rjx

rjx

Lives in United States Santa Clara USA, CA, United States
Works as a Odd person & noncontributing member of society
Joined on Oct 2, 2007
About me:

Learn as much about photography and create photographs people enjoy.

Comments

Total: 148, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

JaimeA: Reading the specifications we found out that this camera has NO image stabilization. Totally nuts if you like closeups, interior and night shots.

It's common knowledge the camera doesn't have image stabilization. None of the X100 cameras had IS. Typically image stabilization is not needed for wide angle lenses compared to a telephoto lens with a very narrow angle of view. The main reason people like IS on wide lenses is due to the emergence of DSLR's being used for film making. Other than that, IS has never been a needed feature of wide angle lenses for photography.

None of Fuji's primes have stabilization. Only the zooms. Why would Fuji put IS in the the X100 camera? If Fuji wanted to give the lens OIS, they could have. It's a very unnecessary feature that would only make the camera more expensive.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 13, 2014 at 19:04 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

jorg14: Great camera that serves a niche market.

@ jeremyclarke
The X100 series is one of the greatest digital camera lines for street shooters ever produced (if you're into the classic 35mm equivalent). In fact, even though the teleconverter is a bit bulky, I feel the X100 series camera is like a great interchangeable lens camera if paired with the wide angle and tele converters. In that case, it's a very small, light, 3 lens system, imo.

But the X100's are really a beast of a camera for street photography. And a large part of their street success is the optical viewfinder. The X100's are truly special camera's.

I replaced my X-PRO1 + Canon FD 24mm f/2 with an X100S for street duties due to the size and weight difference of the X100S. An X-Pro1 w/ the XF 23mm is huge compared to the X100's with the tiny built in 23mm lens.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2014 at 19:13 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

joyclick: Now,that's a camera !!!

@ the lens being obsolete.

How ignorant can you be?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 08:12 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

Craig Atkinson: still no snap function...GR rrrrrrr

On my GR the way I have it set up is:

Fn1 Snap focus distance
Fn2 AF / Snap

So if i'm in snap focus mode already, all I have to do is push Fn1, then push up/down until I have the focus distance I want and push OK.

I prefer the X100S for setting my focus distances. Don't even get me started on the GR's manual focus adjustment process. Press and hold the up button while using my index finger to move the dial.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 07:38 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

Craig Atkinson: still no snap function...GR rrrrrrr

As an X100S user, it's pretty fast to set the focus distance since the scale is displayed on the lcd / OVF / EVF. From the time I determine I want to change the distance, it only takes 2 seconds or less.

Also, as a GR user, it would be cool to have snap focus on the X100 series. But the time to set the focus distance in each camera is about the same time (for me).

I prefer it it on my X100S because all I have to do is look and turn the focus ring. And I can quickly set whichever distance I want instead of picking from 6 presets.

On the GR I can also use the AEL/AFL button to focus quickly at a certain distance and it will stay at that distance until I change, or turn off the camera. Whichever comes first. I think it would be great if we could override the snap focus presets with our own custom distances.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 07:38 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

xpanded: Surprised Fuji is not going full frame. Hopefully next time dropping the X-Trans sensor as well.

I'm not surprised at all. Especially after Fuji had Zack Arias made that ridiculous video saying why full frame isn't needed.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 06:53 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

bigdaddave: Emperor's new clothes, retro is always best.

A fixed lens, utterly limiting, a pointless exercise in posing

A fixed lens might be limiting to someone that only uses a zoom. But anyone buying an X100 series camera (and that's a lot of people) shouldn't feel the fixed lens is limiting because if so, they wouldn't buy it. They have the choice. So many great options out there. I'd bet that 85% or more of x100 series users are more than happy with the fixed lens. Myself included.

Actually, i'm convinced if a person uses a fixed lens for a good amount of time, preferably a 35mm equivalent, that it will make most people a better photographer.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 06:48 UTC
On Very flashy: Ricoh unveils Pentax K-S1 DSLR article (206 comments in total)
In reply to:

KL Matt: Looks like a poor unsuspecting K5 got some bizarre disco mirrorless rammed down its throat and unfortunately lived to tell about it.

I want to see KL Matt buy one and eat it.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 28, 2014 at 01:04 UTC
On Fujifilm X30 First Impressions Review preview (453 comments in total)
In reply to:

MrFlash: Big fan of the Fuji X series, but the X30 is a disappointment. The OVF is what made the X20 a special compact zoom. The X30 appears to be just another 'me too' camera like the Canons and Sonys of the world.

I'm obviously a fan of Fuji. But I definitely wouldn't put Sony in the "me too" category. Sony has been disrupting the camera market for a while now, releasing unique cameras (RX100, RX1, A7, RX10). I have a lot of respect for Sony taking risks on cameras like those. And they're all very nice too.

Fuji has done a lot too. And I wouldn't really put them in the me too category just for the X30.

Canon and Nikon defiantly deserve the me too category for their Powershot and Coolpix P7000 compacts with the exception of the Coolpix A and G1 X. Though the Coolpix A was too expensive (compared to the Ricoh GR) and the G1 X was flawed. But at least they took a chance on those two cameras. With another exception of the Canon S90 / 95, all their other recent compacts are "me too's" though. Even some of their DSLR's. But I like how Nikon took a chance with the D800 and 1 cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2014 at 06:43 UTC
On Fujifilm X30 First Impressions Review preview (453 comments in total)

Sounds like a nice photographic tool.

But come on. 2/3? In the 3rd quarter of 2014?

I really feel Fuji could have elevated their game by making this at least 1".

For the older X10, fine. And for the X20, okay. But not for the X30.

Personally I'd like to see an APSC sensor, but that might hurt X100S/T sales. So I really don't think it would have been unrealistic to put a 1" sensor in this nice camera. Sigh. I guess a bigger sensor will be the big selling point for the X40.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2014 at 06:26 UTC as 135th comment | 3 replies
On Niko announces service advisory for D810 'bright spots' article (379 comments in total)
In reply to:

newe: Personally I think this camera is already out of date...bright spots should never be happening at this point in imaging. I'm waiting for the D820...in the meantime my camera phone will suffice.

If using a camera phone is a nice alternative to a d810, then the d810 or future 820 is the wrong camera for you.

Your comments have a troll-like tone.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 19, 2014 at 21:18 UTC
On Sony announces Alpha a5100 compact mirrorless camera article (106 comments in total)
In reply to:

c76: for $100, A6000 might be better choice.

Ozyxy

It's how you use it that counts ;)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 18, 2014 at 07:25 UTC

On a lighter note.

This monkey makes better selfies than 99% of the selfies made by humans.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2014 at 22:27 UTC as 493rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

vFunct: The person responsible for the creation owns the copyright. Photography equipment "operators", like this monkey, do not own copyrights.

If that were the case, then the assistants of high-end photographers would own the copyright to the photos, instead of the photographers, who normally act as directors. Most high-end photographers have assistants hold the camera and operate them and take the actual shot, instead of of the photographer themselves.

This is also why the NFL owns the copyright to their work, instead of the cameraman.

The big mistake people make is assuming photography is the art of operating cameras. It actually involves much more than that, including planning, production, styling, lighting, post-processing, etc..

It's very amateurish to consider photography as only taking pictures.

Excellent post and very spot on!!

I've spent some time learning about copyrights and everything you stated is correct.

"It's very amateurish to consider photography as only taking pictures."
I agree 100%

Operating the camera is the easiest part of being a photographer and ANYONE can do it. Even a ..... well, you know hehe.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2014 at 22:23 UTC
In reply to:

CatchAlive: So, photographers using sensors for taking pictures (using light or movement detection...) are not the author of their photo? Because it's movement/light/sound that release the shutter at the end... :-/

If I was to use your camera and I made a picture with it, I would be the copyright holder. Even though it was your equipment.

The pictures of the monkey were not taken by the owner of the camera / uploader, therefore wikipedia is within their rights.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2014 at 22:16 UTC
In reply to:

Valiant Thor: As I observe people and society I am 100% convinced that the smartphone is the worst invention in the history of the world, bar NONE. It has turned a once observant and interactive society into pathetic, electronic addicted, anti-social zombies who walk around with their glazed empty eyes affixed to those crappy little LCD boxes glued to their hand, their thumb frantically pushing stupid little chicklets around the screen with the look of a meth addict on their face and mortal fear in their mind that they would accidently miss one non-essential, meaningless message from an emotionless fellow zombie doing the same thing. They roam the malls dressed in jackass attire of distasteful, offensive, or sports related t-shirts, baggy silk exercise pants, bright Nike clown shoes, tattoos, and all the while radiating themselves with dangerous levels of packet-data microwave energy. The corporate illuminati puppet-masters must be laughing their billionaire butts off. Other than that, nice phone!

I agree with you!!

I look at it this way.
Many people with all their fancy gadgets under the illusion they're"connected," when in reality I feel they're really disconnected, walking around like zombies with their face looking down into their LCD, oblivious to everything around them. They're pathetic.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2014 at 03:39 UTC
In reply to:

Johannes Zander: Paper layers instead of Photoshop layers.

Brilliant idea!

This must be art!

I appreciate the hands on approach. Makes it more intimate to me. Probably is more enjoyable having everything out in the open in front of you instead of having to use a mouse or tab, zooming in and out, clicking, dragging, etc.

Doing something like this by hand makes it more of a "one of a kind" instead of being able to mass produce it with a sterile digital file.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2014 at 19:10 UTC
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: Gimmickry, not photography.

"Gimmickry, not photography."

More like creative, thought provoking, original, fresh, etc. A photographer that's saying something with his work instead of repeating the same old photos everyone else is doing.

Whether you like his work or not, at least he's trying to be original and doing a pretty good job at it. And this could lead to bigger and better things in the future that maybe you might actually appreciate.

If people like Michel Lamoller didn't take risks, photography would be pretty boring at times.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2014 at 19:05 UTC
On Flickr launches image marketplace initiative post (37 comments in total)
In reply to:

rjx: Dear Flickr,

Why the hell are images so slow to load when looking at photostreams? If I browse 500px.com, their images load MUCH faster than Flickr's. I really wish Flickr would do whatever 500px is doing and make their site faster.

47872Mike

Ever since Flickr's first big change last year, the justified layout loads slowly for me. I constantly need to wait for images to load.

500px, on the other hand, has a similar looking layout yet their images load quickly for me.

It would be nice if Flickr could do whatever 500px is doing regarding loading times.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2014 at 20:57 UTC
On Flickr launches image marketplace initiative post (37 comments in total)
In reply to:

rjx: Dear Flickr,

Why the hell are images so slow to load when looking at photostreams? If I browse 500px.com, their images load MUCH faster than Flickr's. I really wish Flickr would do whatever 500px is doing and make their site faster.

JDThomas

Cute response.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2014 at 20:50 UTC
Total: 148, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »