Philly

Lives in United States CA, United States
Joined on Aug 15, 2002

Comments

Total: 41, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Philly: The image quality of the lens looks nice. Personally, I don't think the extreme shallow depth of field is that pleasing on portraits--with blurred noses and ears. I much preferred the one or two portraits by Wenmei, who had the discipline to stop down to 2.4 or so, I believe. At least, keep the nose in focus, along with the eyes, IMO.

The political protest photos do not seem to be a good vehicle to showcase this type of lens--unless the event really did have low energy, as the photos seem to imply. I would much prefer a wider angle of view for actual, spontaneous events, to capture the emotion of the moment. Something like this: https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/161109-trump-camp-election-12.jpg

Or if a sign is to be showcased, capturing it at the right moment would make the photo appear not as trite as the photos in the gallery. Something like this, perhaps: https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/161109-trump-camp-election-01.jpg

My example was to demonstrate that--as optically good as the Sigma 85mm f1.4 lens appears to be--it may be the wrong tool to use in some instances. Because of the ability to achieve subject isolation with this lens, it can be robotically applied, with many unskilled photographers being easily seduced down this path.

I am not a particularly skilled photographer myself, but I find that even I notice a capture that uses thin depth of field creatively, versus one that only shows thin depth of field.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 07:28 UTC
In reply to:

Philly: The image quality of the lens looks nice. Personally, I don't think the extreme shallow depth of field is that pleasing on portraits--with blurred noses and ears. I much preferred the one or two portraits by Wenmei, who had the discipline to stop down to 2.4 or so, I believe. At least, keep the nose in focus, along with the eyes, IMO.

The political protest photos do not seem to be a good vehicle to showcase this type of lens--unless the event really did have low energy, as the photos seem to imply. I would much prefer a wider angle of view for actual, spontaneous events, to capture the emotion of the moment. Something like this: https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/161109-trump-camp-election-12.jpg

Or if a sign is to be showcased, capturing it at the right moment would make the photo appear not as trite as the photos in the gallery. Something like this, perhaps: https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/161109-trump-camp-election-01.jpg

Pat, yes, the shallow depth of field of this lens can be too much of a crutch for some photographers, in an attempt to create drama artificially. I'm afraid that the flatness and the isolation capabilities of this lens may require a skilled photographer, in order to provide an engaging narrative, without appearing to scream "isn't my bokeh great?".

Further, to use such a lens to capture a political narrative is even more difficult, I believe. DPR certainly has guts for attempting. But to simply isolate a political sign--or a political sign with a person holding it--can be sterile and uninteresting, as the DPR photos demonstrate, in my opinion. Again, it appears to me that a wide angle lens is needed to provide a narrative with emotional impact, in these cases. Take this photo for example:
https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/161109-trump-camp-election-19.jpg
It "speaks" raw joy and excitement--or even "Pennsylvania". To me, that is great photography.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 06:57 UTC

The image quality of the lens looks nice. Personally, I don't think the extreme shallow depth of field is that pleasing on portraits--with blurred noses and ears. I much preferred the one or two portraits by Wenmei, who had the discipline to stop down to 2.4 or so, I believe. At least, keep the nose in focus, along with the eyes, IMO.

The political protest photos do not seem to be a good vehicle to showcase this type of lens--unless the event really did have low energy, as the photos seem to imply. I would much prefer a wider angle of view for actual, spontaneous events, to capture the emotion of the moment. Something like this: https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/161109-trump-camp-election-12.jpg

Or if a sign is to be showcased, capturing it at the right moment would make the photo appear not as trite as the photos in the gallery. Something like this, perhaps: https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/161109-trump-camp-election-01.jpg

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2016 at 22:29 UTC as 79th comment | 6 replies
On article A photographer's intro to the world of video (98 comments in total)
In reply to:

Philly: I want to video an interview inside a fairly noisy restaurant, and be able to capture the audio from both the interviewer and the interviewee. I have an Olympus E-M1 with a microphone jack input and some (inexpensive) lav mics. How can I set up the audio wiring to accomplish this? Do I need to purchase an external microphone like one of the higher end Zoom models with multiple microphone channel input? Is there a cheaper solution? Thanks to anyone who can help.

El Jeffe - thanks for your comments. Point taken, regarding use of (hyper) cardioid mic for interview. StevenE also stressed that in his comments. Would have not realized the importance without such comments. Thanks for shortening the learning curve. My biggest fear on using a boom mic with an assistance is that it may raise expectations on the finished product. This video event is a spur of the moment addition to doing some event photography for friends. I'll try to practice beforehand, but expect the event to be a learning experience on video (and audio) production.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 18:00 UTC
On article A photographer's intro to the world of video (98 comments in total)
In reply to:

Philly: I want to video an interview inside a fairly noisy restaurant, and be able to capture the audio from both the interviewer and the interviewee. I have an Olympus E-M1 with a microphone jack input and some (inexpensive) lav mics. How can I set up the audio wiring to accomplish this? Do I need to purchase an external microphone like one of the higher end Zoom models with multiple microphone channel input? Is there a cheaper solution? Thanks to anyone who can help.

StevenE, thanks for the recommendations. The Aputure mic appears to have great design elements. I don't have headphone monitoring on my camera, so it looks like this mic would be able to provide that capability. It does look like a "must have"--I just ordered it.

I'll also consider getting the ME15 mic when I buy an external recorder.

Thanks.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 18:42 UTC
On article A photographer's intro to the world of video (98 comments in total)
In reply to:

Philly: I want to video an interview inside a fairly noisy restaurant, and be able to capture the audio from both the interviewer and the interviewee. I have an Olympus E-M1 with a microphone jack input and some (inexpensive) lav mics. How can I set up the audio wiring to accomplish this? Do I need to purchase an external microphone like one of the higher end Zoom models with multiple microphone channel input? Is there a cheaper solution? Thanks to anyone who can help.

I did some research on the microphones suggested above. I'm looking for something a little less expensive (for now) than some of the nice microphones recommended above. I almost never shoot videos, but would like to shoot more. I did find the following:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1025888-REG/polsen_olm_20_dual_omni_lav.html

It's similar to the dual cardioid mic mentioned by StevenE, except it's omnidirectional--but it also has in-line battery, which I like. At $45, it may be worth a try for me.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 05:11 UTC
On article A photographer's intro to the world of video (98 comments in total)
In reply to:

Philly: I want to video an interview inside a fairly noisy restaurant, and be able to capture the audio from both the interviewer and the interviewee. I have an Olympus E-M1 with a microphone jack input and some (inexpensive) lav mics. How can I set up the audio wiring to accomplish this? Do I need to purchase an external microphone like one of the higher end Zoom models with multiple microphone channel input? Is there a cheaper solution? Thanks to anyone who can help.

Wow, thanks for all the great suggestions and information! The quickest and cheapest(?) solution for me, I think, is to combine Richard's suggestions. I have other cameras but none with mic input, so I can use 2nd camera to video capture interviewer with interviewer using lav mic into a cell phone recording app. The Olympus E-M1's video and audio capture would be dedicated to the interviewee. This would allow me to record onto two separate audio tracks for editing.

I will also check out the other microphone suggestions. Thanks.

Richard--if you're still reading this: I have a suggestion if you plan to do a follow-on article on video creation. It would be great if you can provide a few application examples of how you would set your camera for different video applications (e.g., my interview example, or, say a graduation ceremony, etc.) and the considerations involved. Or maybe show the end to end workflow from video capture to post processing.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 02:34 UTC
On article A photographer's intro to the world of video (98 comments in total)

I want to video an interview inside a fairly noisy restaurant, and be able to capture the audio from both the interviewer and the interviewee. I have an Olympus E-M1 with a microphone jack input and some (inexpensive) lav mics. How can I set up the audio wiring to accomplish this? Do I need to purchase an external microphone like one of the higher end Zoom models with multiple microphone channel input? Is there a cheaper solution? Thanks to anyone who can help.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 17:03 UTC as 33rd comment | 13 replies
In reply to:

Philly: Does the DL 24-85 require an external lens cap? Small point, I know, but it does effect usability.

You're right. B&H's preorder page just came online and the "in the box" description includes a push-on lens cap:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1234166-REG/nikon_25918_lc_dl1_lens_cap.html

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 09:52 UTC

Does the DL 24-85 require an external lens cap? Small point, I know, but it does effect usability.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 07:39 UTC as 125th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Alex Kooistra: Sigma is making some nice lenses the last couple of years.
A 50-100 1.8 would also be nice om MFT by the way.....

I would get it if offered for m4/3. It would still be shorter and lighter than Oly's 35-100mm f2.0 lens--at HALF the price. This lens is screaming to be mounted on an Oly with IBIS. The only APS-C camera with IBIS is Pentax, and I don't think this lens is available in Pentax mount.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 06:56 UTC
On article Inching forward? Canon PowerShot G5 X review posted (401 comments in total)
In reply to:

damian5000: Jeff may have a point re lens, but what most people fail to understand is that it's *moot*.

Nearly literally, it means nothing, because these differences in sharpness don't show until making big crops or pixel peeping or looking very very hard at corners and comparing the two side by side SOOC.

Very unfortunate these sad reviews of g7x and g5x. Fine, mention it, but criminal to not also put it in the appropriate light (context, not literal light). Jeff should be ashamed.

Raist3d - I would prefer a better lens also. In fact, when G5X was announced, I was disappointed that Canon just used the G7X lens. But I like a lot of things about the G5X so I am interested in "guaging" the extent of the softness. For me, the screen pixel level difference that DPR shows just doesn't convey a difference that I can interpret in a meaningful way. Also, the fact that DPR mentioned the lens softness back in the G7X review (I believe) but still recommends that camera as well as the G5X, with overall positive comments about image quality strikes me as a somewhat contradictory assessment that deserves additional supporting comments--with something like maximum print size before the softness can be observed (or some other qualifiers)--to help review readers assess how bad/relevant the softness is.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2015 at 07:36 UTC
On article Inching forward? Canon PowerShot G5 X review posted (401 comments in total)
In reply to:

damian5000: Jeff may have a point re lens, but what most people fail to understand is that it's *moot*.

Nearly literally, it means nothing, because these differences in sharpness don't show until making big crops or pixel peeping or looking very very hard at corners and comparing the two side by side SOOC.

Very unfortunate these sad reviews of g7x and g5x. Fine, mention it, but criminal to not also put it in the appropriate light (context, not literal light). Jeff should be ashamed.

@Rishi and @Simon, I think DPR should have provided a little more context to the Canon lens sharpness (or lack thereof). It would have been pretty easy to say that the sharpness difference (Canon vs. Sony) can or cannot be seen in a 12" x 18" print or, say, 16" x 20" print.

Looks like I'll have to spent a dollar at Costco and print some 4x6 crops of the sample files.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2015 at 05:43 UTC
On a photo in the Sigma 24-35mm F2 DG HSM Art Real-World Samples sample gallery (5 comments in total)

How about posting the unedited jpg so we can see how much this was pushed?

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2015 at 02:31 UTC as 3rd comment

Only thing I am unsure of on the G5X is the lens. I remember reading that the G7X's lens is soft. However, if the lens is at least as good as the RX100 IV's lens in that lens' range, then I don't know what's not to like about the G5X--size and style not withstanding.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 04:39 UTC as 81st comment
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1291 comments in total)
In reply to:

Philly: Will someone at dpreview please put an Oly 12-60mm lens on this camera and tell us about the AF performance. Thanks! :)

I'm talking about the 4/3 Oly 12-60mm f2.8-4 lens which typically requires PDAF for fast AF. I want to know how the Panasonic GX8 AF system performs with this lens. (As pointed out, this lens requires an adapter for m4/3 bodies.)

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 21:50 UTC
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1291 comments in total)

Will someone at dpreview please put an Oly 12-60mm lens on this camera and tell us about the AF performance. Thanks! :)

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 04:26 UTC as 110th comment | 5 replies

Thumbs up for taking Mr. Kataoka's portrait with an Olympus E-M1 and the Oly 25mm f1.8 lens.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2015 at 23:53 UTC as 37th comment | 1 reply
On photo Sigma24mmF1.4_samples-01-F1.4 in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (7 comments in total)

Interesting choice of camera to test this lens. Does the metabones adapter support auto focus? If so, did the AF work well? If this shot was manually focus, must say it looks very nice. Certainly no misfocus here. Is it practically to use this lens in manual focus mode at 1.4 with the Sony Alpha?

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 05:08 UTC as 7th comment
On a photo in the Sigma 24mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Initial Samples sample gallery (7 comments in total)

Interesting choice of camera to test this lens. Does the metabones adapter support auto focus? If so, did the AF work well? If this shot was manually focus, must say it looks very nice. Certainly no misfocus here. Is it practically to use this lens in manual focus mode at 1.4 with the Sony Alpha?

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 05:08 UTC as 7th comment
Total: 41, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »