HB1969

Lives in somewhere on earth (mostly)
Joined on Jul 27, 2012

Comments

Total: 492, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Yashica is teasing a comeback to the camera market (291 comments in total)
In reply to:

HB1969: definitely a film camera. at 0:06 you can see her winding the film to the next frame.

Hadn't thought of that. I'm not familiar enough with Yoshica cameras to pick if it's an antique

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2017 at 22:05 UTC
On article Yashica is teasing a comeback to the camera market (291 comments in total)

definitely a film camera. at 0:06 you can see her winding the film to the next frame.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2017 at 21:08 UTC as 61st comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Angrymagpie: Does this mean that we also need to use some sort of filter to take very bright subjects, say welding or smelting?

I think welding glass #11 is 14 stops, if memory serves.

Link | Posted on Sep 4, 2017 at 10:33 UTC
In reply to:

grock: So... i wasn't planning on shooting the eclipse so did absolutely no research/prep, but once it was going on, and I was in an area of near-totality, I figured, what the hell. Took a couple shots in live view. How much direct sun do you really need to expose your camera sensor/lenses to to really damage them?

also sun is low in the sky when I take shots of it so that makes a big difference

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2017 at 03:47 UTC
In reply to:

grock: So... i wasn't planning on shooting the eclipse so did absolutely no research/prep, but once it was going on, and I was in an area of near-totality, I figured, what the hell. Took a couple shots in live view. How much direct sun do you really need to expose your camera sensor/lenses to to really damage them?

Think of how long it takes a magnifying glass to start burning a piece of paper. The glass in the lens is doing the same thing, telephoto especially.
Having said that, I've taken shots of the sun where I've lifted the camera, composed and taken the shot (in live view) and then lowered it and it hasn't damaged my camera. Whole process takes <10sec and I was using wide angle lens.

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2017 at 03:39 UTC
In reply to:

RJeffB: As stated by Lensrentals-- an entertaining post; though perhaps not especially instructive. Clearly, net radiant energy from the sun is substantially reduced during a solar eclipse, and I know of various webcams whose field-of-view captures direct sun for an hour or more daily, without evidence of acute damage. Thus, I suspect that instances of acute camera (and eye) damage during eclipse viewing arise NOT during totality; and arguably could better be described simply as photographing the sun, likely with a telephoto lens.

I think it's preferable to look away BEFORE the "dimond ring" ends totality...other than that, I agree with your comments :)

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2017 at 03:28 UTC
In reply to:

Lees Channel: You'd think at least the Canon 600mm L series lens would have metal aperture blades.

Which is exactly what the lens elements are doing

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2017 at 03:23 UTC
In reply to:

Class A: My results:
Sony: 31
Nikon: 21
Canon: 20

I always partial to the warm style of Sony JPGs and it was good to see that confirmed through this blind test. However, much more interesting than OOC performance is how well and quickly one can tweak images until they look how one likes them the most.

Out-of-camera JPEG performance really should not influence any review score or anyone's preference of a camera. Most certainly not in this price league. As DL Cade put it in another article "Always shoot RAW". Note that "always" does not leave any room for some perceived benefits of using OOC JPGs, even if they existed.

BTW, some of the tallies people posted do not add up to 72, indicating a mistake in adding up the scores.

I guess that would depend on whether you scored each image set 1,2,3. If you didn't like any of them you could score all 1 or not give them a score at all.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2017 at 07:17 UTC

I've always thought that Canon had warmer skin tones (which I prefer) and Nikon had cooler skin tones...but the colours were the opposite way around in this test. Nikon was the winner for me.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2017 at 07:13 UTC as 9th comment
In reply to:

DuncanM1: Typical...DPR excludes the Pentax K-1.

this is not a dpr video. Read the description

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2017 at 04:32 UTC
In reply to:

pawn: I read that each sunspot is larger than earth. Based on the image (and my eyes), ISS is larger than a sunspot. Is this because ISS is much closer to us?

@ PeteQuad...I have to stand on chairs to look eye to eye with 10 year olds so you might have a point there ;-)

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 07:07 UTC
On article Shooting the solar eclipse at DPReview headquarters (58 comments in total)

Great work Rishi.
I'm on the other side of the world but here are some of my faves from flickr
https://www.flickr.com/photos/themagiccity/36582286731/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/22553111@N07/36678073546/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/83072274@N05/36728427715/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/brucetopher/36581106411/

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 07:06 UTC as 15th comment
On article Shooting the solar eclipse at DPReview headquarters (58 comments in total)
In reply to:

barrym1966: Cool but I can make an equally impressive orange crescent in Photoshop . Can't believe the amount of hype of photographing something that really isn't very interesting. I mean an eclipse is cool but the actual image is pretty dull

Partial eclipse would be more accurate rather than "not really an eclipse".
I've seen some amazing images of partial eclipses when terrestrial features are included in the image (eg mountains, buildings etc...)

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 06:42 UTC
In reply to:

Karroly: How much time does it take for the ISS to cross the solar disk ? As it is a 16 s video, recorded at 1,500 fps and played back at 30 fps I suppose, I guess this is something around 0.3 s.
Am I right ?

love calsky.com - it's a great resource

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 06:27 UTC
In reply to:

pawn: I read that each sunspot is larger than earth. Based on the image (and my eyes), ISS is larger than a sunspot. Is this because ISS is much closer to us?

Yes Pawn, it's because it's closer to us that it looks bigger. The same way you can block out the sun with your thumb held at arms length.
The ISS is actually about the length of a football field and orbiting us at 400km above the surface of the earth. The sun is 149 milion km away.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 06:20 UTC
In reply to:

Dan: Is it necessary to use an ND filter to protect a video camera (Sony FDR-AX100) if I want to record the eclipse? I don't really care about the before and after, but I want to capture the moment of totality, so in order to do that, I would need to have my camera pointed at the sun for a few minutes, and I don't want to damage it. It does have a built-in 3-stop ND filter, so I'm wondering if I need to add another filter to protect the sensor.

Don't use an ND filter during totality otherwise you won't see anything.
See Fred Espenak's (Mr Eclipse) guide...
http://www.mreclipse.com/SEphoto/SEphoto.html

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 10:22 UTC

There was a pro-photographer who posted a vid that you can never turn a $500 client into a $5000 client so the idea that you can turn someone who downloads your work for free into a paying client down the track is simply false. You might build a relationship but not one that will be financially fruitful in the future.
The second point is on altruism. Altruistic photographers who want to give away their photographs already have a means to do so with any number of photosharing sites by posting their images under creative commons or no licence.
Last point is directed to DPR...The author of this article is also the CEO of Upsplash so this isn't an "opinion piece", its advertising. This article should have been marked as sponsored content.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2017 at 22:58 UTC as 51st comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

HB1969: I've been looking at that photo of the eclipse on the boat and I can't, for the life of me, work out what that light on the horizon is. Was there a city in the distance? Was the sky edited in from a sunrise/set image? Is it lightning from a storm? Would lightning light up the whole horizon like that?

To me the sun looks quite high but that might be the wide angle shot that's making it look that way.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2017 at 12:23 UTC
In reply to:

dash2k8: Where would we be without such in-depth studies and experiments? ;) OK, I'm just having a touch of fun. Obviously a 50K camera is going to be better, this shouldn't have to be tested to be proven, but I do applaud the efforts that went into it.

Next up: a $100,000 Ferrari vs. a $5000 Whatever. On your mark, set, go!

I guess we'll both have to keep waiting do to a comparison ;)

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2017 at 01:48 UTC
In reply to:

Sdaniella: lol, egads!

i hate wasabi
or its milder alt-substitute, horse-radish

The trick is to avoid breathing in and out through your nose while eating it. That's were all the receptors are

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2017 at 00:58 UTC
Total: 492, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »