Tilted Plane

Joined on Mar 17, 2012

Comments

Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

Totally fun and fun to think about, and offering lots of points to cheerfully debate. (24mm equiv. is better, of course.)

Well done. And my 16mm Sony is rather good, even in the corners, and it's a pancake. On a NEX-5N, anyway--back when the Sony APS-C (NEX) cameras were actually small. Thanks!

Link | Posted on May 15, 2017 at 15:01 UTC as 138th comment | 1 reply

Great nuts and bolts reality article. Love the no nonsense attempt to be real world about it. Let people quibble...it's a good piece. And it points out the obvious--the A9 is a game changer, short term or long term. Thanks!

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 12:59 UTC as 202nd comment

Cool.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2017 at 17:45 UTC as 38th comment
On article The Leica Summaron 28mm F5.6 is old-fashioned fun (189 comments in total)

Great opinion article. Gives some quick insight without having a full blown review. Appreciate these on all kinds of equipment, and appreciate the frankness. (I appreciate reviews, too, for sure.)

It all sounds about right, from what I can see, so thanks!

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 10:11 UTC as 60th comment
In reply to:

Tilted Plane: $900 for entry level DSLR? Whew.

One last note: I teach college level Photo I, and the specs and abilities of the Rebel series and the D3000 series (like the D3400) are amazingly similar. Over the last decade, students have steadily shifted from Canon to Nikon largely because of price. And dpreview would probably agree that the Nikon sensors at this level are slightly better (made by Sony) in several, small, measurable ways (like low light performance). But, enough on this. Cheers.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 13:41 UTC
In reply to:

Tilted Plane: $900 for entry level DSLR? Whew.

Not compared to Nikon's similar and cameras. Isn't a D3400 about $500 with a lens?

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2017 at 15:49 UTC

$900 for entry level DSLR? Whew.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2017 at 13:49 UTC as 5th comment | 4 replies

great!

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 10:41 UTC as 82nd comment
On article Sony FE 50mm F2.8 Macro Sample Gallery (84 comments in total)

This lens is super sharp once you stop down a couple stops, equal to the fantastic Sony 28 f/2. But beware, the autofocus (on an A7r) is horrific. Basically unusable for many situations. If you don't need the short working distance (which I do, for copy work), and you have the money (which I don't), consider the Sony 90mm macro instead.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 12:51 UTC as 21st comment | 17 replies
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (273 comments in total)

Great, sharply worded review.

I am probably not the only one with a Nikon 14-24mm that wonders about how the Sigma compares there, at least down to 14mm.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 14:47 UTC as 47th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Tilted Plane: Some of your accessory articles do seem a bit random, or sporadic, and this is a cute bag but is an odd item to highlight. Not all "camera bags" are made by Domke, no doubt, but have you ever spotlighted Tough Traveler bags, or Copper River bags? There are lots of really cool "camera bag" alternatives that we would love to know about, and some are even good for carrying cameras.

Good point. Probably too much work but wouldn't we prefer that DPR scoured the market and knew what their readers would really benefit from? Otherwise it's just acting out of convenience. And creating a hit or miss kind of PR site. They surely don't do that with cameras, which they cover with brilliance and completeness.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 19:36 UTC

Some of your accessory articles do seem a bit random, or sporadic, and this is a cute bag but is an odd item to highlight. Not all "camera bags" are made by Domke, no doubt, but have you ever spotlighted Tough Traveler bags, or Copper River bags? There are lots of really cool "camera bag" alternatives that we would love to know about, and some are even good for carrying cameras.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 11:50 UTC as 13th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

sh10453: I was told that president Carter was reluctant to sit down for a drawing (for his official picture to be added to the walls of the White House) while he was still in office.
Then the late Ansel Adams took the official picture of him using one of Polaroid's 20X24 cameras, and that it was the first official president's picture to be a photograph instead of a drawing.

I just read my comment and I have to say that I don't know that Adams used the 20x24 for the Carter portrait. Maybe. But he did take what Carter intended to be the official portrait...until the aesthetic conservatives swooped down from on high.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2016 at 13:07 UTC
In reply to:

rfsIII: Please stop showing off your knowledge of pretentious Britishisms such as "shortlist." This is a US -based publication so please observe US usage; the term you want is "finalists."

I like shortlist. Why is it just British?

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 13:38 UTC

From what I've gathered elsewhere, John Reuter's business used old stock 20x24 Polaroid film that he bought up in the final days. He never made his own or had anyone make it (which would have probably been Fuji if it had the incentive). So the multi-millions needed to produce the film would mean a whole new start-up, and yes, it's not going to happen. I'll add (having helped organize a Reuter workshop at a photography center years ago), the whole process of sitting, shooting, and then seeing the physical results is something unique (and fabulous) in the history of photography, and it will be missed. You might come up with a digital semblance of it, but then they wouldn't be one-of-a-kind (necessarily) and they'd lack some primal alive-ness that these 20x24 prints have.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2016 at 11:09 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

sh10453: I was told that president Carter was reluctant to sit down for a drawing (for his official picture to be added to the walls of the White House) while he was still in office.
Then the late Ansel Adams took the official picture of him using one of Polaroid's 20X24 cameras, and that it was the first official president's picture to be a photograph instead of a drawing.

That's all true, but then I think some office demanded a painting instead, so the official portrait isn't the Adams. Or so I heard back then. Wikipedia might know.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2016 at 11:04 UTC

Yes, more about the lens (and images made with it) and less, perhaps, of the info that sounds like a sales promo. Like nfo about who the heck Astra is, or Birns and Sawyer. Etc. Cool beans.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2016 at 18:26 UTC as 75th comment

There is some question about whether the adapter works with Canon brand lenses, or simply Sigma lenses in the Canon mount. Any thoughts? It seems this is a far bigger question? The idea of buying a Sigma lens in a Canon mount to use on a Sony camera starts to get convoluted! Though not totally wacky.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2016 at 13:07 UTC as 40th comment | 2 replies

Doesn't this strike people as too expensive? Whew!

Oh, and the "Oh Wow" is really out of line. Fun, but inappropriate for an impartial review site. Let's see if you have the courage to edit that.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 17:40 UTC as 290th comment | 2 replies
On article Sony Alpha 7R II: Real-world ISO invariance study (371 comments in total)

I think the labels here are misleading for people not reading, carefully, the article. Just saying "ISO 100" is not what it seems here, right? (I'm addressing the dpreview folks here.) Worth fixing with true clarity because the point is terrific and well done!!! Thanks

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2015 at 16:11 UTC as 102nd comment
Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »