Lives in United States San Tan Valley, AZ, United States
Works as a Geologist
Has a website at
Joined on Apr 10, 2010


Total: 14, showing: 1 – 14
In reply to:

Mister Roboto: While the photo is good, I don't think it is worth that money. Not even close to 1/1000th of the price. It is ridiculous and most likely bogus that someone in the right mind will buy a photo at that price. A worthless homo sapien IMHO.

In regards to the comment by "Mister Roboto"...any object is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2014 at 20:55 UTC


Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2014 at 20:54 UTC as 51st comment

Why would anyone want the Leica X when the Fuji X100S is on the market?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 23:50 UTC as 33rd comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

retro76: I hate when company's do this. Basically they are saying; you know how our 1.2 lens has crappy bokeh, well here we fixed it by adding a filter, all you need to do is give us $500 more and your good to go. Shame on you Fuji.

No, I disagree completely! All things change...nothing stays the advances and improvements are made. Now buyers will have the option of two different 56mm lens options for their system! $500 does seem like a steep price in my opinion...but that is merely my opinion. If Fuji or any other company thinks that the market would support a price of $3,000 for this lens...they would sell it for that.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 11, 2014 at 00:14 UTC
On Ricoh surfs into action camera market with WG-M1 article (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

EHDesigns: Hmm, Could it be a repackaged/re-branded PIXPRO Kodak SD1 from JK Imaging?

No it is not.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 11, 2014 at 00:06 UTC
On Very flashy: Ricoh unveils Pentax K-S1 DSLR article (206 comments in total)
In reply to:

George Veltchev: amazing tastelessness ... but some kids from Ordos ( Inna Mongolia ) will love it !

If you don't like it...don't buy it. This would really be a boring world if everybody liked the same thing. I don't care for it either...but if Pentax can expand its market much the better.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 30, 2014 at 22:31 UTC

Looks like a fantastic lens1

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2014 at 12:22 UTC as 18th comment
On Walmart sues photographer's widow over family pictures article (200 comments in total)

This is a ridiculous story. On the surface, it certainly appears that Walmart is being greedy...trying to steal the photos from the copyright holder. But perhaps it would be better to hear the rest of the story prior to judgement. What if the photographer is trying to get $1 billion from WalMart for the photos or some other overbloated price? Is the photographic studio violating any previous agreements on photo reproduction? However, it is quite likely that WalMart is trying to taking advantage over the photo studio simply because they have the power...and that is wrong!

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 12:08 UTC as 67th comment | 2 replies
On Pentax K-3 preview (959 comments in total)
In reply to:

RolliPoli: Please check a Pentax lens 'road map'. Their range of lenses is one of the best. Pentax has a stunningly good 31mm f1.8 lens. I'm sure you won't be able to tell the difference between its field of view and that of a 35mm lens.
Their 35mm f2.0 is great and there isn't a meaningful difference between its f2.0 and f1.8
As for "cheap" , when it comes to buying lenses, smarter people than I have said that there are just three main features to select from and the photographer can only ever have two of those.
They are: 'Cheap', 'Fast' and 'Sharp' Now, select any two!

There is no such thing as a "reasonable" price. Items are priced at the value the market will bear. They must be selling enough of them at that price to make the lens profitable.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 28, 2014 at 00:29 UTC
In reply to:

alexzn: A useless feature if I ever saw one...

This feature is only useless to someone that finds it useless. A good feature does not have to be useful to all.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2014 at 01:26 UTC
In reply to:

maksa: > infrared photo from 2009

From August 2008, please correct.

Why...does it really matter for the purposes of this article?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 12:00 UTC
On Pictures emerge showing widely-leaked Fujfilm 'X-T1' article (373 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zoron: where's the body flash?

I don't you seriously think it is hidden somewhere on the body?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2014 at 00:49 UTC

Wonderful design...showing a great sense of imagination!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2013 at 21:28 UTC as 36th comment
In reply to:

Dave Oddie: Pentax seem to have forgotten the K-5 is an aps-c camera when designing the 40mm lens.

On a full frame camera that focal length is great (I owned an Zuiko 40mm F2 in film days) but on aps-c with a f.o.v equal to 60mm I can't think of a more useless specification for a prime lens.

Pentax are not the only one to do this. Sony brought out a 50mm "portrait" lens when that is really too short to be a classic portrait lens with a f.o.v of a 75mm.

They are both far too conservative and seem to think they should stick to focal lengths that are really for full frame rather than develop specifically for aps-c. A 28mm prime which is approx 42mm f.o.v would have been much better.

I doubt if Pentax forgot anything. They designed exactly the lens they wished to build and sell. It really comes down to a matter of preference by the photographer.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 8, 2012 at 19:21 UTC
Total: 14, showing: 1 – 14