babart

Lives in United States ME, United States
Works as a Pharmacist
Has a website at www.brucebartrug.com
Joined on Jun 23, 2008

Comments

Total: 253, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Student takes 2016 Zeiss Photography Award top prize (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

babart: Many of those commenting on the contest winner are so pathetic. Go get a life somewhere. Somewhere else.

And so I guess this qualifies as a simple boo (your quote): "Take a picture of a woman in an upscale NY setting, it's called fashion and will be published in Vogue. Take a picture of the same woman in third world setting, suddenly it´s called photojournalism and will be published in National Geographic." That's not a critique. That is an arrogant, self-indulgent, cynical attempt to denigrate the photographer who won the contest.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2016 at 20:57 UTC
On article Student takes 2016 Zeiss Photography Award top prize (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

babart: Many of those commenting on the contest winner are so pathetic. Go get a life somewhere. Somewhere else.

Exactly, Kairil. I have no idea about the rules for the contest or what the judges were using as criteria or what they were looking for in a winner. So why should I insult the photographer that won?

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2016 at 12:07 UTC
On article Student takes 2016 Zeiss Photography Award top prize (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

babart: Many of those commenting on the contest winner are so pathetic. Go get a life somewhere. Somewhere else.

That's your opinion. You're welcome to it. I was referring to the slew of cynical posts decrying the winning image. I've never seen so much pure slander over a photo that isn't that bad....depending on the criteria the judges were using. And if you offered some constructive criticism, good for you. But if you just moaned and screamed like too many in this thread, don't respond to this message.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 23:21 UTC
On article Student takes 2016 Zeiss Photography Award top prize (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

babart: Many of those commenting on the contest winner are so pathetic. Go get a life somewhere. Somewhere else.

Some seem to feel that, to win, a photo must be of a completely different place, angle, color, or whatever to be considered "creative." I have news for those who think this way: EVERYTHING HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE. Period. More that once. Creative is how or when the photo is captured. And the mood that photo invokes. The same photo can be shot by hundreds of people and they'll all look a bit different.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 18:28 UTC
On article Student takes 2016 Zeiss Photography Award top prize (223 comments in total)

Many of those commenting on the contest winner are so pathetic. Go get a life somewhere. Somewhere else.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 15:44 UTC as 21st comment | 20 replies
In reply to:

a-flying-wuss: Are the current a7 bodies weather-sealed? I remember reading about the original a7 how it was first marketed as "weather-sealed" (before it was available in stores), but then, after it hit the stores and people started using it in bad weather, there were multiple reports of a7 units failing miserably even under moderate rain.. a few dead bodies and then Sony stopped advertising it as weather-sealed, even removed it from some of their materials if I recall correctly.

I haven't payed any attention to the a7 series after that and so I'm curious now, seeing how this 70-300 is marketed as "dust and moisture resistant": are those newer, a7 II bodies really weather-sealed (similar to Olympus E-3/E5 or Pentax K-3/K-5)? Or is it still the same kind of "gimmick" as it was with the 1st generation and you can't actually use them in rainy/dusty/snowy environments without worrying about ruining them?

I wash my sealed and nitrogen-purged Leica binoculars under fresh water after being on the ocean, but I'd never do that with a camera. Even a Leica camera.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 20:56 UTC
In reply to:

a-flying-wuss: Are the current a7 bodies weather-sealed? I remember reading about the original a7 how it was first marketed as "weather-sealed" (before it was available in stores), but then, after it hit the stores and people started using it in bad weather, there were multiple reports of a7 units failing miserably even under moderate rain.. a few dead bodies and then Sony stopped advertising it as weather-sealed, even removed it from some of their materials if I recall correctly.

I haven't payed any attention to the a7 series after that and so I'm curious now, seeing how this 70-300 is marketed as "dust and moisture resistant": are those newer, a7 II bodies really weather-sealed (similar to Olympus E-3/E5 or Pentax K-3/K-5)? Or is it still the same kind of "gimmick" as it was with the 1st generation and you can't actually use them in rainy/dusty/snowy environments without worrying about ruining them?

@Androole. Thanks for the info. I suspected as much, and have kept the a7 out of even a drizzle, except for quick dashes from under my raincoat.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 21:34 UTC
In reply to:

a-flying-wuss: Are the current a7 bodies weather-sealed? I remember reading about the original a7 how it was first marketed as "weather-sealed" (before it was available in stores), but then, after it hit the stores and people started using it in bad weather, there were multiple reports of a7 units failing miserably even under moderate rain.. a few dead bodies and then Sony stopped advertising it as weather-sealed, even removed it from some of their materials if I recall correctly.

I haven't payed any attention to the a7 series after that and so I'm curious now, seeing how this 70-300 is marketed as "dust and moisture resistant": are those newer, a7 II bodies really weather-sealed (similar to Olympus E-3/E5 or Pentax K-3/K-5)? Or is it still the same kind of "gimmick" as it was with the 1st generation and you can't actually use them in rainy/dusty/snowy environments without worrying about ruining them?

I do the same, even with "sealed" Pentax cameras. I keep the Sony a7 out of even drizzle. I'm quite certain there are no waterproof cameras. Unless these are in waterproof holdings and inside two rolled-top waterproof bags :). Thanks.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 21:33 UTC
In reply to:

a-flying-wuss: Are the current a7 bodies weather-sealed? I remember reading about the original a7 how it was first marketed as "weather-sealed" (before it was available in stores), but then, after it hit the stores and people started using it in bad weather, there were multiple reports of a7 units failing miserably even under moderate rain.. a few dead bodies and then Sony stopped advertising it as weather-sealed, even removed it from some of their materials if I recall correctly.

I haven't payed any attention to the a7 series after that and so I'm curious now, seeing how this 70-300 is marketed as "dust and moisture resistant": are those newer, a7 II bodies really weather-sealed (similar to Olympus E-3/E5 or Pentax K-3/K-5)? Or is it still the same kind of "gimmick" as it was with the 1st generation and you can't actually use them in rainy/dusty/snowy environments without worrying about ruining them?

Interesting post for more than one reason. If you check with Roger at Lens Rentals you'll discover that "moisture and dust sealed" can be a piece of tape across a potential opening. Which is "sealing" against fog and the occasional puff of pollen. "Weather resistant" uses rubber o-rings and sealing gaskets by comparison, and would be the only description I would trust in a light rain. In heavy rain I'd put the gear in a back pack.

Second, the Sony alphas are all claimed to be weather sealed. How weather sealed I'm not certain but perhaps someone else will explain what that means in Sony talk. I have the a7 but have never played with it in the rain, as I've not read that that is a great idea. I could be wrong.

This new 50/1.8 is a step in the right direction. If Sony could add a 28/2.8 and 85/2.0-2.8 I might consider the three. Even though I have Contax manual focus lenses 28, 50 , 85. The IQ on the newbies would have to be superb, however.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 19:50 UTC
In reply to:

D135ima: Good price, excellent performance on paper. waiting for tests

Oh, not bad at all. Wish they made it in Sony E, but I have converters.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 13:20 UTC
In reply to:

D135ima: Good price, excellent performance on paper. waiting for tests

Where do you see a price?

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2016 at 23:47 UTC
In reply to:

Tugela: Curiously, if these are manual lenses, why do they have electronic contacts on the mounts in the pictures?

Correctamundo.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2016 at 23:43 UTC
On article Adobe Camera Raw 9.5 introduces new color scheme (132 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cdog: This is like putting a bandaid on a broken leg.
Adobe,if you're going to boast an integrated workflow between LR & PS as the creative cloud suggests, you need to keep the UI consistent.
It's the same RAW processing engine, give us the same interface please.

I know what you mean. However, Photoshop is the same in that one must "import" a raw photo to be able to use ACR. I do use CS6 for most of my importing and processing, then if there are features I need in Lr, I import the photos there as well. Actually I import all my photos to LR sooner or later, as the LR Catalogue is simply another DAM method, and duplication in the digtial age is a necessary evil. Eventually, since I haven't bought into the Photshop CC, I'll have to use LR to import all raw photos. Afterward, and after some basic processing in LR, I can go to Pshop and finish using my favorite program. And I still have the "old" UI in Pshop, which doesn't bother me a bit. :)

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2016 at 02:04 UTC
On article Adobe Camera Raw 9.5 introduces new color scheme (132 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cdog: This is like putting a bandaid on a broken leg.
Adobe,if you're going to boast an integrated workflow between LR & PS as the creative cloud suggests, you need to keep the UI consistent.
It's the same RAW processing engine, give us the same interface please.

ACR is the same in Lightroom and Photoshop.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2016 at 10:51 UTC
On article Adobe Camera Raw 9.5 introduces new color scheme (132 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cdog: This is like putting a bandaid on a broken leg.
Adobe,if you're going to boast an integrated workflow between LR & PS as the creative cloud suggests, you need to keep the UI consistent.
It's the same RAW processing engine, give us the same interface please.

One can search for anything in Bridge, same as in LR. The ACR screen in LR and PS may look different, but the controls are the same in each, other than those controls only available in LR using one of the quick click buttons. I can't understand some of the complaints about these two products....I want to ask if the person has actually used ACR in both applications. I bought LR as the front end for CS6. To date I still mostly use Bridge/ACR/Pshop, but there are some features in LR that are very helpful. Eventually I may use ACR in LR more frequently, but I'll still need PShop to do additional processing. I find it's UI easier to use, but that's because I started with Pshop.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2016 at 22:33 UTC
In reply to:

babart: Won't Sigma pulleaze consider making a few of these in Pentax or Sony a7 mount? Not requiring buying the Canon model and an expensive lens adapter.

Tamron used to have that very system......if you bought their lenses you could just change the mount and use it on different cameras. Electronic contacts add a difficulty but one that is easily overcome.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2016 at 22:05 UTC
In reply to:

babart: Won't Sigma pulleaze consider making a few of these in Pentax or Sony a7 mount? Not requiring buying the Canon model and an expensive lens adapter.

@Higgins2002: So what about Pentax SLRS? And note Entropy512 post just below. Rokinon (Samyang) does the same with there lenses for mirrorless....just adds a spacer barrel.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2016 at 13:50 UTC

Won't Sigma pulleaze consider making a few of these in Pentax or Sony a7 mount? Not requiring buying the Canon model and an expensive lens adapter.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2016 at 00:21 UTC as 27th comment | 9 replies
On article Flickr makes Auto-Uploadr tool a Pro-account exclusive (97 comments in total)
In reply to:

jkrumm: Never saw much of a reason to use it, even as a "pro" user. I do like Flickr since it's place where people talk about the images. without getting into gear digressions.

I believe one has the same storage even if you don't buy a Pro account. I could be wrong, but don't think so, unless Flickr has changed its policy.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 21:13 UTC
On article Flickr makes Auto-Uploadr tool a Pro-account exclusive (97 comments in total)
In reply to:

jkrumm: Never saw much of a reason to use it, even as a "pro" user. I do like Flickr since it's place where people talk about the images. without getting into gear digressions.

AdBlock will keep the ads at bay.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2016 at 19:50 UTC
Total: 253, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »