Lives in United States The Nation's Capital, United States
Has a website at
Joined on Jun 16, 2002


Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

webrunner5: I would just rather stick to my 70-200 2.8 and 1.4 extender. About the same money and a lot more useful all around. Just walk a little closer. I don't regard this lens as a Birder anyways. Still too short unless on a crop camera.

Walk a little closer? "Zoom with feet", huh?

That is the most idiotic notion in photography. If one takes BIF (bird in fly), how's he supposed to zoom with feet, or "walk a little closer"? Fly with the bird?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 11, 2014 at 15:09 UTC

Droll ... A delicious piece of glass!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 11, 2014 at 12:24 UTC as 40th comment


Direct link | Posted on Aug 1, 2014 at 19:39 UTC as 52nd comment

Yawn, whatever, make some cameras please.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2014 at 14:18 UTC as 16th comment | 1 reply

It's a rather lame interview, the most important question, how Canon is doing in the sensor department, has not been even brought up. The Canon execs are just giving vague and sometimes conflicting replies, yes, still is important, see, we have the latest innovation for video; mirrorless is important, DSLR is also important too.

It's all corporate double-talk with not much substance in this entire interview.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 13:05 UTC as 42nd comment | 3 replies

Don't buy Motorola phones, I've been burned before (Droid X). Their phones are just not good. I got the HTC One and it is night and day.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 13:00 UTC as 23rd comment | 2 replies

Ouch, another more-or-less-the-same camera with the same old 18MP sensor, don't we have enough of these already ?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2014 at 16:19 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply
On Canon announces EOS M2 in Japan article (616 comments in total)

Wow, an M2 that is essentially the same as the M, which did not sell very well anyhow, the question is: why bother?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 3, 2013 at 16:18 UTC as 153rd comment | 3 replies
On French newspaper publishes issue with no photos article (203 comments in total)

They should have published not only without the pictures, but also without the paper as well.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2013 at 19:09 UTC as 71st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

jdc562: All these images would deserve derisive critiques in today's photo forums. Nearly all these photos violate the Rule of Thirds. Cindy Sherman's shot #96 is mangled: one shoulder is cut into, the other arm is incomplete, and the top of of the girls' head is chopped off--very sloppy framing. Gursky's horizon in the L.A. shot isn't level. His Rhein II shot is soft. Both Steichen's and Prince's images have unacceptable levels of noise--they shouldn't bother us with their images until they've learned more about exposure, ISO, and photo processing. In addition, Prince's composition would have been much better if the cowboy were riding into the frame, not out of it. The images in the Gilbert & George piece are all too soft and badly exposed. I hope these photographers haven't quit their day jobs thinking they might have a future in photography.

<sarcasm on>

Hush, but they made a lot of money and you didn't! They went to the prestigious Art Institute of ***, how can these not be anything but art?! If you disagree then your brain is not developed enough to appreciate high art.

<sarcasm off>

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2013 at 01:53 UTC
In reply to:

mcshan: Kim Kardashian could snap a photo and sell it for big money. If she did that some on this forum would refer to her as an artist no matter how mundane the photo.

@Jeff: I think you completely missed his point.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 24, 2013 at 18:33 UTC

For those of you who praise the "high art" in the "II" and other photographs -- did you honestly form your own opinion purely based on the artistic attributes of the photograph, not influenced by the prize tag and the fame of the artist?

We are all entitled to our opinions; some of us just cried "the emperor has no cloth".

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2013 at 17:53 UTC as 32nd comment | 4 replies

I have no issue with the Rhein II, I just think it should be more appropriately titled "Blah".

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2013 at 15:14 UTC as 41st comment
In reply to:

Jeff Seltzer: Well, it's no surprise to read the chorus of "I could do that!" and "This is art??" and "What a bunch of crap!" It's amazing to me you people (yeah, I said people) who come to PHOTOGRAPHY FORUM can not understand and appreciate some of the greatest photographers of all time! Do you even know anything about Gursky?? Have you seen any of his works in-person? Looked at any of his dozens of books?? What you seem to NOT understand is that fine art photography is not about one image, but a body of work, and the importance of that work in the overall medium. You people are the same who walk into a museum, and say "what's with the abstract painting?? It looks like a kid did that!"

Sorry to say, but your images of cats, sunsets, and kids are NOT hanging in museums or on the walls of collectors for a reason. Instead of quickly judging single images, try to do a little research on WHY these images are so sought after.

So share your understanding with us, Mr. Smarty.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2013 at 15:10 UTC
On Super Moon Over Golden Gate Bridge in the Super moon challenge (13 comments in total)
In reply to:

babalu: What is the bright, blurred object to the left of the "super moon" just above
the city ??

That is some bright object (perhaps a balloon with lights?) streaking because of the long exposure. You can also see a bright line to the right of and a little above the moon.

Had this been a real photo, the moon would be a cylindrical blur of brightness.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2013 at 12:02 UTC
On Just posted: Our Canon EOS 70D hands-on preview article (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

micahmedia: What's the chances of getting 40mp output from this sensor? Also, are the pixels all split the same direction? How big of a deal is it if they are? Does AF sensor resolution make up for a lack of cross type sensors?


Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2013 at 03:02 UTC
In reply to:

Howard: How exciting ... NOT!

These are not for your garden variety "videos"; these are very expensive cinema equipment. Have you checked out the price tag? :-)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 4, 2013 at 22:33 UTC

How exciting ... NOT!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2013 at 19:29 UTC as 10th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Ross the Fidller: I'm always glad to hear others whinge about Canon instead of bashing what I use.

What is it that the US models have to have their own (whacky) name for the models?

Actually we don't care what YOU use and we're not bashing it.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2013 at 18:36 UTC
In reply to:

yabokkie: I can tolerate the old image sensor if it got 7D's AF sensor, which is definitely not for the top APS-C model (should have 61-point AF and 10K pixel AE).

Then you should get the 7D.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2013 at 18:34 UTC
Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »