primeshooter

primeshooter

Lives in United Kingdom Scotland, United Kingdom
Joined on Jun 13, 2012

Comments

Total: 139, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

primeshooter: Has the camera standard profile changed at all? I am quite happy with it for several of my cameras and do not want to install it if it's going to mess them up? Does it just literally add these extras?

dareshooter, nikon.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2018 at 14:54 UTC

Has the camera standard profile changed at all? I am quite happy with it for several of my cameras and do not want to install it if it's going to mess them up? Does it just literally add these extras?

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2018 at 07:45 UTC as 8th comment | 5 replies
On article Sigma interview: 'This is just the beginning' (340 comments in total)

Nice read.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2018 at 09:03 UTC as 24th comment
In reply to:

primeshooter: Maybe Canon lenses don’t look that different to our competitors, but in terms of performance, we’re able to create lenses that are superior

Really?

@ Yake...Sigma sound like damn Canon fanboys!

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2018 at 19:11 UTC

Maybe Canon lenses don’t look that different to our competitors, but in terms of performance, we’re able to create lenses that are superior

Really?

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2018 at 12:28 UTC as 75th comment | 15 replies
In reply to:

primeshooter: Dpreview users be like "What's it's Dynamic Range?"..."Does it have a magenta cast above ISO 400?".

Bigben08 That's a cryin' shame isn't it!

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2018 at 17:53 UTC
In reply to:

primeshooter: Dpreview users be like "What's it's Dynamic Range?"..."Does it have a magenta cast above ISO 400?".

Negative.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2018 at 17:16 UTC

Dpreview users be like "What's it's Dynamic Range?"..."Does it have a magenta cast above ISO 400?".

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2018 at 16:59 UTC as 46th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Yake: I really dislike when people talk about cameras having "soul". That word is a blank placeholder for something — for whatever you want to fill it in with — but it doesn't describe anything real in a camera. Cameras can be very special (this one surely is) but they don't have any soul whatsoever. Talking about soul in a camera sounds like a snobby way to say "My camera has soul and yours doesn't."

It's a camera.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2018 at 12:22 UTC
In reply to:

primeshooter: The ring shot on the toilet brush is hilarious that is actually won. The crying child for me is meh. The shot of the line of wedding guests I actually like, because it is dramatic and different. It doesn't convey happiness but it's all the better for it. Too much wedding photography is sugar coated smiles and rainbows for me. So it won't surprize that the rainbow shot is pretty cliche and too sugar coated for my tastes, and I do not like the composition that much. The other landscape shots are more about location rather than technique or timing, they are still good pictures generally speaking. Don't mind the crying bride or the speeding car. I love vignetting but even for me the bride photo needs to seriously ease up on the vignette for my money, feels too forced. The parking lot photo for me isn't awful, I don't love it or hate it.

I realise that it's a plant, ;-) But it might as well be a toilet brush.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2018 at 17:40 UTC

The ring shot on the toilet brush is hilarious that is actually won. The crying child for me is meh. The shot of the line of wedding guests I actually like, because it is dramatic and different. It doesn't convey happiness but it's all the better for it. Too much wedding photography is sugar coated smiles and rainbows for me. So it won't surprize that the rainbow shot is pretty cliche and too sugar coated for my tastes, and I do not like the composition that much. The other landscape shots are more about location rather than technique or timing, they are still good pictures generally speaking. Don't mind the crying bride or the speeding car. I love vignetting but even for me the bride photo needs to seriously ease up on the vignette for my money, feels too forced. The parking lot photo for me isn't awful, I don't love it or hate it.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2018 at 13:20 UTC as 18th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

HeyItsJoel: Sorry but the 3rd photo with the rings on the flower is just lame. I look at it and ask myself, "Why?" The bride's bouquet should have been used, imo.

@Neil189, literally almost spat out my drink reading your comment, I thought exactly the same thing when I saw it. Ha ha!

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2018 at 13:13 UTC
On article Lensbaby Burnside 35: sample gallery and impressions (66 comments in total)

Nice idea, like some parts of this. That said: I can ride roller coasters all day long and I'm fine; but feel like I am getting motion sickness looking through this gallery of swirly bokeh here. Not for me, but then again I can see why some folks might err to this. In a world of photoshop nuts it could be a nice change of pace.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2018 at 20:12 UTC as 19th comment
In reply to:

Brom78: If Nikon released updates that would improve their products rather than just allowing them to sell you more stuff maybe they'd not be losing sales

Tell that to Fuji RedFox88, who with several cameras have made actual improvements and added functionality / features to their cameras. The kind of company that might still be around in years to come. More likely anyway...

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2018 at 12:26 UTC
In reply to:

fishy wishy: I expect to be able to handhold this focal length. But I'm not sure this lens looks comfortable. I've never had something this short and fat before.

I'm assuming 10% of the weight of this lens is for the removable collar.
It's like one of the big Canon telephotos you rest by putting front down on the floor.

'I've never had something this short and fat before.'

That's what she said!

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2018 at 12:17 UTC

Looks fairly ridiculous hanging off the body for a 105mm fixed lens, the weight is also ridiculous, a 70-200 is a different beast and still slightly lighter. Is this a competition between manufacturers; who can make the most ridiculous looking lens and still get photographers to buy it and lug it about? The Nikkor 105mm 1.4 just got a whole lot more reasonable looking, and it least it will focus properly.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2018 at 12:10 UTC as 95th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

rbach44: The real crime here is that horrible faux-HDR post-processing.

Yeh, the HDR and the yellow to blue gradient are awful. If it's noticeable, you've gone too far. I grow weary of overly photoshopped pictures. The internet is full of people who do not understand the 'less is more' concept.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2018 at 12:08 UTC
In reply to:

Decooler: The Sigma lens will fail to impress, because it will not focus accurately on Nikons, and its manual focus direction will be in the opposite direction to the way it should go on a Nikon, because the company simply just cannot be bothered to do a version for Nikon that is completely compatible.
Resolution is immaterial when your lens misses focus- hence the larger number of third-party lenses on the secondhand market. Resolution is dependent on the lens working perfectly with the camera body, and tuning it with a third-party gizmo and software should be COMPLETELY unecessary, and still cannot solve the manual focus direction choice Sigma still make, unfortunately. AND good second-hand copies of the 14-24 Nikkor can be had for the same money.......

It seems that plays out already perhaps. Look at the sample photo on the beach. Focused on the distance, not the people...May be user error.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 09:11 UTC

All that said about folk talking about quality etc and that Nikon's are well built. Yes. But they also have to wake up. A 24mm 1.4G lens over here is approaching 1600 pounds non grey, as is a 35mm 1.4. Sigma versions are 600 pounds. And they ain't badly built. The only thing that has somewhat kept me to nikon lenses is better AF, but I may rethink this.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 09:00 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

primeshooter: As someone that has produced stock photography for years with some of the big players, it is frustrating to see a lot of people giving their product away; as Zack rightly said this is truly a race to the bottom. Big corporations etc really see these people coming. Big woop if you got printed in a newspaper / used in a magazine with your name next to it and did not get paid. You got worked over! It is amusing to see on the unsplash site the part about you do not have to credit the photographer but we like it if you do. Photographers that are on their giving away their stuff; have no illusions it's not going to magically turn into paid work etc. If you are good at something; never do it for free.

Teila I wasn't responding to what you said. I agreed with you. Many stock guys, (myself included) are out taking those shots anyway. Stock just gives them another revenue stream.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 18:00 UTC
Total: 139, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »