Tom K.

Tom K.

Lives in United States Tulsa, United States
Joined on Mar 6, 2002
About me:

Retired aerospace engineer

Feb 2000 - Canon A50 (Sold Aug 2000)
July 2000 - Canon S100 (great early pocket camera)
Oct 2000 - Olympus C-2100UZ (a classic)
Nov 2003 - Minolta A1 (CCD died 8-2006)
May 2005 - Panasonic FZ5 (given to wife after I got FZ30)
Sep 2005 - Panasonic FZ30 (great camera in its day, seems dog slow now)
Jan 2006 - Fuji F10 (don't like it-overrated)
Apr 2006 - Kodak CD33 (2 from eBay for grandkids to use)
July 2006 - Nikon 4500 (from eBay for digiscoping-disappointed)
Aug 2006 - Panasonic FX07 (lost)
Sep 2006 - Minolta A2 (from eBay to replace A1)
Aug 2007 - Kodak P880 (from eBay on a whim)
Apr 2009 - Panasonic ZS3 travel zoom
Dec 2009 - Panasonic GH1 with 14-140 lens (finally a decent EVF)
Sep 2012 - Panasonic FZ200 (lightweight, wanted more zoom reach)
Apr 2013 - Panasonic ZS19 (replaced ZS3 when zoom function got intermittent)
Feb 2014 - Panasonic GF1 (bought cheap to have a dedicated body for the Samyang 7.5mm fisheye)
Jun 2014 - Panasonic ZS40 (replaced ZS19 which lacked EVF)
Dec 2014 - Panasonic FZ1000 (4K video, beautiful EVF)
Mar 2015 - Panasonic ZS50 (replaced ZS40 due to improved EVF)

Comments

Total: 80, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Desert Cruiser: We shot a total eclipse in May 2012 in Utah, USA, I think article above forgot about that eclipse? It was fairly easy to shoot and if you want to do it yourself, then here's some info on doing that. http://www.in-the-desert.com/solareclipse2012.html
Don....

Here are a couple of shots from the 2012 annular eclipse.
https://s6.postimg.org/pfy9lm6tt/2012-05-20-19-09_P1100296.jpg
https://s6.postimg.org/fjx6lz11t/2012-05-20-19-31_P1100323.jpg

As you can see the sky doesn't even get close to being dark, it's like sunset except with sun still well above the horizon instead of partly below it.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 22:31 UTC
In reply to:

Desert Cruiser: We shot a total eclipse in May 2012 in Utah, USA, I think article above forgot about that eclipse? It was fairly easy to shoot and if you want to do it yourself, then here's some info on doing that. http://www.in-the-desert.com/solareclipse2012.html
Don....

No, you did NOT shoot a total eclipse in May 2012. That was an annular eclipse in which the moon is near the far point of its elliptical orbit and so does not completely cover the sun, leaving a ring of sunlight (or an annulus). What you saw was an 87% partial eclipse, which I've pointed out below, is a 0% total solar eclipse.
https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEgoogle/SEgoogle2001/SE2012May20Agoogle.html

I photographed the same eclipse in Albuquerque where the ring of sun was low to the horizon. Yes, shooting a partial eclipse like this is easy, slap a solar filter on your camera and shoot away. Capturing totality is a whole 'nother animal. But hey, it's your 2-1/2 minutes, your call.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 22:14 UTC

When they make a sensor that can vary its curvature as a lens zooms, let me know.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 15:54 UTC as 50th comment | 3 replies

The sad part will be the millions of people trying to capture the event with their cell phones.

Here's a better use for a cell phone - set it up on a tripod facing away from the eclipsed sun, towards you and your companions and start it shooting video 5-10 minutes before totality (in landscape mode for god's sake!) Stop shooting video 5 minutes or so after totality has ended.

Instead of a blurry picture of a blank sky with a black dot in it, you'll have a cool video of your experience.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 15:36 UTC as 21st comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

stratplaya: The astronomy expert should realize that most people don't have the luxury to travel the world seeking the next eclipse. It's a once in a lifetime thing for most.

The astronomy expert DOES realize that it's an extremely rare event for most people. That's why he recommends experiencing it, rather than wasting precious time trying to photograph it.

And for folks in the US, it's a once in a lifetime event only if you plan on dying in the next seven years.
https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEgoogle/SEgoogle2001/SE2024Apr08Tgoogle.html

I plan on seeing the next one in the US after that from my house. I'll be 88.
https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEgoogle/SEgoogle2001/SE2045Aug12Tgoogle.html

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 15:24 UTC
In reply to:

ewelch: Stupid test. You say no, and it asks you where you think the photo was altered.

Whoever did that test is not very good at what they're trying to do.

"Asking someone to tell you where they would think 'the most likely place an edit would occur' is itself a data point, even if the image isn't edited."

But they didn't ask for that. They asked you to click where "you believe it has been altered". If you don't believe it has been altered, there isn't any reason to click anywhere at all, so one place is as good as another.

The instructions were badly worded. Your interpretation may have been what they had in mind but to me (and others) what they actually said just didn't make sense.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 23:29 UTC
In reply to:

ewelch: Stupid test. You say no, and it asks you where you think the photo was altered.

Whoever did that test is not very good at what they're trying to do.

That's stupid, I just clicked the lower right corner on the ones that I did not think had been manipulated because it was less mouse movement. As far as I was concerned, any area was as good as any other. I did not "guess" anything.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 20:24 UTC

9/10 but the scoring results were not informative. I missed one that had been altered but I don't remember what the picture was, and they don't show them again with an explanation of what was changed.

And yes, the part about guessing an area even if you think the image has not been altered is stupid. That may be in fact what the test was, to see where people click when there is no reason to.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 20:18 UTC as 125th comment | 2 replies

I don't believe I've ever taken a selfie. I have however, done a good many self portraits.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 20:49 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

brycesteiner: I hear these and when trying to new new stories or interviews. Extremely annoying.

Almost as annoying as the CLACK CLACK CLACK CLACK of SLR cameras at a news conference. You can hardly hear what's being said. When are they going to ban those clanking dinosaurs and mandate mirrorless cameras?

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 04:29 UTC
In reply to:

dgumshu: Bit what? :-)

Money out of thin air... sounds like the American dollar. Who needs a gold standard anyway.

Here's a gif of how bitcoins are created:

https://i.redd.it/fvxwflw3te4y.gif

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2017 at 02:42 UTC
In reply to:

Tom K.: "But throughout the video the same theme comes up over and over again: what makes a 'great' photograph?"

Obviously a really big camera.

@Deardorff: I guess if he wants to make a greater photograph he needs an even bigger camera. ; )

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2017 at 04:59 UTC

"But throughout the video the same theme comes up over and over again: what makes a 'great' photograph?"

Obviously a really big camera.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2017 at 15:04 UTC as 62nd comment | 3 replies
On article SainSonic launches 50mm F1.1 lens for APS-C cameras (243 comments in total)
In reply to:

lambert4: No word of a Nikon version, might be fun and at sub $200 reasonable if it can be shot wide open.

Wonder if there will be an m43 version. Be nice not to have to use an adapter.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 00:01 UTC

"Your photos look great. You must have some really expensive post-processing software."

Link | Posted on Jul 4, 2017 at 04:19 UTC as 33rd comment | 1 reply
On article Sony's Mavica FD71 liked floppy disks, hated magnets (80 comments in total)

"We early adopters didn’t care about any of that, because the magic of taking a picture and seeing it appear (almost) immediately on the rear screen, and the freedom to shoot to our heart's content without having to pay for film or processing (and without the need to scan images) was the most exciting thing to happen to photography since the Box Brownie."

And homemade porn!

Umm, so they say.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 17:10 UTC as 20th comment

What is a "camera roll"? Do they mean the storage location, or what exactly? I am serious, this is a term I've never heard of before.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2017 at 17:08 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

Marty4650: 2008 might have marked the beginning of the end for small sensored Superzoom Bridge Cameras. At least until Sony figured out how to put larger sensors in them in 2013. Then Panasonic and Canon followed suit, and they had a renaissance.

Back in 2008 you could buy a DSLR two lens kit for around $500, and that seriously killed the market for superzoom cameras with tiny sensors that cost the same, and were almost as large, or sometimes even larger than a DSLR.

I always roll my eyes when someone suggests "a DSLR two lens kit" as a valid alternative to a versatile superzoom. A two lens kit simply guarantees that you will have the wrong lens on for the shot that you want to take.

Interchangeable lens cameras are specialized instruments, not generalists. You put on THIS lens for THIS situation. If the OTHER situation arises you have to put on the OTHER lens. Then THIS situation comes up again. Not at all convenient, and a body with two lenses is definitely more bulky than any superzoom.

ILCs can certainly excel over a superzoom in individual circumstances, but a stock two lens kit doesn't have the easy versatility that a lot of people want.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 16:26 UTC

And not a single human being in any of them. Did he have access when they were closed, or take multiple pictures and clone out the people, or do people just not go to libraries any more?

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 20:22 UTC as 7th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

dala: The focus is on the photographers in the foreground. I'd prefer to have it on the main subject.

The photographers ARE the main subject.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2017 at 05:54 UTC
Total: 80, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »