Jeff Peterman

Jeff Peterman

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

Comments

Total: 97, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus E-10 (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

NAwlins Contrarian: "[T]he [Olympus] D-600L ($1299) ... had ..., in a first for consumer cameras, a TTL optical viewfinder."

Wait, what? This really intrigues me. How did a through-the-lens optical viewfinder work when the camera is not an SLR or view camera? You sure that wasn't the same sort of zoom-tunnel viewfinder found on 35mm compact cameras in the 1990s and basic digital cameras (like the Canon A570 IS we had) in the mid-2000s? If not, then please explain, I'm really curious!

It was an SLR: it used a mirror to direct light to the viewfinder. However, with the Olympus cameras of that era that mirror was semi-transparent so that both the viewfinder and sensor could receive the image (at reduced brightness).

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 14:50 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus E-10 (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: I used one of these for years. Olympus argued that having a removable lens on a DSLR was a bad idea because of the risk of getting dust on the sensor. This was a problem with the early removable lens DSLRs (I remember cleaning my Canon 10D sensor a lot) - later resolved by having vibrating sensors (as in the current Olympus DSLR line, and all/most others).

The camera had two key flaws: slow/poor autofocus (long a problem with Olympus film SLRs) and terribly slow image storing. At full resolution, you could have a noticeable lab between shots - which could stretch to minutes if shooting RAW! I went from the E-10 (the last in my very long line of Olympus cameras, including an OM-2) to a 10D, and the improvements in usability were huge.

As did I - the biggest difference was the shot review delay, which was significant on the 10D and not noticeable on the 20D. Plus, the 20D could take EF-S lenses, for more/cheaper wide angle options.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 14:47 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus E-10 (158 comments in total)

I used one of these for years. Olympus argued that having a removable lens on a DSLR was a bad idea because of the risk of getting dust on the sensor. This was a problem with the early removable lens DSLRs (I remember cleaning my Canon 10D sensor a lot) - later resolved by having vibrating sensors (as in the current Olympus DSLR line, and all/most others).

The camera had two key flaws: slow/poor autofocus (long a problem with Olympus film SLRs) and terribly slow image storing. At full resolution, you could have a noticeable lab between shots - which could stretch to minutes if shooting RAW! I went from the E-10 (the last in my very long line of Olympus cameras, including an OM-2) to a 10D, and the improvements in usability were huge.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 13:41 UTC as 59th comment | 2 replies
On article New kid on the block: YI M1 review (710 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: It looks a lot like a Leica - especially with the red dot brand logo. Coincidence?

Xpro 2 may have the similar concept - but it doesn't have the little red logo on the front.

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2016 at 19:00 UTC
On article New kid on the block: YI M1 review (710 comments in total)

It looks a lot like a Leica - especially with the red dot brand logo. Coincidence?

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2016 at 16:07 UTC as 76th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

JordanAT: They should have renamed it "The President" because that bezel is yuuuuuge!

iPad or iPad Pro? There is a big difference between those two.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 13:10 UTC
In reply to:

JordanAT: They should have renamed it "The President" because that bezel is yuuuuuge!

But for the intended use, a large bezel is useful as a palm rest, so that you cover less of the image when working.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2016 at 19:06 UTC

My cat. Who else?

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 13:58 UTC as 90th comment

Just cut a round hole in a sheet of cardboard, hold it in front of a lamp, and take a photo. You'll get a bright white/yellow circle on a black background.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2016 at 22:46 UTC as 27th comment

That is a really good price for a twin lens macro. If it would work on a Canon body, I'd buy one!

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2016 at 19:49 UTC as 16th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Danny: The problem is that all these expensive add-ons are for a mobile phone, and with all the technological developments on the mobile market, mobile phones have such a short lifespan these days.

But the design advantage is that you can slip off the attachment and have a thin phone when you need it, but a much more capable "system" when you need it too.

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2016 at 21:34 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Canon EOS M5 quick look video (262 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bassman2003: Could you tell us what camera was used to film the video? Thanks.

Probably a Sony ... ;-)

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 17:47 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: Put out some excellent f/1.4, 1.8, or 2 primes with silent STM or NANO USM and Canon... You've got me.

Well, the implication was your own due to the lack of mention of that lens in your post. The Original M was a notoriously slow focusing body and so how much of the slow focus was due to the lens and how much was due to the body? I suspect (without data) that a lot was due to the latter, which has been greatly improved on the M5.

Until we have data for the 22mm F2 on the M5, we don't really know how quickly it will focus.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 12:49 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: Put out some excellent f/1.4, 1.8, or 2 primes with silent STM or NANO USM and Canon... You've got me.

You mean like the Canon EF-M 22mm f2 STM?

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 12:24 UTC

When I wanted a small camera for travel, I looked at the M series and decided that I couldn't live with the slow focusing and limited controls, and bought an SL1. I've been waiting to hear about an SL2, but given the improvements in focusing speed and controls, it is pretty certain that Canon will abandon the SL line and consider the new M5 as a replacement for the SL1.

I'm tempted by an M5 - especially if the price drops significantly in a few months.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 12:21 UTC as 141st comment
In reply to:

Marty4650: The XA was the original pocket camera. Slide it shut, put it in your pocket, and it will sit there until you see something you want to shoot. Then, it just takes one second to pull it out and slide it open... ready to take a photo.

There were no cases or straps for this camera. It was intended to travel in your pocket or purse when it wasn't being used.

The XA was just a tiny bit larger than a Minox 35GL.

Olympus actually did build clamshell digital cameras like their D-340 and D-400, but they were larger and heavier by necessity. Film cameras are essentially just boxes to hold a roll of film, with a lens and a few controls. Digital cameras are much more involved things, especially if they have zoom lenses, which is something the XA lacked.

Minox mostly made their name with cameras that took a smaller film format than 35mm, which compromised image quality for pocketability. Their 35mm models were no better than the XA and a lot more expensive.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 14:41 UTC

I had two of those. The XA was a great, carry-everywhere little camera - although the screw on flash module was a little inconvenient.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 12:12 UTC as 145th comment
On article Rebel in your pocket: Canon EOS M3 Review (464 comments in total)
In reply to:

entoman: To be honest, I think the only people who would really consider this camera would be Canon DSLR users wanting a mirrorless second camera with familiar styling and controls. Even then, you'd have to be blind to reality to be convinced that the M3 would be a sensible choice. As a committed and happy Canon DSLR system user, I'd look elsewhere if I wanted a CSC - and Fujifilm would probably get my money.

When I wanted a smaller body to go with my Canon DSLRs, I looked seriously at the M series - and then bought an SL1.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2016 at 22:30 UTC

I can see one situation in which this is useful. There are some sensitive locations, including some businesses and some government offices, where you are not allowed to bring in any phone with a camera. In the past, companies sold versions of their phones without cameras for this reason, but not any more.

A company/office could install this device and then say you could bring in phones that were certified to work it it - any other phone has to go in a locker at security (the latter is the case for all phones with cameras in those locations today).

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 00:26 UTC as 169th comment
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: Sounds like a reason not to buy an iPhone.

I've had one iPhone, a 3GS in the days when Android was too limited and the phones with the Microsoft OS made their initial failed attempts to work without a stylus. But I've been Android-only since then, partly because I hate the way Apple force you to try to do everything with just one button. And I hate iTunes.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 00:23 UTC
Total: 97, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »