expressivecanvas

expressivecanvas

Lives in United States Northern-Central Vermont, United States
Works as a Disabled/Retired Veteran, now artist and educator
Joined on Feb 22, 2010

Comments

Total: 54, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2052 comments in total)

I've been agonizing over whether to buy an a6000 for well over a year now to complement my a7 kit (and so I can share lenses between bodies rather than a line of lenses for each). The a6000 (and probably this a6300 too) is a great camera but every time I hold one, I just can't bring myself to buy one. It is not comfortable in my hand, therefore I am not comfortable, and it feels like a fiddly little thing. If the body was styled more like a smaller a7-type body or even anything more ergonomic and stylish than a utility box, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I truly WANT to like the 6000 series but it is very uncomfortable and utilitarian-like.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2016 at 12:27 UTC as 124th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

expressivecanvas: I don't have a clue what Kodak is attempting to accomplish here, realistically speaking, but the whole idea seems like crapola.

One question I was left with at the end was about resolution... what will be the final resolution of the files Kodak delivers? Regardless, even if the digital files are in 4K or better (which I highly doubt) the total cost is absolutely absurd when compared to the rest of today's video options.

What a bunch of crapola though. Are Kodak's execs on crack and think it is 1980? (I guess that makes two questions I have...) My advice to Kodak... go ahead and make one for Spielberg and then try to develop something more marketable.... perhaps a digital Brownie?

There is no doubt that the resolution will be miserable. I suspect only those who used 8mm in film school 'way back when' will be interested in a product such as this for nostalgia reasons.

If I were to create and manufacture a new hybrid digital/film camera for today's market... it would need to have enough "wow" features (including resolution) to capture the attention of most people interested in video. What I'm seeing here from Kodak doesn't cut it. You'd might as well just buy an existing good quality Super 8 camera on the used market.

I suppose this could be a good idea but Kodak seems to only be going partway there to make the good idea an irresistible product... which, unfortunately, is par for the course for Kodak in recent years.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2016 at 18:50 UTC
In reply to:

M1963: So, if I got it right, you record image and sound separately - the former on film, the latter on a memory card. What a fuss!
It's hard to understand the purpose of this camera, even for me - and I do most of my shooting on 135 black and white film and listen to vinyl LPs!
On the other hand, calling a camera which records 2m30s long videos a 'movie' camera... it's a joke, isn't it?

The obvious difference between this Kodak nonsense and the Fuji Instax series is that the Fuji Instax cameras perfectly fit in with today's 'instant gratification' society. Kodak is at the opposite end of the spectrum in this regard.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2016 at 13:46 UTC

I don't have a clue what Kodak is attempting to accomplish here, realistically speaking, but the whole idea seems like crapola.

One question I was left with at the end was about resolution... what will be the final resolution of the files Kodak delivers? Regardless, even if the digital files are in 4K or better (which I highly doubt) the total cost is absolutely absurd when compared to the rest of today's video options.

What a bunch of crapola though. Are Kodak's execs on crack and think it is 1980? (I guess that makes two questions I have...) My advice to Kodak... go ahead and make one for Spielberg and then try to develop something more marketable.... perhaps a digital Brownie?

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2016 at 13:40 UTC as 52nd comment | 13 replies
On article Kodak revives Super 8 with part-digital cine camera (367 comments in total)

Is it April 1st already?

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 02:57 UTC as 148th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

swimswithtrout: Holy Crap Batman !!! I'm trying to remember the last time I saw that much noise !

If this was supposed to be about how "good" the camera could do, you did the opposite.

and c) Adobe ACR's default sharpening for the Sony a7 series is overly aggressive and always creates this horrible noise pattern. If sharpening is adjusted correctly/effectively, this type of noise never appears.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2015 at 04:43 UTC

In reference to Sony E mount: If Sony had found a way to produce a robust lens lineup leading up to this past year, to include high end as well as smaller, moderately priced lenses, they probably would have more money in their pockets right now than they do. Continuing to produce newer, better cameras without a significantly better lens lineup with only continue to hurt their bottom line. Not only that, but they will probably sell fewer cameras at this point due to the rather limited lens selection.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2015 at 13:09 UTC as 3rd comment | 4 replies

As usual... another new lens and no Sony e-mount. Sigma already said they were interested in the Sony e/fe market and they already manufacture a few APS-C e-mount lenses. It would be really nice to see some full frame Sigma lenses in e-mount so this is another disappointment.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2015 at 01:36 UTC as 42nd comment | 13 replies
On Connect post Amazon reveals thinner Fire HD tablets (66 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mal69: These replacements are worse than the old models, resolution is far worse, i guess they are going cheaper because they cannot compete with iPads anymore, shame as the older ones had far better resolution and more memory.

I had to check the accuracy of this announcement because I also couldn't believe Amazon went backwards. I have the HDX 8.9"... the resolution is outstanding and photos look great... the size is perfect (7" is too small and 10" is a bit too large)... reading text and magazines is a joy... my only complaint is that it could really use a microSD slot. If Amazon dropped the HDX line they have made a huge and costly mistake.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2015 at 05:41 UTC
In reply to:

gens: I was hiking John Muir Trail and happened to be at the top of Half Dome that day and witnessed the wedding. Apparently, they didn't bring any guests, but everyone at the top cheered loudly when the priest said, "Now, you may kiss your bride." I took some shots of them. See page 2 of this album.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/33299644@N03/sets/72157655851099140

Outstanding photos, gens. I much prefer your photos of the little wedding ceremony to the "official" photos. Some stunningly beautiful photos in your album.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 01:32 UTC

Doesn't anyone else feel that this makes this one musician seem a bit egotistical and pompous? As a musician, I probably would not have wanted to be the model for this particular project.

Now... if the photographer put in the effort to create an ultra-stitch of a full orchestra in action... I'm all for it and encourage it! THAT would be a project with so many people to direct... and nobody would come across as egotistical and pompous.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2015 at 04:44 UTC as 58th comment | 2 replies
On article Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 (497 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eugene232: don't understand why mirrorless cameras getting bigger and bigger..
The mirrorless idea is -to have a DSLR IQ in a smaller body/

"don't understand why mirrorless cameras getting bigger and bigger.. The mirrorless idea is -to have a DSLR IQ in a smaller body"

This camera body still is quite small. It is only a little bit larger than the Panasonic G3 (mostly in the grip) and that is welcomed news as far as I'm concerned because I feel the G3 is too small and too light. I like the idea of a slightly larger body and I love the idea of a slightly larger body with more controls on it!

Furthermore, this Panasonic G7 and even a good selection of m4/3 lenses is NOTHING like a dSLR with the equivalent lenses in size nor weight... not even close.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2015 at 12:27 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 (497 comments in total)

This will definitely be my next m4/3 camera body! If marketed correctly and if QC was up to par throughout production, Panasonic should have a huge success on their hands.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2015 at 13:40 UTC as 101st comment
In reply to:

Atsyn: Very well said, a ILC force is the lens set up, that is why µ43 and fuji are so great system and why sony, samsung and canon are so behind in term of mirrorless.

"Sony are certainly way behind Fuji when it comes to lenses for their mirrorless camera range..." B&H has only 54 lenses for the Fuji X mount... and they have 79 lenses available for the Sony E mount (both APS-C and FF). So, I don't know how you figure Sony is 'way behind' Fuji when it comes to lenses.

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 13:44 UTC

To me, the images created are drastically different. The original photographer created a beautiful image conveying motion and capturing a player in action. Nike's photographer created a static, stiff, boring image which, in my opinion, does not accurately depict basketball. The image Nike is using is boring and poorly represents what Nike probably desires it to represent. I see no similarities other than the subject being a basketball player... so, no case, in my opinion.

I also see no reason to sue for "renumeration in the form of part of the billions in profits..." This is excessive and a waste of the court's time. For that alone, I would throw this case out. If he was simply asking for the going commercial rate in 1984, which he clearly feels he was cheated out of, I might have a little more compassion for his claims.

The only one going to win in this case is Nike. This photographer just brought more attention to the Nike brand than ever before!

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2015 at 14:46 UTC as 32nd comment
In reply to:

D200_4me: One thing's for sure. The Sony fans are very enthusiastic about the 'a' lineup (a6000, a7). I looked at them and tried to get interested, but for whatever reasons, it just doesn't do it for me. More of a feeling I suppose rather than a statement about the gear's abilities. After I bought the a6000, that was pretty much it for me. I lost interested in even thinking about going down the Sony road. I'll keep the a6000 as my little point and shoot type camera, but no more Sony gear for me.

To some degree, I do agree with you on the a6000 but under one condition... when paired with the 16-50mm kit lens. I simply hated that loose, slow, laggy zoom ring. It made the whole kit seem cheap and toy-like. However, when you use any other lens, it feels as it should... really nice. I do own the Sony a7 and love it though. Whenever one of my friends picks it up they immediately say, "WOW!" I even still find myself saying that every now and then.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2015 at 14:54 UTC

Considering I just rec'd my a7 yesterday, this is great news!

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2014 at 23:15 UTC as 17th comment
On article Price released for Brikk's 24k gold Nikon Df (386 comments in total)

Wow... this makes the Hasselblad collector cams look really good. What is Nikon thinking? Then again, everyone knows that if you cover the nameplate with some gaffers tape, nobody will know you are carrying around a pricey camera... :)

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2014 at 12:17 UTC as 98th comment
In reply to:

expressivecanvas: Lame... nothing like the leading camera manufacturer (for now, anyway) making themselves look desperate. I find this nonsense just that... nonsense.

...and, unprofessional.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2014 at 00:33 UTC

Lame... nothing like the leading camera manufacturer (for now, anyway) making themselves look desperate. I find this nonsense just that... nonsense.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2014 at 00:31 UTC as 195th comment | 2 replies
Total: 54, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »