boinkphoto

boinkphoto

Lives in United States Lebanon, USA, United States
Works as a Computer Specialist
Has a website at http://boinkphoto.com
Joined on Feb 24, 2009
About me:

To tale pictures of course!

Comments

Total: 46, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

Given that they released the X100F and therefor the X100T is effectively deprecated, this doesn't seem like major news...

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 12:46 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

Eric Ouellet: Don't photograph train tracks, don't do bike without your helmet, don't walk without shoes, don't look too far, don't breath too quick, don't think too much...

My mom, like most moms at the time, shoved us out the front door at 8 AM and didn't give a thought about what we did until 5 PM when dinner was served. We took all sorts of adventures, including walking the tracks and dodging a train now and then, and I wouldn't trade those memories and the risks that went with it for anything. Yeah, sometimes bad things happened, but nowhere in proportion to the fantasies that the news now spins constantly to us. The world wasn't, and still isn't, as dangerous of a place as we now make it out to be, and the lives of our children are far less vibrant because of it. We're so busy preventing our kids from dying that we're not giving them the chance to, well, live.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 00:57 UTC
In reply to:

Indohydra: also, don't take photos in the streets, near buildings, around other people or animals or at night...or day, or when anything might happen that you don't expect.

Thank you. Yes, you should be smart around tracks, but the people acting like it's akin to child neglect, need to take a quaalude.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 00:49 UTC

In regards to all this angst about train tracks, my inclination is to say, "Lighten up Francis". Yes, it adds unnecessary risk in your life, but so do things like motorcycles.

I've spent plenty of time taking photos on the rails, and I will continue to. Count me up as a Darwin award if I end up a smear on the cow catcher.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 00:45 UTC as 50th comment
On article Google AI adds detail to low-resolution images (150 comments in total)

Well, it only matters if the resulting photo looks like the actual person. It doesn't do any good if the resulting image looks like someone totally different than taken in the low res original.

The article doesn't seem to clarify whether the result was ultimately a close approximation.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2017 at 23:12 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply

Because I love photography I want to agree, but I'm not sure it holds up under scrutiny. There are plenty of photojournalists who might not have ever experienced a threat like this and not held up to the moment. Similarly, I bet you there were non-photojournalists there who have photos on their phone that we would be seeing instead had this photojournalist not been there.

Honestly in the end my bigger fear is about how little it actually matters. Some say below how good information and visual truth is important, but we went through an election where visual and audio truth abounded - where anyone with 10 minutes and Google could fact check. Yet, still on both sides there were people who thought their candidate was the messiah even though the tiniest effort could show neither were.

In fact if anything we find ourselves in a world with so much information, information seems to hardly matter anymore. Someone shot the Russi... Oh look, a squirrel!

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2016 at 21:22 UTC as 153rd comment
On article Fujifilm launches X-A10 as entry-level X-series model (166 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vanitas Photo: I think many are throwing this camera under the bus just because it isn't aimed at them...

Most camera manufacturers drive the most of their income from entry level gear, that's a reality for Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Pentax, etc. And Fuji has to start to get income in the same level too (this also serves the purpose of cheap entry into the system which sooner or later they will upgrade).

BTW on social media and selfies: In Hong Kong and other regions of Asia Casio cameras like the EX-TR70 sell like hot pancakes and mind you they aren't cheap (700 bucks) and guess what? it is a selfie oriented camera (retractable handle for selfie and wireless connectivity with smartphones, people are fed up of smartphones for selfies there.)

Vanity is a comodity that is in high demand thanks to social media and camera makers would be dumb to not cash in.

There's the XT-10, XE-2s, XPro2, XT-2 for the serious photographer.

The waist finder is very useful for what you indicate, if not also for more discrete street photography. I actually wouldn't mind the selfie capability. I rarely do it, however if I am, I'd rather use a real camera. That said, I certainly wouldn't put the tilt screen in the critical path of buying a camera.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 17:04 UTC
On article Fujifilm launches X-A10 as entry-level X-series model (166 comments in total)
In reply to:

Charlie Jin: It looks so stupid to take a selfie using a camera with such a huge lens attached. No one will buy it for a selfie. I don't think that this camera has any place in the market. Sony a5100 is the way to go.

My sense is the X-A# line has been fairly successful. They released an X-A3 with 24mp before they released an X-E3 (which may never come unfortunately).

Not arguing with your logic about the selfies, but there are more reasons to buy than just that and humans are hard to predict.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 16:58 UTC

It's true in this day and age that you can't tell astroturf advertising from reporting and it's also true that these show best condition photography. Still, they are very nice pictures.

I think calling out astroturf vs. non-astroturf is really up to DPReview and similar sites. They should take the time to find out, and specifically call out any cases where the artist and the manufacturer have a relationship.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2016 at 15:20 UTC as 79th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

usernamealreadyinuse: Unfortunately for Phil, "great new product" does not describe the new MacBook Pro. Too bad that not a single engineer on Apple's design team ever tried to transfer 60MB RAW files via "wireless", or he'd understand how absolutely stupid his comment sounds.
Apple has completely lost it's mojo in every product category, and I've been a fan since my first Mac 'Classic'.

Good point about the bandwidth too!

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 19:37 UTC

You know what is more cumbersome than an SD card sticking out? A "USB A" to legacy USB adapter connected to a card reader sticking out of your MacBook. Plus having to carry that around in case you ever need it.

Also "we think there is a path forward" with wireless is a lot of wishing at this point. The cameras I've seen only have software for phones, not macOS (given how you have to associate wirelessly to the cameras to pull files, it probably wouldn't work too cleanly on a laptop). Then of course each camera has a custom API to deal with.

I say this writing from a MacBook Pro that does happily have an SD slot.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 19:37 UTC as 137th comment
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2196 comments in total)

> whether this is worth the loss of fine detail and restrictions on Raw
> converter choice is something for each photographer to consider

Outside of the leaf smearing, which for the most part I don't see anymore in modern versions of RAW converters, including Adobe, there is no "loss in fine detail". Certainly for street photography, portraiture, and most studio work there in no "loss in find detail" (quite the opposite).

As far as RAW converter choices, DxO is the only converter I know of that doesn't handle X-Trans. There may be others, but outside of DxO all the major ones do support X-Trans, so it's not very "restricting".

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 19:16 UTC as 153rd comment | 5 replies
On article Drone footage captures the raw power of Iceland (56 comments in total)
In reply to:

naturetech: I can't wait for this drone fad to end.

I think there are some interesting views we're getting to see, but I do suspect at some point the novelty of the images/videos will wear off. Certainly my visceral reaction is to want to use them as skeet, however I am sure they are a lot of fun and there is still original work left to be done with them.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2016 at 21:31 UTC
On article Drone footage captures the raw power of Iceland (56 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reactive: I found Iceland to be a depressingly barren, grey and dull place to visit, and I've spent years out walking in the great outdoors. Sure it's interesting to see how the flora, fauna and humans have had to adapt to their environment, but the endless vistas of barren moonscape and Armageddon lifelessness can make for some very dull days. There's only so much rock you can shoot! This video shows that very well, so in that respect it's a great film.

As an alternative , try Tangerine Dream's 'Canyon Dreams' video; lots of rock but at least there's some colour ;-)

Go in late August. Plenty of color, though rain can always be an enemy. Be prepared to have your wallet thoroughly hoovered. Iceland made Switzerland seem cheap, and I am not joking.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2016 at 21:21 UTC
On article Drone footage captures the raw power of Iceland (56 comments in total)
In reply to:

landscaper1: Very beautiful film, but an incorrect title. I saw no fire.

Iceland is called the "Land of Fire and Ice", hence I think the title.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2016 at 21:17 UTC
On article Still solid: Fujifilm X-E2S Review (239 comments in total)
In reply to:

dariva: .................
And this is my credo and advice to all photographers may it be pro ore enthusiast:
Since we went digital you have to focus first on the "film" you by and then on the camera that comes along with it. Since you cant change the sensor later on, you stick to the pictur quality of the sensor, no matter what the fantastic features of the camera offer.

Conclusion on my side. The sensor in the XE2 is not so much better, that I "need" to
buy it. The XE1 is in my travelers camera and has prooved reliable through out the
four years ( And I dont treat cameras well ;-)

good light !-)

I have the X-E1 and the X-T1. Assuming the X-E2(s) focusing is near the X-T1, the update is probably compelling. It is that much better and I regularly struggle for lock with the X-E1 where the X-T1 locks immediately. It's on the edge, but at least for me there are enough missed shots to probably make it worth it.

For people photos, I actually prefer the color rendering of the X-E1 over the X-T1 (or even X-Pro2), so it will stay in my toolkit. The skin tones are less "plasticky" I find and have a special quality to them.

I may look for a used X-E2, which I definitely don't see the X-E2s upgrade as a "need" to as you describe. Still, having the X-Pro2 as well, the 24mp is pretty compelling and does render landscapes better in my opinion, so I wonder if I should be waiting for the X-E3...

Admittedly all first world problems.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2016 at 10:47 UTC
On article Still solid: Fujifilm X-E2S Review (239 comments in total)
In reply to:

Contra Mundum: Interesting physiological phenomenon: weird one-trick-pony niche products often generate a small but aggressive cult-like following.

Don't suppose you've actually used a Fuji to any extent? In any case, allow me to like my cameras and I'll do the same for whatever brand you have a cult-like love of as well.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2016 at 10:38 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: when studio lenses retire (203 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sergey_Green: Had this lens a while back, was pretty good for what it was, I thought. It does not produce that tightly sharp images wide open as Sigma Art does, but Nikon does add that certain character to the image (as many lenses from that period do), that can be quite attractive just as well. And it is way smaller (several times in fact) than the 50mm Art lens. Certainly worth having, and they do not cost much.

I agree - it has "character", but having gone mostly Fuji, I've learned it's possible to have both character and sharp images. I can leave my 35mm f1.4 almost wide open and get the best of both worlds (say nothing of the 56mm f1.2). Using the Fujis has made me grow somewhat disenchanted with my Nikon lenses - I had no idea how much I was fighting against the Nikon glass (and to note, not just on FF, I used APS-C as well).

That's not to say I'm going to ditch my Nikons - I still have Nikon love and some of the lenses do have such lovely character that I would never part with them. It has been an eye opener though.

Need to look at that Sigma 50 though - everyone seems to rave about it...

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2016 at 10:28 UTC
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: Interesting!

But do selfie photographers care?

I don't want it for selfies and I don't even use my phone's camera that much - but, yes, I would find such technology useful for taking pictures of others.

I was actually wondering the other day if such technology existed.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2016 at 03:00 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-Pro2 versus X-T2: Seven key differences (368 comments in total)
In reply to:

zakaria: Fuji AF first gen is not so good i hope the new AF system is better because i like fuji colores and have a decent xf lenses intend to buy the xt2 if the the af is like the competitors!

Agreed that it was painful, but first gen is a long time ago for the X series. This is the 3rd generation, 4th if you count the X100. Fuji has also improved older models through updates.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2016 at 17:18 UTC
Total: 46, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »