John Bean (UK)

Lives in United Kingdom Waterfoot, Lancashire, United Kingdom
Joined on Jun 29, 2003

Comments

Total: 306, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Heavy. When I need a backpack I have a 16L Lowepro Hatchback that weighs all of 675g, and when using a shoulder bag (Crumpler Light Delight 4000) with camera (Sony A6500), three lenses (Sigma 19/30/60mm) and batteries etc it weighs in at 1.5kg total - 100g less than this backpack weighs empty.

"Backlight" it's not.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2018 at 09:29 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: Those who frequently use EVF and suffered eyes problems in the future, don't blame when you have eyes problem. Up to now, there is no proof that using EVF is totally safe. We don't know the possible negative impacts of EVF to human yet, that is the reason why do we need to take appropriate precautions when using EVF.

Repeat misinformation often enough and some people will actually start to believe it. It's been a standard tactic of propagandists forever and more popular than ever due maainly to the exponential growth of social media.

Works too. Ask Trump or Putin ;-)

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 09:59 UTC
In reply to:

Azathothh: But can it run Lightroom?

... and Adobe's profit rocketed up as a result of their change of strategy. Doesn't look like nobody uses it to me.

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2018 at 07:48 UTC
In reply to:

stevo23: Is their stuff any good?

Probably just depends what you're used to. I prefer twist locks and although I've never used a Gitzo the Amazon has better lock action than others I've used from Giottos and Sirui - all far more expensive. The action is progressive but predictable and all leg locks feel much the same, with not much force neded to lock securely. The big outer column is a bit more troublesome to lock (maybe that's why the X-4CE's lock is bigger) but I rarely use it so it's not a big deal for me.

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2018 at 15:02 UTC
In reply to:

stevo23: Is their stuff any good?

And I have no issues at all with the twist locks. I bought mine in 2012 (I just checked) so it's been around a while. The price has actually reduced since then making it an even better buy.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2018 at 17:45 UTC
In reply to:

stevo23: Is their stuff any good?

The X-4CE looks very similar to the Amazon Basics travel triood I bought some years ago. It's still available (see: https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00DHPCSA0 ) but now has a smaller (slightly lighter) head than the one I bought - which was huge and heavy for a tripod of this size. I sold the head for £20 on ebay and use a more sensible head. The legs alone weigh 800g, or about 950g total with the head I use. Good value and has lasted well in the real world.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2018 at 15:22 UTC
In reply to:

desertsp: It’s confusing so it probably doesn’t work that well.

Not to mention the human brain... or life in general for that matter.

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2018 at 09:06 UTC

Interesting that the lens says "50mm" and not "5cm" as seen on later models. I wonder when (or why, for that matter) they changed... and then changed back again.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2018 at 15:50 UTC as 71st comment
On article Why brand market share shouldn't matter to you (552 comments in total)
In reply to:

Camera Conspiracies: I have just 1 lens for my Panasonic G85, and I refuse to buy another one because the day I do, Sony will finally release a full frame camera with a fully articulating screen. That's about the only thing that could get me to switch. So while Panasonic is my only system, I'm about as loyal as a pet bird when you open it's cage. You give me a glimpse of hope and I'm gone ;)

I don't do video, I can see its value to those who do though.

The articulating screen is just an annoyance to me; unlike a tilt screen that I can flip up instantly with a single finger its articulated counterpart needs a lot of movement to get it into use. Little annoyances like that add up and I find myself not enjoying using an otherwise nice camera.

Like I said, you can't please everyone.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2018 at 09:03 UTC
On article Why brand market share shouldn't matter to you (552 comments in total)
In reply to:

Camera Conspiracies: I have just 1 lens for my Panasonic G85, and I refuse to buy another one because the day I do, Sony will finally release a full frame camera with a fully articulating screen. That's about the only thing that could get me to switch. So while Panasonic is my only system, I'm about as loyal as a pet bird when you open it's cage. You give me a glimpse of hope and I'm gone ;)

Preferences differ; manufacturer's can't please everybody whatever they do.

I used to love Olympus cameras... until they lost the tilt screen and went the fully articulated route. So now I use a different system - with tilt screen of course. Choice is good :-)

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2018 at 18:08 UTC

If you can't see normal white lens markings in available light then you also need a lens much faster than a f/2 Summicron to make meaningful images with it. Had the camera been mated to a Noctilux I could just about believe it was serious, but as it it this is just another money-extraction tool from Leica rather than a solution to a real low-light photographic problem.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2018 at 16:27 UTC as 138th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Tape5: To call something visible one has to appreciate what "visibility" means. For something to be visible, the human eye must be capable of seeing "reflected" light from a thing, and not "emitted" light.
Since the human eye can only see the visible spectrum of electromagnetic radiation and the size of an atom is way too small to interact with the visible photons, only the following conclusion can be reached :
An atom is not visible, ever, under any circumstances with any tech trickery.

It is like claiming that a torchlight is visible five miles away with naked eye. The claim would be true if you could see the torchlight when turned off by the visible light reflected from its surface and not when turned on and emitting light. In the latter case you cannot claim to have seen the torchlight.

The whole claim then is that a single atom has been trapped, and stimulated with photons. The atom then throws its own photons back at us.

But this has been done before.

Tape5 said "people who do not really understand physics..." in a reply to me. I just thought I'd mention that although now retired my qualifications are in... physics. People who do not really understand much of anything often jump to (wrong) conclusions without testing their hypotheses.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 19:24 UTC
In reply to:

Tape5: To call something visible one has to appreciate what "visibility" means. For something to be visible, the human eye must be capable of seeing "reflected" light from a thing, and not "emitted" light.
Since the human eye can only see the visible spectrum of electromagnetic radiation and the size of an atom is way too small to interact with the visible photons, only the following conclusion can be reached :
An atom is not visible, ever, under any circumstances with any tech trickery.

It is like claiming that a torchlight is visible five miles away with naked eye. The claim would be true if you could see the torchlight when turned off by the visible light reflected from its surface and not when turned on and emitting light. In the latter case you cannot claim to have seen the torchlight.

The whole claim then is that a single atom has been trapped, and stimulated with photons. The atom then throws its own photons back at us.

But this has been done before.

'For something to be visible, the human eye must be capable of seeing "reflected" light from a thing, and not "emitted" light. '

Hmm. I often wondered whether the sun and stars were really visible to the human eye. Apparently they're not, according to your assertion.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 09:46 UTC
In reply to:

janist74: No offence, but as I see it, the "IPhone is the best tool for me" originates mostly from laziness.

Is the most important aspect of photography to fast share the photos on internet?

If not, then even an old RX100 would give you more possibilities and technically better photos, in a marginally bigger package. But then yes, you need some extra steps to post your images...

Good luck making a phone call with it, or checking your email, or... Well, you get the drift.

The real argument in favour of the phone camera is that you always have it with you anyway, for many reasons other than photography.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 16:14 UTC

Unnecessary ad hominem attacks on the photographer or for that matter on his work; *you* might not like the pictures, others (like me) will find them interesting.

That said I'm getting tired of all the "all you need is a NEW iPhone" ads posing as articles* these days on DPR.

* paid or unpaid they're still ads for Apple.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 15:40 UTC as 269th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Retzius: I need this for posting unboxing videos to youtube

How about 'Unboxing Schrodinger's cat"? Ticks an extra box...

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2018 at 08:56 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Permit: I wouldn’t call 110 volts a “shock”. Its more of an annoyance. I’ve been “shocked” with 110 volts dozens of times. Unless you wet your hands and grab each pole by a seperate hand (sending the current through your heart) you will be fine. In any event, good to see Fuji doing the right thing.

220 volts is another story. I have been shocked with 220 volts. That will really wake you up :).

For power sources the amount of current delivered into a resistive load is directly proportional to the voltage applied (Ohm's law) so it's not true to say it's not the voltage that matters since the two are very closely related.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2018 at 09:41 UTC
In reply to:

eyeport: I have heard too many good things about huawei phones....but I am still skeptical about android devices because of my horrible experience with Sony Xperia phones...they are just so darn slow after a few month of use.

True. I have a cheap Umidigi Z phone running plain Android 7 and a Samsung Tab S2 tablet running Samsung's Android 7. The cheap phone works perfectly, the much more expensive tablet is buggy, lacks many features like scdeen casting and has memory management problems that need a reboot to resolve. And that's without even considering the annoying changes to the user interface.

I like the tablet's hardware but when the time comes its replacement won't be Samsung.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 09:24 UTC
In reply to:

AWG_Pics: If we combine these thin metal lenses, with mirrorless and wireless tech, we will soon be able to reach into a pocket, pull out a metal disc, about the diameter of a skoal can, and take amazingly rich photos of our cats.

If you want the your photo assistant to actually understand what you want I would suggest an alternative implant from Amazon or Google rather than Apple ;-)

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2018 at 11:51 UTC
On article Sony releases silver version of the popular a6300 (211 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: Didn't the Sony 16-50mm get a DPR award for Worst Kit Lens? :-)

Yep. I have an excellent 16-70 and a good 16-50 that took only three attempts to find - the first two were dire. Maybe it was just third-time lucky :-)

The 16-50 image quality is not really up with the 16-70 but it's not at all bad. It's also tiny, weighs practically nothing, and cost next to nothing into the bargain. I like both, in their own ways.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2018 at 16:38 UTC
Total: 306, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »