Jeff Peterman

Jeff Peterman

Lives in United States USA, MD, United States
Joined on Jul 4, 2002

Comments

Total: 139, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

About 20 years ago, I carefully set up my film camera to take a photo of an eclipse, getting a picture showing the sun with a bite missing. On the one hand, I was pleased that my effort paid off. On the other, I realized that I could have created an identical image just by taking a photo of a pin hole in a box, with a lightbulb inside the box.

Sometimes, all the effort isn't worth it.

A few years later, I experienced another partial eclipse and didn't bother with the camera - but saw some amazing images of the shadows created by the eclipsed sunlight passing through trees - hundreds of tiny shadows showing the outline of the eclipse.

So, I recommend not shooting the sun, but looking around for other unusual images created by the eclipse.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 13:27 UTC as 43rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

AshMills: I got 6/10 too. Harder than I thought too, as the standard of the changes was higher than the standard of photography, if that makes sense. I was looking for "edits" - perhaps should have looked more at tweaks.

I think my problem was that I was looking for additions when I should have also been looking for where something was removed.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 22:08 UTC
In reply to:

Tom K.: 9/10 but the scoring results were not informative. I missed one that had been altered but I don't remember what the picture was, and they don't show them again with an explanation of what was changed.

And yes, the part about guessing an area even if you think the image has not been altered is stupid. That may be in fact what the test was, to see where people click when there is no reason to.

Yes, I wish that they had shown the edited component on the shots that I missed. It also would have been good if they had given an example - maybe an image with something added and something removed.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 22:07 UTC

I got 7 out of 10. With one, I said "no manipulation" and as I left the page I noticed something clearly added, so I could say 8 out of 10. But part of my failure on the other two could be on their definition of "manipulated" being different than mine.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 22:01 UTC as 126th comment

You should have cropped the tree out of the top right corner of the climbing shot - pretty much shows you rotated it to fake the climbing difficulty!

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2017 at 15:23 UTC as 6th comment | 3 replies

Note that right now, if you get a new S8 phone you can order this camera from Samsung for only $50. Mine is on the way. (You don't have to use it for 360 degree shooting.)

Link | Posted on May 29, 2017 at 13:44 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (828 comments in total)
In reply to:

StevenN: I still have my Olympus XA, complete with case, and my Olympus Stylus. Both are in near-mint condition. I always had one of them with me wherever I went. Today, that task falls to my Panasonic GM5.

The XA was my go-every-where camera for a long time. I took a lot of good shots with it, and never found it too fiddly, My only complaint was the top ISO setting of 800; I used to do a lot of push-processing for night shooting at high ISO.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2017 at 22:36 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (828 comments in total)
In reply to:

StevenN: I still have my Olympus XA, complete with case, and my Olympus Stylus. Both are in near-mint condition. I always had one of them with me wherever I went. Today, that task falls to my Panasonic GM5.

I may have to find my XA and look into that.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 20:32 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (828 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: Three classics missing from this list: The Canon A1 - the successor to the AE1, with aperture and shutter priority options, and the two smallest SLRs: something from the Olympus OM series (OM-1, 2, 3, or 4), and the Pentax ME. The Olympus cameras were relatively tiny marvels: robust, with great functionality, commonly used by professionals. I owned several versions of the OM2 (I still have an OM2P).

For novelty, I'll through in the Pentax 110 SLR, which probably is the smallest SLR ever made (I was tempted to buy the 3 lens kit)- but the "sensor" size (110 film) was too small for it to really be practical.

By the way, I bought an Olympus XA when they first came out. A great little camera that I carried everywhere for over a decade. But the seals on the back cover dried up and started cracking, so if you buy one, test it for light-tightness.

I just checked priced on the 110 camera and found this one:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pentax-Auto-110-SLR-Outfit-Case-Accessories-18-24-mm-lenses-Brand/112401042829?_trksid=p2385738.c100677.m4598&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20160908110712%26meid%3D1713c238850a430bb172617b673fe9a2%26pid%3D100677%26rk%3D4%26rkt%3D41%26sd%3D272644980627

According to the listing, it is "medium format" and takes "medium format file." I guess this is one listing to avoid, but there are several offering kits for around $100.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 16:53 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (828 comments in total)
In reply to:

zakk9: To those who would like to have the OM-1 included:
Not a good idea. I loved mine and used it for 30 years, but batteries can't be found anymore, so an adapter is needed.

One camera that should absolutely have been there though is the Nikon F3. It's a legendary camera with professional build quality, manufactured for 21 years, surviving the F4 and mostly the F5 too. Besides the Leica M3, it's the 35mm classic to have, but as opposed to he Leica, the Nikon is a bargain and can easily be found for $2-300,

If you don't need the built-in meter, the OM-1 will work fine. And it is a wonderful camera to use.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 16:47 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (828 comments in total)
In reply to:

RoelHendrickx: Any camera of the Olympus OM series would be a worthy addition to this list.
I own an OM2n and it is a gem.

I bought an OM-2 (original) shortly after they became available - the first camera with TTL metering for flash, giving it a great exposure system (you could combine flash and available light for some great shots). I bought an OM-2SP when they came out, and it lasted for years - until I switched completely to digital in the early 2000s.

The OM4 was always my dream camera, but I could never afford one when I was shooting film. Now, I'm tempted to pick one up just to have it.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 16:46 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (828 comments in total)
In reply to:

StevenN: I still have my Olympus XA, complete with case, and my Olympus Stylus. Both are in near-mint condition. I always had one of them with me wherever I went. Today, that task falls to my Panasonic GM5.

If you haven't touched the XA for a while, open the back and check the seals. On mine, they dried out and crumbled, making the camera worthless for taking photos.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 16:41 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (828 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: Three classics missing from this list: The Canon A1 - the successor to the AE1, with aperture and shutter priority options, and the two smallest SLRs: something from the Olympus OM series (OM-1, 2, 3, or 4), and the Pentax ME. The Olympus cameras were relatively tiny marvels: robust, with great functionality, commonly used by professionals. I owned several versions of the OM2 (I still have an OM2P).

For novelty, I'll through in the Pentax 110 SLR, which probably is the smallest SLR ever made (I was tempted to buy the 3 lens kit)- but the "sensor" size (110 film) was too small for it to really be practical.

By the way, I bought an Olympus XA when they first came out. A great little camera that I carried everywhere for over a decade. But the seals on the back cover dried up and started cracking, so if you buy one, test it for light-tightness.

Every now and then I pick up my OM2 with winder attached and an f1.8 50mm. It is so tiny compared to my 7D, and even small compared to my SL1.

Still, the nostalgia makes me very tempted to pick up an Olympus OM-D kit (which I don't need).

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 14:39 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (828 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: Three classics missing from this list: The Canon A1 - the successor to the AE1, with aperture and shutter priority options, and the two smallest SLRs: something from the Olympus OM series (OM-1, 2, 3, or 4), and the Pentax ME. The Olympus cameras were relatively tiny marvels: robust, with great functionality, commonly used by professionals. I owned several versions of the OM2 (I still have an OM2P).

For novelty, I'll through in the Pentax 110 SLR, which probably is the smallest SLR ever made (I was tempted to buy the 3 lens kit)- but the "sensor" size (110 film) was too small for it to really be practical.

By the way, I bought an Olympus XA when they first came out. A great little camera that I carried everywhere for over a decade. But the seals on the back cover dried up and started cracking, so if you buy one, test it for light-tightness.

"Through in" - I need to proof-read what I type before I post!

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 14:10 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (828 comments in total)

Three classics missing from this list: The Canon A1 - the successor to the AE1, with aperture and shutter priority options, and the two smallest SLRs: something from the Olympus OM series (OM-1, 2, 3, or 4), and the Pentax ME. The Olympus cameras were relatively tiny marvels: robust, with great functionality, commonly used by professionals. I owned several versions of the OM2 (I still have an OM2P).

For novelty, I'll through in the Pentax 110 SLR, which probably is the smallest SLR ever made (I was tempted to buy the 3 lens kit)- but the "sensor" size (110 film) was too small for it to really be practical.

By the way, I bought an Olympus XA when they first came out. A great little camera that I carried everywhere for over a decade. But the seals on the back cover dried up and started cracking, so if you buy one, test it for light-tightness.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 13:20 UTC as 362nd comment | 8 replies
On article Looking back: Canon's eye-controlled focus (210 comments in total)

Many of us have a lot of nostalgia for those days. I was a dedicated Oly SLR user, with OM2 and an OM2P bodies. They were so great ergonomically (with the Winder module attached) and so tiny. But Olympus never developed a good auto focus mechanism for their film SLRs, and were very late getting into the DSLR market, so I ended up going with Canon and would not go back.

But I still miss using the

Link | Posted on May 11, 2017 at 16:41 UTC as 88th comment
In reply to:

Geekapoo: Bah, that's just a hot pixel. J/k..way cool!

Sounds familiar to me too.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 01:50 UTC

You sure that's not a hot pixel?

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 01:48 UTC as 6th comment

The 10D was my first DSLR too. It was great - except for the time to show an image on the LCD after a shot. That wait was significant - and something that they fixed with the much better 20D. I still have both bodies on a shelf.

It is worth mentioning that shortly after the 10D became widely available, Canon released the much cheaper digital Rebel. Quite a few people were upset to buy the 10D and then find that they could have saved a lot of money by just waiting a few weeks.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 15:35 UTC as 56th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

ZC Lee: I have a synology 2 Bays and a qnap 6 Bays, Are there any reason to have a DroboDR?

I don't consider RAID 0 of any value for backup. It is fine for working space (where you want speed and can risk data loss - such as video editing) but not storage. One complaint about the Drobo is that it uses a proprietary storage method - this allows mixing hard drives of different capacity/speed, and therefore allows progressive increase in storage capacity. By default, the Drobo set up has one redundant drive (five 2 TB drives gives you 8 TB of usable space) - I have mine configured with two redundant drives (the five 2 TB drives giving me 6 TB of space), so I can theoretically have two drives fail without data loss. I have recovered from a single drive failure, and I have replaced all the drives, one at a time, while upgrading the capacity without data loss.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2017 at 16:47 UTC
Total: 139, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »