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: 284, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Francis Carver: Sony should be getting out of the lens business fast -- they are simply awful at it. Stick with what you know -- making cameras. Leave the lens business to the companies who make lenses for a living.

This all-in-one travel zoom might be a reasonably easy sell at $300 -- but an impossible sell at around the indicated USD $1,000 price point.

They messed it up badly with the entry-level 7-blade aperture, the lack of witness markings on the barrels, and particularly the darker than the Black Hole of Calcutta iris specs. F3.5 at 24mm???? Going all the way down to F6.3?

Has Sony gone raving mad, finally? Apparently. This thing is totally useless for videography, and a bit large and cumbersome as an easy to cart about travel companion. So, who is it made for exactly?

@Francis Carver, I think this lens is a bit on the slow side even considering what it is. Most others are in the 28-300 range with the same f/range. Nikon's 28-300 is f/3.5-5.6.

But, I think I'd rather have the 24 on the wide side than 300 on the long side, so perhaps Sony's concept is the better approach.

That said, I'd personally never ever own a 10x ratio lens for all the reasons I and others have stated with regards to compromises in the optical formulas required for such a range. Not for travel, not for home and not even for snapshots. Let those who are not really that serious about photography make this purchase. ;-)

If you wanted something specific to video needs, I think something along the lines of a 24-140 f/4 might be a good choice, but it'd probably be quite a bit more expensive, would be my guess for a 6x continuous aperture without so many optical compromises.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 18, 2015 at 12:22 UTC
On Gay love challenge (8 comments in total)
In reply to:

Guidenet: The problem with the one in last place is that is not the photographer's work. It's just a photograph of some other artist's work and should probably have been disqualified for that reason alone. To photograph another artist's work might be acceptable for personal enjoyment, but to submit it to a photography challenge, I think is dishonest and unacceptable.

On the other hand, I love the one in 18th place. That's beautiful. In fact, all the rest are fun indeed.

Thanks, pal. Yes, plagiarized is the word. I have a studio and adjoining gallery where once per month I have open house to the public along with other artists in my art village. I show my photography, water colors and acrylic work and sell both originals and prints. The prints are generally 8x10 or 11x14 with matting and backboard in a plastic bag starting at only $30.

I have two signs that say, "No Photography of Artwork," yet every single open house I get people who come in, whip out their cameras, and start working down the wall photographing their favorites. When I question them, some have actually replied on the order of, "Why should I buy a print when I can print them at home cheaper than you're selling them?" This type of response never ceases to amaze me. It's not even worth it to explain that my prints are 200 year pigment on cotton rag because that's not the point and they still wouldn't understand. I just politely tell them to stop, explaining I have to pay the rent. ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 12, 2015 at 16:28 UTC
On Gay love challenge (8 comments in total)

The problem with the one in last place is that is not the photographer's work. It's just a photograph of some other artist's work and should probably have been disqualified for that reason alone. To photograph another artist's work might be acceptable for personal enjoyment, but to submit it to a photography challenge, I think is dishonest and unacceptable.

On the other hand, I love the one in 18th place. That's beautiful. In fact, all the rest are fun indeed.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 12, 2015 at 13:03 UTC as 5th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Guidenet: I think "Travel Lens" really is a contradiction. For many, they travel on holiday or vacation and that's the time they might use their camera the most and the time where they may see things most worth photographing. Why on earth would those folks then choose to trade off IQ for convenience? I would think a good travel lens would be the very best optics you can afford, not some super ratio zoom, unless photography is not that serious.

I think people use travel as an excuse to buy such a lens because they might should have purchased a bridge or super zoom compact in the first place. All zoom lenses compromise optics to a degree, but the better 2x and 3x models begin to rival prime lenses. A 10x lens just increases those optical compromises too much, IMO.

I completely understand a small light weight kit when out with the kids and such. You're not looking for ultimate IQ but acceptable IQ to record the occasion. Putting a large super ratio zoom on your large DSLR doesn't really help make a small light kit. Also, I don't really believe swapping between a couple of little primes takes any time at all and would hinder the trip, but I do understand small.

When I take the grandkids to the zoo, Disney, Gatorland or some other event, I often only carry my Canon G1X. It's a great little camera with a 1.5 inch sensor and does a wonderful job for those situations. A Nikon 1 or Sony RX100 would also be perfect for those times and my use. Until it was stolen, my Canon S95 fit in my shirt pocket and took great images when I pointed it in the right direction. Even my iPhone isn't too bad, well sort of. ;-)

It's only the DSLR or like type cameras with the large super ratio zooms which make little sense to me. :-)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 23:27 UTC
In reply to:

Guidenet: I think "Travel Lens" really is a contradiction. For many, they travel on holiday or vacation and that's the time they might use their camera the most and the time where they may see things most worth photographing. Why on earth would those folks then choose to trade off IQ for convenience? I would think a good travel lens would be the very best optics you can afford, not some super ratio zoom, unless photography is not that serious.

I think people use travel as an excuse to buy such a lens because they might should have purchased a bridge or super zoom compact in the first place. All zoom lenses compromise optics to a degree, but the better 2x and 3x models begin to rival prime lenses. A 10x lens just increases those optical compromises too much, IMO.

As far as swapping goes, isn't that why we purchase an interchangeable lens camera? We want to match the focal length to the type of subject at hand. This is not meant to denigrate a zoom, but just an extreme ratio zoom.

For example, when traveling and not knowing what I might need when walking around town while on holiday, I might carry a 28mm prime in my pocket and an 85mm on the camera. Easy to swap when needed. I also sometimes use a belt pouch. Sometimes, I'll carry a 16-35 f/4 and a 150 f/2.8. One on the camera and one in the pouch. Any of these have far better IQ than some Tamron 18-270, as an example. Of course, I have to do my part, but it's worth it to start with high quality options.

As I mentioned, traveling is no excuse to put up with optical compromises. In fact, the opposite should be true. Travel with the best optics. Save the poor glass for the kid's birthday parties where you're just recording events in a point and shoot style close to home. :-)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 14:51 UTC

I think "Travel Lens" really is a contradiction. For many, they travel on holiday or vacation and that's the time they might use their camera the most and the time where they may see things most worth photographing. Why on earth would those folks then choose to trade off IQ for convenience? I would think a good travel lens would be the very best optics you can afford, not some super ratio zoom, unless photography is not that serious.

I think people use travel as an excuse to buy such a lens because they might should have purchased a bridge or super zoom compact in the first place. All zoom lenses compromise optics to a degree, but the better 2x and 3x models begin to rival prime lenses. A 10x lens just increases those optical compromises too much, IMO.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 10, 2015 at 18:05 UTC as 4th comment | 6 replies
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1392 comments in total)
In reply to:

rinkos: i think showing us an edited photo stream is kinda cheating.

we all ( or most of us) know the power of a good PP .

the point is to see though the base line photo ..what is the raw material you work with .

i hope this PP photo stream thingy wont become a regular here

What you are asking for is impossible. All a camera sensor knows how to do is to record red, green and blue dots or values. All else is processing whether in or out of the camera. There is no base line photo. Out of the box, all the settings are whatever is default, but that in no way implies this to be some kind of pure unadulterated output. The settings are just whatever the factory or marketing decided them to be. The same goes for the default settings for whatever RAW editor you might be using. There just is no base line, so no "cheating" is going on.

Moreover, you can't tell much from images viewed on the Web anyway. You're looking at fairly compressed 8 bit images stored in a lossy format. You're probably using a 6 bit uncallibrated monitor. Even if it was callibrated, it probably is not using the same profile as the monitor used to process that image. So, what are those sample images supposed to provide? Not a whole lot, I believe.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2015 at 15:48 UTC
On Hands-on with Nikon D7200 article (75 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: That camera is HUGE! Says my Olympus E-M5 MK II.

The Olympus E-M5 MkII is HUGE says my Canon Powershot S95.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2015 at 11:36 UTC
On Hands-on with Nikon D7200 article (75 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: The D300's "litter runt" edition 3 is born! BTW, why use a wide angle shot to make the 18-135mm lens look so much bigger than it is?

Rich, by your own definition, all photographs pretty much are non random. Any photograph pretty much are considered to convey some message, even tourist shots at Disney. Photographs taken as part of a hands on preview for DPR certainly are not by the manufacturer anyway and certainly is not marketing. Barney was kidding but right. This conspiracy nonsense does tend to go a bit overboard.

Or, maybe the authors purposely exaggerated the view of that 18-140 Nikkor lens to make it look larger and bulkier because they were secretly hired by the mirror-less contingent here at DPReview. Amazon secretly owns stock in Fujifilm, Olympus and Sony. They used a Canon to throw us off track. ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2015 at 11:31 UTC
On Hands-on with Nikon D7200 article (75 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: The D300's "litter runt" edition 3 is born! BTW, why use a wide angle shot to make the 18-135mm lens look so much bigger than it is?

I'm really not quite sure what is meant by "random shots" here. If you mean, someone sneaking up and taking a picture of the camera unposed, that's really a bit silly, don't you think? Moreover, I'm not thinking this pre-preview is a marketing ploy in the least. As I mentioned, they used an old Canon to take those shots and a wide angle lens was not used as was suggested. If Nikon Marketing had anything to do with it, they wouldn't have left the EXIF attached showing a Canon 40D used to take those pictures. ;-)

In fact, the EXIF showing pretty much tells you that this was a very casual and amateurish segment; certainly not some sleek marketing display.

PS. In the above, when I say "amateurish," I'm not speaking in the pejorative.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2015 at 01:25 UTC
On Hands-on with Nikon D7200 article (75 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: The D300's "litter runt" edition 3 is born! BTW, why use a wide angle shot to make the 18-135mm lens look so much bigger than it is?

All those shots seem to have been taken with an old Canon 40D using between 52mm and 70mm focal lengths. Moreover, I believe that's the Nikon 18-140, not the somewhat smaller and long discontinued 18-135. The older lens didn't have VR and was a kit choice on the old D80 as well as a few others.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2015 at 12:27 UTC
In reply to:

JackM: I'll wait for the version that is the size of a film MX, so I can use my nice small K primes on something discrete.

I just hope there is some reason to own it alongside my Canon system. i.e., mega DR and no AA filter.

I have a feeling it will be a bit large, but wouldn't it be cool if it were the size of the MX. I might would get one to go along with my Nikon system. Well, maybe. Retirement stretches things a little.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 06:17 UTC
In reply to:

Lassoni: Nikon needs to start moving that 300 PF, or atleast provide better sample images. I'm dying to know more about this lens, but the images they have don't really tell that much. If anything, they leave a sour impression of what it can do.

Agreed. Several good reviews from the better sources would be a whole lot better than sample images on the Web. On the Web, you'd have a hard time picking between birds in flight I took with my Nikon 300 f/2.8 AFS VR and my 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 AFS VR. The Web just can't show that level of quality unless you download the NEF files and look carefully.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 14:08 UTC
In reply to:

Naveed Akhtar: Go with the mainstream fullframe camera guys .. it will take ages, to fuji, to develop lenses for this new system.

@Tabaplar, you might very well be wrong. I don't know, but maybe history will repeat. At one time, Pentax was a huge competitor in the professional SLR marketplace. It was more Pentax verses Nikon, not Canon. Pentax made the exquisite jewel-like small cameras with the superb Takumar lenses while Nikon made the larger, more robust systems camera with user interchangeable finders, motordrives, backs and focus screens. With Nikon, you could just grab these things off the shelf and they'd work, while you'd have to send the Pentax in if you wanted to fit a motordrive and 250 bulk film pack et al. Pentax finally released the LX model but it was really too late and they'd lost most of their professional dominance to Canon by then, in my opinion, but I think the LX was the better camera.

That's what I think has always been a Pentax issue, being just a little too late in recognizing the trend. Pentax was a serious joy to use though, and history could repeat where Pentax could be pro again.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 23:30 UTC
In reply to:

Dennis: The real innovation here is that it's destined to be the first full frame digital camera to be offered in 17 different colors.

@TurvyT, again, it was a joke and I don't see anyone complaining about Pentax offering color choices. Who really cares? If Pentax marketing thinks pink and yellow cameras will help to sell them, more power to them. If Nikon made the type gear I buy in multiple colors, I might get one too just to be different, if it didn't cost more. They are just tools to get a job done, not something to cause religious fervor. I wouldn't pay a dime more for a yellow screwdriver over a black one. ;-)

One thing though, the camera color would absolutely be the last thing I'd consider in a purchase decision. As far as vehicles go, it's different. I always buy red pickup trucks. It's pragmatic because red just about always has a higher resale value later when it's time to get a new one.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 15:40 UTC
In reply to:

Naveed Akhtar: Go with the mainstream fullframe camera guys .. it will take ages, to fuji, to develop lenses for this new system.

@Naveed, I agree with you about the use of APS-C glass in a crop mode and the use of adapters. I like neither, but I think Pentax still makes a good number of full frame lenses themselves which will work natively with a new Pentax full frame camera. Like others, they have maintained compatibility with older film cameras as well as the fact, often crop lenses really don't save that much size and weight.

As was also mentioned, many new third party optics are also native full frame in K-Mount. The availability of these Pentax and Pentax mount full fame lenses will be a real boon to users from the very start without needing adapters or used glass, though nothing wrong with used glass. ;-)

It's a lot different than the Sony situation where the backward compatibility was only extended to Minolta Maximm glass without adapters, some of dubious quality while some quite good.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 15:14 UTC
In reply to:

Naveed Akhtar: Go with the mainstream fullframe camera guys .. it will take ages, to fuji, to develop lenses for this new system.

I'm not sure why Fuji will develop anything for a full frame Pentax, but as ragmanjin said, there are a plethora of choices out there now by Pentax and other optics makers. I just don't see lens availability as an obstacle for Pentax. They're been at it a long long time. The K Mount has a long history of supplying quality optics.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 13:37 UTC

I love Pentax coming out with a full frame model finally. I switched from Pentax to Nikon in 1968 because I wanted more of a systems camera, but have a soft spot for my first SLRs. When I went digital, I almost went back, but held off and as time went by and no FF, they went out of consideration. Retired now and I've got way too much invested in Nikon gear, but I love what Pentax is doing. I'm sure they will implement it very well. It's another great choice for up and coming enthusiasts and professionals. Kudos to Pentax.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 13:28 UTC as 9th comment
In reply to:

Dennis: The real innovation here is that it's destined to be the first full frame digital camera to be offered in 17 different colors.

@Simen01, it was a joke. It's not a religion. Get it? Don't take yourself too seriously. It was funny, too. :-)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 13:18 UTC
In reply to:

Leok: I decided this wasn't going to happen 4 years ago (despite annual rumours to the contrary). Sold all my Pentax gear and went Nikon instead. I'm so glad I did, no FF for all this time is why Pentax hasn't been taken seriously in the digital era.

@Simen01 People don't bash or troll Pentax any more than any other brand out there. Don't be paranoid. If anyone, Sony probably gets the worst of it. For many, brand ownership is a religion. They will bash anything they don't personally own and claim being bashed by all the others. The old Chevy / Ford or Apple / Windows mentality.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 13:14 UTC
Total: 284, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »