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: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

toni2: The real thread would have been a Rebel with optical viewfinder (760d), and a Rebel with an electronical viewfinder (like 760de).
Canon is the leader, so they don't need to do this, at this moment.
But I think others (perhaps Nikon) will do it soon.

A DSLR without microAFadjustment is one of the silliest things I have ever seen. Almost every compact or smartphone camera has in fact better focus precision that a DSLR without microAFadjustment. So, they have 2 options: add microAFadjustment or put an electronic viewfinder.

@wizofoz As I mentioned, Pentax does a good job with respect to the type features I like in a camera, but then so do my Nikons and I've got a large an over forty year investment in Nikon glass. My Pentax glass is all prior to 1968 when I switched, needing a more systems level tool. Now retired, I'm not likely to change mounts. Besides, I'm almost entirely full frame and pro-grade bodies. :-)

As much as I respect what Pentax has done, it would not be a good choice for me. Maybe if I were younger and after Pentax actually releases a full frame camera. The younger part being the key word here. Also, you really can lose the AV, TV, Hyper P and TAV for all I care as I don't use automated photography. I just find it much faster to determine the EV and set it. I also could care less about small APS-C glass, though the sensor is nice for a crop camera.

For someone starting out, the Pentax K3 should certainly be on the short list of choices, in my opinion.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 2, 2015 at 15:48 UTC
In reply to:

xsamie: It's not whining. really. The main complaint is that if you already have a rebel or similar, you are getting very little new. It is not an upgrade, at all. Even if pictures are your main field, you still get very little more. Wifi? If you are a canon user and needed wi-fi, you probably already bought a wi-fi solution. Like I have. lol It is 2015, it's a little too late. Touchscreen is probably most useful in video, and you are getting 30fps(!). I rather buy used L glass for my d500/d600 for photos, which is a bit of a shame. Has it been 4+years?

Canon is just protecting its upper market. It is never fair to underdeliver and live off your name for ever. Eventually, things will backfire.

People will buy these cameras, sure. But know that for a similar price you can get timelapse, stock animation, multiple custom buttons, wi-fi, 60fps, touchscreen, camera stabilization. etc

Anyways, I had been waiting to upgrade, but it has been to long. @Xmas I left canon, sadly so.

You are an amazing photographer to be able to do a RAW conversion and quality edit, individually on each of 200 images in 3 seconds per image. Moreover, to have all 200 images as keepers is pretty much of an accomplishment in it's own right. I'm seriously impressed.

On a corporate event, I'm lucky if I consider a fraction of my output good enough to turn over to the client and I carefully screen, evaluate, and edit those prior to handing them over. I usually have a powerful laptop at events to be able to display some output and could probably put together a slideshow if need be, but not 200 in 10 minutes. I'd probably shoot the event in RAW and Jpeg so I could tag some of the Jpegs for a slideshow if needed. I'd cull out the ones where eyes blinked or someone sneezed, along with blurry ones

Regardless, in-camera RAW editing was really not one of the Playstation type features I was referring to, though I personally don't use it. I prefer the much more robust software on that laptop.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 29, 2015 at 13:35 UTC
In reply to:

toni2: The real thread would have been a Rebel with optical viewfinder (760d), and a Rebel with an electronical viewfinder (like 760de).
Canon is the leader, so they don't need to do this, at this moment.
But I think others (perhaps Nikon) will do it soon.

A DSLR without microAFadjustment is one of the silliest things I have ever seen. Almost every compact or smartphone camera has in fact better focus precision that a DSLR without microAFadjustment. So, they have 2 options: add microAFadjustment or put an electronic viewfinder.

@MrPrime, good point. I wish Nikon and Canon would use real optical glass pentaprisms on their more basic models like in the film days and like Pentax does now. My deal breakers are real pentaprism viewfinders, a top mounted informational LCD, and Compact Flash memory cards. I also want a cast magnesium body. These leave out most of the more cost effective bodies unfortunately. I'd give up most of the Playstation XBox toy features so popular these days. I'd even give up Av, Tv and P to get the price reasonable. LOL Give me an all metal body with the three things I mentioned and losing the other things I mentioned plus more for less that a grand, and I'd stock up. Sort of like a digital Pentax K1000 with 8 frames per second and a Nikon F mount. :-)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 27, 2015 at 01:11 UTC
On Island life: Samsung NX500 Shooting Experience article (164 comments in total)
In reply to:

shademaster: It's a bit unfair to knock it for lack of EVF when there will likely be an NX50.

LOL @Barney, So true.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 21:10 UTC
In reply to:

xsamie: It's not whining. really. The main complaint is that if you already have a rebel or similar, you are getting very little new. It is not an upgrade, at all. Even if pictures are your main field, you still get very little more. Wifi? If you are a canon user and needed wi-fi, you probably already bought a wi-fi solution. Like I have. lol It is 2015, it's a little too late. Touchscreen is probably most useful in video, and you are getting 30fps(!). I rather buy used L glass for my d500/d600 for photos, which is a bit of a shame. Has it been 4+years?

Canon is just protecting its upper market. It is never fair to underdeliver and live off your name for ever. Eventually, things will backfire.

People will buy these cameras, sure. But know that for a similar price you can get timelapse, stock animation, multiple custom buttons, wi-fi, 60fps, touchscreen, camera stabilization. etc

Anyways, I had been waiting to upgrade, but it has been to long. @Xmas I left canon, sadly so.

A camera should be a serious tool for creating images, not some PlayStation XBox game toy with a ton of useless features to get in the way. Keep that touch screen and wifi on these consumer cameras, please, where they don't get enough use to really matter. And, in body stabilization. Keep that on the brands that haven't invested in optical stabilization.

It's too bad that serious photographers on a budget can't have junk-free cameras to choose from much anymore. The video gamers have invaded photography. Ach!

All your base are belong to us. Somebody set us up the bomb!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 20:55 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?

To add to what Redfox said, the top LCD is something that's on all prograde and enthusiast cameras. There's a reason for that, don't you think? It's extremely useful, and would be a deal breaker for me if it wasn't on a camera. It's the first and fastest place to look when you pick up your camera. No need to light up the back or stare into the viewfinder. It's all there. Shots left, battery condition, focus points chosen, mode, exposure info, bracketing info and much more on my cameras. Once you're used to having it, it becomes indispensable. It's visible in bright sun or the black of night.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 20:27 UTC
In reply to:

Gerrit J: I miss the "Av" button to make adjustments to the exposure on the back of the EOS 760D. Does anybody know how the EOS 760D is able to simply (not via a menu structure) adjust exposure.

@mntncougar To each their own, but to those of us who use professional grade cameras, the top mounted informational LCD is one of the most used and required items and is probably why Canon included it on the more expensive body. Not having one on any of my Nikon bodies would be a deal breaker for me and I'd never purchase it without. I can glance down in my camera bag and see how many shots are left on all the bodies instantly even with them turned off. I can know bracket situation, battery life or any of a number of things without having to light up the back or change the back from image preview. All these things I can see without touching the camera when it's around my neck or on the tripod. Like having twin control dials, the top LCD is a must feature. It's one of those things that once you're used to having it, you wouldn't do without it.

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

toni2: The real thread would have been a Rebel with optical viewfinder (760d), and a Rebel with an electronical viewfinder (like 760de).
Canon is the leader, so they don't need to do this, at this moment.
But I think others (perhaps Nikon) will do it soon.

A DSLR without microAFadjustment is one of the silliest things I have ever seen. Almost every compact or smartphone camera has in fact better focus precision that a DSLR without microAFadjustment. So, they have 2 options: add microAFadjustment or put an electronic viewfinder.

While I would agree even the cheaper cameras could use micro adjust capability, I would hope none would go with a cheap electronic viewfinder. Heaven forbid. I'd rather use these cheap penta mirror arrangements than a tiny television screen for an eyelevel viewfinder. The problem I find with an electronic viewfinder is that you're looking at some 6 bit or 8 bit video representation of the scene rather than a real still capture or the actual optical view through the lens. With even the most modern EVF, you're still getting added gain and Heaven knows what else added to the view such that it in no way resembles what you're going to get, regardless of advertising. Leave EVF on mirrorless where it's required and let's keep an optical viewfinder when we have a clean optical path through the lens we can take advantage of.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 20:03 UTC
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

So you'd rather see what the marketing arm of the company decided where to set the default Jpeg settings at? Viewing that 5% of the image data with those contrast, saturation, and other processing settings is going to tell you what you need to know? You think this is the baseline quality of the camera?

Don't you get it? It's all software whether made by Adobe or whatever they stick in the camera. The camera's basic Jpeg conversion and editing software is trivial, but can be adjusted all over the place, just like Adobe. No difference with respect to this. There is no SOOC anything that represents anything special or worth considering. Anyone with half a brain can adjust this camera to output like that camera. Total unadulterated nonsense.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2015 at 10:20 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II Review preview (797 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eugene232: don't understand all buzz about this camera.
I had an EPL5 which has a the same outdated sensor,
IQ is a mediocre

@Thorgrem These cameras are not a religion. Nobody stepped on your religious beliefs. The mean spirited responses just show the vitriol of fanboyism. It really takes a bitter perspective in order to need to denigrate another's gear or profile.

When one's particular brand doesn't make a Gold Award, it truly brings out the religious fervor in the fanboys of that brand. I'll award you a nice gold star so you can feel better about yourself and others who live vicariously through their camera brands rather than making photographs.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2015 at 23:36 UTC
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
Total: 314, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »