David 247

David 247

Lives in Philippines Subic Bay, Philippines
Works as a Retired in the Philippines. Travelblogger
Joined on Jul 23, 2005
About me:

Former military, medical and industrial photographer doing mostly technical and not very creative photography. (about 13 years) Most recently a fraud and compliance manager for a global corporation, including 11+ years in the customer support industry (internationally). Officially retired and will be relocating to the Philippines by end of summer 2015. Lived and worked there before so know what I'm getting into and relish the challenge of photographing as many of the 7,107 islands as time allows documenting the people, places and beauty of that nation.

Comments

Total: 98, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know (460 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mastering Light: Gutsy move.

Interlaced 1080 video
4.5 FPS
Sensor from 2012 (but with a newer processor)

This will be one of the best cameras for a few limited things. But since it has some big flaws for an "all-around" camera the targeted user base seems very small. I don't mind the lack of high end video, but the low FPS despite high IQ is a turn off for me. I hope many others see it differently. More competition is good.

Well Xiao, then it is not the camera for you and that is okay. As to pixel shift, for my photography, it find it an amazing asset producing superior quality and detail while eliminating moire and other aberrations. Lack of modern lenses is an issue, but only if there is something you need that they don't offer. (tons of very good legacy glass thought) Focus is not a problem for me. It is not a camera for everyone, but there are no "cameras for everyone". Another feature I love is built-in GPS, but that is because my primary photography is travel, historical architecture and landscapes. So the combinations of Pixel shift with GPS are perfect for me. Just because it does not meet your needs or desires does not make it a bad camera. It is an excellent choice for me, and others who shoot similar subjects to me, and I can still get the occasional action or other shot if I desire. And the price is right.

It's okay if it isn't the camera for you. Use what is best for you.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2018 at 06:09 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know (460 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mastering Light: Gutsy move.

Interlaced 1080 video
4.5 FPS
Sensor from 2012 (but with a newer processor)

This will be one of the best cameras for a few limited things. But since it has some big flaws for an "all-around" camera the targeted user base seems very small. I don't mind the lack of high end video, but the low FPS despite high IQ is a turn off for me. I hope many others see it differently. More competition is good.

Umm! Because we don't see it as a weakness? If you shoot action, including kids, it probably isn't your best choice, but believe it or not, there are a lot of photographers that do not shoot much action, and since I grew up with photography before high frame rates, high ISO (400 was considered very high) and developed talents to shoot without all the technology, on the rare occasions when I shoot action, I still get the shots. Not hundreds of them but enough for my needs. After all, 1 great shot is better then hundreds of mediocre. Some of it comes down to skill, and some to luck. But I have never regretted a shot I missed, just focused on the next good possibility. Guess that comes from 50+ years of photography and not having the benefit of the fast technology for the first 30+ years. If I was a sports/action/kids (non-portrait) shooter, my choice of equipment would be different. So just realize that not all cameras are made for every person.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2018 at 09:48 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know (460 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mastering Light: Gutsy move.

Interlaced 1080 video
4.5 FPS
Sensor from 2012 (but with a newer processor)

This will be one of the best cameras for a few limited things. But since it has some big flaws for an "all-around" camera the targeted user base seems very small. I don't mind the lack of high end video, but the low FPS despite high IQ is a turn off for me. I hope many others see it differently. More competition is good.

Sure it is not a great sports or action camera, by today's thinking, but I've been taking photos for 50+ years and this is the kind of camera I have been looking for. I almost never shoot multiple frames unless bracketing exposure. On the rare occasions when I shoot "action", I still have the talents learned from before the "auto everything" phase of photography. You know, single shot, manual focus, even manual exposure and anticipating where the subject will be. But I do like the new technologies but refuse to be a "slave" to them. It's okay if I miss a few action shots. I'll get a few good ones too. I shoot mostly travel and landscape. The Pentax looks like an ideal camera for me. GPS and Wi-Fi are more important then high frame rates and instant focus. About the only thing I see lacking is variety of modern lenses, and even there they have the basics covered. My only problem is how to pay for one at this time. Love the clarity and detail of their previous pixel shift.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2018 at 06:16 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know (460 comments in total)

Interesting! I was wondering who would go to a digital sensor shift for pixel resolution. I also wonder how it compares to the physical sensor shift. Is this a hand-held mode only or does it replace the prior physical sensor shift, which was amazing in its quality? The ISO is not critical for me. I am primarily a travel and landscape photographer, not an action shooter. While many complain "it is not as good as... (enter your choice of camera)" Keep in mind the price point is far below the other competition. I think it is great to have choices. If I had the money to invest right now, I think it would be a great camera for the travel and landscape work I do. Will be watching for the reviews. Want to see image results. The prior Pixel shift was amazing in the detail it got from 36mp. Better yet it could be rezzed up to 60mp in software and still look great. Will be keeping an eye on this.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2018 at 00:58 UTC as 83rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

kaipr: Is there a software that:
1) Produces about the same quality (for Olympus/Panasonic raws)
2) Is more performant in browsing through images, rating them and applying rather simple edits (don't care about import or export speed)
3) Has at least an okay usability (don't care if its .001s faster when it takes 2 more seconds to get to it)
4) Does not cost considerable more than LR when I want to stay up to date for lets say 4 years

I couldn't find an alternative yet. DXO seems to be insanely slow compared to LR after import and Capture One is way more expensive than LR. Darktable seems to need weeks to get comfortable with (might be an option) and other software doesn't come close in quality it seems.
LR 4 years: 4 * 142 Euro = 568 Euro
CO 4 years: 332 Euro + 3 * 142 Euro = 758 Euro (or 4 * 214 Euro = 856 Euro for subscription)
Sure I don't have to update, but I usually want the improvements.

Salsguy I remember when they first started out, with basically a set of plugin's for Lightroom. They are constantly growing and evolving. I like what I saw with the demo, though didn't have time to put it through its paces fully. I will be watching them. When my year subscription is up with Adobe, I'll be looking around again. ON1 does have a pretty complete package already, more then lightroom, and getting better every year. Worth keeping an eye on.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2018 at 16:10 UTC
In reply to:

kaipr: Is there a software that:
1) Produces about the same quality (for Olympus/Panasonic raws)
2) Is more performant in browsing through images, rating them and applying rather simple edits (don't care about import or export speed)
3) Has at least an okay usability (don't care if its .001s faster when it takes 2 more seconds to get to it)
4) Does not cost considerable more than LR when I want to stay up to date for lets say 4 years

I couldn't find an alternative yet. DXO seems to be insanely slow compared to LR after import and Capture One is way more expensive than LR. Darktable seems to need weeks to get comfortable with (might be an option) and other software doesn't come close in quality it seems.
LR 4 years: 4 * 142 Euro = 568 Euro
CO 4 years: 332 Euro + 3 * 142 Euro = 758 Euro (or 4 * 214 Euro = 856 Euro for subscription)
Sure I don't have to update, but I usually want the improvements.

I've looked at ON1 and it looks very good. Tried out a demo. In my previous comment I said they aren't quite there with cross-platform. Must've been tired. I meant to say they aren't quite there in synchronizing across devices. I believe they do have a cell phone app that can allow you to view your images on other devices, but can't edit them. For me the need to work across devices is a big need. But ON1 looked very good. When my year subscription with Adobe is up, I will look at them again.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2018 at 11:43 UTC
In reply to:

kaipr: Is there a software that:
1) Produces about the same quality (for Olympus/Panasonic raws)
2) Is more performant in browsing through images, rating them and applying rather simple edits (don't care about import or export speed)
3) Has at least an okay usability (don't care if its .001s faster when it takes 2 more seconds to get to it)
4) Does not cost considerable more than LR when I want to stay up to date for lets say 4 years

I couldn't find an alternative yet. DXO seems to be insanely slow compared to LR after import and Capture One is way more expensive than LR. Darktable seems to need weeks to get comfortable with (might be an option) and other software doesn't come close in quality it seems.
LR 4 years: 4 * 142 Euro = 568 Euro
CO 4 years: 332 Euro + 3 * 142 Euro = 758 Euro (or 4 * 214 Euro = 856 Euro for subscription)
Sure I don't have to update, but I usually want the improvements.

If there is an equal alternative, I haven't found it yet, I keep looking though. A requirement for me is cross-device synchronization. In that area I haven't found anything that works as well, and still delivers a comprehensive set of image tools. Always looking, but after a several month search, haven't found anything else that meets all my needs. Adobe's most recent efforts at improvements are good, but not yet enough. Still it is a step in the right direction as far as I am concerned but they need to do more. Been using lightroom since the very first version came out. Use it on both my Mac Laptop and IOS devices. Luminar might be an option once they come out with their image management module, am waiting to see what they do. ON1 is an alternative, but not quite there on their cross-platform. Capture 1 is targeted to professional volume users and expensive. ACDSee is a possibility but they still don't support cross device sync on their Mac Version.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2018 at 00:37 UTC
In reply to:

Yake: The true Lightroom "Classic" was the one that didn't come with a subscription. The subscription version is not "Classic" at all.

The call it classic, because you can work with it offline. As Adobe announced and has done, they have done away with the Stand-a-lone version that you paid for up front. I don't care all that much for the subscription version, but when you look at everything it comes with, including additional apps, photoshop, etc, it isn't a bad deal. Of course of you don't use any of the additional, then it doesn't benefit you. Over time though I have come to appreciate the ability to sync libraries between devices over the internet. Well I appreciate it when Internet is available. I seldom ever use photoshop but have it if I need it. I have started looking at Portfolio and Spark which are also included in the subscription, and will give them a try. FYI, if you are working on IOS devices only, not Mac OS, they do have a version for IOS @ $4.99 month and 200 gigs storage. (Apple Store). IOS LR does not require a subscription unless you share with other devices.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 03:28 UTC

Thought I would test the import and rendering of the New Version. Had an image only backup of my Lightroom data in folders by subject. No XML or other info, just the images. Created a new catalog and imported, including creating folders automatically. It also mapped images with GPS data. That probably added time to the total.

5015 images, 4785 JPEG, 226 RAW, 4 TIFF.
14 minutes for initial upload when you can start working. 1 hour 8 minutes to render and geolocate 5015 images total. Once the initial upload is done, you can work on images while its is rendering thumbnails. Even if a preview hasn't loaded, you can click an image placeholder and it will load that image and previews in just a few seconds. If you select images that aren't fully rendered to work on, it will prioritize those images. Speed is definitely increased overall compared to the previous version by a noticeable amount.

My computer. MacBook Pro, mid 2014 model. 2.8 ghz. Intel Core I7. 16 gig RAM.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 03:10 UTC as 30th comment

Haven't had a chance to really put it through its paces yet, or do any heavy importing, etc, but in overall general use there is a moderate but noticeable improvement, especially when editing photos. Much less hesitating. MacBook Pro Mid 2014 with 16GB RAM

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 21:29 UTC as 43rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

David 247: I was a US Navy Photographer. Combat Camera was an elite photographic unit but not the main source of photography. But they were some of the best. Navy rolled the PH (Photographer) into a Mass Media rating a couple of decades ago. MM is a rating that includes Photographers, Journalists, graphic artists, Public Relations, and all prior visual arts ratings. While individuals still have specialties within the rating, it is expected you will have knowledge and skills across a broad discipline of graphic and mass media and be able to take the image from shooting to final product.
Sad to see it. But the Navy has already changed in so many ways to adapt to new and really more efficient technologies. The passing of Combat Camera, is the sound of the final trumpet for media specialists. You have to be multi-faceted and able to work in multiple graphic disciplines. But you can still take photos when needed.
- Formerly PH2 (E5) US Navy,

Whaevs, you are correct. It is MC for Mass Communication Specialist. And it was established July 1, 2006. You got it right. I misread some info. Not enough sleep I guess. Thanks for the correction.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 21:04 UTC
In reply to:

HRC2016: This is the equivalent of taking body cams off police officers. What does the US government want to hide?

Oh well. The paranoid will remain paranoid. Do people think they ever saw more then a tiny percentage of the work shot by Naval and other Military photographers? Everything is classified until it gets declassified. Combat Camera was one uniques and specialized unit, the creme of the crop, but just an assignment given to the best photographers. The Navy and other Military services still have photographers doing what Naval and Military photographers have always done. Don't know what the Army and Air Force are doing, but the Navy consoldated the Photographers rating into an image and graphics. general rating (along with several others) called Mass Media. That was done in the 80's. Personal will still be available as necessary for various specialized military assignments. In reality, Body Cameras would make more sense for general documentation, and special photographic assignments will come form the Mass Media command. It is a reorganization, not an elimination of services.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 12:47 UTC
In reply to:

Ken60: Wow ........ Tesla can send a car to Mars but Donald cant afford a camera ?
I guess they will save ...hmmm about the cost of one small missile.

Thanks cantanima bis, that would be correct. And as for. Trumps new budget, he pushed for more then the military even asked for. It will take some time to actually determine how the money will be spent, and most is likely earmarked for weapons and weapons research. It will have no significant impact one way or the other on support services which is what Combat Camera was. Still they were always considered the best of the best among naval photographers. It was an assignment, not a rating. There are still and still will be photographers in the Navy. But they now come under the consolidated rating of Mass Media. the specialized rating was eliminated back in the 80's.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 12:35 UTC
In reply to:

babart: Sounds like another effort to hide military actions from the public. Especially when on considers what a small amount of money was necessary to support these units when compared to the enormous military budget. If there's a budget crisis, cancel one destroyer to be built, at the cost of 3billion dollars.

Suntan. Yes, that is it exactly. I was a Navy photographer, and the labs were classified material handling areas. Everyone had to have basic clearances and most had more than that. What is/was seen has has always been handled or approved by the Public Affairs or Media Specialist departments in conjunctions with traditional military command. Nothing more will shown or not shown then as before. They are only eliminating a specialized. command that was no longer needed in today's digital world, and most of what Combat Camera shot was classified anyway. Some people just want to be paranoid and have something to complain about.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 12:27 UTC
In reply to:

MikeRan: Why is this a news story?

Oh my God!! The navy is eliminating TWO Camera units!!! The humanity!!! What are they hiding!?!?!

The Navy used less toilet paper in December too...

Not quite. They still have a variety of imaging specialists. This is really a consolidation of commands. But there will be fewer specialists, they will have to be multi-faceted, and able to work cross disciplines. Still and video have already merged and the merging of all image/graphic ratings into Mass Media specialists took place a couple of decades ago. The "Photographer" rating has been gone for quite some time. Combat Camera was an assignment, not a specialty, though they typically were the very best.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 12:22 UTC
In reply to:

Denis of Whidbey Island: The Navy has been winding down photography operations for some time. A decade ago, I managed a civilian contractor operation that replaced Fleet Imaging tasks on a naval air station. The Navy was in the process of eliminating the Photographer's Mate MOS, folding into the broader Mass Communications Specialist rating.
For a while I worked (as a DoD employee) alongside someone who had been a PM in Combat Camera. He couldn't talk about a lot of interesting stuff they did, but I learned enough to know that there will be a sad loss of professional documentation of bleeding edge missions with Combat Camera gone.

Yes. As a former Naval Photographer I hate to see it, but it makes sense. the MM rating still has specialists including both still and video, but you do have to be multi-faceted. They are Mass Media Specialists now, and while still taking photos the fact is everything is digital, and from taking the photos to enhancing, and creating graphic layouts, publishing, etc, it can all be done in one office. The are all Mass Media imaging and graphic rating with some sub-specialities.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 12:18 UTC
In reply to:

HRC2016: Without these units who will photograph the Dotard's parade?

The press, same as always. Then he can complain about it on camera too.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 12:14 UTC
In reply to:

FOTOMASSIMO: CNN"...President Donald Trump said the US military would be the strongest it has ever been, including "increasing arsenals of virtually every weapon."
The Defense Department's budget is $686 billion, an increase of $80 billion from 2017... . Photographer = documentation... and sometimes this is a bad idea. In my opinon.

Yes photographer means documentation. But with today's tech, almost any enlisted or officer with a good eye for light can be a photographer. I saw the trend decades ago while working in Bio-Medical photography. Instead of requesting photographers to photograph a lot of medical procedures, many doctors were already starting to do their own, just sending their film down to the labs. And that was 30 years ago. Nowdays it is even more prevalent.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 12:13 UTC
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: An excuse for hiding facts.
Maybe this world would have one more country like Russia and China. Too bad!

Only different in operations. Actually by moving it to Mass Media, there it is likely to be more open. There will still be films, photography, etc, but if it isn't done in service, then it will be contracted out. Public Affairs is a logical move. Classified work will remain classified and public work will remain public. If anything, it will be more open then the old model. Much of what Combat Camera shot will never be seen. Some was traditional public release video and some was not. It is the military, and it was "Combat" Camera.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 12:08 UTC
In reply to:

FantasticMrFox: What baffles me is how a) in times were the budget is increased by $180 bn. in one year (that's more than the UK's entire military budget) they struggle to finance a couple dozen photographers, and b) how they "failed [...] to consolidate the two units into a single COMCAM unit."

The Navy Times reported that the latter was due to "an inability to agree to terms of the consolidation" - how?! It's the military, they either get to work together, or they are made to.

Different commands. Atlantic vs Pacific I expect. Still politics in the Military and disagreements on who is in control.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 12:04 UTC
Total: 98, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »