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)


Total: 144, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

An advertisement that is not completely honest? I'm shocked. Shocked!
Well, not that shocked.

Much like every ad on television for electronic devices that say briefly in tiny print at the bottom, "Sequences shortened. Images simulated." Except there was no fine print in this ad.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2018 at 20:20 UTC as 56th comment
In reply to:

PostModernBloke: I really prefer the 'before' images. They look like the real world, places I'd like to visit.
The 'after' ones (particularly the desert scene) resemble bad CGI to my eyes.

Different strokes I guess...

Same here. Fakety fake fake. The more I see overly processed images the more I prefer straight out of camera.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2018 at 17:04 UTC
In reply to:

Rensol: DJI just like majority of chinese companies in the business of misleading and deseiving!
Their only goal is to sell more by all means even if those means include jeopardizing citisend of other countries
They should be charged for any damage caused by their drones!
Research is correct.
While particular plane might not fly that fast most passenger aircraft can and do!
It would cause similar damage so accept and move on.
Situation is similar to tobacco manufacturers denials of harm of smocking.

@Ken Seals - I said, "the leading edge thickness".

So if the skin thickness of a Mooney is .050", the skin thickness of a commercial airliner would be half an inch? Well, drone strikes certainly wouldn't be a problem as the airliner would never get off the ground.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2018 at 03:04 UTC
In reply to:

Will Murray: Yeah, why would aerospace engineers, who do such research for a living, have any idea what they are doing?

I'm sure DJI have absolutely zero commercial bias.

@Eric Hensel - "I'm so tired of the "my opinion is just as good as your actual data" idiocy."

I would like to "Like" this statement 500 times, please.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2018 at 03:00 UTC

After reading the comments, it appears that there is an astonishing number of people who would not correctly answer the question, "Which is heavier, a pound of lead or a pound of feathers?"

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2018 at 14:03 UTC as 33rd comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

MichelBB: I guess terrorists did not know how easy it is to down a plane with a drone, until now.

"....trained ISIS Ibis."

Trained "In Body Image Stabilization"?

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2018 at 02:21 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: i wish someone would do a survey on how many would buy a fuji x series camera with a 1 inch or apsc sized trifocal equiv of say 18 21 35 mm equiv in a compact camera
with some evf action on the side

why are makers clueless as to what would sell?

" many would buy a fuji x series camera with a 1 inch or apsc sized trifocal equiv of say 18 21 35 mm equiv in a compact camera with some evf action on the side"

When you describe something that specific? Only you.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2018 at 05:55 UTC

I wonder what percentage of DILC owners are sick and tired of the bulk, weight and expense and considering getting rid of them, and just using a smartphone or P&S camera? Does the survey address that?

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2018 at 01:35 UTC as 51st comment | 4 replies

From the look of the photos, this pancake lens includes syrup.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2018 at 03:20 UTC as 52nd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

BobT3218: I've had the Olympus EE-1 for a while. It's a stand alone hot-shoe device that will work with any lens any camera with a hot-shoe. It needs to be adjusted for parallax, dioptre and brightness. Be warned, the cross-hairs image is a red laser image and if set too bright, can cause a seriously sore eye. Personally, I don't think it is that useful except for birds in flight. Gun totting red-necks will love.

An RDS works great for sports too, such as soccer and football. You can follow the ball or a particular player without losing awareness of what else is going on. I use one all the time.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2018 at 05:38 UTC
In reply to:

davesurrey: Does this fit on the camera hot shoe. In which case could it be used on cameras other than, dare I say it , Nikon?

@davesurrey - In the first place, it's airsoft, not airshot. What you should Google is "red dot sight hot shoe adapter" without quotes. Or search this forum for red dot sight or RDS and find lots of information.

The most commonly used mount is made by Photosolve.
You can mount most any RDS on their adapter, and there is no need to pay big bucks. Just get one that is compact and light enough to suit you.

Then there's this one, which I don't know anything about:

Here's one on Amazon that looks pretty secure but you have to mount it, then mount the sight on top of it, so it's not easily removable;

I wasn't satisfied with any of these so I made my own. It is secure, easily removed, and maintains its position.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2018 at 13:55 UTC

Relatively newer Panasonic cameras such as my FZ1000 can be controlled via smartphone with a Panasonic app. However that means you have to dick around with a smartphone, which I find inconvenient. It's bulky and you have to be looking at it to use it.

I much prefer a simple RF wireless remote shutter release, which the FZ1000 has a jack for. Unfortunately other Panasonic cameras such as the ZS200 do not have a jack, and a dumb smartphone is your only option.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2018 at 14:10 UTC as 27th comment
In reply to:

HosseinG: This article is not about ten years of Mirrorless, this is Mirrorless at ten years ago.

That's because Panasonic and Olympus got it right pretty much from the get-go.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2018 at 13:19 UTC

That's all well and good. Now how about giving us a negative/slide scanner that will scan at 9600dpi with dust removal, in seconds rather than eons?

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2018 at 18:29 UTC as 17th comment | 7 replies
On article Lensbaby Sol 45 impressions and sample gallery (111 comments in total)

Seems a bit soft around the edges....

Seriously though, I can't say I liked any of the pictures. Not an effect I care for. Thanks for letting me know I don't need to buy one of these.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2018 at 14:17 UTC as 53rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Alan2dpreview: So what should the average shooter do?

"So what should the average shooter do?"

Don't worry about it. You've managed to make pictures just fine before you read the article, haven't you?

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2018 at 14:48 UTC

"We were rained on during our entire visit to the ghost town of Kolmanskop, which my participants weren't too happy about, since it meant they were missing the famous light coming out of the windows of the buildings."

I thought this was pretty funny. "What, we can't take the exact same type of pictures that everyone else has taken? Waaaah!"

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2018 at 14:25 UTC as 60th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

M H S: thank you for this timely article...

it had been nearly half a week since the last time DPR pimped this new offering.

I would love a dedicated all-Sony version of the web site... but kind of like the light /dark theme choice you offer.

Trends come and go. Back when the site was owned and run by Phil Askey it was pretty much all Canon, all the time.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2018 at 20:29 UTC
In reply to:

mahonj: IMO, it is really down to your budget.
If you can drop $1200 on a compact, get the Sony, else the TZ100.
The Tz200 is quite expensive and there are lots of TZ100's available used.

"The Tz200 is quite expensive and there are lots of TZ100's available used."

While not as plentiful, the ZS200 can also be had used at a substantial savings. I bought mine used from B&H for $600. That is still more than a used or even new ZS100, but it is more palatable $800 for a new ZS200. And B&H has reasonable return policies if you get a lemon. The Sony doesn't appear to be available used yet but will likely still be quite a bit more expensive.

Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer choice.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2018 at 20:44 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: really? a travel camera has to be almost the size of a gopro?

a small lovely ilc for those who have not bought into this absurdity that i must travel with a tiny camera or a 2 lb bridge cam?

i assure sanity follows, STAY WITH ME
here is a highly capable ilc from panny with a great 16 mp sensor. a genuine evf not on a stalk and 2 . yes Virginia 2 zooms !
they are all tiny because m43, but have a real 225 sqmm sensor [ 1\4 ff not 1\\8!!!]
like these above

so for a small great ilc gx85 panny ilc with BOTH a pancake 12-32mm
[ yes pancake ] really and a really compact tele zoom 45-mm to 150
[ 90 to 300mm equiv!!]

price for all 3 ?? 597.00 usd thats 199 usd each for a camera and 2 capable zoom
i n s a n i t y ! ! !

this is travel zoom stuff even if you are only doing a backpack let alone the giant suitcase you've already committed to !!
this is pouchable

@cosinaphile - Having to have two lenses to cover a zoom range makes any ILC a non-starter for a pocket-size travel zoom, and this is the category that these cameras are in. "Pouchable" is not the same as pocketable - doubly so when you have to juggle lenses. Your example is irrelevant to the conversation.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2018 at 17:04 UTC
Total: 144, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »