Guidenet

Guidenet

Lives in United States Orlando, US, FL, United States
Works as a Retired Corporate Photographer
Has a website at http://faithartsvillage.com/
Joined on Sep 27, 2007
About me:

I'm a 63 year old retired corporate photographer who has also been a software engineer. My academia is largely based on Vision and my dissertation was on Fluids. I have a small studio and gallery which I enjoy on occasion. My specialty is bird photography, and I've been lucky to have had a few attempts published over the years. For the past twenty years, I worked for a large Fortune 500 company as their in-house photographer for the communications, publicity and care departments. I’ve also done their corporate meetings and events. As the company owns several television stations, making the opportunities endless.
I had to retire because I suffered a massive right side stroke in the spring of 2013. My small portrait studio and gallery are doing better than ever.
I have a daughter who is a successful Wedding Photographer. As I’ve embraced retirement, I've taken more and more shooting contracts, but only those I enjoy like the local little league baseball teams. I occasionally act as a cruise photographer for some of the cruise lines here in Florida when requested by organizations.
I also spend more and more time teaching basic photography for several resources locally as well as out of my studio located at FAVO (Faith-based Art Village of Orlando). As well as Photography, I am also a Water Color and Acrylic painter and enjoy recreating some of my favorite work in those mediums. Learning how to create art is a lifelong passion.
I'm seriously passionate about people learning exposure and the Zone System of Photography before considering themselves sufficiently astute in this craft. I’ve held several Zone System Workshops over the years as well as one Cruise based workshop. I’m also passionate about Ansel Adams’ ideas about pre-visualization. Pressing the shutter button and the camera are just one small part of the image creation process.
I started at eight years old in 1959 when my dad and I built a darkroom, him more than me. My father taught me the Zone System at a very young age. I continued as a youthful photographer, buying glass with lawn mowing money through my high school and then into college with odd jobs. I paid most of my tuition as an undergraduate shooting weddings and baby pictures as well as for the university newspaper. Many of those years I shot 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 field cameras and sheet film. In small format, I shot Pentax until 1968 when I switched to Nikon, needing a better more professional system tool. I still shoot Nikon today as well as Nikkor lenses for some of my large format gear. I also mostly shoot digital but still maintain a darkroom for up to 5x7 format. 8x10 is stored in the attic and is only black and white. I even have a Nikkor enlarging lens. Over the years, I believe Nikon has been instrumental in the creation of truly great glass.

Comments

Total: 314, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: While I agree that there is an issue with these cameras I cringe at the fact that some people think that shooting at F32 is an essential aspect to their A-PSC photography. The earliest reports were only reporting that it was an issue at focal ratios past F20.

I suspect that most people shooting at Focal Ratios that high on a regular basis with an A-PSC camera have no clue what the depth of field actually is at that focal ratio. In addition I bet they have no clue what focal ratio yields the greatest detail across the entire frame for their particular lenses. I guarantee F32 is not the most detailed focal ratio.

Some have reported it being visible at f/11 and smaller. I shoot regularly at f/11, f/16 and don't mind f/22 regardless of the diffraction boogieman, especially in the studio with white seamless paper backgrounds and maximum DOF on products. You just can't paint with too broad of a brush. There are many photographic opportunities where a wide DOF is preferred. I have all my camera's sensors cleaned around once per year, professionally at the nearest manufacturer's facility because dust and specs add to processing time in removing them. I'd be one annoyed photographer if my new camera came with those built in spots.

Direct link | Posted on May 4, 2015 at 21:32 UTC
In reply to:

jrkliny: It seems to take Canon a long time to do anything. Lens Rentals notified Canon, waited 3 days and then announced the issue towards the end of last week.

By now I would have expected to at least hear that Canon is working on this issue.

I don't think it's quite been enough time. When they respond, they should probably be very sure what the issue is even if they haven't a plan yet. As mentioned, others have probably identified it, but Canon can't guess. They have to know what the problem is when they make a press release to say they are working on a solution. A guess could end up being wrong. That would amplify the damage that's already occurred.

I would expect 7-10 days to accurately identify the issue, come up with an initial plan on how to fix it, then to construct an official response. Then they can say they are working to correct this issue and formulate a return and repair policy.

Direct link | Posted on May 4, 2015 at 18:31 UTC
In reply to:

Dimit: Canon sensor...Rebel body...would anyone expect something outstanding???
We live in 2015,in a reasonable consumer world Rebels shouldn't sell over 1k pieces..totally..worldwdle !!

They can be great cameras. My only problem with CanonUSA's Rebel line is somewhat silly of me, I know, but I hate the word Rebel emblazoned in red on a camera. It strikes me as somewhat insulting to think we Americans need Rebel on a camera to be hairy chested macho Marlboro Men. They don't use Rebel anywhere else in the world. LOL Just us.

Like I said, it's not a serious objection, just a pet peeve towards Canon's US marketing arm.

Direct link | Posted on May 4, 2015 at 18:19 UTC
In reply to:

D Bowcut: My T6s sensor is fine. Camera purchased 04/26.

That's a good sign. Thanks Doug.

Edit: I think good because this might mean a faster fix for people who have the damaged ones because Canon could use non-damaged sensor arrays from the current production run.

Direct link | Posted on May 4, 2015 at 18:04 UTC
In reply to:

digiart: If the protective glass over the sensor is coated (which it probably is) this may be caused by a problem in the coating process. This seems to me a more plausible explanation than a problem in the adhesives used to put the layers of glass together.

Several labs and other facilities have looked at the issue using photomicrography and other techniques. They've measured where these bubbles actually exist. At this time, most believe it's in the layer between the outside glass and next in the adhesive, sandwiched in and not accessible via normal cleaning methods.

There are several layers to a filter array with adhesive between each. The specs are actual spherical bubbles a few mm from the actual sensor but not on the outside. That's measurable. There are now several websites with photographs, micro measurements, diagrams and other visual aides pinpointing the issue. They are not sure what caused it, but have certainly measured where it is located at this point, and it is not in the outside coating regardless on how plausible that might appear if one hasn't checked it out.

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2015 at 15:26 UTC
In reply to:

D Bowcut: My T6s sensor is fine. Camera purchased 04/26.

I would agree. At least for the time being, I'd check it on occasion, maybe a month or so. These seem to be tiny bubbles which could be caused by the adhesive deteriorating over time. It might be a chemical reaction like oxidation. Not being a chemist, I've just theorizing, but I'd none the less do my due diligence and keep an eye on it.

Canon might do some kind of time limited repair or replacement which you could miss if you'd checked yours out, finding it clean, then assumed it remained that way.

It seems to me, since this was missed at the QA level, maybe it was because it didn't exist at that point, but might be a deterioration which developed over time and after shipping. Too early to tell, but something to consider and keep an eye on.

Direct link | Posted on May 2, 2015 at 23:52 UTC
In reply to:

D Bowcut: I "louped it" and my new T6s has a clean sensor, so I am probably the luckiest Canon purchaser in the dpreview.com diaspora. Whew!

Sensor bandwagoneers aside, before springing for the T6, I tried out the D5500 and D7200--a week each--and find this camera better or equal, respectively. Neither of the Nikon sensors demonstrated the anticipated quality issues--guess I was lucky there too.

Glad Lensrental was on-the-job. Perhaps s/n checking will help Canon track their glitch, and certainly potential buyers ought to be a bit wary. I bet many camera shops will check before purchase, but not sure about mail order...

I agree with you. As I said, return policies are good for people who find themselves with defective or a mistaken purchase. Both apply, I believe. It's the ones who buy repeated items, playing around with them and trying them out, who really need to use the Rental companies for this purpose rather than creating all those open box and used cameras for the rest of us.

Many of us, including me, detest the idea of maybe paying full price for some camera or lens someone else might have messed around with for a week or two. This is especially true when some online stores carefully repackage a returned camera or lens so it's hard to tell. It's often that or defraying the cost back to us because of open box discounts.

I would be extremely annoyed at paying full new price then finding one or two thousand clicks in the EXIF on my new camera.

I think if there are excessive clicks on a non-defective camera, there should be a restocking fee to offset the open box discount expected by the next.

Direct link | Posted on May 2, 2015 at 19:07 UTC
In reply to:

D Bowcut: I "louped it" and my new T6s has a clean sensor, so I am probably the luckiest Canon purchaser in the dpreview.com diaspora. Whew!

Sensor bandwagoneers aside, before springing for the T6, I tried out the D5500 and D7200--a week each--and find this camera better or equal, respectively. Neither of the Nikon sensors demonstrated the anticipated quality issues--guess I was lucky there too.

Glad Lensrental was on-the-job. Perhaps s/n checking will help Canon track their glitch, and certainly potential buyers ought to be a bit wary. I bet many camera shops will check before purchase, but not sure about mail order...

That was smart. Renting or borrowing a camera before purchasing just makes good sense. So many people abuse retailer's return policies these days.

Return policies are designed to protect people from defective products or mistakenly purchased products, and so they don't have to go through warranty on a product that might be dead on arrival. I believe the fraudulent use of this policy to play around with new cameras as a lazy try before you buy method just creates open boxes and used cameras for the more honest consumers, not to mention an overall higher price for everyone to offset discounts on open box models.

Rental companies exist so smart buyers like yourself who rightfully want to try before buying can do so in an above board manner. So way to go and kudos for doing it the honest way. I doubt the dishonest would admit to it in a public forum like this. :-)

Direct link | Posted on May 2, 2015 at 05:56 UTC
In reply to:

Muqdad: If RC of L.Rentals is so insistingly positive about Canon's response and reaction, and the general impression on Canon's customer service is almost of the very best out there among manufacturers, shouldn't an honest will to be helpful to Canon in this matter made him more willing to give them a supposedly deserved chance to show their good support action expected by R. Cicala himself?

Rather, he went trigger-happy and did this HUGE damage to the company we applaud for caring for and actually respecting their customers?

I can only think he believed he may lose the chance to be the one who first tells about it. This is exactly the perfect abuse of authority.

@Martian Keyboard Also NO. Tell you what, if you believe that nonsense and expect folks to wait around for their camera to fix itself, go ahead and buy one yourself. I'd bet you wouldn't.

Do you really believe the consumer should bear the brunt of this issue and it's a good idea to keep it secret? Canon and retailers can continue to sell a possibly defective camera? Canon continues to profit and a high percentage of buyers get to basically loan those profits to Canon while waiting for the sensor to repair itself or waiting for Canon to come up with some solution.

What if there is no easy solution and owners must wait for a full redesign and then ship it back for a complete sensor replacement? What if the redesign has different specs than they expected? What if the solution is to peal back the glass, dissolve the glue and put it back, essentially a refurbished camera? I just don't believe it should be incumbent on the consumer to bear the brunt of this. However, go buy one yourself.

Direct link | Posted on May 2, 2015 at 05:13 UTC
In reply to:

Muqdad: If RC of L.Rentals is so insistingly positive about Canon's response and reaction, and the general impression on Canon's customer service is almost of the very best out there among manufacturers, shouldn't an honest will to be helpful to Canon in this matter made him more willing to give them a supposedly deserved chance to show their good support action expected by R. Cicala himself?

Rather, he went trigger-happy and did this HUGE damage to the company we applaud for caring for and actually respecting their customers?

I can only think he believed he may lose the chance to be the one who first tells about it. This is exactly the perfect abuse of authority.

@Muqdad That is the most fanboy ridiculous responses I've ever heard here at DPR. People like R. Cicala have a responsibility to comment to the public when he spots issues which could easily affect a possible buying decision. Receiving six out of twenty with defective sensor arrays is atrocious and sales should probably be halted until these unsold cameras are inspected and the issue known better. Moreover, if this is caused by a rapidly deteriorating adhesive, additional quantities could be affected.

Canon doesn't need your or anyone else's protection. Quality control is their job. Had you been considering a purchase of this camera with your hard earned money, you'd probably be happy to receive this information.

Who knows how long it will take to remedy this. If it affects more cameras, it might require a retool or redesign. Who wants a refurbished camera they paid a premium to own? What kind of frustration must one go to to ship it back and wait for a possibly lengthy repair?

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2015 at 21:11 UTC
On Sony Alpha a7 II Review preview (813 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike Sandman: Sony, if you're listening out there... fix the RAW compression issue via a firmware update and I'll place my order the next day.

I think the review is on target with its complaint. They say you're a "stone's throw" from being fully equal to a FF DSLR. You'll be a hair's breadth away with lossless RAW, or perhaps an option to save as an (uncompressed) DNG.

I agree, but just look at it differently. They abandoned the SR bayonet eventually and left many stranded just like Canon and Olympus also did. Sony did inherit the A mount, but also added the E mount. Some bodies have IBIS and some require OIS. Some can use both, but regardless, that's too much bouncing around for many of us, regardless of their reasoning. It makes for a much smaller selection on any one type and I think contributes to the higher price some products tend to have. It can make it a little harder for a novice to know which to buy to match their camera. But, to each their preference. :-)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2015 at 23:24 UTC
On Sony Alpha a7 II Review preview (813 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike Sandman: Sony, if you're listening out there... fix the RAW compression issue via a firmware update and I'll place my order the next day.

I think the review is on target with its complaint. They say you're a "stone's throw" from being fully equal to a FF DSLR. You'll be a hair's breadth away with lossless RAW, or perhaps an option to save as an (uncompressed) DNG.

@Photomino We're talking mounts, not electronic connections. Don't be defensive. Also, yes, all my Nikon lenses made prior to 1977 required a one time notch which cost $25. They work in automatic mode with Matrix metering, if I desire to use them that way. Nikon allows you to add the lens data from older non-electronic lenses into the camera so no need for any other connection. The camera remembers that lens, as well. No need for adapters or changing connections. I use some of these older lenses every day for making a living. They just plain work the way they were intended.

Sony has A and E mount lenses. Some bodies have IBIS and some require OIS. Not to mention adapters. Even A mount only extends compatibility to Minolta Maxxim, not all the other Minoltas prior to that, and there were plenty when Minolta abandoned their mount.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2015 at 01:05 UTC
In reply to:

Canon 70D OR 760D Rebel T6: What is better 760D or 70D for someone who aspires to become a pro?
Still have no answer! :/

I think if you are really aspiring to be a jobbing professional, you'd not be looking at entry level tools designed for the most basic users like the 760D et al. None of the Rebel line.

To be brutally honest, once you've grasped the basics and done your time, a real pro camera body would be in order. In the Canon line, that would start with the 5D models. In the Nikon line, it starts with the D8xx models. So a 5D MkIII maybe or a Nikon D810 for new bodies. For more sports and action, you'd be looking at the Canon 1DX or Nikon D4S. So, camera bodies costing between $3000 and $6000 with good glass and other accessories will make a start. Good professional tools do not make a photographer, but they tend to hold up better. Think about it. A good professional auto mechanic might spend between $30,000 and $90,000 on their tools.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2015 at 17:15 UTC
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I really don’t understand why they put the little screen on top of the camera. That is the last place I would want information to be displayed. I have to bring the camera down to be able to check that information. What is the need for it anyway? Can’t all of that information just be displayed on the LCD screen on the back of the camera?

@RedFox88 Yes, I was thinking about what was displayed on my Nikon cameras, but even what is displayed here is way better than no LCD. Thanks. :-)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2015 at 17:01 UTC
In reply to:

paul simon king: why nothing from RRS?

@dougstroud photography I read nothing in Paul's remarks that showed any bias whatsoever. It was a question and he was ok if it were answered either way. Don't read too much into someone's remarks. To claim to be a supporter of free speech, then in the same breath to call for censorship of his post is most amazing and a bit humorous.

Moreover, as Mark says, please read his 2014 review and you'll see other brands included. I don't think he's considering political positions of the companies involved. It's a ballhead review. It's a person's opinion. Read it and enjoy it, if you want.

Doug, Mark is probably just as gay as you and I am. ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 16:01 UTC
In reply to:

Guidenet: I've always considered the big four of Arca Swiss, Really Right Stuff, Kirk and Markins to be the largest part of the Arca dovetail market with Aratech in there at a slightly lower price point. Quite honestly, I've never heard of the rest of them in both tests.

Personally, I'd not consider Gitzo because it's not Arca compatible. Gitzo is part of the Manfrotto group which is also not represented in either the 2014 or this review.

If we consider ballheads which are not Arca compatible, then we're certainly missing Manfrotto which probably has a market share larger than all these put together. Their top models are superb. I'm a little surprised at their omission. The Hydrostatic and magnesium models seem technologically interesting enough as well as being as unique as many that are represented but unheard of. ;-)

Maybe this is a list of ballheads owned by staff members and therefore readily available for review. Nothing wrong with that.

@Neroon I know one can find cheap off-brand Arca plates, but I personally find they often just don't fit well. I like the larger Markins Q20 head as well as the RSS BH55, but find that RSS fits the best on any head I've tried. Therefore, that's what I get and they are $50 plus per plate. I need one for each camera and for each lens with a tripod collar. I also have two for my macro focusing rails and one for my bellows, so that's a lot of plates and some are even more expensive than others. I haven't completely migrated over yet but we're talking between $750 and $1000 just in Arca plates by Really Right Stuff when I'm done, probably. That's something to consider.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 15:49 UTC
On Sony Alpha a7 II Review preview (813 comments in total)
In reply to:

QuantumPhysics: Can I post twice? I neglected to mention that all the lenses identified in my comment are without image stabilization. But for digital work with the A7 II they are now stabilized on three axes--you just dial in the focal length. The Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L is a zoom, but using the metabones adapter, focal length is communicated to the body.

The point I am making here is quite important. Low light performance is improved by three or four stops by image stabilization, compared to Canon and Nikon, so you can work at lower ISO levels in the first place. I think the images are just sumptuous using lenses I never thought suitable for digital cameras.
(Have you checked the price on a sub-645 Hasselblad digital back lately?)

@Ed Ingold No doubt, you're correct, but faster shutter speeds, tripods, and sometimes good hand holding techniques can trump electronic stabilization which is not a panacea. Faster speeds not only can freeze subject motion, but as a byproduct, also freezes photographer motion. Obviously, there are times where a photographer is using "Available Dark" where a fast shutter speed may not be appropriate, but a good support system might indeed be. IS/VR is just another tool in the toolkit, not the only one nor often the best.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 15:10 UTC
On Pentax K-3 Review preview (514 comments in total)
In reply to:

We PhotoBooth You: I still think Pentax are falling behind too much.

I much prefer CF to SD and also prefer to plug whatever card into a high speed USB-3.0 reader over anything much else, but I'm transferring a lot of 40+ meg RAW files sometimes daily. Facebook and Twitter don't like 40 meg RAW files much. ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 14:57 UTC
In reply to:

Guidenet: I've always considered the big four of Arca Swiss, Really Right Stuff, Kirk and Markins to be the largest part of the Arca dovetail market with Aratech in there at a slightly lower price point. Quite honestly, I've never heard of the rest of them in both tests.

Personally, I'd not consider Gitzo because it's not Arca compatible. Gitzo is part of the Manfrotto group which is also not represented in either the 2014 or this review.

If we consider ballheads which are not Arca compatible, then we're certainly missing Manfrotto which probably has a market share larger than all these put together. Their top models are superb. I'm a little surprised at their omission. The Hydrostatic and magnesium models seem technologically interesting enough as well as being as unique as many that are represented but unheard of. ;-)

Maybe this is a list of ballheads owned by staff members and therefore readily available for review. Nothing wrong with that.

@Neroon While I like cross compatibility, Manfrotto's RC2 is fairly much a standard in its own right, considering a less expensive approach. You can buy plates nearly anywhere and they lock up nice and tight. Many third party head makers also use RC2, not just Manfrotto.

Consider a good Arca plate costs somewhere around $50 while a Manfrotto RC2 plate can be had closer to $10-$15, there can be a significant savings when you need ten to fifteen plates. Admittedly, the Arca plate may be of better quality, the Manfrotto plates and system does a darn good job and I think they are slightly more secure. They absolutely cannot slide out and with the safety lock engaged, they can't pop out either even if you inadvertently brush the lever.

The point is that on a budget, the RC2 standard isn't a bad system for many. It was quite expensive for me to upgrade just in plates alone, not to mention 3 ballheads and 1 monopod head. LOL

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 01:14 UTC
In reply to:

Guidenet: I've always considered the big four of Arca Swiss, Really Right Stuff, Kirk and Markins to be the largest part of the Arca dovetail market with Aratech in there at a slightly lower price point. Quite honestly, I've never heard of the rest of them in both tests.

Personally, I'd not consider Gitzo because it's not Arca compatible. Gitzo is part of the Manfrotto group which is also not represented in either the 2014 or this review.

If we consider ballheads which are not Arca compatible, then we're certainly missing Manfrotto which probably has a market share larger than all these put together. Their top models are superb. I'm a little surprised at their omission. The Hydrostatic and magnesium models seem technologically interesting enough as well as being as unique as many that are represented but unheard of. ;-)

Maybe this is a list of ballheads owned by staff members and therefore readily available for review. Nothing wrong with that.

Mark, I understand your point and I'm sure it's fun to review obscure models by brands many haven't heard of. For me, I try to stick to mainstream gear so I have a better chance for repair and parts later on. Moreover, I know I'll find specific plates and my L grips will more likely fit better. I can mix and match safely from any of my three tripods and monopod without concern something won't fit right on a job. If they've been around twenty plus years and been successful, chances are they'll be around for the next twenty. It doesn't mean they're the best, just the best choice for my work.

I'm sure others have different wants and needs, of course. :-)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 8, 2015 at 15:21 UTC
Total: 314, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »