Lives in United States United States
Joined on Oct 11, 2009


Total: 171, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (772 comments in total)
In reply to:

maxnimo: For those that really want a D400, get a D500 with a bit of paint and a small brush and change the 5 to a 4.

They should include a sticker in the box.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 21:49 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (772 comments in total)
In reply to:

DStudio: For me the most exciting feature is the AF points covering most of the frame. Will we finally start seeing enthusiast action shots where the subject isn't smack in the middle of the frame every time? Maybe we can finally stop blaming the camera makers for this assault on our visual senses!

It's laid out for video. Still big blank areas top and bottom. But still better than on the FF cameras.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 21:43 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (772 comments in total)
In reply to:

Leonp: This camera is so big and heavy. Why? When I bought the D70 I thougt DX camera's were so big because of standarisation or because it was expected that soon all these camera's would be FX models. That's a long time ago now.
Today, It seems that this camera is only this big because.
I hoped the newer camera would be smaller and lighter so my arm would not hurt that much after a 8 h wedding shoot.

Other issue: with the d300 I almost always use the pop-up flash to use the SB-800 cable-less in my left hand. So the D500 would cost me big money. Not going to.

I always thought the D300s was perfectly sized to allow all the manual controls needed and a firm grip on the camera. This body is very similar. The camera is perfectly usable with gloves on, another important consideration for a camera to be used in a wide variety of conditions. The missing direct controls on smaller cameras make them more complicated to operate.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 21:39 UTC
On article Nikon's New D5 and D500 Push the Boundaries of DSLR (718 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cameracist: The reflections on the headline image are somwheat messed up:-D

Yes, the same shot flipped. Pretty awkward.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 17:16 UTC

Not quite 645 full frame, but close (about 93.4%). My Pentax 645 slides are about 41.5 x 56mm in image area. Certainly still a long way from 6 x 6 or 6 x 7 medium format film sizes.

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2016 at 17:29 UTC as 119th comment | 10 replies
On article Lumu Power meters light, flash and color temperature (22 comments in total)
In reply to:

whyamihere: For those who complain about the lack of Android support, I can only respond by reminding people how utterly fractured the OS really is:

Samsung produces dozens of Android devices running different versions of Android that are forked by varying TouchWiz modifications. Lumu, being a small company, does not have the resources to test what would be hundreds of combinations of software and hardware to ensure compatibility.

And that's just one manufacturer.

It probably make sense for Lumu to put their efforts into a platform that only has a handful of devices, where most users tend to use the latest version of the OS, and which can be more-easily tested for QA. Testing the latest stock version of Android on a few ubiquitous devices is simply not representative of the majority, and they'd likely not want to have bad press because their device failed to work with your Samsung Galaxy Rectangle Note S6+ Whatever.

A meter is used to help achieve (1) color accuracy on the final image product, and (2) maximum useful data to the sensor with minimum noise. I need a meter mostly when trying to balance light from sources of significantly different colors (usually outside it's shade + flash; inside it's window light + interior artificial light + flash) with filtration on lens or light so I don't get strange color effects. Every surface can get different ratios of light from each source depending on angle of surface to the source and whether or not it's shaded from the source. It's very hard to assess these effects accurately on the LCD display of the camera, and a lot of work to reshoot another day if you've made a mistake. Something like a Color Checker only captures one particular combination of source angles in each setup.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2015 at 03:42 UTC
On article Lumu Power meters light, flash and color temperature (22 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tim Gander: I'll stick to my Sekonic meter thanks. The battery lasts years, I don't risk someone calling me on it while I'm in the middle of taking a light reading, and it won't become redundant when phone tech changes. It's also more ergonomic than my iPhone.

My Sekonic doesn't need a battery. Of course, it doesn't measure flash illumination or color temperature.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2015 at 03:24 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: The assumption being, the purpose of photography is to create art.

I have only recently realized that many, even most photographers think this way.

I've been shooting for over 35 years and I never really thought of photography as a way to create art, at least for me.

I guess I'm now wondering if there aren't two totally different types of photography - artistic and documentary. I've always thought of photography as a way to document events, not as a way to create art. For that reason, very little of what he said made much sense to me.

It's a way for one person to communicate the beauty, or significance, or wonder, in what he or she sees, to others. If the communication is successful, I think that makes it art. That applies to documentary photography, landscape, travel, portrait, macro, street, architectural - any of it.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2015 at 13:01 UTC
In reply to:

justmeMN: Staying inspired, when you live in a Midwestern suburb, and don't have a travel budget, is even harder. :-)

There are lots of opportunities to document the lost people in the dying suburbs. "It's been done" is no excuse - each place, each person, is unique, and makes the story different.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2015 at 12:33 UTC
On article What's missing? Ming Thein on the state of mirrorless (734 comments in total)
In reply to:

ejw07: Had the Fuji X100t ..God that battery was even eating my food to stay alive..3 hrs for me doing useless, nice camera ugly power consumption and people like for its discreet shooting agreed on that point.

More like a half dozen, and how many chargers (or being there to swap batteries) do you need to charge them back at the hotel? 1000 shots on a battery is my minimum for a workhorse camera. That means most days I only need one spare, and two chargers is enough.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2015 at 15:05 UTC
In reply to:

PowerG9atBlackForest: I've seen no explanation so far of how this filter can be adjusted directionally. It is for good reasons that polarisation filters in front of a lens e.g. can be rotated. Would someone like to clarify this question before proceeding? Or did I miss something? If so please tell me.

It looks like the sensor has pixels aligned to sense polarization in different orientations on each pixel. it would take quite a few to sense the polarization angle precisely, and for the pixels not aligned, it wouldn't know whether that light had a polarized (reflected) component or not. But if it even detects angle on every 20th or 40th pixel, that might be useful in some circumstances.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 00:21 UTC
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1290 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donald M Mackinnon: For £1069 you can buy a kit that would defeat the GX8 on every conceivable front.
The worrying aspect of this price is it puts the GX8 beyond the budget of possibly many current mft users. The price will inevitably drop but in two years time will it be down to £600?
Any camera shop in the UK will tell you right now that the "camera to have" is the Nikon D5500 - currently £599

@Demoz Nikon may have a good selection of 18-xx zooms and lots of teles for DX, but its fast wide prime selection, other than a couple of bloated full-frame monsters and a fisheye, is miserable compared to MFT.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 01:13 UTC

To show the earth's rotation, it would be better to shoot from the moon, or from another point in space. This video actually just shows an effect of the earh's rotation combined with the moon's rotation and its movement in its orbit around the earth.

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2015 at 22:53 UTC as 8th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

JackM: I have to wonder if the lens was a bit slower like f/2.2 or f/2.5 or f/2.8, could the camera be more compact? Even in my fantasy world where price is no object, the size of this thing is a dealbreaker for me. I buy a "compact" in order to take it places where I don't want to carry a camera bag. My X100S just barely meets this requirement, as I can stuff it in a loose pants pocket or jacket pocket.

With a collapsing Elmar, a mechanical M fits in a coat pocket.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2015 at 19:27 UTC
On article Leica Q In-depth Review (1275 comments in total)

A little bit bigger and heavier than the CL with a 28mm, but beautiful in execution. Leica actually brings their concept cameras to market. I would love to see Leica follow this up with an interchangeable-lens version, or something like a 21-28-50 tri-Elmar. Not that I could actually buy one, but I'd just love to see it done.

The Full-Frame Coolpix B done right.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2015 at 11:08 UTC as 276th comment
In reply to:

EskeRahn: This seems like a project done just because it is possible.
I find it hard to find any other reason...

The selfie potential in such a shot is surely a more important motivation.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2015 at 11:03 UTC

It would be great if Nikon would work with Fujifilm and Zeiss to design and build some fast wide primes for Nikon DX cameras. I'd love to have a lens like this, or the 14, or the 12 Zeiss, for my D400. Or the 24. This is a company that understands what lenses you need to make an APS-C camera system a complete solution.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2015 at 21:36 UTC as 14th comment | 4 replies
On article Sources of noise part two: Electronic Noise (238 comments in total)
In reply to:

mga010: We are not talking about astronomical photography where single photons are counted. I have my doubts that even the darkest areas in everyday images produce a measurable variance in the photon count on sensor elements. Is there any convincing proof for that?

We are counting actual photons, one by one, and the receptor sites in current camera sensors count most visual-light photons that hit them. Most sensors miss a substantial percentage overall because of the physical structure of the array, the RGB filters and the microlenses that direct light to the receptors.

The quantum efficiency of actual camera sensors is discussed extensively at and

You can test the variance in your own photos using Excel to look at TIFF files converted to CSV using a freeware TIFF to CSV converter. If you take a fairly uniform dark area that clips shadows, you can find pixels with low pixel counts and calculate the variance in dimly illuminated areas using Excel's statistical functions to satisfy your doubts. You can also calculate the variance of an unexposed frame with whatever exposure you like by making an exposure with the finder and the lens blocked.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2015 at 11:42 UTC
Total: 171, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »