PhotoKhan

Lives in Portugal Cascais, Portugal
Works as a Airline pilot
Joined on Mar 22, 2003
About me:

A good photograph shows what you saw.
A superior ones conveys what you felt.

Comments

Total: 1380, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Michael Foran: Is the unsaid inference here that Adobe will be deprecating the 'Classic' version while they spend all their time developing the new 'CC' version with new features? If so I'm going to have to start looking for new software. I have no issues with the Adobe subscription service- I use their entire suite on a daily basis for work and it more than pays for itself. But I have no desire for the cloud based integration that seems to be the focus of the new version. *Especially* the cloud-only database. While I wouldn't mind to have automatic cloud based database backups, an exclusively cloud based solution is not something I can trust. Also, I'm not exactly buying the whole 'legacy code' thing. Lightroom isn't that old. I suspect the more likely reason for the new version is that they want their tablet and desktop versions developed in parallel, so they are probably writing in a new environment that compiles more easily, and behaves more consistently across platforms.

Jeff,

Wouldnt't it be more appropriate, as the author of this piece, to ask them rather than making an educated guess, like any of your readers may also do?

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 11:57 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: For that kind of scene, it is way more flexible and, specially, cheaper to take a drive series of 3 FEC shots and then use LR/PS to do what they do best.

Good for you.

Again, for that particular scene, bracketing is more practical and, especially, since we're talking about Lee, less expensive.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 09:39 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: For that kind of scene, it is way more flexible and, specially, cheaper to take a drive series of 3 FEC shots and then use LR/PS to do what they do best.

There is no "right in the field", there is "neutral from the field".

That neutrality can be obtained by either Nds or bracketed exposures.

I've just arrived from a trip to Brittany, France where I used both approaches, depending on the scene and final intent.

Again, for that particular scene, bracketing is more practical and, especially, since we're talking about Lee, less expensive.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 20:58 UTC

Only when judges/courts start adding surprise heavy punitive damages to the relatively small amounts requested by the plaintiffs will this trend into exploitative gig-economy be reversed or, at least, stopped because that - hardcore cash - is the only language these people understand.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 10:54 UTC as 20th comment

For that kind of scene, it is way more flexible and, specially, cheaper to take a drive series of 3 FEC shots and then use LR/PS to do what they do best.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 08:27 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies
On article More Nikon D850 samples images added (144 comments in total)

This crowd SO needs some blind testing...

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 16:44 UTC as 37th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon patents a huge, hinged and reversible DSLR LCD (165 comments in total)
In reply to:

cd cooker: instead of working on their sensor tech, Canon is spending time on this?

Thanks cd cooker for validating the current state of affairs to an whole new level:

We already know everything Canon does is "Meh!".

... but, as far as "Mehrs" go, you could be called an pre-emptive one: To you this is "Meh!" even before being made "Meh!".

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 15:18 UTC
On article Gallery: Fujifilm X-E3 sample photos (91 comments in total)

As a Canon user, the EOS-M line offers me a full "click-in" integration into the wider EOS ecosystem that is difficult to live without.

Further more, departing from the earlier offers, the EOS-M line cameras are consistently becoming better offers with each interaction.

I am also a firm believer that multiplying camera types platforms is something quite ineffective, financially-wise.

All that said, I must add: These little Fuji gems are making me vacillate about those certainties like no other cameras.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 09:18 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

blackcoffee17: Nice. The next step will be stopping the development of the Classic version.

I would love to say you're wrong but the way the news piece is outlined sure seems to point in that direction.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 13:39 UTC
In reply to:

Paul B Jones: I don't like change.

Especially when, by going into subscription mode, a implicit commitment could be presumed whereas we would be able to count on the way we organize and process Raw files for a very significant period of time.

Instead, after only 2 years, we get this "branching out" where we have to be very optimistic in order to believe that re-branding what we use as "Classic", while admitting that it has insurmountable speed problems related to legacy code, is not the first step to drop what we use and need, altogether.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 13:36 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Nah...

(Cont.)

In my view, from these and other already published samples, this lens simply has a "Meh!/Nah!" soul, no matter how bogus-metrically-"sharp" it might be.

In fact, I am finding it detrimental for use under perfect light (...low cast, early morning or late afternoon, natural light...) on account of having the strange ability to "flatten" that very same light.

This is my opinion.

That others seem to not be able to live with it or, better still, move forward into other perspectives that might comfy-sustain their own POV, up to the point of trying to exercise plain and simple censorship, much like a 5-year-old who would put his hands over his ears and cry "Shut up!, Shut up, Shut up!", is something utterly strange and that only they can explain why it is so.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 09:57 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Nah...

Hi Lawny,

Thank you for you civil and to-the-point reply.

"Others" would not have reacted a little more toned down because their reactions would always stem from the same place - insecurity.

They just would pick something else to try and suppress what is, essentially, an opinion.

Their insecurity does not tolerate alternate views because it makes them doubt their own.

...and the reason they feel that way is because they relentlessly and stubbornly resort to "metrics" (...and extremely dubious ones, for that matter...) when, in fact, the tangible optical output from any lenses goes well beyond those beloved "metrics", into a realm one could call the lens "optical souls".

(...not having anything else to resort to in the realm of long-teles, bar adaptations, must also not help with the insecure "need" for this to be a stellar offer...)

(Cont.)

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 09:56 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Nah...

Mr. Armandino,

You do realize that you don't get to tell other users what "their place is", right?

Surely you do realize that what you've told has a child, that you're "so special" and that all that you say is "gold", just because, does not apply in your adult life?

You have started to sound quite unpleasant a few exchanges ago (...passive aggressiveness always repulses me...) and you've now crossed an wanna-be-authoritarian line that is the true trade mark of closed-mindedness.

As such, our exchanges are now terminated.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 09:12 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Nah...

Wagnar,

"You guys should quit obsessing ". It's a plural. Are you all of Sony users? Probably not. Then why would you need to be on a Portuguese forum for me make that general consideration?

First, not understanding what a simple "Nah..." might mean, then this confusion over semantics.

You might understand how such failings in simple logic can taint your "tested a lot" opinion, right?

Again, just have fun and quite worrying or you'll run the risk of ending up sounding like poor armandino and his schoolyard-level rethorics.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 08:03 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

T3: Wow, this has to be one of the ugliest cameras Canon has ever put out. Not that looks are the end all and be all of cameras, but they don't need to be fugly.

It is ugly...and the wrong kind of "ugly", like in "attention grabbing ugly":

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 11:15 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Nah...

Here’s an educated Sony user that knows why a 100-400 should be a flexible tool that extends well beyond just “action photography”:

https://www.richardfoxphotography.com/review-sony-fe-100-400-master-lens-landscape-photographers-part-1/

Unfortunately, to me, the review confirms the underwhelming optical performance of this offer that I've noticed on the DPR gallery, up to the point – in Richard’s Fox case – of having the ability of turning obvious great lighting into flat images, lacking both overall and micro contrast (!)

As a final note, I will say this.

You guys should quit obsessing having Sony gear trump over whatever and just enjoy the excellent, good and less-than-good gear the brand offers you.

Your repeated stance over these kind of matters (...that I perceive both here, on DPR and in the national forum I participate in...) REALLY makes you sound insecure about your options.

Out, with a final "Nah..." ;)

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 10:21 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Nah...

(cont.)

If I were you, I would skip DXO altogether and wait for true credible sources like Photozone.de or Roger Cicala to see how really “sharp” this lens is (...a characteristic that seems to be your only relevant criteria, something that, in turn, tells volumes about your priorities and take on Photography in general and Optics, in particular).

That you think the AF is "mediocre" on the Canon lens just shows that you're an easy prey to Sony marketing, who have to tout about how fantastic the AF is supposed to be on this lens because, at the moment, it is their ONLY credible offer for action photography.

That you and other Sony users think a 100-400 is exclusively for action photography is also rather cute and both another sad indicator of a restricted view on photography and that you guys really don't have any other native options for that type of photography, having to resort to adaptations (...which you, yourself, already made clear how less-than-perfect it is...).

(cont.)

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 10:18 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Nah...

Magnar,

Nobody recommended anything over nothing. A native system lens is always, obviously, a better choice.

My inputs are on this lens, per se, as a photography enthusiast and I already explained why the underwhelmed simple comment I made.

To me, these samples are precisely that - underwhelming in optical terms.

That you think that the the Canon offer is "less sharp" is quite cute.

You're obviously another misled fan of DXO and their “M-pixs”, a non-scientific, unrelated to actual optics concept that was hilarious when they tried to explain it, up to the point that they must have felt so embarrassed that we now get "Oops! That page can’t be found" when we click on the explanation link.

(cont.)

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 10:15 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Nah...

Armandino, you sound a bit insecure. Just enjoy what you seem to like.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 23:20 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Nah...

Nah...

(...but It's all Ok. There's always the "metrics" to go by when the eyes fail...)

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 23:14 UTC
Total: 1380, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »