Jeff Peterman

Jeff Peterman

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

Comments

Total: 146, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / EOS 200D Review (432 comments in total)

I love my SL1, bought specifically to use as a travel body. I can put the body in one pocket and a lens in another, and carry this combinations where my 7D or 6D are just not practical. I've taken the SL1 all over the world this way - on trips where photography was secondary and size/weight where critical.

The SL2 adds some nice features, but in a larger size. Not by much, but I need to see if the body will still fit in a coat pocket - and wait for the price to drop a little more.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2017 at 21:57 UTC as 48th comment
In reply to:

Najinsky: Good luck Apple.

This is a brave move and one many photographers will eventually thank you for when all the flack has died down (and boy will there be flack, lol).

I'm really looking forward to saying goodbye to 8 bit color and hello to higher quality 10bit color. I just hope camera makers are fast to realize this and the many other benefits it brings and get on board sooner rather than later.

That all depends on the licensing fee charged by Apple. Most other companies will be reluctant to use the new format if they have to pay a fee to integrate it into their hardware/software.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2017 at 13:32 UTC
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: Sounds a lot like they are trying to catch up with the 8 series from Samsung - the X looks a lot like the Note 8 (including the dual cameras, optical image stabilization, and one with optical zoom, but without the Stylus).

My Note 8 is due in 10 days ... (I'll keep a fire extinguisher nearby for the first few days).

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 00:40 UTC

Sounds a lot like they are trying to catch up with the 8 series from Samsung - the X looks a lot like the Note 8 (including the dual cameras, optical image stabilization, and one with optical zoom, but without the Stylus).

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 23:46 UTC as 127th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: What about for 6D users? Many of us with the older model who don't shoot video are struggling to determine if the upgrade is worth it.

Unfortunately, none of these responses helps. Yes, the MKII has a relative limited spread of good focus points, but the I only use the center one original so the limited spread is still a big improvement. Low ISO DR is not critical to me, but high ISO is and I haven't seen good comparisons of real-world use of the 6D and 6D II in low light. The improvements in AF spots could be enough to justify the upgrade - if the high ISO is at least as good as on the original.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 14:56 UTC

What about for 6D users? Many of us with the older model who don't shoot video are struggling to determine if the upgrade is worth it.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 04:30 UTC as 43rd comment | 8 replies

Typo: when comparing the two, the article shows the Canon at 29mm at the wide end and the Nikon at 18mm, when the latter should be 27mm.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2017 at 14:14 UTC as 58th comment

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 47th 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 130th 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 7th 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 3rd comment
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (815 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 (815 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 (815 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 (815 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 (815 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 (815 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 (815 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
Total: 146, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »