just Tony

just Tony

Joined on Jun 28, 2012


Total: 8, showing: 1 – 8
In reply to:

nicoboston: The pictures are undoubtedly nice, however some of them obviously try to replicated aerial photos published years ago (for instance in the "...From the Air" books).
The best would be to show what can be achieved with drones, but not with planes or helicopters.

The idea in that last sentence is certainly an important category. But there is another unique aspect to this that still applies when even when there is overlap in where traditional aircraft can go: the enabling effect of bringing in other photographic artists who don't happen to have the budget for 200 helicopter flights per year. 1000 or 2000 people will inevitably think of something that didn't even cross the minds of only 1 or 2.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 18:07 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus C-3040 Zoom (121 comments in total)

I selected the model C-3030 for my employer to use in documenting assembly procedures. It was hard to shoot small objects because it could not focus very close when zoomed in. Optical quality was satisfactory although there weren't any convenient options for high quality printing.

There were three issues with the camera that were very irritating. For some reason the center of the front element was so exposed that it ended up accumulating severe scratches. We had that repaired once. It also had a weak rack and pinion drive system for the zooming and focusing, and even a slight bump would knock the lens into a sideways tilt. We'd pop it back straight and continue using it, just about once a week.

The absolute worst aspect was the SmartMedia data cards. There were two different voltage spec families (3.3V and 5V), and if you used the wrong kind you could kill the card and lock up the camera. Those cards were super slim and super fragile. This was before SD cards existed.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2017 at 23:45 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

Ran Plett: I've got some issues with this article. First, why the 35mm lens? I virtually never misfocus that FL, even at 1.4. My 135mm on the other hand, DOF is so thin that only 1/5 shots have actually nailed focus. That's more likely due to user error (both camera and subject moving slightly OOF), that's something that can't be fixed with micro-adjusting the lens. In fact, if half of my OOF shots are front focused, and the other half are back focused, wouldn't that indicate that the focus is actually pretty accurate?

The author writes: "a resounding no" which I believed at first until seeing the video produced by Canon, which really indicates how useful that function is and based on that, I'd have no problem with larger file sizes or with using Canon software, much like I would use stitching or HDR software.


Looks like a resounding yes from that video!

Not quite so resounding to my eyes.

Just as with dpr's example files, in Canon's video example yet again I'm seeing that the effect exists more in the form of blurring of the formerly sharp area, than from actual sharpening in any other area. It bears a slight resemblance to stopping down, along with the accompanying loss of sharpness due to diffraction.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2016 at 23:38 UTC
In reply to:

gonzalu: Why is this still not implemented by default into every single camera by now? I mean seriously? I can get a FREE Android or iOS device that has FAR MORE functionality than a dSLR that costs hundreds or thousands... Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, 3G, 4G, LTE, full functioning software, apps galore, etc. etc. Why are cameras still hobbled ???

<rant mode off />

You can not get a free Android or iOS device. You don't understand your cell service contract, especially the part about length of the contract and the early termination fee.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 00:26 UTC

Odd math from what I see in the exposure info displayed:

Sony ISO 102400 1/125s f/1.4 = EV-2
Nikon ISO 51200 1/40s f/1.4 = EV-3
Canon ISO 12800 1/40s f/1.4 = EV-1

Yet this was called an EV -3 comparison... and the only one competing was the Nikon?

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2015 at 04:09 UTC as 128th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

ncsakany: Hard G. End of story.

"A" in Computer Science.

"D" in Linguistics.

Ultimately, a language is composed of what survives the test of time. It's always worked that way.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2013 at 05:58 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: I don't quite get the criticism which is lurking in the article.

I am pretty sure this inofficial repair center rescued an otherwise irrepairable lens. And in quite a creative manner too. Kudos to the guys and to make it public.

This is apparently what comes from Nikon cutting off the parts supply to the independent shops.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2013 at 04:45 UTC
Total: 8, showing: 1 – 8