Lives in United States Jackson Hole, WY, United States
Works as a Photographer
Joined on Apr 14, 2007


Total: 62, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »

Is there any stabilization built into the software, like the iPhone has, which might also eliminate 4th axis 'bumps' when walking? That remains the biggest challenge for 'follow cam' type shots, and the only solution I'm aware of is a $3k 4 axis gimball from turbo ace, which seems to get mixed reviews.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2016 at 19:43 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply
On article Pentax K-1 Pixel Shift Resolution: Updated Field Test (211 comments in total)
In reply to:

BBnose: Really want to see the image quality comparison of K-1 to Nikon D5. Just image quality.

The D810 would be a better comparison, it has higher DR and overall IQ than the D5. The D5 is best for low light and sports, not resolution battles.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2016 at 14:42 UTC

So, they still don't have the DR of Nikon/Sony APS-C, much less Nikon Full frame? I keep debating switching to Canon for their 17mm T/S, but the Nikon DR and high ISO performance is hard to leave behind... I'd think the big makers would be closer together by now - i.e. Canon might have caught up to what Nikon was putting out several years ago with the D800...

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 08:17 UTC as 111th comment | 4 replies

I'm in the market for a new portrait lens, so I'll be curious to see how the reviews pan out on this one... I'm not a fan of manual focus, but for portrait use it would work, and the price is certainly right...

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2016 at 18:02 UTC as 49th comment
On article Profoto launches collapsible OCF Beauty Dish (33 comments in total)

If only it worked with a Pro-B head. :-(

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2016 at 03:38 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply

From a sales perspective, I cannot fathom why they would make a Sigma mount over a Nikon mount.

Surely there are more Nikon users who also own Sony E mount cameras than their are Sigma camera owners with E-mount cameras?

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2016 at 03:25 UTC as 58th comment | 11 replies
In reply to:

electrophoto: So the 24-70 2.8 has NO Image Stabilisation? at 2200$?
Even Nikons "mildly" overpriced 24-70 2.8 VR costs a tad less and has image stabilisation.

Tamron's pretty excellent 24-70 2.8 has VR... at about half the price (or even less).

And now there's what I've been saying for some time about the Sony FF Alpha:
it's "size advantage" is reduced significantly if you attach the respective fast lenses... making it less appealing in my opinion...

I would wait to judge until the reviews of the lens come out. It sounds like they put the money into class-leading contrast and bokeh effects, and are relying on IBIS, which seems like the optimal choice to me (don't need in-lens stabilization on a 24-70, however I would think it might be appreciated on the 70-200).

Regardless, I would wait for the reviews to judge.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 17:17 UTC
In reply to:

brownie314: So, announce a new aps-c body along with some new ff glass. Makes sense.

They have a FF camera in dire need of 2.8 zoom lens lineup and a serious portrait lens. This addresses that problem.

Hobbyists and sports shooters demanded an APS-C body. They addressed that.

What's the problem, Brownie?

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 17:13 UTC
In reply to:

neatnclean: On a MILC with IBIS, image stabilizer is not needed in a 24-70 lens. :-)

Just love it, how Sony now brings down the hammer on CaNikon and their outdated mirrorslappers.

If only they could deliver battery life on par with 'lens slapper' cameras... they would be professionally viable tools.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 17:12 UTC
In reply to:

D200_4me: Small body, large lenses ;-)

Professionals put top priority on image quality, not lens size.

Also, the body is the most bulky part of packaging, so even with a larger lens, the combined package still enjoys a substantial size advantage over a traditional DSLR.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 17:10 UTC
In reply to:

scottcraig: Ridiculous, I guess pretty soon we'll no longer have to handle our cameras at all.

I understand the 'bond', but when you need to shoot a composite image, and you need to change things like ISO and shutter speed without having the camera move, wifi is the way to go... no other option, really. Having the ability to review the image remotely is a nice side benefit too, especially when I've got the D800 50' in the air on a mast, shooting a hillside home, etc...

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2016 at 20:18 UTC
In reply to:

nathantw: Who pays the tax on that wonderful high-end medium format camera? The photographer, of course.

Seriously, who would want to be that lucky? That's why I don't play lotto. I won't fall for the tax trap!

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2016 at 00:29 UTC
In reply to:

PeaceKeeper: I have to say I like these, but the amount of alteration on more than a few is a bit shocking.

The amount of PP is hard to bear, for me.. Something I KNOW I'd get called out for if I ever posted something like that in any photography forum. I am personally more a fan of journalistic photography, though(I think many here are, since this is more of a techy site). This is clearly aimed at the art/fashion/marketing crowd. Strange how those first 2 always have that 3rd close behind, isn't it?

They are skillfully done, I think(maybe?)... but it sorta just looks like a lot of them said "damn the torpedoes!" and pushed that slider ALL they way over. The effect draws attention, I will admit. But I tend to think(hope?) that reality can be just as powerful and eye-catching.

I suppose it says more about the audience than the artist.

Some humans see more colors than others, some see them differently. Cameras and lensesnsee things differently, with varying DR, color balance, varying bokeh, varying focal ranges... none of it is 'every man's' reality. So, what difference does it make if the created 'art' is manipulated by the camera, or in the digital darkroom?

Throwing that term 'reality' around as if it were a singular thing? You either like the presentation, or you don't.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2016 at 00:25 UTC

The one problem this would pose for me is my hotshoe is already occupied by my pocketwizard. The Camranger sits in a nice little pouch, attached to my tripod with a small beaner.

If they want to use the hotshoe, then they need to provide a dummy hotshoe on top of the Camfi for remote flash triggers, or some other means of dealing with that situation.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 18:17 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

scottcraig: Ridiculous, I guess pretty soon we'll no longer have to handle our cameras at all.

It's actually an indispensable tool for those of us shooting composite photos where it is imperative that the camera remain perfectly still between shots, but we need to adjust ISO and other camera settings.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 18:08 UTC
In reply to:

gonzalu: Why is this still not implemented by default into every single camera by now? I mean seriously? I can get a FREE Android or iOS device that has FAR MORE functionality than a dSLR that costs hundreds or thousands... Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, 3G, 4G, LTE, full functioning software, apps galore, etc. etc. Why are cameras still hobbled ???

<rant mode off />

As kb2zuz notes, freezing is a real problem. I use CamRanger for architectural work and there are plenty of times when I have to reset the software, and occasionally have to power cycle the camera because of certain glitches.

I have to imagine a day will come when wifi will be built in, but for the various reasons kb2zuz notes, it's not going to be right away, and that's just fine, really, considering the tradeoffs.

When I'm not shooting architectural, I generally cannot afford to have to troubleshoot equipment issues, or I risk missing decisive moments.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 18:06 UTC
Total: 62, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »