyone just shoots in 'default' modes; which is preposterous.

Extra Mp (due to larger sensor area size) does offer more flexible creative crop options, it's more about the relevance of how well particular pixel sizes perform 'like-size-for-like-size'.

There is nothing about the Sony RX-100 that is a 'engineering marvel' at all, when all they do is resort to using slightly larger yr2012-pixels than all the rest, albeit plastered on a large enuf sensor size to ensure more Mp overall

Based strictly on predicting IQ on pixel density (pixels/mm of sensor), larger pixels should perform better than smaller (sensor size and Mp count notwithstanding):

Best to Worst, similar pixel densities, if same*, are truly pitted 'one-on-one'*:
1) RX100 @ 415 pixels/mm
2) FujiFilm X10/XF1 @ 455 pixels/mm
3) Pany LX7 @ 490 pixels/mm
4) Oly XZ-2 @ 533* pixels/mm
4) Nikon P7700 @ 533* pixels/mm
6) Canon G15/S110 @ 538 pixels/mm

If a sensor with SMALLER pixels happen to demonstrate superior IQ to others that are LARGER, then, it's the better pixel (superior tech).

omg... lol...
my ol' place...
where original shot was taken!

https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=43.609219,-79.639972&spn=0.000922,0.001464&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=43.609133,-79.640317&panoid=mXW7RZ1wYeWtWiqsJhKleA&cbp=13,332.49,,1,-0.78

A 'fake' single-take zero manipulation film shot of my family alongside an 'impossible/improbable' supercar I thought would be nice to pretend to have.

Shot & scanned from the old film days (a print that was strictly un-tampered from a film negative shot with my Canon T-90 SLR):

http://www.oocities.org/xzotyqarz/Audi-AVUS-Quattro-at-Home-2000.jpg

I used to be on 'Supercars.net' forum, where discussion was about cars we liked, versus what we had, and also 'concept cars' we drew. So for fun, I simply created an imaginary scenario where I had a supercar (which obviously I couldn't), but some folks who came across my photo on the web said it was an example of 'photoshopped' image which simply wasn't at all. It came straight from the camera 'as is', and 'printed' as original, and scanned for digital upload. Zero tampering here. It's just a trick of DoF and Perspective (albeit a bit imperfect)

I didn't know it would be immortalized in 'archival' websites till I saw it a few days ago

lol

if you question all Moon pictures, you might as well include all Earth pictures too (all historical pics captured on film could have been faked too). of course this is absurd in either case, because fakes are easily detected. moon shots are not fake; nobody was smart enough to know how to fake them.

it's disrespectful to call someone not a real geisha when even real ones you've captured are no longer the 'real' geishas of the ancient past. get over your elitist mentality. if a Japanese girl dresses as a geisha, there will surely be degrees of authenticity, and none original. it's the 21st Century, so there's going to be a natural overlap and wide influence of 'geisha-ness' affecting those who cannot be 'original style' geishas.
this is going to be true of anything even in the west; how many in the USA are 'real cowboys'? probably none living; but all are simply modern versions of past originals. how many cowboys rustle cows for a living (not for show?). how many REAL cowboys really rustle cows and don't even remotely look like the 'ol wild west cowboy'. get a grip. you're talking nonsense.
every 'real geisha' you've taken is going to be more for cultural show, than representing a lifestyle entrenched in the Japanese past. all u may come acrss is geisha-subculture that apprx's past

there's nothing conflicting about eyes that do change in one's lifetime. happens all the time to those in that 'medium' eye color range.

24mm prime lens (FoV/AoV) would have been my preference; never 35mm or 28mm, for most of my shooting.

and agree; a fully articulating VASS (Vari-Angle Swivel Screen), giving one option for different 'extended' perspectives, is preferable to anything fixed or less flexible (perspective stuck behind the camera body; not much farther beyond).

there is no doubt majority, not all, of Japan Inc (the larger ones; financial/banks, power groups, conglomerates, old companies, and GOVERNMENT) are Yakuzakian in nature from the old era, it affects both big and small players all around (vendors/suppliers/distributors, etc). one cannot separate the two, unless it is an independent younger company that survived amongst the 'big boys' club. thus, no such thing as 'independent auditor' nor 'manager/employee' that would dare question/challenge the Yakuzakian entrenched status quo. (US Wall Street 'old plutocratic-corporatocratic' corruption isn't that far off; just different.)

PowerShot G1 X.

I just hope Canon offers a built-in wider 24mm FOV equivalent starting Zoom PowerShot Pro1 X with the same sensor; which I would instantly snatch up any day over a G1 X.

not really. with the advent of the PowerShot G1X, both m43 and 1" series seem like a 'nice niche' idea where 'small' sensor users get to have interchangeable lens flexibility, and supposed portability with 'flat primes' and 'flat zooms', but no significant IQ gains over smaller sensor digicams.

the 1.5" sensored PowerShot G1X already has IQ rivals many APS-C dSLRs, whether NEX/Sony/SLT, or other mfrs. Canon raised the bar so high w/ a mere prosumer P&S Powershot G1x, competitors are getting bleeding noses from both their 1" systems and APS-C systems.

thus we SHOULD EXPECT MORE from larger sensor systems and interchangeable lens systems, not less. and 1" sensor systems are already showing their outdatedness first time out.

this means a 'large' 1.5" integrated lens digicam (G1X, pejoratively labeled as a P&S) forces folks to rethink viability of 'lego-lens' miniature toy fun flexibility on bodies with iffy sensors, barely better than IQ of tinier sensored digicams (like G15 or P7700)

optical viewfinder is no more a piece of humor than OVF on a dSLR is a piece of humor

one can never satisfy everyone, whilst the EOS M lacks an optical tunnel or OVF or EVF, folks whine about having just a touch screen LCD (even though this is identical to millions of popularly well-liked used phone cameras with that non-optical capability (but no flexibility of lens options), like iPhone, iPad, and whatever other smartwebphones out there (Galaxy S, etc)).

ditto vast majority of mirrorless, they're stuck with less-than-direct EVFs, atop a body w/ an LCD anyway, but NO optical option.

w/ pure optical options, like the optical tunnel, at least one can preview 'framing' scenarios with the power OFF; much like what a dSLR user can do. the only difference is that an optical tunnel cannot convey resizeable zoom framing when off, but a dSLR w/ a zoom-ring lens can do so without power at all.

each are configured for its own niche. don't forget that; everyone has different preferences/needs

the RX100 is in the 'compare tool', just refresh your browser for that page:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocomparefullscreen.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=canon_eos5dmkiii&masterSample=5d3_5218&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=canon_eos5dmkiii&slot0Sample=5d3_5218&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=canon_g1x&slot1Sample=img_0021&slot2Camera=canon_g15&slot2Sample=img_0043&slot3Camera=sony_dscrx100&slot3Sample=dsc00495&x=-0.33613423624917194&y=1.3195833677454059&extraCameraCount=0

folks have to get over the fact, comparing G15 to RX100 is apple vs orange scenario, completely different category. sensor size-wise, it's 1" is between the PowerShot G15 and 1.5" G1 X. where IQ compares like sensor for like, not different.

I'm not a nikon user, but wouldn't a FF 24Mp Nikon D600 simply highlight dust due to its higher resolving power, where a meager DX 6Mp Nikon D70 wouldn't ever resolve, even if the dust were just as proliferous (same as before, but impossible to detect due to dust spots being smaller than the sensor can highlight)? had to point this out, as it may play a partial role in making folks notice 'resolved' dust where it wouldn't be before unless it was 'giant' dust intruding into the system from outside.

otherwise, on the whole, yes, the D600 probably is mfr'd under new compromised conditions, or compromised designed components, so, that's not good, as new mfr processes should improve over time rather than get worse (higher sensor resolution notwithstanding).

my 20Mp FF 5DMkII never experienced any dust whatsoever, and i was testing long term 'no lens changes' keeping my favorite 24mm prime on it, thus sealed from day-one, just to see how it fared over time.