JimW-203

JimW-203

Lives in United States Tarpon Springs, FL, United States
Works as a Retired
Joined on Jun 4, 2011
About me:

I have been doing photography since the early 50s while in school and later traveling the world in a variety of positions in the government and private industry. Moved from Boston to Florida in 1988; first, St. Petersburg then Orlando, and now, Tarpon Springs.

Comments

Total: 150, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Going Home in the The American Cowboy challenge (8 comments in total)

Very elegant image - nothing in the frame that is superfluous or not needed.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2015 at 01:20 UTC as 8th comment
On A Beach house - No people - Beach and Dwelling only. challenge (9 comments in total)
In reply to:

JimW-203: Earlier a number of entries were disqualified because water was not visible in the picture. Several new entries have the same problem - has something changed to prevent them from being DQed?

1) Seaside - Discovery Park
2) Carmel 2
3) Beach House (taken 1 March, 2013)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2015 at 18:59 UTC
On A Beach house - No people - Beach and Dwelling only. challenge (9 comments in total)

Earlier a number of entries were disqualified because water was not visible in the picture. Several new entries have the same problem - has something changed to prevent them from being DQed?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2015 at 08:18 UTC as 1st comment | 3 replies
On Shoes challenge (7 comments in total)

Does "any pair" exclude single shoes?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 1, 2015 at 21:41 UTC as 2nd comment
On Sony Alpha a7 II Review preview (779 comments in total)

It strikes me that the belief that the "sensor is all" flies in the face of logic. If correct, that would lead to the conclusion that in pre-digital era cameras all one would have to do to get outstanding pictures would be to pick the right film.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 31, 2015 at 21:19 UTC as 156th comment | 3 replies
On Sony Alpha a7 II Review preview (779 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I am starting to think that a Canon Camera, with a Sony Sensor, Nikon Processing, Panasonic Videos capabilities, Fuji Hybrid Viewfinder, and Olympus 5 axis stabilization would pretty be the end all be all.

If only they would all collaborate on one camera together the world would be a better place.

Whose mount for the lenses? Or, why not, a universal adapter that would allow full functionality for all lenses ever made from any manufacturer. Maybe even add "Chameleon Skin" surface for the body in order emulate any color scheme you desire.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 31, 2015 at 21:06 UTC
On Clean me please in the Dirty portrait challenge (1 comment in total)

Duplicate?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 24, 2015 at 23:23 UTC as 1st comment
On 3155305 photo in JimW-203's photo gallery (2 comments in total)

Thanks for the kind comment; I understand what you mean. Life in Beirut in the sixties was often a mix of poignant and vibrant. Multi-generational families were common and very supportive - this, I think, illustrates that.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2015 at 06:51 UTC as 1st comment

Thanks for the kind comments; while living in Beirut I spent a lot of time wandering the streets looking for opportunities like this.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2015 at 06:36 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

Papi61: Here's a great tip for you: change the name.

Perhaps to something as elegantly alliterative and exciting as "Google." ...oh, no! That's already been taken.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 18, 2015 at 21:34 UTC
On ND, 2 challenge (6 comments in total)

I assume you mean "neutral density," not "natural density."

Direct link | Posted on Mar 18, 2015 at 04:01 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

0mega: I just don't see how this can compete with Sony mirror-less.

HowaboutRAW:

You are right, even though the body/lens cost is close to 1:1, the cost/quality ratio is appealing. In absolute terms an experienced user who is familiar with what they would be getting would probably find it exciting. I do think, however a relative novice user might find the 20 1.7 more appealing if they were buying early in their experience with the camera. Generally, I think there may be two distinct groups of potential buyers:
1) the experienced and discriminating user who is looking for a casual, take-everywhere second body with a broad range of lenses that could yield excellent results.
2) the novice user who is looking for a camera that will fit easily into a busy lifestyle - all while allowing them to memorialize their activities under a broad range of conditions and expectations.
In both cases the m43 mount allows access to a very broad range of lenses that can stimulate and support growth in photography - they need never fear they will be an orphan anytime soon.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2015 at 22:13 UTC
In reply to:

0mega: I just don't see how this can compete with Sony mirror-less.

HowabouyRAW:
"Anyhow the best PanaLeicas aren't on that list. "

You are right about that.
However, I can certainly understand it. If I were showing samples that illustrated the capabilities of a camera, I would pick lenses from those most likely to represent the space in which the user would be operating: for a camera body costing somewhere in the $450 range and possessing the physical and feature characteristics of the GF7, I would probably not include lenses that cost 2 or 3 times the body cost. For a buyer to be willing to accept the premise that the ultimate cost of the camera could reach into the thousands in order to get acceptable pictures stretches credulity too far. That would just drive the consumer away. That said, once purchased and used, if the user ultimately feels the need for more (IQ, speed, sharpness, fill in the blanks), that opens the door to that never-ending search that we all know.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2015 at 20:26 UTC
In reply to:

0mega: I just don't see how this can compete with Sony mirror-less.

@HowabotRAW:
" ...these samples were shot with a kitzoom."

In addition to the 12-32 kit lens, I note the use of The Lumix 7-14, 45-200 and Olympus 75mm

Direct link | Posted on Mar 15, 2015 at 06:58 UTC
In reply to:

JimW-203: There are several bits of information I think would be useful in evaluating this camera using this set of samples:
1) Were all pictures taken on automatic or were there differences other than ISO in exposure determination?
2) Did one person process all images or did the person taking any given image process it? In other words, are we seeing one version of "to taste" or several?
3) In the case of image 2, I would like to know if the dramatic underexposure was intentional to evaluate how much could be pulled out of such dense shadow. What was the decision process?
4) So much of the dullness I see in the out doors shots, particularly distance scenes, I attribute to atmospheric haze - given that most persons viewing these images may not live in climates like Seattle, might there be some few examples to illustrate just how good the images could be with judicious de-hazing. Not just this camera, but all cameras - I can't think of a single camera that automatically clears haze.

I use the term "haze" as a general, not specific one. Many of the comments regarding the flatness, softness, lack of vibrancy, etc. I attribute to the atmospheric haze seen in many untouched jpegs straight out of the camera. It is the generally blue haze one sees with pictures taken in areas like Seattle and other areas of relative high humidity. Consequently, I believe one cannot appropriately evaluate a camera/lens combination unless one deals appropriately with this phenomenon. I merely generalize the phenomenon to reflect this belief regardless of the absolute source of the "hazing" effect

Direct link | Posted on Mar 15, 2015 at 02:18 UTC

There are several bits of information I think would be useful in evaluating this camera using this set of samples:
1) Were all pictures taken on automatic or were there differences other than ISO in exposure determination?
2) Did one person process all images or did the person taking any given image process it? In other words, are we seeing one version of "to taste" or several?
3) In the case of image 2, I would like to know if the dramatic underexposure was intentional to evaluate how much could be pulled out of such dense shadow. What was the decision process?
4) So much of the dullness I see in the out doors shots, particularly distance scenes, I attribute to atmospheric haze - given that most persons viewing these images may not live in climates like Seattle, might there be some few examples to illustrate just how good the images could be with judicious de-hazing. Not just this camera, but all cameras - I can't think of a single camera that automatically clears haze.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 14, 2015 at 17:58 UTC as 17th comment | 6 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 real-world samples article (113 comments in total)
In reply to:

Menneisyys: Would it be possible to (automatically) add suffixes to image name to show not only their ISO, but also other parameters like FL? A compact superzoom like this will be most interesting for us at the long end. (Otherwise, many of us already having a much more decent but not THAT big MILC would not bother with superzooms.) Regretfully, you need to click thru almost all images to find out which of them has been shot at (around) the long end.

My principal interest in this is as a means of evaluating the ZS50 as an added camera. I currently use DxO OpticPro 10 as my default RAW processor. It supports all my current and past cameras for which I have RAW files and offers some very intuitive options that I find very appealing. I currently have a ZS19 (an older predecessor to the ZS50) that I don't use often but like for its range of capabilities. I see the ZS50 as a way of regaining those capabilities while adding a significant improvement in IQ. That said, if I need to complicate things in order to process the files, it's just not worth the hassle. DxO OpticsPro 10 process ZS40 files just fine; what I don't know is will they add support for the ZS50 going forward. Only time and the sales volume of the camera will tell. From what I have seen, with judicious PP, IQ is definitely an improvement over the ZS40 and any of its predecessors - I think it is well worth the price as very capable travel camera and will serve nicely.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 12, 2015 at 20:43 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 real-world samples article (113 comments in total)
In reply to:

Menneisyys: Would it be possible to (automatically) add suffixes to image name to show not only their ISO, but also other parameters like FL? A compact superzoom like this will be most interesting for us at the long end. (Otherwise, many of us already having a much more decent but not THAT big MILC would not bother with superzooms.) Regretfully, you need to click thru almost all images to find out which of them has been shot at (around) the long end.

I downloaded RT 4.2.1 and they opened the DPR samples with no problems. However, it clearly would be a steep learning curve for me to use it well. Additionally, it is seems to apply no lens corrections of any type.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 12, 2015 at 18:43 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 real-world samples article (113 comments in total)
In reply to:

Menneisyys: Would it be possible to (automatically) add suffixes to image name to show not only their ISO, but also other parameters like FL? A compact superzoom like this will be most interesting for us at the long end. (Otherwise, many of us already having a much more decent but not THAT big MILC would not bother with superzooms.) Regretfully, you need to click thru almost all images to find out which of them has been shot at (around) the long end.

Which build of Therapee with support for ZS50 is most stable?
a further question to whomever processed the pictures in the ZS50 gallery: what did you use for these pix?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 22:54 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 real-world samples article (113 comments in total)
In reply to:

Menneisyys: Would it be possible to (automatically) add suffixes to image name to show not only their ISO, but also other parameters like FL? A compact superzoom like this will be most interesting for us at the long end. (Otherwise, many of us already having a much more decent but not THAT big MILC would not bother with superzooms.) Regretfully, you need to click thru almost all images to find out which of them has been shot at (around) the long end.

I second the request for some RAWs to download. The correct RAW processing does wonders for IQ. As an example, I noted several images that appeared to be duplicates, but their designation had an ACR suffix which implied to me that they were processed using Adobe Camera Raw. I believe these were comparison shots to show the difference between out of camera jpegs and jpegs from RAW. In most cases, the improvement in those from RAW was obvious (at least to me).

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 19:51 UTC
Total: 150, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »