Lives in United States Panhandle, TX, United States
Works as a Engineer
Joined on Jan 19, 2005


Total: 54, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Yongnuo creates near-clone of Canon 35mm f/2 (170 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photato: Isn't this lens design protected by patents and such?
If the IQ is the same, it would be a great buy.

Like rrccad said, the patents would have expired. The thing Yongnuo would most likely be violating is "trade dress." I have no idea if Canon has ever tried to sue Yongnuo for trade dress infringement, but their flashes and other lenses also look like exact Canon copies.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 21:09 UTC
On article Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path (1602 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bruno Doyle: Having travelled the upgrade path myself, I disagree with the assertions in "fallacy 2".

Right from the start, I preferred shooting with primes and acquired (over time) fast 35, 50, and 85 FF glass. Once I moved to FF, the role of each changed a bit, but I still felt I had great coverage. The 50 is getting up there in age, but still sees lots of use. It was definitely a solid investment.

Lenses such as the Sigma 35/50 ART are outstanding. I'd emphatically recommend them to APS-C shooters as much as I would for a FF shooter. I expect those are lenses from which you might end up getting decades of use.

Bruno Doyle, your APS-C kit lacked a wide angle lens. If you avoided purchasing one because you didn't want any APS-C lenses, then I think fallacy 2 still stands. Even in your relatively uncommon case of using all primes.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2015 at 22:30 UTC
On article Canon EOS 7D Mark II: A professional's opinion (475 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jason Racey: "I like knowing that my lenses are true to their focal length"

I'd say this is the number #2 reason I switched to FF. #1 reason is that Canon doesn't make an L-quality wide-angle zoom for APS-C. If you want to shoot landscape you're stuck with the 10-22. Not a bad lens but mine constantly had little problems. It's was clearly lower build quality.

"Lenses are true to their focal length" is true with any lens on any camera. What she should have said was "I am more familiar with full frame focal lengths."

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2014 at 14:35 UTC
In reply to:

SunsetMagnet: these photos became popular because :
- the claim that the monkey stole the camera and took the images. for some reason while this notion was propagated back then, Slater didnt dispute it?

Now that wiki uses that loophole to challenge copyright, suddenly i am reading website article by the author that he setup the scene and allowed the monkey to play with the cameras.

Moral of the story. Careful how u want to spread the news, it could backfire

I've looked online for evidence that he actually claimed that originally. Other than an article in The Daily Mail, most of the quotes from 2011 news stories support his current story that he set up the camera and the monkey simply clicked the shutter.



Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2014 at 02:06 UTC
In reply to:

smafdy: So, I — a person unaware of the pic or the events surrounding its taking — am equally within my rights to copy and distribute this photo?

How can that be? Obviously, a human is responsible for the photo, having put the time, money, and energy into "creating" it.

The monkey ceded the copyright to the human when he gave the camera back (if he hadn't, we would not be discussing this topic).

Who owns the right to copy the pic? The human who owns the lens, sensor, and who put both in the position to capture the image (the latter is crucial to the point).

I don't see any basis for "community" ownership or non-ownership of the copyright of the image by the PHOTOGRAPHER who made it happen.

Aside: A hunter leaves a remotely triggered camera in the woods to capture animals passing by. The animals, by their motion, trigger the shutter.

Does no one own the copyrights to those photos?

If you are in the US, the US Copyright Office believes you are within your rights to copy and distribute this photo. No one owns the copyright to those photos in the US.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2014 at 01:27 UTC
On article Accessory Review: Drobo Mini RAID (149 comments in total)
In reply to:

Greg Gebhardt: There is much cheaper and more dependable storage available.

Can you post an example for those of us who don't follow backup storage industry very closely?

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2014 at 12:05 UTC

I think DPReview needs to write a "Copyright for Photographers 101" article. People are bringing up a lot of interesting scenarios and analogies, but even in these example situations, people can't agree on who owns the copyright.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2014 at 19:43 UTC as 268th comment | 1 reply

I saw something like this at one of those Sears type studios. The results looked really stupid.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2014 at 13:45 UTC as 11th comment
In reply to:

bford: How can people online get access to your full resolution image if you don't post it online? Anyone with an obviously desirable image that posts the full resolution version online is a fool.

Supposedly, he put it on a private flickr page, but there is a security gap that allowed people to access it.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2014 at 03:07 UTC
In reply to:

Reactive: What a great shame that Sigma are getting so greedy, just like Canon.

Reactive, this thing is trying to replace the 50mm L, not the 1.4.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2014 at 13:52 UTC
On article 10 essential time-saving Photoshop tips (87 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shiranai: Instead of the first 2 tips, I recommend setting your mousewheel as zoom.
Thats always the first thing I set up in photoshop, dunno why they didn't enable it as standard. You find it at preferences > general > zoom with scrollwheel.

I use CTRL + scroll wheel for zoom. It's pretty standard in many drawing programs

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2014 at 22:36 UTC
On article Challenge of Challenges: vote for the best shot of 2013 (118 comments in total)
In reply to:

Halstatt: While the images are praiseworthy, technically, haven't we all seen similar ones time and again? There's a lack of vision, creativity and spontaneity on the whole.

I think this is a side effect of the rating system that is used in the challenges. Photos with a lot of vision, creativity and spontaneity tend to be controversal (people either love or hate them). With the rating system, it's hard for an extremely creative photo to beat out a technically perfect and beautiful cliche. If the challenges used a "pick your favorite" voting system, the creative photos would start to beat the cliches more often.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2014 at 18:52 UTC
In reply to:

draleks: I dont get it, how is adding a transparent subpixel better than making the Bayer filter slightly more transparent?

Great point. (I think)

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2014 at 17:28 UTC
In reply to:

babalu: So who took who's idea ?

I've seen a theory floating around that Phonebloks was basically designed as a viral campaign by Motorola. Phonebloks was listed on "Thunderclap" (which I think is like Kickstarter). The Thunderclap campaign ended at basically the same time as the Motorola press release.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2013 at 20:28 UTC
In reply to:

CZFox: For me as an amateur photographer, these copyright laws created by lobby are ridiculous.
If I take a photo of some part of street should I pay all people in a photo, all companies having a shop there, all companies who built the houses and roads, and the Mature of nature for growing a tree, and feel afraid that someone already took similar photo and will sue me? Just because I would sell a few copies or put it on a commercial website?
I simply don't understand these copyright laws, so much restrictions.

I don't think copyright laws are written to protect amateur photographers (In theory they can, but unless you have a lot of money, they don't do you a whole lot of good). If a blogger starts stealing your photos that you posted on the internet, does anyone ever stop him? The sentiment is basically "well, you shouldn't have put your work on the internet."

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2013 at 18:53 UTC
In reply to:

onlooker: The level of contempt for the rights of the creator is astonishing among the so called photographers here.

The fact that it's a national monument makes it seem different too. The Statue of Liberty and Mount Rushmore are also sculptures. They have both been made into postage stamps.

If a government employed photographer can't own the copyright of a photo that he took while on the job, why can a government commissioned sculpture own the copyright to someone else's photos of his work?

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2013 at 18:40 UTC
On article Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Review (362 comments in total)
In reply to:

Theophilus101: Will this lens work on my Canon Rebel T1i?


Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2013 at 15:53 UTC
In reply to:

cedarsphoto: Wow. If you read the actual article he clearly describes why that one has more logged fails - because it's a complex lens that is rented out a phenomenal amount.

What crappy, sensationalist headline grabbing reporting dpreview.

Poor show.

If you read the actual article, you'll see that he normalizes for the amount of time the lenses are rented. He uses a metric called "rental weeks per failure" so 70-200mm lenses really are less reliable than other name brand lenses.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 12:31 UTC
On article Nikkor 18-140mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR hints at mid-range DSLR (181 comments in total)

It's kind of interesting that DPRreview is including speculation in one of their posts. They haven't done too much of that in the past. I wonder if they know more than they are letting on.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2013 at 17:51 UTC as 50th comment | 6 replies
Total: 54, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »