Joined on Feb 9, 2012


Total: 16, showing: 1 – 16
In reply to:

D500 001: Tried and true software since when did it begin? Still two dozen bug fixes. It's a good thing Adobe doesn't wire homes for a living.

You say: "It's a good thing Adobe doesn't wire homes for a living."

Home rewire: two skilled electricians for about a week. Shouldn't be too difficult to get it right.

Adobe Lightroom: about 190 highly skilled IT professionals working continuously year round. I think one or two errors might creep in.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 18:53 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Minolta's prosumer DiMAGE 7 (215 comments in total)

Yes, me too. Bought a DiMAGE 7i in March 2003 and absolutely loved it. I'd used digital cameras before that but I'd always regarded them as toys. This was a REAL digital camera. This was the camera that caused my 35mm SLR to start gathering dust.

I think I might still have it in a box in the attic, but I see from Lightroom that I abandoned it for a DiMAGE A200 in 2006.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 16:01 UTC as 30th comment
In reply to:

Elliot H: Made in Germany?

I read on another blog that Metz have been having "financial difficulties" of late. Part of their solution is to move all production back to Germany to improve quality and reliability.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 13:17 UTC
In reply to:

perry rhodan: Nissin i40 anyone? It's a superb flash. Small and powerfull. 4xAA wireless and all work perfectly, on ALL platforms inclusing Fuji. For 179 a piece it is a no brainer. They even work great on multiplatform by using slave settings and if needed FEC.
It's good the Metz is here also as it is always nice to have choices.

I bought a Nissin i40 almost a year ago. Right from the start the TTL setting didn't seem to work reliably - quite a high proportion of badly exposed shots. Then a couple of weeks ago it started giving full power every time on TTL or Auto. It's currently back with Nissin for repair.

Perhaps I've just been unlucky. But it's shaken my confidence in Nissin - the last flash that failed me was way back in the early 1990s in 35mm film days!

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 13:09 UTC
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (765 comments in total)

1966. Russian made Cosmic 35.

At that time Russia invested heavily in technology products then sold them to the rest of the world at hugely subsidised prices - political propaganda, of course.

But savvy westerners grabbed the opportunity - products that were as good or better than UK/European/Japanese goods, but at a tiny fraction of the price!

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2016 at 15:49 UTC as 25th comment
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (563 comments in total)
In reply to:

pjbw127: I find all the reviews and discussions about modern cameras meaningless.
My 10 year old camera has the rear lens element just 1.5mm from its APS-C sensor so no need for in-camera lens correction.
Its truly unique feature is what I call Live, Live View. No need to preview or review. What I saw in the viewfinder (or screen) is what I will get on the PC monitor.
The EVF (or screen) makes no attempt to emulate an OVF. Over exposed areas are clearly indicated so move the metering spot over one of them and I can see the rest of the view becoming possibly underexposed. All 'Live' so I can fine-tune the exposure (and white balance) before I press the shutter button. I have no idea how its spot autofocus works, but I have never had to use manual focus because it is so accurate.
One day all top-end cameras may have such a metering mode, hopefully before my oldie expires!

Sorry, perhaps I'm a bit dim, and I don't want to sound rude, but unless you tell us what your camera is, your post is meaningless.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 19:49 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (563 comments in total)

Good review.

I've been an amateur photographer for near-on half a century. I "dipped a toe" into the mirrorless world some years ago and was rather disappointed.

Then last month, a big, big decision. I've sold ALL my camera gear and gone four-thirds mirrorless. I thought, no half measures, commit to it. Time will tell, I might regret it. But so far I'm very, very pleased.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 19:40 UTC as 29th comment | 1 reply
On article What's missing? Ming Thein on the state of mirrorless (734 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vanitas Photo: I think most current ILC's are fine, my only gripe is battery capacity, i would be happy if they had a bigger grip to acommodate a bigger battery (big hands too) as for the rest for what I do ( people who are still) most mirrorless are more than enough :)

And yes I know I can carry more batteries yadah-yadah but it would be nice to have 600-700 shots per battery instead of 300-350

Long battery life is nice but, to me, it's really not important. As long as the battery lasts all day that's fine by me, it can recharge overnight while I'm asleep in bed.

And just in case one battery doesn't last all day, I always carry a spare or two.

The cost is insignificant in the grand scheme of things. For example, I'm thinking of ditching my Nikon DSLR in favour of an Olympus M1. The Olympus (with very basic, pro quality kit of wide angle, standard and tele zooms) costs 3,500GBP with one battery. Or 3,700GBP with FIVE batteries.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2015 at 12:04 UTC
On article What's missing? Ming Thein on the state of mirrorless (734 comments in total)
In reply to:

WellyNZ: I see that my digital photography colleagues are still continuing to place importance on gear over photographs, despite more or less any camera costing upwards of a couple of hundred dollars/pounds/euros being capable of generating images that far outweigh the quality (technically speaking) of images from almost any 35mm camera ever made.

I'd wager if you're unable to create a high quality image from almost any of these mirrorless cameras, the problem is probably not with the technology.

After Ming's first paragraph there's a link that says
"Important: Read this first."
You did read it, didn't you?

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2015 at 11:29 UTC

" media sites, such as Facebook or Twitter, as those sites carry advertising that is attached to the content of its pages."

Alternatively, Facebook and Twitter could allow the user to suppress any advertising on their pages that included such photos.

Wouldn't that be fantastic? Dream on!

Better still, we could all move to

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2015 at 13:20 UTC as 14th comment

Interesting stuff. But I would disagree with "Was this image taken with a DSLR or a mirrorless camera? If you can't tell from looking at the final image, does it matter?". For us hobbyists, yes it does. ENJOYING taking the image matters a lot.

Having owned both Nikon D7000 (optical viewfinder) and Sony NEX7 (small and light), my preferred solution to get the best of both worlds is a small dSLR - Nikon D5300.

When I need something truly pocketable my smartphone has to suffice.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 17:50 UTC as 15th comment | 5 replies
On article Am I missing something here? (627 comments in total)

Excellent review. And I agree wholeheartedly except for one thing. Why the worry about exposure compensation?

When I started in photography, light meters were an expensive luxury that few of us amateurs could afford. So exposure was based on judgement, or 'look at the light and guess'.

Forty years on, all cameras have light meters, most of which are staggeringly good. I reckon at least nine out of ten photos I take are perfectly exposed. But what about that one in ten that isn't? Well, there's three ways to solve that:

1. Use exposure bracketing and throw away the two poor shots.
2. Focus on the real subject, lock exposure, then re-frame.
3. Exposure compensation based on judgement, or... Exactly the same as good old 'look at the light and guess'.

Why do Richard, and most reviewers, want to turn the clock back forty years and return to guesswork? I'm more than happy for exposure comp to be relegated to a 'third class' dial. Aperture and ISO are the ones I want quick access to.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2014 at 11:10 UTC as 37th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

PStu: Why only add SmugMug? How about 500PX or other sharing services?

I agree.

I use Aperture and Smugmug; I upload using 'SmuginProForAperture' - I made those decisions many years ago. Trouble is, with 50,000 photos on Aperture and Smugmug I cannot (realistically) change those decisions now.

Apple needs to recognise this and give us, and future customers, as much flexibility as possible.

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2013 at 16:57 UTC
In reply to:

Anaxagoras: No built-in flash - disappointing
No built-in GPS - disappointing

No viewfinder - APPALLINGLY BAD, Canon

Funnily enough, you don't see many professional photographers holding their cameras at arm's length and squinting at a screen.

And as far as I know, ALL Canon's dSLRS (professional or amateur) have viewfinders.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 13:54 UTC

No built-in flash - disappointing
No built-in GPS - disappointing

No viewfinder - APPALLINGLY BAD, Canon

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 13:35 UTC as 241st comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

Cy Cheze: It looks as though the NEX system can't provide a fast lens unless it is also rather big. If the E50mm f/1.8 sample is any indication, a 35mm or wider lens with f/1.8 would be very big. Both the 200mm f/6.3 lenses are too slow for sports at the long end, except maybe with the ISO juiced up.

(Physically) bigger sensors = (physically) bigger lenses.

Bigger apertures = bigger lenses.

Sorry, but unless you re-write the laws of physics...

(or give the NEX7 a puny, low-quality, small sensor?)

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2012 at 16:29 UTC
Total: 16, showing: 1 – 16