PIX 2015
rrr_hhh

rrr_hhh

Joined on Dec 29, 2002
About me:

I'm an amateur photographer, mainly interested our daily environment, architecture and steetphotography.

Comments

Total: 236, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Harry Lane: The new Gitzos are way too expensive for minor cosmetic changes.

I do also have a Manfrotto, but don't like it either : the leg locks are much better, but the feet can't be blocked at the angle you want on the center rotule and i almost threw my view camera down several time (instead of sliding forward or backward on three legs, one of the feet folds inside. Not a funny thing.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 19, 2015 at 11:25 UTC
In reply to:

Harry Lane: The new Gitzos are way too expensive for minor cosmetic changes.

@ Denooyer

Yes they last a life time, I do still have mine, but you have to wind the legs locks for hours.. Bad system. I don't like using it anymore. I may look for a Benro instead.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 19, 2015 at 11:11 UTC

What about the new leg locks ? Do you still have to wind it during hours before it is fixed ? Or is it more like a clamp ? That is not cleared by the above the text.

Oh.. my, what prices ! That is almost twice more as what I paid around the millenium.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 19, 2015 at 11:07 UTC as 21st comment | 3 replies
On Quick Review: PhotoKeeper article (101 comments in total)
In reply to:

DavidKennard: The big problem with any cloud storage for me is simply that upload speeds are too slow for it to be a viable option for anything other than web-sized JPEGs.

@ sh10453

It's the Internet providers, at least here in the EU : the upload speed is at least ten times slower as the download speed.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 1, 2015 at 15:48 UTC
On Quick Review: PhotoKeeper article (101 comments in total)

Personally, I don't see much advantages in such a server :

1) uploading originals is going to take eons, given that the internet providers allows fast download, but only very slow upload (about 10 to 1).

2) I don't like the idea to store all my pictures on foreign servers, I prefer to have them on my own server (Sinology is perfect for that).

3) for sharing some downsampled jpeg images there are already good and even free sites, like Microsoft OneDrive, or Flickr, or Google, etc.

4) for back up, an external HDD of 2T costs about the same as the annual fee for that service.

Nowadays, all main brands are competing to get your personal data (pictures, files, emails etc.) stored on their servers. Once you do, you become captive of them and they can increase prices.

I vote against storing my own data and pictures outside of my home/office. We have enough governmental agencies sniffing around and monitoring our (virtual) lives.. I don't want to give them easy access to the rest..

Direct link | Posted on Aug 1, 2015 at 15:41 UTC as 12th comment | 3 replies

I think it is better to just have two lens caps glued together ! A Velcro in a bag won't resist torsion well enough. Especially if it is hanging perpendicular to the bag like the picture shows

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2015 at 13:37 UTC as 2nd comment

Well that behavior (returning to the defaults camera settings) is the same with all the camera apps and is very annoying : it is so for instance with the timelapse movies app : I have the AFLock on the back button, but I have to reset it to the shutter release if I want to be able to focus while using an app. The same goes for using a scene mode : unless I put the AFL back to the shutter release, I can't focus my pictures if I have chosen the portrait scene mode. What a hassle.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2015 at 12:29 UTC as 60th comment
On Manfrotto unveils Digital Director for iPad Air article (46 comments in total)

The question is how do you fix that thing to your tripod/head : there is nothing about it. I'm sure that you will need additional parts and then the Cindy will go up.

NB : all my cameras are already able to talk to the iPad via WIFI, so I'm rather interested into the hardware.. Although of course for the moment what you can do with the software produced by the cameras manufacturers is nit so performant.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 14, 2015 at 18:13 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Weia: Where can I find more about diffraction limits and sensor size? Fourthirds, APSc and full frame. Especially in macro.

@ Weia

Ooops.. I hadn't seen you were doing mainly macro. Macro is a particular case. With general photography, many variables can be ignored (some tends to 0 other to infinite and thus they can be ignored). Macro is a whole other story given the much smaller distance involved.. I'm not qualified enough to say more about it.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 16:23 UTC
In reply to:

Weia: Where can I find more about diffraction limits and sensor size? Fourthirds, APSc and full frame. Especially in macro.

@ nerd2

Diffraction is dependant of aperture, length of the wave and of the circle of confusion. By convention, the circle of confusion of MFT is 2x smaller than that of FF, because for the same print size you need twice the magnification. Also those circle of confusion are convention linked to film times. With the modern high res sensors like the D810 or A7r, the diffraction strikes earlier due to the denser pixel pitch, you are right in this.

The larger the difference between the wave length and the aperture the less diffraction you see. At wide aperture there is no diffraction because the difference between the two is important. The smaller the aperture, the nearer the two becomes, the more interference you get, aka the more diffraction will blurr your picture.

Here is a link to Wikipedia concerning diffraction :
a) in general :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction#Diffraction_of_light
b) for imaging devices :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction-limited_system

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 16:09 UTC
In reply to:

Weia: Where can I find more about diffraction limits and sensor size? Fourthirds, APSc and full frame. Especially in macro.

For FF the sweet spot of lenses is usually around F8 and F11.
For MFT it is around F4 and F5.6. After that diffraction takes a toll, so unless you need the deeper DOF it is better to avoid using smaller aperture.
For more, aka mathematic formula you could may be make a search on Wikipedia .. For the sweet spots of individual lenses look at the MTF charts you can usually find in lenses reviews (for instance at Photozone.de, at DXOmark.com, at SRLgear.com, at Lenstip.com etc.)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 24, 2015 at 13:25 UTC

Thanks DPREVIEW team for offering a written interview rather than a video. I do really appreciate.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 24, 2015 at 08:31 UTC as 16th comment
In reply to:

obsolescence: The 40MP high res mode is the main feature that would make me want to buy an OMD camera -- I could fix the artifacts of moving objects by patching in upsized segments from outtakes in post. What I really need for architecture and landscape is a 17mm equiv. shift or tilt-shift lens, preferably one that's not too expensive (like Canon's is). I'll bet Samyang could build one.

@ fmian
Because it is all done in one single click ! Because it allows you to get non converging vertical without fussing around in software.
Because at near distance (studio work on product photography) you can still get everything in focus etc.. Etc..

Direct link | Posted on Mar 24, 2015 at 08:28 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II Review preview (829 comments in total)
In reply to:

ABM Barry: How do we process RAW Hi res. I downloaded the latest version of Adobe dng converter 8.8. However, none of my Adobe programs can handle the 40,000kb files and the 102,000kb have no chance?

The supplied olympus disc also states that it can't handle them, ... it states: "FILES TO LARGE"

I can't imagine the reviewers actually tested this out or they would have mentioned this problem? Or if they did, why wasn't it brought to our attention?

I probably would have put off purchase until it was sorted!

Also the shooting menue option is only jpeg or RAW+jpeg, can't seem to capture RAW only? not an option? (I don't shoot jpeg, far too limiting)

The logical question is: "What have I missed"

@Valiant Thor

The last version of Olympus Viewer is able to develop normal raws only, not the HiRes ones. You need the Olympus import Plugin for Photoshop if you want to be able to develop the HiRes raws.
That was untill the last version of Adobe camera raw was issued. Now, the problem is solved for all raws and HiRes files, if you have CS6 or CC.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 22, 2015 at 16:14 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II Review preview (829 comments in total)
In reply to:

ABM Barry: How do we process RAW Hi res. I downloaded the latest version of Adobe dng converter 8.8. However, none of my Adobe programs can handle the 40,000kb files and the 102,000kb have no chance?

The supplied olympus disc also states that it can't handle them, ... it states: "FILES TO LARGE"

I can't imagine the reviewers actually tested this out or they would have mentioned this problem? Or if they did, why wasn't it brought to our attention?

I probably would have put off purchase until it was sorted!

Also the shooting menue option is only jpeg or RAW+jpeg, can't seem to capture RAW only? not an option? (I don't shoot jpeg, far too limiting)

The logical question is: "What have I missed"

The limit may be that you need a PC with a processor which can handle 64 bits. I seem to remember that the Photoshop plugin offered by Olympus on their CD states that it won't work on a 32bits machine.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 22, 2015 at 06:47 UTC
In reply to:

Andrei Todea: This guy doesn't have a clue about photography. I just love how he measures image stabilization in steps instead of stops. What an idiot!

Don't you think it could just be a language problem ? May be he isn't an anglophone speaker.. Not everyone has English has his native language

Direct link | Posted on Mar 15, 2015 at 07:43 UTC
In reply to:

rrr_hhh: Bahhh another video where you will loose half an hour instead of reading the gist of it in five minutes..

This is not fair for non anglophones !

@ Richard Butler : thanks for taking notice of my comment. But reading speed being much faster than speaking and hearing speed, a video will never be as effective as a written text.. Hiwever, i understand that writing takes time, probably more time than creating a video ?
Anyway, i'm sure it takes you a lot of effort too.. So i just wanted you to hear the voice of those that prefer reading to seeing videos.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 20:43 UTC

Bahhh another video where you will loose half an hour instead of reading the gist of it in five minutes..

This is not fair for non anglophones !

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 17:42 UTC as 11th comment | 7 replies

I hate video : especially this one. That guy seems to have something interesting to say about focusing, but he is speaking so fast that it is not understandable for persons like me who aren't native English speakers.

Plus it takes way too many time to look at it.

Give me the same thing in a text illustrated with a few pictures.. That is all what is needed.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 18, 2015 at 15:41 UTC as 79th comment | 1 reply

Great post ! I agree with most things you said, owned a Canon 5Dc then also several Olympus MFT up to the E-M5. Updated to a Canon 6D but now also own a Sony A7r and regret that update to the 6D which I don't use anymore.

What the EOSm misses more than lenses (that could come) is an integrated EVF. I know there is an optional one, but from my experience with the E-P3 I find it to be an annoyance. It makes the camera cumbersome to store and you have to add about 200$ if you want to use one.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 09:35 UTC as 62nd comment
Total: 236, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »