questionlp

questionlp

Lives in United States PA, United States
Works as a IT Systems Engineer
Has a website at http://qlp-photo.com
Joined on Dec 6, 2008

Comments

Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Mobile Speed: Portable SSDs for photographers (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

CekariYH: Eh, I don't really get it, How do you get your camera images to these SSDs in the first place?

I have there battery powered HDDs with built in card reader and USB 3 and that works great for me, I mean whats the point to rant about size if you still need a computer with you?

@virtualreality, Was not responding to you but to CekariYH. I'm making the case for portable SSDs and I do know that CFast and XQD are slower than decent portable SSDs.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 22:35 UTC
On article Mobile Speed: Portable SSDs for photographers (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

CekariYH: Eh, I don't really get it, How do you get your camera images to these SSDs in the first place?

I have there battery powered HDDs with built in card reader and USB 3 and that works great for me, I mean whats the point to rant about size if you still need a computer with you?

CFast and XQD cards transfer rates can outstrip rates for many portable HDDs. Also, I usually have two XQD readers that I can pull from and send the files over to external drives connected via Thunderbolt. It's not just the ingest, which is rather small amount of the time compared to importing into LR or C1 and building previews in LR. Even if I'm not generating previews, just browsing and re-organizing stuff on SSD is much snappier than slower USB HDDs.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 22:10 UTC
On article Mobile Speed: Portable SSDs for photographers (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

CekariYH: Eh, I don't really get it, How do you get your camera images to these SSDs in the first place?

I have there battery powered HDDs with built in card reader and USB 3 and that works great for me, I mean whats the point to rant about size if you still need a computer with you?

I went with portable SSD drives in an OWC USB enclosure over standard portable drives due to durability (SSDs can handle more abuse versus HDD, even with rugged casings) and I will pour through hundreds of photos in Lightroom so that I can get a handful up for live events, club social media, etc. On an SSD, even over base USB 3.0, it was a lot faster than on my RAID-10 setup at home (which isn't very portable). The bottleneck no longer was storage, but now my CPU.

When I do get home, the transfer from SSD to the RAID setup is also faster than using 5400 or 7200 RPM portable drives.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

SirSeth: Am I missing the manual aperture ring? Seems like most manual lenses have them and I'm not sure that this would work on my Sony with adapter without an aperture ring. Otherwise, I like the aesthetics and am curious about the IQ.

It has electronic aperture control only, which is a bit unfortunately for a manual lens.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 22:50 UTC
In reply to:

obsolescence: Looks like an excellent design, but anti-theft? ...Not if the thief is holding a gun to your head or a knife to your throat. (Been there.) The steel reinforced strap is important, but it's best to keep the camera inside of a nondescript bag and only take it out when ready to shoot.

Well, you could be out on a shoot or session, in public, when the camera on the strap and someone could try to steal the camera while you are actively using it or swapping out a lens, battery and/or card. Can't actively shoot with the camera in the bag.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2016 at 20:36 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

Neez: "Furthermore, the need to constantly power a screen while shooting, combined with attempts to capitalize on the size benefits of mirrorless mean that battery life is much more limited on most mirrorless cameras - sometimes to a restrictive degree. "

This statement isn't correct because DSLR's have LCD screens that are on all the time as well. They don't suck down nearly as much juice as a mirrorless. LCD screens are known to be fairly efficient as long as backlighting is kept to a minimum, the LCD itself uses very little energy.

It's actually because the IMAGE SENSOR has to be on all the time, regardless of whether you're taking a shot or not, is why the battery life sucks on mirrorless cameras.

I own a sony a6000 and A7II, and have learned to just carry 3 spare batteries with me when i go out. But you are right, was never a concern on my canons.

I shoot primarily with a D800E and a D300 and they don't have the rear LCD running all of the time. Mine turns on for image previews (2-3 seconds, viewing histogram), Live View and when going to the menu. The entry level DSLRs may differ though; so, don't presume that's the case with all DSLRs.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2015 at 19:45 UTC
In reply to:

Kamox: 8K video! The answer to the question no one asked!

Well, there kind of is for those that want to shoot video at a higher resolution than what the final result will be primarily shown in. A good amount of people are looking at shooting at 4K so that they have a bit more to work with and be able to downsample to 2K and potentially have a crisper output.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2015 at 19:29 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

Neez: "Furthermore, the need to constantly power a screen while shooting, combined with attempts to capitalize on the size benefits of mirrorless mean that battery life is much more limited on most mirrorless cameras - sometimes to a restrictive degree. "

This statement isn't correct because DSLR's have LCD screens that are on all the time as well. They don't suck down nearly as much juice as a mirrorless. LCD screens are known to be fairly efficient as long as backlighting is kept to a minimum, the LCD itself uses very little energy.

It's actually because the IMAGE SENSOR has to be on all the time, regardless of whether you're taking a shot or not, is why the battery life sucks on mirrorless cameras.

I own a sony a6000 and A7II, and have learned to just carry 3 spare batteries with me when i go out. But you are right, was never a concern on my canons.

DSLRs don't always have large LCD screens that are on all of the time, especially when Live View is not used. Sure, there are LCD displays that are a part of the viewfinder or on the top plate, but those don't tend to draw as much power as the large LCD screen in the back.

That said, if you primarily use a DSLR with Live View and/or as a video recorder, you'll be waving your battery life good-bye as well.

But I do agree that running an image sensor, processors and memory constantly in the case of MILCs are big power hogs as well.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2015 at 19:27 UTC
On article The new Canon 35mm F1.4L II will be a thing of beauty (227 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gary Martin: I can't tell the ads from the articles any more ...

@Barney, I thought you guys were paid by Uncle Ricoh and fantasize about Leicas, made for its magical photo looks.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2015 at 23:37 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: "At least for the first few years of its production, the older 24-70mm F2.8 was notorious for cracking rubber around the zoom ring, and for the zoom barrel jamming."

That's the first time I've ever heard of those issues. Sounds like hyperbole.

There have been documented issues with the 24-70mm zoom ring being quite rough or bound up. I borrowed a 24-70mm from an acquaintance at a car show and the first thing I noticed was the zoom ring sticking or felt a little grindy.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 04:33 UTC
In reply to:

Just Ed: Nice lens, but 3'6" close focus....ouch!

The 3'6" close focus is for the adapter, the 50mm f/0.95 lens has a 0.60m close focus.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2015 at 21:56 UTC

Shouldn't that be 5000mAh and 10000mAh, not 500mAh and 1000mAh, for the battery packs?

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2015 at 20:16 UTC as 12th comment | 3 replies
On article Leica M9 users report sensor corrosion issue (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark9473: I'm curious if this is a potential problem for other sensors (other camera brands) not having an AA filter on the cover glass of the sensor.

I think the issue is with what's happening with the bonding of the glass to the sensor, not the fact that it doesn't have an AA filter (or one that is cancelled out).

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2014 at 23:27 UTC
On article CES 2014: Nikon Stand Report (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

WACONimages: What happened to the Nikon 1 series??? Like the waterproof version, or a new V3 for example. An underrated system because of it sensor. But a camera is more as its sensor size alone!

@rfsIII, I think the reason why Sony's RX line (which uses the 1"-type sensor that's found in the Nikon 1) gets lauded is that Sony, so far, has not made it into an MILC like the Nikon 1. The RX100 and RX10 have fixed lenses and the RX100 is pretty darn tiny with a metal body. And yes, I have an RX100.

Even though I have a good number of F mount lenses, I think I would probably opt for an Olympus m4/3 over a Nikon 1 for its controls and really great primes (Pana/Leica, Oly or Voigtlander). Having the ability to attach a tele F mount lens on a Nikon 1 would be the reason why I wouldn't count it out as an option.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2014 at 20:47 UTC
In reply to:

EssexAsh: how much! its like that car Homer designed. Is there a button somewhere that makes it play La-Cucuracha?

You can probably hack it so that the shutter sound plays La Cucaracha :)

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2013 at 16:06 UTC
On article 5 Reasons why I haven't used my DSLR for months (593 comments in total)

As much as I love my Nikon D300, but I have done basically the same with my Leica M9 and a Sony RX100. The fact that I can carry a small camera bag that houses both cameras, plus two additional M mount primes that weighs less than my usual two-lens D300 walkabout kit has made my D300 almost obsolete.

I still use my D300 for macros and architectural photos, but the RX100 fills in the former in a pinch. The M9/RX100 can do architectural, but requires a bit more PP than using a PC-E lens to begin with.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2013 at 17:45 UTC as 302nd comment
On article Instagram app arrives for Android (29 comments in total)

The app has been pretty unstable on my Evo Shift 4G and it doesn't seem to allow me the option to set the Facebook posting to a specific page.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2012 at 17:18 UTC as 22nd comment
On article NHK working on 8k video sensor capable of 120fps (94 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mssimo: Sounds like a D800 that can shoot at 120Fps. WOW

Except that the sensor is 21.5mm by 12.1mm versus the ~36mm by ~24mm FX sensor size in the D800/D800E.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2012 at 23:48 UTC
On article Tamron releases image-stabilized 24-70mm F2.8 zoom (190 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jogger: Ive been shooting the Nikkor 24-70 for almost 3 years, i dont think ive ever needed IS/VR once. If you are shooting under 1/60, youre going to get motion blur from your subject... so, nice sharp background and blurry subjects.

There's a reason why there are as many kinds of lenses as there are styles and schools of photography. I have several lenses that have VR/IS and use them when I need reach (70-200mm f/2.8 and 70-300mm VR). For the 24-70mm focal length range, I just can't justify the size, weight and cost... with or without VR/IS.

I don't use fast primes only for shallow DOF or for nostalgia; instead, I like to travel as lightly as possible and it fits the photography that I do.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 03:30 UTC
On article Tamron releases image-stabilized 24-70mm F2.8 zoom (190 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jogger: Ive been shooting the Nikkor 24-70 for almost 3 years, i dont think ive ever needed IS/VR once. If you are shooting under 1/60, youre going to get motion blur from your subject... so, nice sharp background and blurry subjects.

Adding to footdoc66, is the extra weight and 82mm filter size worth it if one doesn't need VR/IS?

For me, I'll stick with faster primes that don't weight down the camera as much.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 00:21 UTC
Total: 23, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »