mfinley

mfinley

Lives in Colorado
Joined on Dec 10, 2016
About me:

Was a professional commercial advertising photographer in the 80s, then left the field, now am back shooting just for my own pleasure

Comments

Total: 987, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

mfinley: Not an exciting lens for me personally, but any new releases of anything are good signs of the patient is still alive which is a good thing.

Personally, I'd like a tilt / shift.

Now come out with a 30-40mp sensor camera and you will not only have a prognosis of survival but thrival!

Xforest - and then go to save the file, it saves as a jpeg. Not sure why you keep beating this dead horse. If you have one of the cameras, go try it. All of the "retouching" in camera functions on those cameras save your retouched file as a jpeg.

If you have a tilt shift lens you should also know that the digital keystone is extrapolating the digital capture which lacks the missing parts of the image that aren't captured, when you use a tilt shift you capture the building for instance with the perspective corrected. A keystone correction can't recreate data that doesn't exist in the image. Maybe this is just not something you've thought of or don't have the experience. Go shoot the same shot on a tripod with your tilt shift lens pointing up at a tall building, don't correct with the lens and then shoot the same subject with the tilt corrections, then correct your distorted shot with keystone correction and compare it to the tilt-shift shot, they aren't going to be the same. Go try it.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2023 at 03:36 UTC
In reply to:

mfinley: Not an exciting lens for me personally, but any new releases of anything are good signs of the patient is still alive which is a good thing.

Personally, I'd like a tilt / shift.

Now come out with a 30-40mp sensor camera and you will not only have a prognosis of survival but thrival!

Not on either my EM10 or OM1, you're got a unique camera there if you're creating RAW files with keystone correction.

All that does is saves the keystone corrections to a Jpeg which I don't use.

And as I said, digital keystone correction is not the same experience as a tilt-shift lens.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2023 at 00:11 UTC
In reply to:

mfinley: Not an exciting lens for me personally, but any new releases of anything are good signs of the patient is still alive which is a good thing.

Personally, I'd like a tilt / shift.

Now come out with a 30-40mp sensor camera and you will not only have a prognosis of survival but thrival!

@xtforest
I don't shoot jpegs and those features don't work shooting RAW files, and even if they did, if you have experience with a tilt-shift lens you know that they aren't the same results.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2023 at 16:27 UTC
In reply to:

mfinley: "'I think the need for small, lightweight cameras that can be carried around all the time like smartphones will increase, especially among the younger generation.'"

I hope that is not an actual marketing strategy of theirs. Camera makers are either in denial or just so out of touch with consumers.

Planning on taking market share from cell phone cameras is the exact opposite of a plausible strategy, they should be looking at FF cameras and cannibalizing that user base by increasing IQ to compete with FF and pull more FF users to M43.

Yeah for sure. I spend a lot of time stitching together low-light images in my cell phone, just days and days. I got to get me one of those new-fangled ones that does that by itself with the push of a button. Oh, wait, mine does that now.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2023 at 21:41 UTC
In reply to:

mfinley: "'I think the need for small, lightweight cameras that can be carried around all the time like smartphones will increase, especially among the younger generation.'"

I hope that is not an actual marketing strategy of theirs. Camera makers are either in denial or just so out of touch with consumers.

Planning on taking market share from cell phone cameras is the exact opposite of a plausible strategy, they should be looking at FF cameras and cannibalizing that user base by increasing IQ to compete with FF and pull more FF users to M43.

I suppose you're referring to the EM1-X when you say huge Pro?

That's not the way to compete with FF. The moment the camera body grows you've negated the number one benefit of M43. A huge body like the EM1-X is exactly the wrong strategy and was the last nail in the coffin for Olympus, leading to the sale.

The proper strategy is a small body + higher IQ, a pretty simple equation.

Also, I never said anything about happy or unhappy with a pixel 6, stay on the course, and re-read what you need to. I said one of the main strengths of cell phone cameras is low-light photography. Computational Photography google it. Saying cell phone cameras have a weakness in low light is ridiculous as its exactly the opposite of reality. Low light images are one of the huge heralds of cell phone cameras. Again - read about computational photography, it's only been one of the biggest subjects in the last decade and there are cries daily for it to come to dedicated cameras here all the time.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2023 at 19:00 UTC
In reply to:

mfinley: "'I think the need for small, lightweight cameras that can be carried around all the time like smartphones will increase, especially among the younger generation.'"

I hope that is not an actual marketing strategy of theirs. Camera makers are either in denial or just so out of touch with consumers.

Planning on taking market share from cell phone cameras is the exact opposite of a plausible strategy, they should be looking at FF cameras and cannibalizing that user base by increasing IQ to compete with FF and pull more FF users to M43.

Keep grasping at straws my man. With your $200 experience.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2023 at 16:46 UTC
In reply to:

mfinley: "'I think the need for small, lightweight cameras that can be carried around all the time like smartphones will increase, especially among the younger generation.'"

I hope that is not an actual marketing strategy of theirs. Camera makers are either in denial or just so out of touch with consumers.

Planning on taking market share from cell phone cameras is the exact opposite of a plausible strategy, they should be looking at FF cameras and cannibalizing that user base by increasing IQ to compete with FF and pull more FF users to M43.

You bought a cheap cell phone that costs 1/3rd of the average cell phone, and it doesn't take pictures as well as an average cell phone? Shocker! LOL.

What's next? Are you going to go buy a 4-cylinder car and expect it to perform like an 6-cylinder?

There is always one in the crowd who wants to paint his exception as the rule.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2023 at 16:51 UTC

Not an exciting lens for me personally, but any new releases of anything are good signs of the patient is still alive which is a good thing.

Personally, I'd like a tilt / shift.

Now come out with a 30-40mp sensor camera and you will not only have a prognosis of survival but thrival!

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2023 at 00:48 UTC as 29th comment | 13 replies
In reply to:

mfinley: "'I think the need for small, lightweight cameras that can be carried around all the time like smartphones will increase, especially among the younger generation.'"

I hope that is not an actual marketing strategy of theirs. Camera makers are either in denial or just so out of touch with consumers.

Planning on taking market share from cell phone cameras is the exact opposite of a plausible strategy, they should be looking at FF cameras and cannibalizing that user base by increasing IQ to compete with FF and pull more FF users to M43.

lol, cherry-pick much?

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2023 at 22:08 UTC
In reply to:

steve ohlhaber: Not sure why m43 is so hated. I think APSC should be the odd one out. I mean, go FF or go m43 seems way more logical. APSC is too big to be small and so close to FF, you may as well just go FF. The costs of APSC are nearly the same. m43 gives you a nice step down in size and price.

The problem really is, we dont have good enough bodies for m43. I mean, phones have 64 mpixels, but we cant get a m43 to go over 24? Come on, push the limit, there is plenty of room on the sensor.

I love having FF for the 24-70mm range and m43 for any long lens stuff. The long lenses are way smaller and not that expensive. I hated carrying long lenses, so my rig allows a small m43 body and long lens and a FF body and lens, and I dont have to swap bodies either. I had APSC and hated it.

I have to agree. FF gives you shallow depth of field which if tough to get with m43. But if they can come up with anything close to a 40mp sensor and 14 stops of dynamic range, they will cannibalize the FF market and gain lots of market share.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2023 at 17:33 UTC
In reply to:

mfinley: "'I think the need for small, lightweight cameras that can be carried around all the time like smartphones will increase, especially among the younger generation.'"

I hope that is not an actual marketing strategy of theirs. Camera makers are either in denial or just so out of touch with consumers.

Planning on taking market share from cell phone cameras is the exact opposite of a plausible strategy, they should be looking at FF cameras and cannibalizing that user base by increasing IQ to compete with FF and pull more FF users to M43.

I have seen this refrence to "low light", and I don't understand it. Low-light shooting has been a hallmark of cell phone camera technology for at least the last 5 years. If anything cell phones excel at handheld low-light photography as one of their best features. Are people who say this using really old cell phones and just don't know any better?

As for selling m43 versus cell phones for telephoto situations, that's a temporary advantage right now. All 'wow' advances in cell phone cameras is focused on the race to improve telephoto aspects.

Pixel 7 is going to have a 6x optical zoom, the next iphone is going to have a 10x optical zoom. The gap of advantages of M43 in telephoto over cell phones is shrinking and soon will not even be of consequence.

My pixel 6 has a 5x optical zoom, and its not enough, when they get to 10x that's going to be plenty for just about all subjects except for safaris and sports.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2023 at 17:30 UTC
In reply to:

goodeyes: only surprise is how it takes until the m43 mistake disappears from market.

it was clear all along that cameras with 1/4 sensor area but 3/4 of bulk and price of FF would not be a winning proposition. Especially not when the choice is "Smartphone" or "real camera". People carrying around ILC cameras today will go for the "real thing" rather than bringing an mFT knife to a gunfight.

And no, it does not matter whether anyone ever prints an image or not. Those still willing to buy and lug around a separate camera plus lens/es, want the best image quality they can possibly afford. mFt was an epic fail from the very start.

AFter the crashing failure of FT Oly and Pana were dumb enough to repeat their mistake. Had they instead decided to go "mirrorfree FF in the smallest possible form factor and at a very attractive price point" - in the very spirit of the film OM system - it could have been a real success story. But ... not.

A lot of bizarre assumptions based I'm guessing on your wants and desires being projected as everyone else?

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2023 at 18:32 UTC

"'I think the need for small, lightweight cameras that can be carried around all the time like smartphones will increase, especially among the younger generation.'"

I hope that is not an actual marketing strategy of theirs. Camera makers are either in denial or just so out of touch with consumers.

Planning on taking market share from cell phone cameras is the exact opposite of a plausible strategy, they should be looking at FF cameras and cannibalizing that user base by increasing IQ to compete with FF and pull more FF users to M43.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2023 at 18:29 UTC as 12th comment | 18 replies
In reply to:

cheetah43: Photography vs Adobgraphy. The first is the real thing - photons strike film or sensor, and these two together with the printing process or sensor to screen processing produce what the eye sees. Adobgraphy (or Pshopgraphy) is not photography; it is a different thing.

lol so transparent

Link | Posted on Jan 2, 2023 at 22:57 UTC
On article DPReview TV: OM System OM-1 final review (237 comments in total)

No improvements to sensor quality at base ISO or dynamic range, means I'm making the same files with my Em-1 iii. The only improvement that would apply to me is a faster processing of HHHR. So it's skip this one for me, hopefully, they survive long enough to produce something advancing IQ and Dynamic Range in the future.

Link | Posted on Jan 2, 2023 at 21:59 UTC as 10th comment

This is the exercise that I tell everyone to try who asks "I'm traveling to XZY, which lenses should I bring?"

In photography school, one of the assignments was to spend a day shooting only with one focal length then the next day with only another. It's a great learning experience.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2022 at 21:20 UTC as 73rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

SushiCub: I used to think, under Adobe's plan, why I want to pay for new updates I won't use, purchasing is better" but the reality is...most have been something I as a beginner could get benefits from. For photo editing programs, there is no such thing "older is better" If you haven't looked at what $10 Lightroom/Photoshop plan can do for a while, including the mobile app, it's definitely worth even checking. No one judges you from what you said in the past! Think about it, the Facetune app charges $10 a month!!!

@jaw3000

amazing huh?

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2022 at 00:55 UTC
In reply to:

mfinley: Lightroom AND photoshop $10 a month...

https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/photography/compare-plans.html?promoid=XFWLHGM1&mv=other&locale=en-US

"and you have to use the Adobe cloud for the $10 per month plan - no local photos at all."

I have the subscription, everything is local.

Click the link I provided you, read the 1st column, all local, you have 20GB of cloud storage if you want to use it, I never have.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2022 at 00:36 UTC
In reply to:

mfinley: Lightroom AND photoshop $10 a month...

https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/photography/compare-plans.html?promoid=XFWLHGM1&mv=other&locale=en-US

"If only Lightroom was capable of delivering decent image quality... I pay for Photoshop anyway so Lightroom would be for free included. But it's pretty much like smartphone photography: in perfect conditions it can be awesome and stunning, but as soon as you leave the programs comfort zone quality goes down the drain."

LOL 🙄

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2022 at 00:35 UTC
In reply to:

SushiCub: I used to think, under Adobe's plan, why I want to pay for new updates I won't use, purchasing is better" but the reality is...most have been something I as a beginner could get benefits from. For photo editing programs, there is no such thing "older is better" If you haven't looked at what $10 Lightroom/Photoshop plan can do for a while, including the mobile app, it's definitely worth even checking. No one judges you from what you said in the past! Think about it, the Facetune app charges $10 a month!!!

"The problem for me with the $10 plan is all Lightroom photos MUST be in the Adobe cloud. You can't use photos locally on your computer or drives. "

I have the subscription with nothing in the cloud, everything is local

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2022 at 00:34 UTC
Total: 987, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »