Lives in United States San Francisco, CA, United States
Works as a Retired Photographer & Photoshop PixelPeeker
Joined on Feb 23, 2011
About me:

After the closing of my three generation old family photography studio in 1997 I changed careers and became an IT professional and manage server/storage and virtualization for a large not for profit organization. I continue to make money shooting events for a newspaper and work through a small agency primarily as an assistant and providing high-end Photoshop/Lightroom “pixel peeking” for prepress and weddings.


Total: 21, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

The new 24-70/f2.8 is a big lens.

Filter Thread Front: 82 mm
Dimensions: 3.46 x 6.08"
Weight: 2.35 lb

I'm not surprised by the big front but 6" long?

Can't wait to see the optical reviews

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 14:24 UTC as 43rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

GlobalGuyUSA: The lens is still the heaviest part of the camera. This argument should probably be SMALL lenses vs. BIG lenses. The hyperfocus on camera bodies is really absurd in some ways. Everyone knows you can go "down a format" to save space. Cellphones.

The physics of the LENS SIZES wont change, unless you go DOWN a format (FF DSLR->Crop->m3/4->1"->P&S->Cellphone, etc). You can get a light DSLR in any format -- that's no problem. The overall bulkiness depends on the LENSES. Anyone using LARGE full frame lenses (70-200/2.8, 300/4, 18-300VR, 135/2, etc) wont care about the slight size difference in the lightest dslrs and the biggest milc. In fact, the bigger dslr body is actually an advantage, because it helps stabilize the weight and pushes back the the center of gravity, providing a stable system. The camera is harder to tuck away, true, but the issue is the LENSES, not really the body.

If you are only using tiny primes (35/2, 50/1.8), I can see the advantage, however as your choice.

100% true that quality optics are often big and heavy and in my view (hands) have a more comfortable balance mounted on a FF body like a D8xx, 5D or bigger.
I once did a job using a crop and if felt like the controls were to tight together. I shoot manual everything even focus so useable controls that are were my fingers are is important.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2015 at 21:01 UTC

Any news about a shipping date?
Recently I dropped my Nikon 14-24/2.8 and need a replacement for that FL but would like to test the Tamron first.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2015 at 20:04 UTC as 2nd comment

Here we go again!

Sony announces lens for its small bodied cameras and the unwashed masses go crazy complaining about the size.
Don’t you think if it was easy to create quality/affordable FAST optics that are as small as some here want Sony and other manufactures’ wouldn’t do it?
I’m not an expert on optical design but it’s clear to me that if you want a quality lens at f2.8 or faster it’s going to be out of scale to the small bodies in many focal lengths.
Nikon just announced a replacement for its 300 f/4 that is much smaller and lighter as has Canon with some of its new lenses so it’s clear that manufactures are listening but it’s a different story if you want a fast f/2.8.
I can’t help but wonder how big is too big. Would a 70-200 f/2.8 with maybe a 55mm or 49mm filter thread element be better for FE bodies?……………….good luck seeing that made.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2015 at 17:14 UTC as 51st comment

I've been planning on buying the Nikon 14-24 for awhile but have waited for two reasons, first the filter issue (I have a big investment in 49,55,72,67,77 filters) and have been avoiding lenses that require me buying a Lee system.
The other is that the fabulous Nikon is getting just a little old.
It's been my experience that todays sensors and digital in general can show the faults even in the finest lenses and every lens supplier is rushing to design new optics for what I see as the coming 50MP+ world.
I'm eager to purchase a zoom in this range and can't wait to see the rumored sigma (I own both the 35 and 50 Art lenses) before I open my wallet.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2014 at 14:00 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

peevee1: From $220? What's up with hundreds of $$$ for a freaking bag? How are they 5.5 times better than $40 bags from Target?

You spend over $3k for a camera body, and spend another $8 to $10k in lenses and stuff and you want a $40 bag!
I'm always looking for a better, stronger, easer to use bag and if it costs $300 then it costs $300
But then again maybe you spent $300 for your complete kit

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2014 at 17:36 UTC
On article Get more accurate color with camera calibration (242 comments in total)

Great tool!
Important part of my workflow!

I’m always surprised to read on blogs people who discount the process of establishing correct color. In simple terms the color we see is the reflection of light from a surface. Anyone that has selected a tie and shirt to go with a suit in the store and then taken it home a discovered a different reality understands this. We don't see color we see the reflection of light from a object. The florescent lights in the store may have a color temp of 4400 kelvin mixed with maybe some halogen point sources at 3500k and then took it all home under incandescent at 2800k. Photography is all about light and color photography is all about how the reflection of a color source off an object is rendered.
Today’s cameras do a good job assigning color but they are not always correct so using a tool like this is important for those of us who that images we create seriously.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2014 at 14:42 UTC as 67th comment

I’m pretty sure I’m going to buy this lens.
Over the last few years as I’ve moved from 12MP, 24 and now 36MP on my D800E and I’ve learned how important good optics are and I think that 50mm is a good length on a full-frame. I use primes almost all the time except for sporting or fast moving street/event photography when I “need” zoom (70-200/f2.8 24-70/f2.8) and stabilization otherwise I shoot with the new Sigma 35/f1.4, Nikon 85/f1.8, and Zeiss 135/f2. I find that these lenses give me consistently sharp images even in aggressive post cropping something I can’t always get away with shooting through a normal old-school 50 like my 50m/f1.8.
Yes, it big and heavy but I don’t care as it’s all about the image.
Over the last two years I’ve become big fan of Sigma lens.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2014 at 14:29 UTC as 26th comment
On article Sigma announces all-new 50mm F1.4 DG HSM 'Art' lens (244 comments in total)

I'm looking forward to reading the first reviews

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2014 at 04:13 UTC as 48th comment

$3K for an A-Mount 70-200/f2.8
The prices on many of the recent full-frame A-Mount lenses have been way higher than Nikon, but are they any better?

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2013 at 14:18 UTC as 9th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Fixx: Does this work with RAW-photos or does the processing produce JPEG-files? That is, if I have distortion control enabled in my camera, do I get corrected NEF-files to my Lightroom library?

So, the firmware change is designed to correct optics by adjusting it at the body. Isn’t that what Sigma offers with its USB interface at the lens and how different is that than making focusing adjustments on the body using firmware was many of us do now.
I don’t see how that messes up the concept of RAW.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2013 at 15:18 UTC
On article Lens reviews update: DxOMark data for Sony NEX primes (54 comments in total)

As camera sensors grow above 24 - 36 MP the quality of the optics are more important. I think all manufactures are having problem shrinking optics and keeping corner to corner sharpness. When I buy into a camera system its the lenses that are the most important element.
I would love to replace my Sony a850's and my Nikon D800E systems with something smaller but for me Sony's NEX system just isn't there yet with the optical range, speed and sharpness for me.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2013 at 14:54 UTC as 20th comment

I've been a loyal Adobe Photoshop buyer from day one and have paid the costs for every new release as it ships. But recently I'm finding that Lightroom and a few well picked add-ons from third parties often does the job.
Maybe its time that I stop spending for a program I'm not using on every workstation in my studio, or at least stop buying as many licenses.

AND maybe I should stop renewing my NAPP at

Link | Posted on May 6, 2013 at 20:20 UTC as 659th comment

A year ago I would have pre-ordered both the Zeiss 50 d the white 70-400 G without question.
As a happy a850 shooter I really didn’t have plans to replace the 850 with the a99 but was interested in the rumored second, or follow-on, higher MP body that was to be released this year. Alas that rumor turned-out to be wrong.
I would love to be buying both of these new lenses and the new Sigma 35 as well, but without a clear Sony A-Mount upgrade path past the a99 I worry that next year there still won’t be a new Sony full-frame besides the a99 SLT camera and I’ll have even more A-Mount gear to unload on eBay than I have now.
Decisions, decisions………….

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2013 at 15:00 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply

A photographer’s work often has more to say about the artist behind the lens than the objects in front. Posters to sites like this often decry others, and criticize others work but where is their offerings?
Put-up or shut-up!
Maybe then you’ll have firm grounding for an opinion and some credibility

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2012 at 14:55 UTC as 9th comment
On article Photoshop CS6: Top 5 Features for Photographers (98 comments in total)

A great tool for photographers that have the skills to use it.
I spent 20 years in a darkroom and the last 10 years using PS.
Lightroom is part of my workflow and PS is used when needed to finish.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2012 at 03:11 UTC as 41st comment
In reply to:

Hans Christian S: @BobYIL - since the NEX-5N have a (marginally) larger sensor than all of your mentioned cameras, then why not also a better IQ performance?
Size isn't everything, but NEX got's it's surprises. The sensor is bigger than the one in my 7D etc....!

Edit: IQ added before 'performance'.

Han's - I do believe that the Nikon D3200 is 24MP APS-C
Canon APS-C IS a little smaller, but not enough to matter.
Is that's wnat you mean by bigger?

Link | Posted on Jul 4, 2012 at 15:45 UTC

I guess this is Sony's new kit lens. How many is that now?

It would be nice to see a lens or two or TEN that are good enough to stay in the line-up for a few years.
The old 85/f1.4 has been in the line-up since 2006 and its still good product, needs a new motor and sealings and other refreshes but it's still has good optics.
We need more lens like that and not a new ket lens each season like this one looks to be!

Link | Posted on May 17, 2012 at 07:27 UTC as 17th comment | 3 replies
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark III low-light ISO series samples (319 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tape5: Photography can also be a sickness. When I talk about photography I am thinking about Blakemore's tulips, not a sweaty girl hitting a baseball bat at high speed. I understand high ISOs believe me. Photography will always be pulled between information and art. I am only saying that most photographers are knowingly or otherwise in need of artistic expression in their lives and are not earning their family income by taking 9 fps indoor shots of fast moving things. And if anyone takes a picture with ISO 12000, I love to see that too. We all have different priorities and different mortgages.

Some of us here pay some or all of our mortgage through this “sickness” you claim to know about and need to deal with both the technical and artistic elements of capturing an image on a daily if not hourly basis. Sorry if I’m being rude, but I just wanted to let you know that photography for some of us is more than a hobby or a way to take picture of the kids it’s what we do to pay the bills.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2012 at 05:35 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark III low-light ISO series samples (319 comments in total)

Really Tape5,
Reviewing the thousands of photos cataloged in my Lightroom database I see many over ISA 400.
My Alpha 900 in auto ISO mode routinely sets ISO between 400-800 and I believe many other cameras do this also.
I use ISO to help create depth of field and adjust it as needed up to 1600 and down to 100 as part of my settings when I shoot in manual mode to help me hit the sweet aperture setting on my optics.
I don’t agree at all.
It would be nice if and when ISO could be made useable higher with good noise control but now at least for my camera an ISO of 3200 is about the limit

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2012 at 16:38 UTC as 28th comment
Total: 21, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »