veroman

Lives in United States United States
Works as a Photographer, Teacher, Writer
Joined on Mar 23, 2004

Comments

Total: 115, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Did he say $14,800?

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 12:28 UTC as 23rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Graham Austin: Buy one, leave it in the box, wait a couple of decades and boom it doubles in price.

I can still get high dollars for my mint Leica Digilux 2 and Digilux 3. Neither camera is obsolete technically. The Digilux 2 still makes superb images. Less so with the D3, but still very, very high quality files with that camera and the 14-50 f/2.8..

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 12:27 UTC
In reply to:

veroman: Seems to me that the difference in price ($900) should be easily justified by image quality and feature improvements as well as overall superior performance. But it doesn't look like it is. That $900 will give you a lot of great lenses to choose from for your shiny new 80D. And I can't help but wonder why the article didn't have much to say about the price difference ... surely an important consideration when choosing between these two cams.

"The article is framed in the context of upgrading from an 80D to a 6DII , not choosing which one to buy when you don't own either."

Duly noted. But I would imagine that any number of photographers and enthusiasts who DON'T own an 80D (or anything as recent) will also read the article as as possible reference material and a resource for making a choice. I mean, the article DOES compare the two cameras and DOES come to conclusions about "which one."

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 15:32 UTC
In reply to:

Robemo: As a retired 'pro' ( I made some money with photography) reading through these forums I am always amazed at how many cameras people have or have owned (or claim to have ..). Call me old fashioned but my cameras last for years and years.

But many seem to feel this urge to upgrade every time a new model is introduced, probably 'enticed' by all the marketing BS that promises better images or 'essential' features that will make you a 'top dog' in photography. Well, it most likely won't.

Judging from the images that are produced over the years there really hasn't changed that much. Yes, by pixel peeping I can see small differences between my 'oldest' digital camera and my 'current' six year old camera. But in print or downsized for viewing on UHD TV it's hard to tell. So I stick to my old stuff ....

"Judging from the images that are produced over the years there really hasn't changed that much. Yes, by pixel peeping I can see small differences ...."

I agree 100%. I've owned, rented and borrowed many digital cams over the years, from full-frame to teenie weenie. So what do I shoot with today? 98% of the time it's a Leica Digilux 2 accompanied by a Ricoh GR II. With either camera I get images that rival just about anything out there, with the Digilux 2 providing a quality that I've not seen with any other camera. The Ricoh is a little wonder, printing clean and clear and sharp to 17 X 22 with little difficulty. I, too, got all caught up in the latest-is-the-greatest syndrome. But with some 180,000+ images to scroll through and compare cameras with, I'm not at all hesitant to say that the differences among them are slight to inconsequential. DXOmark's measurements would have you believe otherwise. Take it all with a grain of salt. Yes, sports/action shooting is another story.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 14:47 UTC

Seems to me that the difference in price ($900) should be easily justified by image quality and feature improvements as well as overall superior performance. But it doesn't look like it is. That $900 will give you a lot of great lenses to choose from for your shiny new 80D. And I can't help but wonder why the article didn't have much to say about the price difference ... surely an important consideration when choosing between these two cams.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 14:20 UTC as 28th comment | 2 replies

There's noise in the studio scene??? Where? Looks pretty good to me.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2017 at 11:47 UTC as 8th comment
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (639 comments in total)
In reply to:

on1on: The best quality image can produce this camera is ...? not idea...
no SFD, and no X3F processed files
same as Pentax k-1, not fast enough, not good enough

Then you would not at all be happy with the Sigma ... ANY Sigma. The noise is ugly. And it arrives much too early in the ISO range. I can't understand why anyone, in fact, would purchase a camera with noise levels similar to an early low-rez point-and-shoot (like a Canon A95!) in this day and age. The "special look" of Foveon images, IMO, is no trade-off for ugly noise levels that high.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2017 at 12:53 UTC
In reply to:

rsjoberg: Nikon Coolpix A, $300 used, looks like new, 3660 clicks, and it came with everything in the box. The focus is slow in dim light, but OK in outdoor lighting. The Image quality is stellar, and it operates like my other Nikons. The 28mm equivalent lens and APS-C sensor are mated to each other.

As far as the GR/GR II goes, the entire camera does not have to be disassembled. There are ways of opening up a specific area of the camera and blowing any dust away. Google for more info.

As far as the overall dust "problem" goes, it's overstated. I have yet to see a spec of dust on my GR II. I don't have any experience with the Nikon A, but I DO have experience with any number of cameras that collected dust like magnets, i.e. Sigma, Canon and Nikon DSLRs. I also have experience with any number of point-and-shoots with retractable lenses, i.e. Canon G Series, Fuji, etc. No dust.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 16:38 UTC
In reply to:

PLShutterbug: Off topic I know, Barney, ... but the beginning of your post really bothers me.

"... I was drunk because I hadn't eaten any dinner."

You were drunk because you drank too much. Please don't deflect.

Had you ended the sentence at "... drunk," no problem. I have been there as have many of us. But don't blame your irresponsible action on lack of food. You decided to drink more than you should and you were drunk as a result.

No, it's Dad.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2017 at 14:22 UTC
In reply to:

PLShutterbug: Off topic I know, Barney, ... but the beginning of your post really bothers me.

"... I was drunk because I hadn't eaten any dinner."

You were drunk because you drank too much. Please don't deflect.

Had you ended the sentence at "... drunk," no problem. I have been there as have many of us. But don't blame your irresponsible action on lack of food. You decided to drink more than you should and you were drunk as a result.

Lighten up.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2017 at 13:45 UTC

Nicely done! Thanks. I now miss my superb 1D II.

And glad to see the link for Glazer's camera store. I've been there several times when visiting Seattle. Great selection of gear and accessories and terrific, knowledgeable people, too.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2017 at 13:44 UTC as 90th comment

Just what the photography world needs. Another bag!!

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 13:48 UTC as 7th comment | 2 replies
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1138 comments in total)

I've been considering the D500 but, features aside for a moment, it appears to have nearly the same levels of noise control and dynamic range as my NEX 7 and Leica X Vario. AF might be faster and more accurate, and the build is certainly robust. But in terms of IQ alone, I don't see why this camera is getting so many rave reviews. It's big, it's bulky, it's heavy and it's quite expensive for a DX format enthusiast camera, don't you think? I'm puzzled.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2016 at 17:44 UTC as 36th comment | 2 replies

Simply a bad, bad, bad idea. Maybe the worst photographic idea of the modern era. Bad at any price, much less $99 a month! I can't help but wonder why this is getting so much publicity here as well as elsewhere. Surely DP's editors know a bomb when they see one.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2016 at 13:04 UTC as 85th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: At the price I wonder how many preorders will they get? 16?

Even high-end video people are not interested (due to the mount choice) and due to the presence of an already just as good version for 1/4 the price.

This is just weird.

You can almost get a Canon 50mm f/1 AF for that price point on ebay (the dream lens). Or get an f/1.2. Just weird.

Great lens. The price is just incredibly stupid.

16? How about 6.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 23:18 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus C-3040 Zoom (121 comments in total)

Good looking camera. I didn't own one, but I did own the C-5060. Similar body design but 5MP. Loved it. Took very sharp, very pleasing images. I even used it on a pro job once when my big Kodak SLR/c died.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2016 at 15:03 UTC as 61st comment

I've owned a MacBook for over a year. Best of its breed, without question. I have nothing to complain about except that I had to pay the higher price for my adapters. Bought them earlier this year. Should I e-mail Tim Cook for a rebate?

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2016 at 13:03 UTC as 145th comment | 1 reply
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Olympus OM-D E-M1 II (654 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alphoid: Bets on how much it retails for? Post your best guess below. Closest guess is the winner.

$1,450.00

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 14:52 UTC
In reply to:

digitalhecht: "...3MP is good enough for a magazine cover, 6-8MP is good enough for a large-ish wall print and anything more than that is a bonus..."

Really? In which universe? Please put the crack pipe down and step away slowly...
(Also, please define "large-ish".)

Yeah ... I was going to comment on that one, too. 3MP for a magazine cover? Must be an awfully small magazine.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 20:35 UTC
In reply to:

Joe Ogiba: John Sculley (former Apple CEO 1983-1993 ) said today on Fox Business that the iPhone 8 will be the one to get since it will be the 10th Anniversary of the iPhone and Apple will give it many new features not on the iPhone 7 (4K 60p ?).
http://www.networkworld.com/article/3118681/ios/iphone-8-rumor-rollup-yes-already.html

When it comes to technology, he had and has no "insights" whatsoever. He's good at faking it though.

His ten years as Apple's CEO produced no significant products whatsoever and one product that was not only a dismal failure, his pushing the designers too hard and too far to get the product out resulted in several suicides. That product was the Newton.

Scully's decisions were responsible for:
— Apple's stock dropping some 80%, maybe more
— the firing of Steve Jobs (who was brought back ten years later to clean up Scully's mess)
— the horrible mistake of licensing Apple's OS to third party computer makers, who then went on to build absolutely terrible Mac OS machines that reflected poorly on the Apple brand
— and the termination of several hundred freelance creative people who, until Scully, were providing Apple and Steve Jobs with outstanding writing, design and support materials

I know. I was there.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 20:33 UTC
Total: 115, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »