7enderbender

7enderbender

Lives in United States Boston, United States
Joined on Jul 11, 2010

Comments

Total: 13, showing: 1 – 13
On Canon EOS 6D sample images added to hands-on preview article (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

7enderbender: Oh, and just because somebody in a marketing department somewhere knows what "the future" is should drive my decision? I'm not intrested in EVF and mirrorless. It's good for what it is but I'm still not interested. Yes, "modern" optical viewfinders often stink. But that doesn't make looking at a screen any more desirable. I can't see myself buying anything Sony for a number of reasons. And I looked carefully the last time around when I had to make a "system" decision. And I will not buy the Fuji X-E1 either. No optical viewfinder, no business from me. While it's still possible at least. We've see enough denigration of quality already thanks to the gizmofication of photography.
Oh, and the 6D I would only consider as a backup emergency body. I don't really get that either. Weird priorities with a lot of this stuff these days.

And how does an electronic viewfinder (if there even is one - on more and more cameras they leave it out altogether and leave you with the screen on the back like on my P&S) help me make better photographs? Just because something is new and fancy things don't get more practical. And just because (after trying and having an open mind) I like the old workflow better doesn't make me a dinosaur. Here is my challenge for you: have you ever used a really good optical viewfinder? That doesn't seem likely because they're hard to come by thanks to other "advancements" that the stupid majority has deemed essential. The viewfinder on my "full frame" 5DII certainly leaves a lot to be desired when I compare it to my old film cameras without AF. Speaking of real-time enabler my friend...
Oh, and there is still lots of room for paper by the way.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 25, 2012 at 14:26 UTC
On Canon EOS 6D sample images added to hands-on preview article (262 comments in total)

Oh, and just because somebody in a marketing department somewhere knows what "the future" is should drive my decision? I'm not intrested in EVF and mirrorless. It's good for what it is but I'm still not interested. Yes, "modern" optical viewfinders often stink. But that doesn't make looking at a screen any more desirable. I can't see myself buying anything Sony for a number of reasons. And I looked carefully the last time around when I had to make a "system" decision. And I will not buy the Fuji X-E1 either. No optical viewfinder, no business from me. While it's still possible at least. We've see enough denigration of quality already thanks to the gizmofication of photography.
Oh, and the 6D I would only consider as a backup emergency body. I don't really get that either. Weird priorities with a lot of this stuff these days.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2012 at 18:35 UTC as 23rd comment | 6 replies

Quite simple actually: any affordable M9-style camera, or a digital version of a Canon F1n with no frills, full-time manual focus with a no-compromise LARGE andbright viewfinder. So basically today's sensor technology in a classic camera design that is centered around quality mechanical parts.

And in addition to that I'd like to have a full-frame point&shoot with manual aperture priority mode and a fast fixed 35 or 55 mm lens. It was possible with 35mm film so it should be possible now.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 22, 2012 at 16:14 UTC as 89th comment
In reply to:

Kevin Jorgensen: With a name like Airport Navigator are they suggesting you can carry it onboard international and domestic flights? Good luck with that one! If there's an airline that has a carry on allowance of more than 10kgs in two seperate bags for international flights and 7kgs for domestic flights in the Asia/Pacific region, please let me know.

I know exactly what you mean. I recently went through that excercise of finding a carrier for transatlantic flights that would take me and my IATA sized Pelican case. Delta-AirFrance codeshare was one of the few options I found. Size but no weight limits (yet).
Not sure about other destinations for AF flights.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 19, 2012 at 02:25 UTC
On Portraiture exhibit that omits the subject article (46 comments in total)
In reply to:

gl2k: Dear dpreview

This website is about pixel beeping and endless discussions about focusing errors, light leaks and the perfect skin tone. Not to forget the 2 most important questions : "what is the perfect walk about lens ?" and "is my lens sharp ?"

It's definitely not about photography and art.

Well, he is a good photographer because he uses Canon - oh wait, he uses a non-L lens, so he really a crummy photographer. That's settled then.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2012 at 16:30 UTC
In reply to:

darellmatt: This has to be one of the most fascinating photographic and artistic controversies I have come across. The photographs are not "constructive" they are "deconstructive" and are squarely post modern in their aesthetic. As constructive images they are "crap", as decostructive images they are brilliant. I can swing both ways. Personally I am a little bored with both polarities, to me it's like listening to democrats and republicans argue. But there you are, the world is polarized. Some want to enshrine the gods, some want ridicule them. Just be grateful we live in a country where no one gets shot for taking unflattering pictures of a herd of sacred cows...

Good way of looking at it. These are clearly not "good" pictures and I think that most people arguing here could do a better job, even under pressure, even under unforeseen circumstances - even with a decent point & shoot. This is not to be arrogant, because it pretty much doesn't matter. We're talking and we're thinking. That should be enough. That makes it art, really. Just like Metallica's "St. Anger" album, or anything by Tom Waits. It's pretty bad by conventional standards, but so what? This shoot - failed or not, intentional or unintentional- caused a reaction. And it in a way portraits an ever changing nation and it's symbols in a different light. Literally. We may not like what we see. Maybe that's a good thing.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2012 at 19:03 UTC
On Leica M-Monochrom preview (449 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lupti: Ok, I say take an ordinary DSLR, set it to B/W and take the same shots. I doubt that most people can distinguish them from the Leica shots if not told from what camera they are. Really. I also would go as far as taking an ordinary P&S with B/W mode and compare them with these.
I don´t see the point of this camera aside from being a new toy for people with too much money. I also never understood what´s so great about the Leica system, the cameras and lenses cost megabucks for what reason? Handmade in Germany, a red dot? But the parts are so expensive there isn´t money anmyore for a higher resolution display? Okay...there are still too much people with too much money.
And no, there is no envy at all.
Now I think some people will tell me I´m trolling(I´m not) or that I don´t understand the special art of photographing with a Leica, but really, I couldn´t care less.

I agree in that the sample pictures are uninspiring and don't showcase anything that this camera may be doing better (or worse) than other cameras.
However, I can absolutely see the appeal in this one and would trade my 5DII and all my lenses in a heartbeat for something like this. But even then there is still a hefty price gap and it's out of my reach at the moment. And ultimately I'd probably want both, a Leica system and DSLR/SLR system.
I see the "limitations" of the Leica rangefinders (and this one in particular) that would suit my priorities in photography. I like the size and sturdiness, the solid and excellent lenses, the use of metal instead of plastic, the absence of AF - in short the reduction to what I still consider the essence of photography. Half of the gizmos and settings on my DSLR are completely useless to me - sometimes they're even in the way.
Clearly, this is not for everyone - not just because of the hefty price tags on their stuff.

Direct link | Posted on May 11, 2012 at 14:09 UTC
On Flickr poised for much-needed interface improvements article (82 comments in total)

It has a few quirks and an interface design overhaul sounds like a good idea. But overall I like it and has been a good site for me so far to a) share images with friends and family and b) search for images and groups to check out samples of cameras, lenses, etc. And often you stumble upon really nice and inspirational work.

For everything else I have zenfolio.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 22, 2012 at 16:34 UTC as 25th comment

Here is the problem: this discussion can go back and forth and back and forth. "You're a rip-off" - "But here are my expenses plus markup" etc etc.

I think part of the reason why a lot of photographers, artists and actually a lot of other businesses aren't doing so well is because they don't understand pricing.

Here's the rule: Never - and I mean never - justify your price based on your expenses. Yes, calculate your expenses to understand your profit margin. But that's between you, your spouse and the IRS. It is irrelevant to your client. They can care less about your three 5D Mark IIs and how much they cost you. The only reason they hire you is their perceived value they get from your pictures. That's it. End of story. There is no cost+markup argument.

Getting to the actual value is of course difficult in an artistic and emotional field.

That being said: Nikki Wagner should rethink her cost structure and business model a bit. Something is off there.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 27, 2012 at 15:34 UTC as 162nd comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

WeddingEtCetera Com: THE COAST OF FREEDOM...

About me, I charge between 1 500 € and 3 000 € for a Wedding in Europe. More Abroad.
With 10 to 15 Weddings a Year, it is enough for living.
My Goal is not to be "Rockfeller". I want to have time for living with my Son, to travel, for me...
Each Wedding is one or two Days of Shooting and a minimum of a Week for an Editing...
I do not love the photographers and the video directors who complain all the time. We are Independents. We are free to work or not. It is necessary to know how to make an adjustment. Those who are not satisfied have to change their Job to become State employee.

Here is the problem: this discussion can go back and forth and back and forth. "You're a rip-off" - "But here are my expenses plus markup" etc etc.

I think part of the reason why a lot of photographers, artists and actually a lot of other businesses aren't doing so well is because they don't understand pricing.

Here's the rule: Never - and I mean never - justify your price based on your expenses. Yes, calculate your expenses to understand your profit margin. But that's between you, your wife and the IRS. But it's irrelevant to your client. They can care less about your three 5D Mark IIs and how much they cost you. The only reason they hire you is their perceived value they get from your pictures. That's it. End of story. There is no cost+markup argument.

That being said: Nikki Wagner should rethink his cost structure and business model a bit. Something is off there.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 27, 2012 at 14:54 UTC
In reply to:

JEPH: Reading the majority of comments thus far, I am concerned about the knowledge and attitudes of Americans.

The Texas law I'd have to see in detail. This, honestly, is the only area again where the ACLU may take it a step too far again. I agree with the general notion that you may take whatever photos you like in a public space. If I catch anyone sticking a camera phone up my daughter's or wife's skirt I'll smash in the photographer's face with his camera.

And I don't expect the ACLU to take on my case. But I would expect the legislature to have some provisions against this type of

photography as this is not a First Amendment issue. In fact, I would indeed extend that to all minors that are intentionally

photographed by strangers without consent of a parent.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2011 at 19:26 UTC
In reply to:

JEPH: Reading the majority of comments thus far, I am concerned about the knowledge and attitudes of Americans.

This, I honestly don't get. As an American not by birth but by choice I'm familiar with the old accusation of the "prude" American. And I am willing to acknowledge that some things that were instated with decent intentions can and have occasionally gone overboard. I as well cringe when I hear about these ridiculous cases where some overzealous lab person called DSS on a family taking offense of private nude pictures of children on vacation that were otherwise completely harmless.

However, I also cringe at people taking oh so "natural" pictures of little one to post them on the internet or their "blog". I seriously don't get either. And I am certainly no prude, like to taking pictures of my own little ones (and that includes those cute pictures from the bathtub to send off to grandma) and I strongly believe that consenting adults should be able to do whatever they wish as long as they're not interfering with others.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2011 at 19:25 UTC
On Samyang announces 24mm f/1.4 ED AS UMC lens article (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mr Fartleberry: I shoot at ƒ8. Why are camera lense makers so obsessed with these high priced fast lenses? I need performance, if I want more speed I'll jack the ISO. "small-image sensors or smaller" WTF does that mean????

Because the availability of fast primes is the most important reason for even having an SLR (or similar). For everything else you can take a good point and shoot and call it a day. Cranking up ISO will not give me shallow depth of field. Hence the "obsession".

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2011 at 01:04 UTC
Total: 13, showing: 1 – 13