Lives in United Kingdom Surrey, United Kingdom
Works as a Photographer
Has a website at www.alexanderleaman.com
Joined on Aug 27, 2010


Total: 126, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Phase One announces Capture One Pro 8 article (67 comments in total)
In reply to:

Operator: Excellent piece of software and for Fuji X RAWs the only way to go!

Jensano - It seems to be quite widely known that C1Pro is the best all in solution for x-Trans. Personally I know a lot of X-photographers who work on C1Pro after coming from the disaster that is Lightroom processing Fuji RAW files.

Don't get me wrong - Lightroom is a great bit of software, and probably a great many more photographers use it with X-Trans RAW files and are happy with the results, but it simply can't keep up with C1Pro when it comes to X-Trans IQ.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 09:06 UTC
On Nikon D750 First-impressions review preview (1422 comments in total)

To me this looks like a great Camera - but should be a replacement of the D610, surely? Or at least it's what the D610 update should have been. It's missing a few key features, and seems like a tired update. Really nothing particularly new. Refined, maybe, but a bit of a Frankenstein's Camera.

I rarely shoot Nikon cameras any more (After shooting the majority of 25 years on Nikon) because another system suits my kind of photography better. When the Dƒ was announced it looked like Nikon were perhaps chasing something new, but alas, no.
Still, the Dƒ could possibly be Nikon's best sensor to ergonomics/cost ratio. Almost. But I should think the Dƒ will flounder around not knowing what it wants to be, much like the 1 system.

The D750 looks like another case of Nikon throwing some tweaked configuration of the same old feature set hoping something will stick.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2014 at 11:42 UTC as 310th comment
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (644 comments in total)
In reply to:

atone2: Totally uninteresting before Fujifilm get rid of the ridiculous x-trans filter array. One must be blind not to see the awful rendering of x-trans rawfiles, especially in Lightroom. My original X100 still has much better IQ than the newer models. Money saved, wooha! :-)

@atone2 - Try the 56mm 1.2 then come back to me.

I'm not interested in the GM1 but thanks for bringing it up.

Many,many users should try Capture One Pro.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 20:17 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Overview preview (644 comments in total)
In reply to:

atone2: Totally uninteresting before Fujifilm get rid of the ridiculous x-trans filter array. One must be blind not to see the awful rendering of x-trans rawfiles, especially in Lightroom. My original X100 still has much better IQ than the newer models. Money saved, wooha! :-)

atone2 - If you make that bet you lose. Many Photographers will adapt to a different workflow if it proves to be better. e.g shoot with more modern technology and use a different software to process if necessary.
In this case necessary means finding a system that will better achieve the photography you want to create. The 3 camera 'workflow' that you describe sounds like a whole load more pain than deciding on One consistent system, perhaps x-trans? (Hint: Use Capture One Pro).

You don't have to, of course, it's just that you were berating Fuji for it's "gimmickry" (presenting probably the most up to date and comprehensive and mature CSCs on the market) while displaying a relatively p**s poor understanding of what a successful and consistent workflow can be.

No offence.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2014 at 16:15 UTC
On Zeiss introduces 'no distortion' Otus 1.4/85mm article (338 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: It must be the best 85 out there, espeicially for the price & OTUS class, but i'm asking myself - who needs that focal length outside the studio for human portrait shots? A 85 as a landscape lens for example is a bit...welll, way much too tele for my taste, no offence. congrats to ZEISS, they've smoked Leica once again.

Me too - I almost exclusively have an 85 on one camera and a wide on another for all of my wedding photography. Both autofocus.

However, the Zeiss is at it's most generous, a hobbyists' lens, but more realistically it's meant for studio, and possibly location fashion/editorial. You won't catch many wedding photographers shooting this wide open on the dance floor!

If relative to wedding photography:
For most purposes the current Sigma 85 1.4 is the best value to performance low light mid range tele. Sigma's next 85mm "Art" lens will likely be better still, perhaps even fixing at least some of the LoCA typical of such a lens.

Personally, I use the Fuji 56mm 1.2 which is pretty flawless for wedding and portrait photography. It's up there and can easily hold it's own against the Nikon equivalents, including Sigma.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 9, 2014 at 08:36 UTC
In reply to:

Debankur Mukherjee: No matter what we do its for sure that film will die a slow death...........its like buying a 78 rpm record.......

No. It's not.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2014 at 09:23 UTC
On Apple to cease development of Aperture article (425 comments in total)

Apple's announcement seems to have caught a few people off guard so I wanted to put my take on things here. It might just help...


Direct link | Posted on Jul 3, 2014 at 12:08 UTC as 3rd comment
On Nikon D810: What You Need to Know article (142 comments in total)

I don't shoot Nikon any more (Well I did keep the D600 which suited me a little better than my D800) - I mostly use Fuji X cameras now.

The D810 looks like an amazing update, really refined with some killer features. I love the new screen spec and I think that the new mirror is going to make a big difference to that many pixels. The new processor completes the package, and all of everybody calling for firmware updates for the D800 would do well to better understand that some of these updates just wouldn't be possible without an optimised back end.

The D800 was already class leading and it's great to see Nikon at the top of their game. It's a mid term update with a lot to offer and lays a great foundation for a killer D900 imo.

I prefer my Fuji's now, and I think there's even better to come so I won't be buying into Nikon again, but will be hiring the D810 for use in the studio for sure.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 27, 2014 at 10:49 UTC as 30th comment
On Nikon D810 Preview preview (1585 comments in total)
In reply to:

photogeek: I was hoping they'd make it smaller and lighter, too. After using mirrorless for a while, "regular" DSLRs are comically large.

One day I'd love to think of myself as a real photographer with the ubiquitous 70-200 zoom lens that weighs as much as a car. A constant reminder that yes, I am carrying an elite photographic tool, and have finally joined the ranks (of millions of other identical) "real" photographers with the same kit.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 08:20 UTC
In reply to:

ZoranHR: Fuji (and other mirorless too) make some really small and nice looking cameras,but all accompanied with big lens. (I know the reason for that) ;-)
No matter how much I like camera body, I just I don't see the point.
Why I should have a camera with body sized almost as a smartphone with lens size of half-used roll of toilet paper?!

How it would look like if they produce lens for wildlife? (since most mirorless already have a weather sealed version)

They should make a body wich gives a comfort while you hold a lens like this.

An SLR with a +200mm lens on it is a lot bigger than this. CSMs are always going to have to strike a camera vs lens compromise if they are going to produce longer zooms with quality optics.

You have to understand how this stuff works. You can't just stamp your feet and expect a 300mm pancake lens - it doesn't exist, no matter what size the body. The closet thing you will find is on the superzoom cameras, but nobody wants one of those & they're not that small either.

If you want to shoot wildlife then you need a longer lens. So pick up the lens, put it in your backpack, go to the landscape, put it on a tripod & photograph the wildlife. Does it matter what size the lens is?

If you want a walk around, take anywhere, travel zoom, either take this lens with it's range and size (yes, it's still much smaller than the SLR equivalent) or as suggested already, buy a travel 'superzoom' camera.

You don't need this lens if you're questioning it's validity - that's the point you can't see.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 14:06 UTC
In reply to:

abortabort: Woot? This is a kit zoom tartied up to be a premium lens by putting lipstick on a pig. Wow its got a million stops of IS so I can marvel at how good it is taking pictures of figurines on my desk and explaining to forums how great it is. But let's not forget the weather sealing! How great will it be to use an overpriced kit zoom in the rain, amazeballs! There is a reason lenses like this don't usually get the pig in lipstick treatment...

and you are.... who?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 13:54 UTC
On Picquest wants to be the Uber for photography post (24 comments in total)
In reply to:

ryanshoots: A ride in a car is a ride in a car, so let's choose photographers the same way. Another platform to race to the bottom with.

Personally, I like to keep my whereabouts private. Not one of my clients need to know if I'm close or otherwise. My competition can be left in the dark here too as far as I'm concerned.

And if this is proposed to be a useful business tool - in what way?
"I need an emergency photographer - where's the closest one?" That kind of desperate grasping doesn't happen and if it ever did, the person commissioning isn't going to get the best talent based on geo location. Social networking in the future will be more integrated not more fragmented.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 12:59 UTC
On Olympus Tough TG-3 real-world samples gallery article (44 comments in total)

I Appreciate what these cameras are supposed to be used for, but really?; NO pictures of people? Just a couple of headshots would be helpful.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 08:06 UTC as 19th comment | 6 replies
On GoPro files for $100 million IPO article (30 comments in total)
In reply to:

nicolaiecostel: I think you should correct the text. You state that GoPro made 18 dollars in revenue in 2013 ?

UM, FWIW it says $1b

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2014 at 07:59 UTC
On Is it true? New service detects processed photos article (88 comments in total)
In reply to:

plasnu: Is this thing against RAW file format?

Yes - It's a Krockwellian invention.

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2014 at 16:41 UTC
On Is it true? New service detects processed photos article (88 comments in total)
In reply to:

ojosodo: I can't imagine how this isn't completely useless. And so what about processing? Are we going to give Ansel Adams' great works a "Don't trust" rating because they have been post-processed? haha.

@badi you just refuted your own argument. What was the point in that?

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2014 at 08:59 UTC

Life affirming, love it.

Direct link | Posted on May 2, 2014 at 09:40 UTC as 13th comment
On Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R real-world samples gallery article (270 comments in total)
In reply to:

Absolutic: Richard, do you know why Fuji would not address a big elephant in the room - 135mm equivalent fast prime for headshots etc. It is not even on their roadmap! We are left with having to get by with 85mm lenses from others on adapters like I did here with Nikon 85 1.4D lens http://brodsky.smugmug.com/Portraits/Portraits-1/Portraits-at-Huntingtons-Nov-2/i-mg76q8C/0/X2/DSCF9019-X2.jpg

If you know?

A 135 would be great but it's unlikely to appear within Fuji's roadmap which currently demonstrates a great line up. The 135 is much more of a niche market that Fuji will wait to get right.
Until then the 56 covers what most people need and is very capable at shooting 'head shots'.
BTW your posted example shows a full body shot to illustrate your point. I don't see that the 56 1.2 couldn't make this photograph and indeed get even closer. All it shows is that using a 3rd party lens via an adapter is a pointless exercise, no?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2014 at 16:32 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R real-world samples gallery article (270 comments in total)
In reply to:

HSway: Looking at the Sony, Fuji and other major players in mirrorless field I am actually *glad* that Nikon and Canon effectively as well left them this segment to themselves. They build systems I have serious doubts Nikon would come close to. Same for the large sensor compacts. Nikon was always, except an occasional feat, struggling outside the dslr.
The more so that the segment is picking up more slowly. They perhaps deserve more coin than they get at the moment but this is a work that will pay off though it can’t be quite fully evaluated by a yearly profit just yet.

Come again?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2014 at 16:19 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T1 Review preview (617 comments in total)
In reply to:

pinnacle: To all of those who have doubts about the realities of what the X-T1 can produce in actual image IQ, please find a way to get your hands on one with one of the excellent Fujinon primes. Use a demo version of Photo Ninja to process a RAW file and then pass judgement.

Seriously, this camera has gotten a lot right. The handling, the ergonomics, the image IQ...

I am thinking that the reason so many people are making quick and mistaken negative judgements about what it actually can do quite well is because the camera is a game changer and has a lot of owners of expensive DSLRs thinking long and hard about whether or not it is time to consider buying an X-T1.

Do your own field test and process the images using Photo Ninja. Many of you will be pleasantly surprised and many of you will not be surprised because you have already seen how well Fujifilm has done previously.

In any case, the differences are small. Small enough for you to keep using the DAM that you like or are used to.

Fuji could help themselves here by opening up the X-Trans to Adobe, Apple et al. I can see people coming from 36 MP might easily make the mistake of assuming that the Fuji's aren't performing in the same way that they're used to, at least at pixel level.

Personally, I'm more than happy with the X-Trans look. It's different from a DSLR, but then I knew that coming from the X100. The colour rendition is superb and the resolution doesn't kill my computer. And RAW files OOC need less attention in post.

I'll be happier still if the X-Trans conversion is given a work over by Aperture & Lightroom, but until then I'm out making pictures without compromise and without carrying a tank around my neck.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2014 at 09:26 UTC
Total: 126, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »