Footloose1949

Lives in United Kingdom Reading / Berkshire, United Kingdom
Works as a Disabled, almost retired.
Joined on Jan 6, 2010

Comments

Total: 15, showing: 1 – 15
On article The mighty PEN: Hands-on with Olympus PEN-F (155 comments in total)

I tried the camera out at an Olympus event at the Design Museum on the 27th of Jan; It's electronic viewfinder (similar to that used on Fuji's X-Pro 1&2) is excellent, and initially I was rather taken aback by the large number of dials that it has in comparison to my E-M1, but after a bit of time, I have to say that the logic behind them became pretty obvious. My only minor niggle would be that the on/off switch isn't on the right-hand side (as on the E-1) so you can switch the camera on and fire using just one hand. - Hell that's a pretty minor niggle though.

Regarding the comments about f-stops, on all cameras regardless of the focal length, film or sensor size, an f2.8 optic allows the same amount of light through ALL of them. The only variable you will get, is in the amount of DOF. A standard lens for FF is 50mm whilst on a 4/3rds camera, this would be a 25mm. However, because of the laws of optics, the 25mm version will have approximately the same DOF of a 25mm FF lens.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 02:09 UTC as 8th comment | 2 replies
On article JPEG Committee contemplates adding DRM to image format (182 comments in total)

If the image is a print, this data could also be encrypted into the pixels on the image, and scanner manufacturers, could fit a chip which on scanning, picks up this data, and does the same thing as I have already outlined in point (4) in my previous post.

Will something like this happen? Maybe ... After all, I believe I am correct in pointing out that the Police and Pathologist's have a way of protecting the 'Honesty' of the images they produce, because they have substantial legal weight in a Court of Law, and their integrity has to be bomb-proof.

If THEY have a system in place, there's no reason why a purely commercial version of this, cannot be developed.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2015 at 12:46 UTC as 5th comment
On article JPEG Committee contemplates adding DRM to image format (182 comments in total)

I would have thought, IF in conjunction with camera manufacturers, a JPEG (or any other type of image file) could have automatically encrypted in it, a code indicating the make, model, and body no, some form of Copyright protection could be devised.

(1) The manufacturers offering this, and the various imaging standards bodies involved, could set up a very basic database which for a nominal annual fee, records* who & when someone bought that camera.

(2) If the camera is sold it to someone else, the original owner can assign the equipment to 'new' owner, so any images taken after that point, are assigned to that owner.

(3) When the image is re-saved or converted into another format, this data if present, is always also incorporated into the new file.

(4) When a (say) picture editor, uses an image, they send it to a website, which 'Interrogates' the image and e-mails the owner, saying that their image is going to be used, and the editor is also sent that e-mail address.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2015 at 12:33 UTC as 6th comment

When comparing the prices from different countries, remember to factor in the customs duty, you'll have to pay when it arrives where you live, and some dealers in their prices, are NOT including local taxes, probably because these vary. Whilst I initially thought the price for my 'old' 7-14mm was high, I can honestly say that this lens will turn out to be a very useful opic.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2015 at 20:57 UTC as 1st comment

First of all, I have the 4/3rds version, so may well upgrade due to it's much smaller size and weight (Remember to fit a 4/3rds on m4/3rds bodies, yo have to fit something the size of a teleconverter!) - Having said that, the images off that lens are outstanding, so I'm guessing optical advances will mean this will be better still. Since I use an E-M1 body, the Lumix lens isn't completely compatible, and anyway the build quality is in a different ball-park too. What I want to see, is a 3 - way review between the original 2006 (yes it's that OLD!) 7-14, the Lumix and the new 7-14 f2.8. I don't think it's expensive when compared to the FF 14-28mm zoom made by (Can't remember who's this is) Canon or Nikon.

Yes it's a semi-specialist lens, not the kind of thing that's going to sell in vast quantities, a bit like fast lenses over 500mm on the FF format, so if you are expecting to find this heavily-discounted, you'll be disappointed.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2015 at 20:49 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Olympus shows camera module concept (65 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peter 1745: English version of OPC website here
http://opc.olympus-imaging.com/en/index.html

4/3rds has always been an 'open' format, it's just that at long last, Olympus are now showing they are willing (unlike other manufacturers) to take this concept further. Maybe, just maybe, they'll make this so that you can also just upgrade the sensor technology, instead of having to buy another complete body ... (bit like changing the digital backs on a Hassleblads ...!

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 22:14 UTC
On article Photokina 2014: Olympus stand report (75 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cani: This 40-150mm f/2.8 lens looks so good...

Well, I'm not surprised the m4/3rds version of the 7-14mm was there for trying out, when it's not going to be shipped until 2015. I'm just disappointed that DPReview hasn't shown the 2.0 firmware update in detail via screenshots of it. Maybe pretty soon, they will do this.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 22:00 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review (2072 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gao Gao: E-M1, not E-M5. looks good

Still owning the E-1, E-3, OM-D and now using this model, I'd say that the only improvements I'd like, are the 2 buttons made more pronounced from the body, for when using gloves. I like the position of the on/off switch on the E-1; initially, I thought it was better but now I've used it a fair bit, the switch being 'tucked away' has distinct advantages as it's pretty difficult to accidentally switch the power on when stashed in a bag where it might get knocked on/off. I've got some of the 4/3rds lenses, they work a lot faster and positively than on the OM-D, and with the 7-14mm fitted, it's more balanced than on the OM-D. That superwide, is optically one hell of a lens, even though it first came out in 2006-7, which is probably a sore point with many APS-C camera owners, as something this wide, has only been available in the APS-C format, in the past year or so. A compromise it may well be, but overall, I feel the m4/3rds format is probably in the SLR format, the best that I've seen.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2013 at 01:36 UTC
On Article:9083705365 (1 comment in total)

I honestly can't see why MS seems to be unable to produce a version of windows so that the OS feeds printing commands to a completely separate 32bit or/and 64bit printer program that is capable of handling 'legacy' printer drivers back as far as say, winXP. I don't know if the reason 'we' have to update our drivers is because MS is just too lazy to implement something like this, or the 'Geeks' doing the programming think they 'must' change everything or hate that old maxim, 'If it ain't broke, don't fix/mess with it.'.

Posted on Jan 21, 2013 at 16:07 UTC as 1st comment

From what I know of the Olympus 7-14mm version, there certainly 'seems' to be enough space between the back of the lens, and the actual lens element, into which filters could be slotted.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2013 at 01:30 UTC as 1st comment

I wonder if the main reason why some people yearn for something like this, is because they are cheapskates, and just want to keep on using what they already own, without having to 'shell out' for film and a film scanner?

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2013 at 01:18 UTC as 4th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

aardvark7: Perhaps I'm being a little slow, but I fail to see the significance of 'Android based'.

Is there going to be a whole range of companies providing customised user interfaces, or the ability to easily make your own?

Even if this would be so, I'd be more concerned as to whether the physical parts performed as necessary, rather than what software is behind the scenes!

Strikes me as somewhat ironic that Polaroid, seems to have survived the demise of it's main products, whilst Kodak, probably the most famous of all photographic brands, is probably going to go down the tubes.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2013 at 16:23 UTC

'Rectro' it may well be, but that's because the original OM1 set standards in size and quality that took the other manufacturers a fair amount of time to compete with. Up until the OM, quality cameras were by default, bulky and heavy. Olympus seriously clobbered that perception. I have the E1, much maligned, bit a superbly competent and compact camera. Then they blew them up in size, but obviously their chief designer's ghost started haunting their R&D dept, and as a result we have the OM-D. It might have it's failings exposure latitude-wise, but it's one hell of a lot more user-friendly, unobtrusive etc than APS-C cameras. ... it's also got some wonderful optics, with specs which are still unavailable in the APS-C format, 6 years on. Most cameras are compromises in one way or another, but I personally think the OM-D, offers less of these than most other camera manufacturers products.

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2012 at 02:06 UTC as 5th comment
On article Digital camera lens buying guide (57 comments in total)

I have one observation which is why not also specify the Angle of View of an optic? That way one can compare in a logical manner, across the different sensor/film formats, how 'different' various lenses are. However, the angle of view given, should be based on the longest side of an image, and not, as some manufacturers advertising agencies do, to make their lens specs 'look' better than they actually are, by specifying the angle diagonally (from the top L/h corner to the bottom R/h corner.

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2012 at 01:35 UTC as 28th comment | 1 reply
Total: 15, showing: 1 – 15