Klarno

Klarno

Lives in Neutral Zone Neutral Zone
Has a website at http://www.photoklarno.com
Joined on Mar 3, 2009
About me:

Lenses paired with Sony Alpha A3000 and Metabones Speedbooster:
Olympus OM 28mm f/3.5
OM 50mm f/1.8
OM 135mm f/2.8
OM 50mm f/3.5 macro
OM 35-70 f/3.6
Soligor 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5

Comments

Total: 114, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (657 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tom Caldwell: I don't like the fully articulated screen to the point it is a deal breaker for me. Has Olympus decided that fully articulated LCD screens are now an "Olympus signature"?

Have the managed to put two batteries in the grip? as having to remove the grip to replace the inner one is idiotic.

Have they reworked the menu system that has been growing like Topsy and quite out of control.

Nice camera but I am afraid I am not a videographer and I can already create more images with the E-M1 than I can rationally deal with. I need even more images like a hole in the head. It is not necessarily good to be able to gather images like confetti.

Two SD cards? Why not just one larger card?

Think, think ... oh and the body still has too many buttons on the back plate with to little to do. Olympus should check out the other brands who seem to actually make fewer buttons do more things quite gracefully.

This isn't a consumer-grade camera, and you just might not be part of the target market.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 06:37 UTC
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: Klarno,

The "socially unacceptable" claim is a different camp. Anyhow 75 dollar, open backed Grados, destroy Beats for sound quality, and Grado is not new to making headphones.

Bose is joke for sound quality, still is, was in say the year 2000 too. First with noise cancelling headphones for general use though, got a pair in 2002, used for jet travel, not great sound, after light use busted by 2005.

For the most part, New Balance makes running shoes for general use that are much more comfortable than those by more famous brands, one has a name that also begins with an N. And good New Balance shoes, have been expensive for at least 30 years.

"The fact remains..." Not a single thing you've said has any basis in fact. Only in faith--and blind faith at that. Blind studies have consistently found an inability to tell the difference between cheap and expensive cables. Audiophiles consistently tell themselves and everyone around them that they can hear a difference. If you feel that your sound sounds better because of your cables, fine, I'm certainly not going to stop you, but don't try to push your neurosis on anyone else. $400 speakers will never, ever, ever benefit from anything more than Monoprice cables.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 16:12 UTC
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: Removing the mini-jack feels like fixing something that isn't broken. But iFans are fiercely loyal, if Apple removed the LCD, defenders would say "but they are including a Lightning-to-HDMI cable in the box you can plug into your laptop should you need to". ;-)

For people who enjoy shooting with their phones, the camera could be interesting.

raindance: Analog is how digital devices interact with anything that doesn't exist inside the digital domain. If the digital to analog conversion isn't taking place in the smartphone, then it's taking place in the headphones--and what a brave new world, where the consumer electronics industry gets to charge more because they had to put a DAC and amp in their headphones just to be compatible with something that never was a problem before! With your logic we should also be removing screens from digital devices, because they represent digital information in an analog fashion. If the user hasn't learned how to think in machine code, well, that's just their problem isn't it?

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 15:42 UTC
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: Klarno,

The "socially unacceptable" claim is a different camp. Anyhow 75 dollar, open backed Grados, destroy Beats for sound quality, and Grado is not new to making headphones.

Bose is joke for sound quality, still is, was in say the year 2000 too. First with noise cancelling headphones for general use though, got a pair in 2002, used for jet travel, not great sound, after light use busted by 2005.

For the most part, New Balance makes running shoes for general use that are much more comfortable than those by more famous brands, one has a name that also begins with an N. And good New Balance shoes, have been expensive for at least 30 years.

"80 dollar AudioQuest RCA cables"? Before you insult everyone by suggesting that's a cost effective option, you've just proven your lack of knowledge in this field. I have no doubt that you're one of those audiophiles who thinks they can hear differences between 44.1 and 96 KHz and that skin effect is significant when dealing with cable runs of less than several kilometers. Thankfully your breed is a dying one, being replaced by people who actually respect the science, who value objective measurements over using subjective wine tasting language while pretending thats the definition of objective to everyone else and aren't allergic to ABX tests.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 15:18 UTC
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

mezastel: I'm still wondering why Apple decided to buy Beats, headphones so awful no self-respecting music lover would ever consider buying. It totally tarnishes Apple's image to be involved with Beats.

HowaboutRAW: Yes, rare earth magnets were a game changer, but I'd like to point out that before Beats it was socially unacceptable to spend $300 on headphones, it was something only doctors, lawyers, jetsetters and executives did, and as far as the public was concerned, they were buying Bose. Last time I was shopping for headphones, back in, oh, 2007, there was much less choice available. It was pretty much, if you want portable headphones, you buy PX100s--and you don't even know those exist unless headphones are a thing that you already knew you wanted. Beats made it into the public consciousness, and Sennheiser didn't. Rare earth magnets made the technology possible, but MP3 players and smartphones gave it a market, and Beats made it acceptable to look upmarket.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 23:40 UTC
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

mezastel: I'm still wondering why Apple decided to buy Beats, headphones so awful no self-respecting music lover would ever consider buying. It totally tarnishes Apple's image to be involved with Beats.

HowaboutRAW: Grado has a radically different sound signature from Beats, so you can't really compare them. If treble-heavy sound sounds good to you, or you listen to genres that benefit from treble heavy sound, then yes, you'll be better off with Grados than with Beats. That's not necessarily true for the next person. The treble-heavy sound signature of the Grados works well with rock music, while the bass-heavy (with balanced trebles and mids) sound signature of the Beats works well with hip hop and electronic music. Neither are anywhere near neutral enough to work with all genres, unless your ears are simply biased in favor of one sound signature or the other, and neither will work well as a studio monitor headphone.

And I don't plan to sing the praises of any Beats headphone but the Solo2. The rest are junk, but the Solo2 has caught the attention of many audiophile reviewers and communities, and when I tried it with compatible genres it sounded brilliant.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 23:10 UTC
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (920 comments in total)
In reply to:

mezastel: I'm still wondering why Apple decided to buy Beats, headphones so awful no self-respecting music lover would ever consider buying. It totally tarnishes Apple's image to be involved with Beats.

The Solo 2 is as highly respected within audiophile communities as it's possible for a mass market product to be: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/time-rethink-beats-solo2-excellent

And you can't deny that the existence of Beats itself has created a renaissance in headphones. Before Beats, there weren't nearly as many viable audiophile-quality headphones that could be driven by mobile devices. Now you can find one for every taste in sound signature.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 20:38 UTC

Wonderful, yet another camera backpack aimed at people who shoot outdoors and designed by people who still don't understand what outdoor photographers need. Where's the water bottle holder? Where's the capacity to store a jacket? Where's the waist support? Where's anything that makes this bag useful for more than half an hour of hiking?

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 17:35 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

acidic: All of the haters of this product:

- don't live in Japan where this product will be offered,

and/or

- are too old to realize many people communicate just fine on a day to day basis without using their voice minutes on their cell phone plan.

Who is even restricted to minutes anymore? Most plans have unlimited voice and messaging because data is where the profit is at now.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2016 at 18:35 UTC
In reply to:

AV Janus: There is a typo in the article.
The flash is built-ON not built-in

Well, if we're going to keep being picky about prepositions in an effort to keep using this phrase in a way contradictory to general usage, it looks like the flash built above the lens or beside the lens. If it were built on the lens, that would be a problem.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2016 at 17:09 UTC
In reply to:

utphoto: An aluminum top plate with some normal wear and tear abrasions, won't do well in salt water. Salt corrodes aluminum and a protective coating or a hard anodize won't be 100% secure forever.

Aluminum is actually quite corrosion resistant on its own. Like stainless steel, it forms a stable oxide coat. Corrosion of aluminum in marine applications comes into play only when you have more than just aluminum--when you have two metals with dissimilar electrode potentials in electrical contact with each other via an electrolyte, one functions as an anode and the other as a cathode and the system basically turns into a battery. That's galvanic corrosion.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 16:07 UTC
In reply to:

AV Janus: There is a typo in the article.
The flash is built-ON not built-in

What does that even mean? Nobody says "built-on". Built-in makes sense, built-on makes none.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 19:12 UTC
In reply to:

samfan: Impressive again. How does one of the smallest photo companies trump all those big dogs?

That said, I'd argue that a fixed 35mm lens underwater is not all that useful.

The luxury market is quite a bit different from the consumer electronics market, their clientele is inherently more willing to buy on the basis of brand name alone and are willing to spend larger amounts of money, which means Leica can charge more for a lower volume product and still turn a profit.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 19:10 UTC
On article Ricoh GR II: What's new and what does it mean? (207 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shoot Raw: The camera made in CHINA and they want $795.00???????
What a joke.

Everything has been changing relentlessly since the first GATT rounds in the 1940s, and solidified by the WTO's codification of our new globalized economy. That's as of the mid '90s.

Chinese is fine, Japanese is fine, Korean is fine, Taiwanese is fine, Thai is fine. In our globalized economy where almost everything is designed by one country's engineers and produced by another country's engineers, the biggest differentiator is who designed the product and how much the company that designed the product cares about quality control.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2015 at 18:02 UTC
On challenge Tilt Shift (1 comment in total)

It's tilt, not tilt shift. And it's far from the only thing you can do with tilt, turning everything into dioramas is just a photographic fad...

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2015 at 03:23 UTC as 1st comment
On article Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path (1615 comments in total)
In reply to:

Klarno: There have been a lot of shifts in the world of photography since the transition from film to digital, and many photographers and the industry at large haven't really taken this into consideration. With film, 35mm was primarily an amateur format that ended up getting developed enough that it was very practical for certain professional photography genres. It was the most popular format for consumers, and have always been where the money is. But now, it's possible get exquisite technical image quality, in many cases better than what we could ever get out of 35mm film, out of a sensor smaller than your pinky nail.

FF still has a major price differential compared to smaller formats. It's just tied up in lenses. A $1500 D610 is really a carrot to get you buying expensive FF lenses, whose prices haven't budged in the last 10 years of digital photography. There are a few inexpensive primes out there, and a few outdated pre-digital lenses that can be had for a song (and people like Brian Caldwell and Roger Cicala can tell you all about how legacy lenses resolve comparatively poorly on digital cameras because of the filter stack) but for the most part, modern lenses for FF digital systems all cost significantly more than their smaller format counterparts.

And the people who used medium format film in the past are EXACTLY the people who are using full frame digital now. Sure, FF also does things faster and there is a little bit of overlap, but that comes directly out of FF's pre-digital heritage as the consumer format, and the format that could be drawn quickly through a camera with a bulk film back.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2015 at 07:24 UTC
On article Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path (1615 comments in total)
In reply to:

nerd2: Two facts:

1. FF camera is NOT expensive. You can get D610 at less than $1300 now. OMD E-M1 costs $1200 and X-T1 costs $1300, so they cost the same.

2. FF camera is NOT that heavier. RX1 weighs only 498gr with excellent 35mm f2.0 lens. X-100T weighs 440gr, while having 1.5 stop slower lens (in equivalence)

10 years ago, FF DSLR used to cost $8000 while comparable APS DSLR cost $3000 range ($5000 premium). Now the price differential is almost negligible (less than $500), and we really don't have any reason to keep expensive small formats alive. Half-format camera at least had the advantage of being able to take twice as much shots compared to regular cameras....

@Yuvalm
So you choose a job to do the lens rather than choosing a lens to do the job. Whatever works, I guess.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2015 at 03:59 UTC
On article Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path (1615 comments in total)
In reply to:

nerd2: Two facts:

1. FF camera is NOT expensive. You can get D610 at less than $1300 now. OMD E-M1 costs $1200 and X-T1 costs $1300, so they cost the same.

2. FF camera is NOT that heavier. RX1 weighs only 498gr with excellent 35mm f2.0 lens. X-100T weighs 440gr, while having 1.5 stop slower lens (in equivalence)

10 years ago, FF DSLR used to cost $8000 while comparable APS DSLR cost $3000 range ($5000 premium). Now the price differential is almost negligible (less than $500), and we really don't have any reason to keep expensive small formats alive. Half-format camera at least had the advantage of being able to take twice as much shots compared to regular cameras....

@Teila Day
1. Square format on 120 film, colloquially called 6x6 has an image measurement of 56x56mm, which gives a diagonal of 76.16mm. the 35mm format has a diagonal of 43.27mm. So square format has a crop factor of 43.27/76.16 = 0.57. So a 28mm lens for 6x6 will yield the same diagonal angle of view as 16mm on FF.

And for the record, as wide as 12mm equivalent is available for both FF and APS-C DSLRs, and 6x6 doesn't exist digitally, nor does a 28mm that covers 6x6.

2. Of course not. But your previous comment was only about angle of view. In your words, "angle of view can make a HUGE difference in what you can fit into a single frame." Depth of field is a different discussion.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2015 at 03:55 UTC
On article Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path (1615 comments in total)
In reply to:

nerd2: Two facts:

1. FF camera is NOT expensive. You can get D610 at less than $1300 now. OMD E-M1 costs $1200 and X-T1 costs $1300, so they cost the same.

2. FF camera is NOT that heavier. RX1 weighs only 498gr with excellent 35mm f2.0 lens. X-100T weighs 440gr, while having 1.5 stop slower lens (in equivalence)

10 years ago, FF DSLR used to cost $8000 while comparable APS DSLR cost $3000 range ($5000 premium). Now the price differential is almost negligible (less than $500), and we really don't have any reason to keep expensive small formats alive. Half-format camera at least had the advantage of being able to take twice as much shots compared to regular cameras....

@Teila Day
That argument seems bunk. Lenses with angles of view that yield angles of view as wide as 114° on a given format (FF's 14mm) are available on almost every format.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2015 at 20:22 UTC
Total: 114, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »