RRJackson

RRJackson

Lives in United States Bradenton, United States
Joined on Apr 27, 2008
About me:

Nikon F5
Nikon D700
Samsung NX10

Sigma 20-40mm f2.8 DG EX Aspherical
Samsung 30mm f/2 pancake
Rodenstock TV Heligon 42mm f/0.75
Sigma 50mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro
Sigma 150mm f/2.8 APO Macro EX DG HSM
Sigma 300mm f/4 APO Tele Macro
Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 1.4x teleconverter
Kinor 28-80mm f/3.5 Macro Zoom
Loreo Lens in Cap 35mm f/5.6 with Lubot 10x Loupe
Vivitar 90-230mm f/4.5 Close Focus
Spiratone 300mm f/5.6
Soligor C/D 500mm f/8 Macro

Comments

Total: 75, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On Samsung NX1 First Impressions Review preview (479 comments in total)
In reply to:

mike geier: what about lenses?

The primes are an excellent cost/quality combo, IMO. The 30mm f/2 was the first one and it's still one of my favorite lenses. The 45mm f/1.8 is extremely nice and very affordable. If your pockets are a little deeper the 85mm f/1.4 is one of the best of its kind, with less fringing than most of the competition and extremely fast focusing. The 60mm f/2.8 Macro is also extremely nice.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2014 at 01:49 UTC
On Nikon announces AF-S Nikkor 20mm f/1.8G ED article (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

nicolaiecostel: Finally, a replacement for my Sigma 20 1.8 I use for events. And at a reasonable price. At least they got something right for Photokina.

They even beat the Sigma's minimum focus distance, and I like that Sigma.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2014 at 10:34 UTC

Do people really buy a Leica based on how fast it will shoot? I mean, it's cool to have the larger buffer, but I thought Leicas were more about the Decisive Moment than Spray and Pray.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 24, 2014 at 16:37 UTC as 20th comment
In reply to:

Mike FL: How about Rolex releases a special edition by removing the Rolex logo. How is that sound?

People still wear watches?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 24, 2014 at 16:32 UTC
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)
In reply to:

RRJackson: Here's something I don't understand at all. Metering on modern cameras can break the frame down into thousands of segments for complex metering calculations...but nobody can seem to make a metering system that prevents highlight clipping. No way at all to reduce the exposure if the highlights are clipping? Really? In 2014 we can't make that happen? The system can analyze 91,000 segments of the frame, but can't tell if one of them is clipping?

Back on my old OM-4T there were spot-metering selections to expose for shadows or expose for highlights, but it was just exposure compensation. It overexposed by 2 stops based on the thing you put the spot meter on or underexposed by 2 2/3 stops for the shadow compensation.

Most of the digital camera metering options seem to work in similar fashion. Canon's "Highlight Protection" doesn't prevent blown highlights. It just seems to involve some exposure compensation.

This really seems like the kind of thing that processing should be able to handle. If one of those 91,000 segments of metering is blown out then you pull that exposure back. I'm not saying it always has to be engaged, but I'd like the option.

Direct link | Posted on May 10, 2014 at 14:04 UTC
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)

Here's something I don't understand at all. Metering on modern cameras can break the frame down into thousands of segments for complex metering calculations...but nobody can seem to make a metering system that prevents highlight clipping. No way at all to reduce the exposure if the highlights are clipping? Really? In 2014 we can't make that happen? The system can analyze 91,000 segments of the frame, but can't tell if one of them is clipping?

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 22:20 UTC as 40th comment | 6 replies
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

BG_CX3_DPREVIEW: WOW,

this is new, DPR openly dares to quesion the existance of a Nikon.

Great piece of journalism guys, i think you summarised perfectly what most of us think about this 1 series. To behonoust, if Samsung, Pana, Sony or any other but Canon would have made the 1 series, it would have been gone long time. Its because Nikon is known fo rits outstanding DSLRs that people still migth believe the 1 seires must have something.

They have, but the pricetag is simply way off Immediatly half the price , and the thing might start selling, it will blow all PxS away. and PxS i mean the top end of the PxS at 3-400 usd.

The problem with that analogy is that none of Nikon's competitors make a small interchangeable lens camera as powerful as the 1 series. Nikon should be a lot more proactive about publicizing the insane amount of processing power and throughput of the camera. It's not like anything else you pick up at any price level. Even in Nikon's DSLR line they only have 3-4 cameras with as much processing. It allows the 1 to be a very smart, very nimble camera with an amazing way of performing tasks. It's really kind of a glimpse at how compact cameras will behave several years down the line.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2014 at 20:47 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

RRJackson: I get the too-expensive part, but the technology is amazing. It's a relatively small-sensor camera (as some have repeatedly mentioned), but it's really compact and has insane processing power. I've stood around in stores shooting with them and been amazed at the ability to shoot several exposures at once and have the camera suggest the best one. The AF is pretty great. The slow-motion video stills (or whatever they call them) are very cool. From the minute you pick up the camera you can tell it's got a ton of horsepower under the hood.

But yeah, it's pricey and the choices in optics are kinda thin, but with the 32mm f/1.2 what more do you need? I mean, it's pricey, but so is the camera. That camera and lens combo is gold, though. And with a 1/16,000 maximum shutter speed? Please. How can people disparage this little camera?

It's kind of hard to assign "value" to something that doesn't have any competition. The Expeed 3A they brought out for the series had higher throughput than the processors in any of Nikon's other cameras until the release of the D4s, D5300 and D3300. And of course the newest V1 has been upgraded to the Expeed 4A.

The amount of processing power on tap makes these cameras capable of much more than other cameras with similarly-sized sensors.

I mean, I get that the expense is an issue, but I also think the average shooter doesn't realize just how powerful they are, either. That's Nikon's fault, certainly. To most people it seems like an X20 without all the retro-cool styling and a much higher price.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2014 at 20:35 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)

I get the too-expensive part, but the technology is amazing. It's a relatively small-sensor camera (as some have repeatedly mentioned), but it's really compact and has insane processing power. I've stood around in stores shooting with them and been amazed at the ability to shoot several exposures at once and have the camera suggest the best one. The AF is pretty great. The slow-motion video stills (or whatever they call them) are very cool. From the minute you pick up the camera you can tell it's got a ton of horsepower under the hood.

But yeah, it's pricey and the choices in optics are kinda thin, but with the 32mm f/1.2 what more do you need? I mean, it's pricey, but so is the camera. That camera and lens combo is gold, though. And with a 1/16,000 maximum shutter speed? Please. How can people disparage this little camera?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 15, 2014 at 00:45 UTC as 86th comment | 4 replies

I wonder how much DxO got paid to ignore the multi-sample noise reduction of the RED sensor? Or are they going to start testing everyone's camera based on multiple exposure HDR imagery?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 00:20 UTC as 18th comment | 3 replies
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)
In reply to:

RRJackson: Still no Auto Focus Area Mode selector switch. We just completely lost that with the transition to video. "It's in a menu somewhere!"

Exactly. So instead of flicking a switch with your thumb you scroll through options in a menu like you would in a consumer-level camera.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2014 at 02:16 UTC
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (1047 comments in total)

Still no Auto Focus Area Mode selector switch. We just completely lost that with the transition to video. "It's in a menu somewhere!"

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2014 at 18:36 UTC as 162nd comment | 4 replies
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)
In reply to:

RRJackson: There's good and bad here.

The weight is a big deal. My old Olympus OM-2n weighed 18 oz. My D700 weighs 35 oz. This new Nikon weighs 25 oz. So actually closer to the OM-2n than the D700.

The grip doesn't look all that comfortable. I made do without for decades shooting with an OM-2n, but when I go back to those cameras now I miss having a comfortable grip.

The lack of interchangeable focusing screens is puzzling in a camera like this.

The locking controls are nice. Reminds me of my F5.

The price is higher than expected, but still lower than my D700 was when it was released.

Overall it seems like an excellent effort, but hopefully just the start of a move towards smaller, lighter, more practical cameras with the functionality of the film cameras Nikon was so good at building. Maybe bring back the match-needle metering of the FM3A. There's nothing better than the swing of a needle to visually tell you where your exposure is going.

Anyone can lift a 35 oz. camera. It's not about whether or not you can lift it. It's about how little it impacts your ability to do the things you're going to be doing in the course of your day. I used to carry an Ikegami tube camera that weighed about 35 pounds with an outboard 3/4" VTR that weighed at least that much. I can remember shooting with it in a stunting jet where the camera seemed to weigh five times as much in the turns. It was how the job was done, though, and we dealt with it. Shooting with a 12-pound camera years later was nicer, though. The day went better overall.

This is the thing about smaller, lighter cameras. They're easier to take to the places where they most need to be taken. Especially in places where you need both hands to get around and the weight of the pendulum around your neck starts to seem like more of an issue.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 09:05 UTC
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)

There's good and bad here.

The weight is a big deal. My old Olympus OM-2n weighed 18 oz. My D700 weighs 35 oz. This new Nikon weighs 25 oz. So actually closer to the OM-2n than the D700.

The grip doesn't look all that comfortable. I made do without for decades shooting with an OM-2n, but when I go back to those cameras now I miss having a comfortable grip.

The lack of interchangeable focusing screens is puzzling in a camera like this.

The locking controls are nice. Reminds me of my F5.

The price is higher than expected, but still lower than my D700 was when it was released.

Overall it seems like an excellent effort, but hopefully just the start of a move towards smaller, lighter, more practical cameras with the functionality of the film cameras Nikon was so good at building. Maybe bring back the match-needle metering of the FM3A. There's nothing better than the swing of a needle to visually tell you where your exposure is going.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 08:43 UTC as 831st comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Deano255: Couple thoughts:

1) BlackMagic is kicking butt because they think and act like a startup computer company, and not a stodgy old camera company. They believe in giving value for your money, not eliminating features so they can charge you more for "higher-end" cameras.

2) I have been skeptical about 4K as well. Only argument I have seen so far that makes sense is that you can crop a 4K clip and still get a high rez shot - same argument works for the Nikon D800 on the still side. The other-argument is "future-proofing" your footage, so that when the world goes to 4K (which means people will ditch their 1080p Hi-Def flat panels and upgrade to 4K) their content will be able to handle that. But 4K is a resource-hog on the editing side, and the leap from 1080p to 4K is nowhere near as great as the leap from standard def to HD, in the U.S. at least we are in a 1080p 24fps Hi Def world for a long time to come.

If you crop more than about 10% in post you'll have trouble intercutting shots without a noticeable change in quality. That's probably more a factor of the lens than the camera, but it seems to hold up in practice. Personally, I'll crop slightly to correct a minor camera tilt more often than any other reason.

The most interesting features about the 4K Production Camera are the global shutter and the compressed RAW. And of course the larger sensor. The original camera has kind of an awkward sensor size. Hard to put together a lens package for it. Of course, the pocket camera and the non-4K cinema camera are both supposed to have greater dynamic range than the 4K.

The pocket camera seems insanely nice for the size and price, IMO. It also has compressed RAW.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2013 at 15:15 UTC

Pixel density will drive things towards larger sensors. The D800 is already up above 36 megapixels. Even with a 135 sensor you're still working the glass pretty hard at resolutions like that. Stepping up to 645 will add a decade to the high end. It's been kind of a slog to get there because it's been really hard to make larger sensors, but things keep moving along.

Mitchell Feinberg had a 10 megapixel 8" x 10" back built to replace the Polaroids he used to shoot when setting up. In time I think we'll see large format backs that don't have to rely on scanning. Of course, sensors aren't flat like film so there may be severe limits to the range of the movements.

Personally, I'm still waiting for a digital 6x9 folder that doesn't weigh any more than the pocketable beasties of days gone by. Hopefully I'll still have some of my vision left by the time they roll out. ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2013 at 01:00 UTC as 42nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

RRJackson: SO they made it bigger and clunkier. Well, that sure is a selling point for a camera designed to take advantage of a small sensor. And the lenses are still huge, too.

I completely respect the sensor size and the software/hardware technology of the system, but making it bigger does not seem like the way.

There's no way that grip doesn't make the body thicker. Those measurements must completely ignore the grip.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 06:04 UTC
In reply to:

Ignacio Feito: Still a micro sensor camera... Why?

It's a good sensor size, IMO. It's big enough to yield excellent image quality and allow some degree of selective focus, but it's small enough to (theoretically) allow very small primes. The trouble is most of the lenses are big clunky zooms. Of course, the market they seem to be reaching is dominated by a desire for ultra-wide to super-telephoto zoom lenses, so they may just be feeding the beast.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 04:26 UTC

SO they made it bigger and clunkier. Well, that sure is a selling point for a camera designed to take advantage of a small sensor. And the lenses are still huge, too.

I completely respect the sensor size and the software/hardware technology of the system, but making it bigger does not seem like the way.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 04:22 UTC as 277th comment | 3 replies

Why do people always insist on zoom lenses? Why can't anyone be happy with primes?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 20, 2012 at 13:00 UTC as 285th comment | 1 reply
Total: 75, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »