NDT0001

NDT0001

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Mar 20, 2009

Comments

Total: 44, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On Canon EF-S 10-18mm F4.5-5.6 sample gallery article (86 comments in total)
In reply to:

Polytropia: It does not give "a 16-29mm equivalent range". That makes no sense. 16-29mm equivalent to what? Depth of field is not the same as a 16-29mm lens. A 16mm lens would have a different angle. How is that equivalent?

Stop lying to people, DPReview. And stop promoting 135F-format every freaking chance you get. Only a small minority even cares anymore about 135F-format. It's not helpful to continually relate focal lengths to a format that only represents a tiny percent of the market.

It's 2014 not 2004. Please get with the times and start using degrees to describe angles, instead of relating everything to a format few people use anymore.

I will bet anyone here $10,000 USD that less than 5% of photographers have ever looked through a 16mm lens on a 135F camera, let alone owned one or taken a picture with one. So how is it useful to make the analogy of this lens to that particular focal length and not even state that's what you're doing?

@Der Steppenwolf. Viewing the website is free, have you ever payed a cent to read an article here? , learn to read, your really showing who the 7 year old is here, pal.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 30, 2014 at 05:59 UTC
On Canon EF-S 10-18mm F4.5-5.6 sample gallery article (86 comments in total)
In reply to:

Polytropia: It does not give "a 16-29mm equivalent range". That makes no sense. 16-29mm equivalent to what? Depth of field is not the same as a 16-29mm lens. A 16mm lens would have a different angle. How is that equivalent?

Stop lying to people, DPReview. And stop promoting 135F-format every freaking chance you get. Only a small minority even cares anymore about 135F-format. It's not helpful to continually relate focal lengths to a format that only represents a tiny percent of the market.

It's 2014 not 2004. Please get with the times and start using degrees to describe angles, instead of relating everything to a format few people use anymore.

I will bet anyone here $10,000 USD that less than 5% of photographers have ever looked through a 16mm lens on a 135F camera, let alone owned one or taken a picture with one. So how is it useful to make the analogy of this lens to that particular focal length and not even state that's what you're doing?

Why so angry Polytropia? No need to abuse and accuse DPreview, we all know they do great work, and its all for free, so just chill with the vitriol.
As for whatever your ranting on about, its commonly accepted that 35mm full frame is a reference point when talking lens field of views. It may change one day, (i doubt it) but that, my dear, is simply how it is.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2014 at 23:48 UTC
In reply to:

NDT0001: Man, whats canon doing releasing this stuff? Why don't they focus their efforts on producing products people want. In case no ones noticed they are getting creamed in the stills field by Fujifilm and Olympus , and creamed in the DSLR video field by Panasonic GH4, and Sigma now showing them how its done in high quality primes. Im very close to dumping my whole 5Dmk3 kit and 6 lenses for the above mentioned brands.

I do agree they are market leaders, but i think this is purely due to market penetration over the last 20 years. They have seriously slowed down with their product development, i would say on the verge of stall. They better watch out though, because companies like fujifilm with their new sensors and body design are surpassing them in this regard. Im speaking from personal experience here. Like the xt-. Superb image quality and ergonomics in a package 1/2 the size of the 5/7D models

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2014 at 08:49 UTC

Man, whats canon doing releasing this stuff? Why don't they focus their efforts on producing products people want. In case no ones noticed they are getting creamed in the stills field by Fujifilm and Olympus , and creamed in the DSLR video field by Panasonic GH4, and Sigma now showing them how its done in high quality primes. Im very close to dumping my whole 5Dmk3 kit and 6 lenses for the above mentioned brands.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2014 at 07:40 UTC as 49th comment | 5 replies
On Updated: Nikon releases Capture NX-D 1.0.0 software article (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

SteveS: I hate sidecar files!

Our photographic predecessors would be envious of the amount of ease and control we have over the editing of our images these days.
Good times!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2014 at 00:01 UTC
On Updated: Nikon releases Capture NX-D 1.0.0 software article (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

SteveS: I hate sidecar files!

I dont understand how you think creating duplicate copies of your files won't l result in more data? Yes lightroom does create an edits database, but what I'm saying is, its always going to be smaller than duplicating files, even if you do just save them out as Jpegs.
I also don't get how you would think using an external program would be superior to having an integrated file manager in the software your working in .
I get you might prefer bridge which is totally fine, but to say its 'vastly superior' is just exaggeration.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2014 at 00:53 UTC
On Updated: Nikon releases Capture NX-D 1.0.0 software article (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

SteveS: I hate sidecar files!

@ HowaboutRAW
Its sounds like your a bit misinformed about lightroom.
Although Photoshop doesn't mess with the original raws, it does save your changes as a new file which is a PSD, so you end up with multiple copies of the same file, which can be laborious to work with as well as eating up huge amounts of drive space.
Ligtroom never dupes the file, but keeps a database of edits which are insignificant in size when compared to making multiple copies of the same file.

As far as your bridge comment goes, i think the Lightroom cataloguing system is logical and far superior to bridge, not to mention that cataloguing and editing are integrated within the same program, so theres no 'round tripping' between software.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2014 at 00:26 UTC
On Updated: Nikon releases Capture NX-D 1.0.0 software article (105 comments in total)

I WILL NEVER GIVE MY MONEY TO THE THIEVING NIKON CLOUD BASED MODEL. ITS ROBBERY AND HOLDING YOUR FILES TO RANSOM. BOYCOTT NIKON!!!!

Oh wait....

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2014 at 22:52 UTC as 21st comment | 2 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 real-world samples gallery article (60 comments in total)

Ive been shooting a doco with this camera. The 4k image really is a knockout, and the pro functions, like highlight/shadow adjust, peaking, zebras, histogram and pedestal adjust make a really professional tool for the videographer. I can only imagine how much better it will be when the production base arrives with hdsdi outputs and all the other things.
Well done Panasonic, you've really nailed this one.

Direct link | Posted on May 30, 2014 at 09:02 UTC as 16th comment
In reply to:

Biowizard: I'm sticking to my two fave versions of Photoshop: 7 (which runs on my legacy computers) and CS6. Not going ANYWHERE near CC.

Brian

Im sorry, you really showed me! So clever! im not going to get over this humiliation any time soon. :-(

Direct link | Posted on May 30, 2014 at 08:09 UTC
In reply to:

Biowizard: I'm sticking to my two fave versions of Photoshop: 7 (which runs on my legacy computers) and CS6. Not going ANYWHERE near CC.

Brian

Your right JF69 i have no clue. But i do use software like Photoshop that can edit raws directly from import to export without having to jump around with different software or do conversions. If peasants like yourself wish to keep using sub standard or superseded software because your too cheap to use the latest software to streamline your workflow thats your choice i guess 3rd world fool lol.

Direct link | Posted on May 30, 2014 at 07:33 UTC
In reply to:

Biowizard: I'm sticking to my two fave versions of Photoshop: 7 (which runs on my legacy computers) and CS6. Not going ANYWHERE near CC.

Brian

Thats fine if your a hobbyist with time on your hands, but those of us who make a living off picture making, introducing yet another step in the post workflow (convert my 500 raws from a shoot before editing? no thanks) is inconvenient and expensive. My time is worth more than that.

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 22:01 UTC
In reply to:

Biowizard: I'm sticking to my two fave versions of Photoshop: 7 (which runs on my legacy computers) and CS6. Not going ANYWHERE near CC.

Brian

Thats fine if you wish to use a superseded product. Good luck trying to edit your RAW files from your new DSLR without a new version of photoshop.

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 11:52 UTC
In reply to:

ottonis: Introducing a subscription business model for already established and de facto industry standard software is a modern way of robbery.
Adobe will have to change this way of dealing with its customers if only many enough people refuse to change from CS to CC for a couple of years.

Such outlandish responses here. Its quite comical in its stupidity.
How is it robbery to pay a fee for a market leading product which is constantly improving and evolving? People will go to CC. Adobe will continue being a market leader, with a superior product for a fair price.

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 11:27 UTC
In reply to:

NDT0001: Frankly im tired of people here taking every opportunity to bash Adobe, if its not complaints about the the CC subscription model, it would be complaints about upgrade price or some other easy complaint. BLAH BLAH BLAH.
Seems that the only people complaining are amateurs and Pro-sumers who happily spend a FORTUNE on hardware upgrades/accessories but cry over a $10 a month subscription fee. And YES i know if i deregister the software i wont have access to edited files, and guess what? If i wish to do that ill work off the raws again or export my work with edits as a non proprietary file like a tif or DNG. The subscription model is good for me, makes software managemet easier and actually COST ME LESS in the long run and i really cant see myself not using their software in the foreseeable future. So you know what? If your not happy with Adobe's business practices, please vote with your wallet and spare us all the moaning and hand wringing.

Well i think its fair to say that Adobe will persist with the new business model. They may lose some users, those people probably weren't really their core customer base anyway. (upgrading your software every 3 years is not gonna help their revenues) Adobe want to keep their Pro users who have integrated the suite as part of running their businesses every day, be it photography, graphic or web design so i think people on forums can rant all they like but is not gonna change a thing.
And i really disagree about the price being more expensive. I can tell you with absolute certainty that i payed more for PS and lightroom previously than the $120 per year subscription they are currently paying. I do agree that they got off to a shaky start with price packages but they listened to photographers and packaged a deal for them which is currently $10 pm for 1 year. Im sure this will go up in the futuee, but then again, so would the box version.

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 05:45 UTC

Frankly im tired of people here taking every opportunity to bash Adobe, if its not complaints about the the CC subscription model, it would be complaints about upgrade price or some other easy complaint. BLAH BLAH BLAH.
Seems that the only people complaining are amateurs and Pro-sumers who happily spend a FORTUNE on hardware upgrades/accessories but cry over a $10 a month subscription fee. And YES i know if i deregister the software i wont have access to edited files, and guess what? If i wish to do that ill work off the raws again or export my work with edits as a non proprietary file like a tif or DNG. The subscription model is good for me, makes software managemet easier and actually COST ME LESS in the long run and i really cant see myself not using their software in the foreseeable future. So you know what? If your not happy with Adobe's business practices, please vote with your wallet and spare us all the moaning and hand wringing.

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 03:22 UTC as 23rd comment | 8 replies

I suppose there will always be snarky comments by people for whom the product is not intended, but Zeiss and their skill in creating products which are at the pinnacle of their industry is simply incredible. As a regular user of their cine master primes, ZE series for Canon and even older super-speed cine lenses, i can say that what they achieve in the quality of their products is peerless. If you want to see what incredible precision and intelligent engineering can create, use one of their professional products. This new series is an extension of that, and i for one think their constant evolution of product line is amazing.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 7, 2013 at 09:18 UTC as 71st comment | 2 replies
On Canon Powershot G15 Preview preview (246 comments in total)

After years of watching compact cameras being replaced by newer models, i have concluded that, a small sensor compact is a small sensor compact is a small sensor compact. The marginal improvements in these cameras from model to model are really not worth worrying about.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2012 at 23:52 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Michael Ma: I'm reminded every day by this rover just how fortunate we are to live on a planet like Earth. Blue skies and oceans, green landscapes, and every hue, saturation, and luminosity available to us from nature. Imagine if we lived on Mars and we put on probe on Earth. Every cell of my being would have an endless yearning to be at such a beautiful world one day, even if it was just for a second. But we are already here. Wow, what a incredible gift!

Wow WellyNZ, lets start mocking peoples religious beliefs, that always ends well.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2012 at 08:46 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Ma: I'm reminded every day by this rover just how fortunate we are to live on a planet like Earth. Blue skies and oceans, green landscapes, and every hue, saturation, and luminosity available to us from nature. Imagine if we lived on Mars and we put on probe on Earth. Every cell of my being would have an endless yearning to be at such a beautiful world one day, even if it was just for a second. But we are already here. Wow, what a incredible gift!

It is also quite poignant and telling that the VERY FIRST THING that we humans did when we arrived on mars was pollute the planet by dropping a piece of plastic on the surface which had detached off the Curiosity robot. (The 'shiny object' which the cameras spotted) God save us.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2012 at 06:27 UTC
Total: 44, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »