tuerta photography

tuerta photography

Lives in United States Portland, OR, United States
Works as a Semi-pro photographer
Has a website at tuerta.com
Joined on Mar 26, 2003
About me:

Old Minolta 35mm shooter - followed that into the digital world and then into the new Sony generation, but just sold off all my A-mount gear and am now looking at moving to Fuji's X line.

Comments

Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20
In reply to:

El Chubasco: What's the strategy here? Can someone explain?

Google bought NIK to get Snapseed, which was written by NIK. They made a tepid attempt to look like the NIK tools were going to get maintained, but are finally revealing that they are giving even that up.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2010016/google-buys-instagram-rival-snapseed.html

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2016 at 03:31 UTC
In reply to:

dennis tennis: Cameras brand should follow Google's lead. Make cameras, lens, flash, battery grips available for free and make money on batteries. Batteries is where the money lies.

Yeah, Fuji is already boldly trying this tactic. ;)

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2016 at 23:54 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Berg: With such a massive firmware feature upgrade, reviews will surely need to be revisited for this camera. Just check the video upgrades alone, exactly *all* of the review critique points have been addressed. For stills the AF focus area problem and customization issues have been fixed, and look at that electronic shutter speed. It's like a completely new camera!

That was the joke I was making, Kevin. They stuffed a whole bunch of fixes and improvements in this firmware update, that resolve nearly every complaint I've heard of for the X-T1, minus the AE bracket (which seems like it should have been an easy inclusion) and the back buttons (which is obviously a firmware impossibility). I guess the other joke I could have made is that the firmware upgrade could have fixed Adobe's mediocre RAW conversions in Lightroom? *shrug*

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2014 at 16:51 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Berg: With such a massive firmware feature upgrade, reviews will surely need to be revisited for this camera. Just check the video upgrades alone, exactly *all* of the review critique points have been addressed. For stills the AF focus area problem and customization issues have been fixed, and look at that electronic shutter speed. It's like a completely new camera!

Yeah, about the only two things not resolved by this upgrade are the bracketing (Why didn't they give us +/-2 for AE bracketing??) and the tiny buttons on the back. I think those are about the only consistent complaints I've heard about this camera that still exist after this update...

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2014 at 20:24 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2513 comments in total)

So, after reading this article, I feel like I still am not clear on the noise and DOF aspects.

I currently shoot APS-C (Sony A57) with popular lenses (like Tamron 17-50/2.8 and Sony 35/1.8). Much of my shooting is lower-light with available light, and I find myself disappointed with the noise levels of my shots, even at max aperture (and lowest ISO that keeps the shutter speed realistic). I shoot RAW and use LR5 for processing.

With the uncertainty of Sony's A-mount future (another topic, not for here), I have been weighing other systems to upgrade to. Given that shallow depth of field and less noise in low light are priorities for me, I am trying to determine if:
1. I could achieve that a M43 system with $$$ glass, or if I need a larger sensor like APS-C or better yet, FF?
2. It's a factor of the quality of the lens and not the aperture (since already shooting 1.8 or 2.8) and I would get less noise with more expensive glass?
3. I just need better noise software like Topaz or NIK?

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2014 at 19:05 UTC as 166th comment
On article Sony announces pricing and availability for Alpha 7S (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

tuerta photography: Very nice, but at that price I'd have to liquidate my lens collection just to afford that body. I was hoping it was going to be priced under the a7R

@Rooru - I was hoping that the 12MP versus the 36MP meant it was a little cheaper to produce and thus cost less.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 06:33 UTC
On article Sony announces pricing and availability for Alpha 7S (131 comments in total)

Very nice, but at that price I'd have to liquidate my lens collection just to afford that body. I was hoping it was going to be priced under the a7R

Link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 04:41 UTC as 30th comment | 11 replies
On article iON announces tiny rugged HD video camera (43 comments in total)
In reply to:

tuerta photography: This looks astonishingly like a slightly repackaged version of my Polaroid action cam: http://polaroidaction.com/xs100.html

No wifi in my XS100, and I think it has a couple other features mine lacks, but physically they look very much like one another. Polaroid somewhere acknowledges they rebadge/license their name for their action cams so I wonder if this is the maker actually wanting to make a better version of their own?

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2013 at 01:47 UTC
On article iON announces tiny rugged HD video camera (43 comments in total)

This looks astonishingly like a slightly repackaged version of my Polaroid action cam: http://polaroidaction.com/xs100.html

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2013 at 01:50 UTC as 16th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

tuerta photography: I'm troubled by a discrepancy between the Apple 5s chart showing how it performed as compared to the Samsung Galaxy S4's chart.

The "Summary" for each phone gave the S4 an 8.0 and the 5s an 8.1, yet if you look at the bar graphs for the 6 different categories in the ratings box, the S4 overall wins out. In fact, I even measured the pixel length of the blue lines in Photoshop and found that the S4's bars are a net 88 pixels longer. Or said differently, the average bar length for the Apple is 320 pixels across all 6 categories whereas the average bar length for the Samsung is 334 (4.4% longer), yet they somehow rank the Apple as better overall?

Unless they have some *really* weird weighting scale, the final summary scores and the bar charts are out of whack. Can we find out the details how the 8.0 and the 8.1 were calculated?

CyberAngel - whose bias are you referring to? Mine? I have no bias in this debate. I've never owned either a Samsung or and Apple phone. I was just noting a disparity how the bar charts they publish show the Samsung as better, but the numerical score shows the Apple to be better, and wanting clarification over which to trust.
Now if you're talking about editorial bias, I'm not even suggesting that - I was just wanting a consistent and understandable scoring system.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2013 at 18:41 UTC

I'm troubled by a discrepancy between the Apple 5s chart showing how it performed as compared to the Samsung Galaxy S4's chart.

The "Summary" for each phone gave the S4 an 8.0 and the 5s an 8.1, yet if you look at the bar graphs for the 6 different categories in the ratings box, the S4 overall wins out. In fact, I even measured the pixel length of the blue lines in Photoshop and found that the S4's bars are a net 88 pixels longer. Or said differently, the average bar length for the Apple is 320 pixels across all 6 categories whereas the average bar length for the Samsung is 334 (4.4% longer), yet they somehow rank the Apple as better overall?

Unless they have some *really* weird weighting scale, the final summary scores and the bar charts are out of whack. Can we find out the details how the 8.0 and the 8.1 were calculated?

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2013 at 20:11 UTC as 47th comment | 5 replies
On article Samsung gets serious with the Galaxy S4: Camera review (44 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kromeo: cant' wait to see IPHONE 5S VS S4 , that's cool.

So the 5s review just came out, and I'm a little perplexed. They gave the S4 an 8.0 and the 5s an 8.1, yet if you look at the bar graphs for the 6 different categories in the ratings box, the S4 overall wins out. In fact, I even measured the pixel length of the blue lines and found that the S4's bars are a net 88 pixels longer. Or said differently, the average bar length for the Apple is 320 pixels whereas the average bar length for the Samsung is 334, yet they somehow rank the Apple as better...?
Unless they have some *really* weird weighting scale, the final scores and the bar charts are out of whack.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2013 at 20:06 UTC
On article Nokia's Lumia sales exceed expectations (13 comments in total)

I know one reason their count is high: My sister-in-law is on her *fourth* Lumia 920. Every one of them has had serious problem locking up, draining battery, or having features that don't work. It's been replaced 3 times under warranty and if she has any problems with this one, she's throwing in the towel and going back to an android phone.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2013 at 17:09 UTC as 4th comment
On GalleryItem:1882727 (1 comment in total)

This is using "Soft Focus (High)" in camera

Posted on Apr 13, 2012 at 21:05 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20