NowHearThis

NowHearThis

Lives in United States United States
Works as a Business Analyst
Joined on Aug 24, 2007
About me:

Future Considerations:
Speakers: (This was easy to decide on...)
Front:2 NHT Classic Three (When the 1.8s finally give out)
Rear: 2 NHT Classic Two
or
Klipsch Reference Series

Current Line Up:
NHT 1.8 (2)
Verve Subwoofer (Dual 10' & 200w amp)
2-Infinity 42.5i in Custom center channel box wired in series (8O).
Polk Audio T15 (2)

Current Camera Gear:
Olympus OM-D E-M10
Olympus 14-42 II R MSC

Previous Camera Gear:
Sony A65
Sony 18-135m f/3.5-5.6
Sony 85mm f/2.8
Sony HVL-F43AM

Sony NEX-7
Sony 18-200mm OSS
Sony 50mm F1.8 OSS
Sony HVL-F20AM

Canon T2i
Canon 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon 270EX

Nikon D40
Nikon 18-55 ED II
Nikon 55-200mm VR
Nikon 35mm F1.8
Nikon SB-400

Comments

Total: 121, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1550 comments in total)
In reply to:

forpetessake: Will this article finally stop those f2=f2=f2 stupid arguments? I doubt it. Stupid arguments come from stupid people: those same people who were explained the equivalence to many times before without any success.

@ Erik Magnuson
Of course there's another way to increase shutter speed, but ultimately it's each photographers choice how they get the desired result they want. Sometimes raising the ISO might be the right option, sometimes using a larger aperture lens is the right option.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 21:22 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1550 comments in total)
In reply to:

forpetessake: Will this article finally stop those f2=f2=f2 stupid arguments? I doubt it. Stupid arguments come from stupid people: those same people who were explained the equivalence to many times before without any success.

The problem is some people think of using aperture only in terms of DOF, others think of it as a way of controlling shutter speed. Where people run into conflict is when each type of person refuses to see the others reason for using Aperture priority.

Maybe I might want F2 for the shallow DOF, maybe I want it to give me significantly faster shutter speeds, either reason can be correct to the user.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 19:11 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1550 comments in total)
In reply to:

W5JCK: Darth "M4/3" Vader, "Luke, come to the Dark Side of digital photography."

Seriously though, a good article that correctly backs up the physics and true life usage.

Will this change the minds of the M4/3 and 1" crowds? Nope. They are religiously devoted to their noisy, little cameras and quite content to believe the fanatics among them who proclaim the laws of physics to be untrue and evil. They will remain in the Dark Ages of digital photography. No Renaissance awakening for them.

And yet my M43 takes great photos just like my previous 4 APS-C cameras did. (My mistake, 3 of my 4 APS-C, my M43 meters better than my Canon did.). I will say that my NEX7 and now my E-M10 are the most satisfying digital cameras that I've owned.

Yes the bigger FF sensors are great, and with great lenses will do very nicely for many people. But FF doesn't have exclusive rights to good/great photos.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 19:06 UTC
In reply to:

molnarcs: So many people complaining about the price for "slow" lens. But speed is not everything people! Yes, $900 is not cheap, the Nikkor 18-140 is $500, but you get 1) 4 aspherical elements (Nikon & Canon has 1) 2) extra ED element (those are not cheap!), 3) weather sealing 4) better VR/OIS/IS (CIPA verified) and from the images I've seen, 5) better bokeh than any convenience zooms out there.

These are well worth the price imho. And if you look at the "premium" consumer zooms (Nikkor 16-85, Canon 15-85) - both long in the tooth (on modern bodies) and worse specs (not to mention the shorter focal range and lack of weather sealing) and difference in $100 for the Canon, $250 for the Nikkor.

With regards to the Nikon/Canon 16(15)-85mm lenses. The biggest benefit there is the wider angle starter point. Back when I shot Canon, I debated over the Sigma 17-70 or Canon 15-85. Ultimately I paid nearly twice as much for he Canon lens just to get the extra 2mm. The Fuji lens might be very good, we'll just have to wait for the reviews.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 21:01 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2979 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: When it comes the aperure, I don't see the big deal here yet. Its lens has a very uninteresting range equivalent to ƒ/5.2-8.1 compared to FF, and still quite uninteresting to ƒ/3.4-5.3 compared to FT. OK, in its category it's quite a deal, specially considering how well this lens may perform overall, its compactness and beacuse it's taking the lead when it comes to aperture.

FF-like shallow DOF is not the purpose of this camera or the aperture of the lens on it. If that's what you want, then buy that type of camera and lenses to give you that shallow DOF. The biggest benefit of the F1.8-2.8 on this camera (IMO) is to give you faster shutter speeds so you don't have to raise the ISO as much. It's quite a bit faster at the long end then the MK II.

Direct link | Posted on May 18, 2014 at 00:21 UTC
On Mockups emerge of new Olympus OM-D 'OM-G' article (332 comments in total)

OMG...Pretty much what I think the OM10 should have been named after I've got to try it out a couple of times now.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 1, 2014 at 19:29 UTC as 128th comment
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II: a quick summary article (534 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tapper123: Nice specs.

But not small or light enough to compete with RX100 series, and with its size and price it's competing against ILC's which offer far more flexibility.

I don't really see where this camera fits in. After you add the EVF especially. Just look at the new Sony A6000, the Fuji X's etc. which have even bigger sensors. Might as well get a real system camera if you're looking at something of this price, size, and weight.

I'm currenly deciding between the Sony A6000 or a Fuji X-A1, however, this G1x II, is now in the running to. The 24-120mm focal range is all i need (95% of the time). It has a high native flash snyc and HSS support to if i need it. The form factor looks nice, it's about the size of the Sony with the kit lens.
So the Canon, seems to me to be geared towards people looking for a small (note I didn't say smallest) one lens, high quality camera.
The only obvious downside is the very short 240 shot per charge battery life.
And the only question I need answered is: Has DR improved significantly over it's predecessor? If it has, then I'll be deciding between 3 cameras instead of 2.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2014 at 04:50 UTC
In reply to:

thx1138: Would take this in a heartbeat of the Sony RX100II. Sure it's bigger, but given how much bigger the sensor is and the wider FL range with faster lens it'll well worth it and it's hardly big and still pocketable. Should kill the Sony above ISO 400 for noise and probably better Canon's own APS-C DSLR's for noise too.

Good to see the optional EVF is 2.4MP too and not 1.4MP. Finally rid of that woeful OVF.

At 116.3 x 74.0 x 66.2mm and 553g, that's thicker and heavier than taping 2 Canon S120s back to back and trying to shove them in your pocket. While you might be able to (albeit not comfortably), you're sure to get some funny looks from that bulge.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2014 at 06:43 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II: a quick summary article (534 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eigenmeat: 12.8MP at 2014 is a bit of let down at 2014 to be honest. Especially with a sensor this large and lens this fast(less diffraction prone). Sony can squeeze fully usable 20MP 1'' sensor on its RX100/RX10 series (especially the RX10). No reason Cannon cannot squeeze a good 16-18MP on a 1.5'' sensor.

Originally, I thought the 12MP was a bit low, then I started thinking. The largest print I made in 2013 was 16x20 (which is a 4:5 aspect ratio). Using as much area as possible from the 4:3 dimensions on the Canon that leaves me with a 3900x3120 pixel image in which to make a that print. If I had a 16mp 2:3 sensor, when I crop to make the print, I'll be throwing away quite a few pixels and end up with, at best 4080x3264. That's a negligible difference and one that won't make a difference - even on a large print. So while 12mp might seem outdated, for some things it's perfectly acceptable. Even if I get a 4K tv someday, I still won't be able to see the image at 100%.

One more thing a 5:4 crop from the Canon 18mp sensor yield a 4320x3456 image - a mere 420x336 pixel difference. The box I typed this reply in was wider than 420px.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2014 at 05:42 UTC
In reply to:

forpetessake: And now a trivia question: name at least one superzoom lens that isn't a cr@p.

Sony SEL 18-200 (The "big" silver one). Best Superzoom lens I've ever used - even on the completely unforgiving sensor NEX 7!

I'm going to add +1 to the RX10 lens as well as the Leica.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2014 at 22:56 UTC
In reply to:

Clint009: If I could get a very nice picture at +/- 800mm, for me it is a winner already.

out of a 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm) sensor and a F5.6 lens (on the long end)... you can probably expect "ok" images - and that's if the lens is stellar.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2014 at 19:27 UTC
In reply to:

Bjorn_L: How is this the first weather resistant superzoom? The Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 has been out for 4 months and is also sealed.

Fuji's worlds first claim is bogus without an "*" pointing out that Sony beat them and that they're referring to >10x zoom lens cameras. Better yet, Fuji should have just said the XS-1 was weather resistant and left it at that. "Worlds first" isn't going to sell more cameras for them then just pointing out the feature itself. Instead it just makes them look like they're - at best, taking the superzoom category and defining it themselves for whatever suits them, or at worst, they're purposefully being dishonest in their marketing. If the latter is true then shame on them, they've had a good reputation up until now.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2014 at 15:06 UTC
On Consumer SLR Camera Roundup 2013 article (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

Antimateria: A58 IS a DSLR and is the best entry level.
Photo, the best video af, no limits in live view and tilting lcd.
In raw quality is excellent on hig iso too, in jpeg too for the target.
Kit is good and you can use 16-80 Zeiss, the best aps-c kit.
Nikon d3100?
What awful piece of s........

The A65, IMO is the best value right now. $600 with kit lens or only $800 with the 18-135 (about $200 cheaper than the SL1 or T5i with a similar lens. And about $300 cheaper than the Nikon D5300 with the 18-140.

HDR, GPS, 10fps, extremely fast AF (photos and video), excellent ergonomics, wireless flash commander, IBIS (any lens is stabilized), sweep panorama, OLED EVF, etc.

I really like mine. I've used it for everything from general snapshots to low-light concert video, to Bridal engagement/wedding photos and videos. It's extremely versatile and quite a bargain right now.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2013 at 17:45 UTC
On Sony Alpha A7 / A7R preview (2381 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alpha Whiskey Photography: So this is how and why camera makers can keep making money out of people. Over 2100 comments about a piece of gear and only a few dozen or so comments on posts to do with actual photography! :P

Most people care more about the gadget than the art. Must be human nature or something.

"Give a man a piano and he has a piano. But give a man a camera and suddenly he's photographer."

(and let the vitriol begin)

"Give a man a piano and he has a piano. But give a man a camera and suddenly he's photographer."

Best quote I've heard in a long time!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2013 at 00:41 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot RX10 Real-world Samples article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: Having already seen some RX10 JPEGs on another website, I knew what to expect. These samples won't please all pixel peepers, but viewed normally they generally look fine.

I'm having a hard time understanding why someone would prefer this camera over a DSLR or MILC considering it doesn't seem to provide a lot of chances for subject isolation, and at over 800 g, the weight of most DSLRs, it doesn't seem to offer portability that some favor. But everybody has different needs I suppose.

*sigh*, come on you've been around a while, you should know BOTH things a F2.8 lens does for you. Shallower DOF is only one of them.

RX10 set at 24mm (equiv), F2.8, ISO 200, 1/500
M43 set at 12mm, F2.8, ISO 200, 1/500
APS-C set at 16mm, F2.8, ISO 200, 1/500
FF set at 24mm, F2.8, ISO 200, 1/500

All of these will produce exposures with the same brightness. That is why my comparison is VALID, yes, it will not produce the same DOF. But it will produce the same shutter speed for a given brightness of the scene.

I often find shooting video with my A65 and 18-135 challenging, not because the camera isn't capable, or the lens isn't the right focal length... It's the F5.6 at 135mm that limits me. My Auto ISO in video only goes to ISO 1600. If I had an RX10 I could shoot at F2.8, possibly with 1 stop lower ISO even & have the correct brightness and shutter speed when shooting videos.
Bottom line: The RX10 is a cheaper, lighter alternative for those who need speed over smallest DOF!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2013 at 18:23 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot RX10 Real-world Samples article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: Having already seen some RX10 JPEGs on another website, I knew what to expect. These samples won't please all pixel peepers, but viewed normally they generally look fine.

I'm having a hard time understanding why someone would prefer this camera over a DSLR or MILC considering it doesn't seem to provide a lot of chances for subject isolation, and at over 800 g, the weight of most DSLRs, it doesn't seem to offer portability that some favor. But everybody has different needs I suppose.

@marike6

The least expensive DSLR/DSLT option is in a Sony/Sigma setup:
Sony A58/A65
Sony 16-50/2.8
Sigma 70-200/2.8
but this setup costs over $2500 and weighs 92oz - that's almost 4x heavier than the RX10.
The smallest and M43 option is:
Pany GM1
Pany 12-35/2.8
Pany 35-100/2.8
This set up in only a few oz heavier than the RX10, BUT it costs OVER $3500 - and you can't even mount a flash on this setup.

The RX10 is a steal at $1300 for a24-20/ 2.8

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2013 at 03:25 UTC
On Panasonic DMC-GM1 preview (639 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dark_Knight: Wow! Shutter speed is 1/16000 sec! I can shoot into the sun wide open!

Even better...using the electronic shutter will mean no "shutter-slap" to induce blur into your image for normal shooting.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2013 at 05:16 UTC
On Panasonic DMC-GM1 preview (639 comments in total)
In reply to:

Deleted78792: Great job by Panasonic on the body. Imagine how much smaller the lens could have been if they opted to go the fixed lens route. The lens would have been retractable inside the camera body, the mount space could have been saved, and sensor to lens distance could have been reduced... all to result in a much closer form factor in lens- collapsed state to RX100. Then it would have been pocketable, and potentially an RX100 killer.

Why are M43 manufacturers so averse to making a fixed lens camera? Surely the RX100 makes profits and so could a fixed lens M43 camera. They already have so many camera models with mounts for those who want interchangeable lenses. Panasonic missed this opportunity to provide a pocketable larger-sensor fixed lens camera. Half measures.

Most consumers would still want a zoom. This is however, a nice offering by Panasonic.

[edit] a hotshoe would have been nice.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2013 at 05:00 UTC
On Sony Alpha A7 / A7R preview (2381 comments in total)
In reply to:

Leok: Why are the 24-70 and 70-200 only f4? Panasonic already offers amazing f2.8 versions for micro 4/3 and Olympus has announced a 70-300 f2.8

As usual with Sony, interesting camera let down by expensive underspecced lenses.

@Leok
If Sony had chosen to use a small sensor like the Panasonic/Olympus, I'm sure these would be faster. But given the small size of these Sony's coupled with the FULL FRAME sensor, F4 is reasonable.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2013 at 01:06 UTC
On Olympus PEN E-P5 Review preview (494 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThePhilips: "The issue is most prevalent at shutter speeds between 1/80th and 1/250th of a second, and most obviously visible when using short telephoto lenses [...]"

Wow. That's a biggie. No, that genormous and unacceptable for a camera positioned that high.

P.S. Gotta try to see whether the touch AF would do anything with the shutter shock on my GX7.

I nearly bought and EPL1 but this issue kept me from buying it and other Olympus cameras. Until they implement an Electronic First Curtain shutter, those light weight Oly's will continue to suffer from Shutter-shock.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 4, 2013 at 00:48 UTC
Total: 121, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »