Timur Born

Timur Born

Lives in Germany Germany
Joined on Dec 9, 2011

Comments

Total: 210, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

gonzalu: Geesh, how dangerous is it to take pictures on Safari? Ever gone to Antartica on a photo expedition? Likely dangerous. How about climbing Everest?

I cross the street in NYC every day. Not dead yet. I stand on an open platform on the NYC subway every day. Now THAT is far more dangerous.

Can we just dial back the anxiety a bit? Thank you!

Yeah, and dead bodies lying around are already counted as part of the "environmental and waste" problem around Mt. Everest. Go figure.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2017 at 14:20 UTC

In 2015 Deutsche Bahn even spent money on a video campaign. One reason being 147 people dying on railways in 2014, including kids doing selfies or kids climbing around poles and trains.

https://youtu.be/N8Zwf3dol_c

In the comments of that video some German train-drivers post their experiences.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2017 at 08:50 UTC as 32nd comment
In reply to:

Jim Evidon: It's a good image. Train tracks are hazardous? Of course they are. Perhaps we should start criticizing war correspondents and photojournalists for exposing themselves to shell fire. Maybe matadors should stop exposing themselves to the bull. Methinks there is a little too much PC going about.

I can tell you that much: During the last years in Germany we had *several* cases of young girls (usually between 15 - 17) dying while doing private photos on railways. Usually in some "best friends forever" fashion where the aesthetics of a "beautiful" railway image was preferred to the boring background of a home-garden. Kids are easily impressed by such aesthetics, even more so when "A world leader in geography, cartography and exploration" promotes them in a positive light (pun intended).

In 2015 Deutsche Bahn even spent money on a video campaign. One reason being 147 people dying on railways in 2014, including kids doing selfies.

https://youtu.be/N8Zwf3dol_c

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2017 at 08:47 UTC
In reply to:

fatdeeman: Infinitely safer than standing in any road, as long as you have common sense.

Not saying it was a good idea to publish it but if you're stupid enough to let a vehicle that has all the predictability of something running on fixed rails and that can be heard from a mile away then I think that says more about you.

But, but... National Geographic shows us that it's okay to take cool snapshots on railways. And I mean, they are a serious institution calling themselves "A world leader in geography, cartography and exploration". If they tell us it's ok, then it surely is ok?!

Those liberal (as in "liberation"?) trolls just want to turn us into dispirited and obedient sheep with they stupid talk about dangers. Oh wait, or wasn't that the other side who tries to fan fear to gain more control over the masses? Now I am confused...

Or maybe National Geographic just needs to put a sub-text under their more adventurous images: "Do not try at home!" ;)

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 22:29 UTC
In reply to:

gonzalu: Geesh, how dangerous is it to take pictures on Safari? Ever gone to Antartica on a photo expedition? Likely dangerous. How about climbing Everest?

I cross the street in NYC every day. Not dead yet. I stand on an open platform on the NYC subway every day. Now THAT is far more dangerous.

Can we just dial back the anxiety a bit? Thank you!

I also didn't see any actual kids being run over by cars. For some inexplicable reason I still tell my kids that it's not okay to just run over the street without looking, even when they see other kids do it. Must be based on the same phoniness that makes me put away medications where they hopefully cannot reach them too easily. Very likely, because I have never seen actual kids swallow those. Yep, definitively phony.

On the other hand I let them climb stuff and tell them not to be sissies for negligible reasons. Hm, must be that "keep a balance" kind of thing where you try not to be one or the other extreme.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 22:15 UTC
In reply to:

Jim Evidon: It's a good image. Train tracks are hazardous? Of course they are. Perhaps we should start criticizing war correspondents and photojournalists for exposing themselves to shell fire. Maybe matadors should stop exposing themselves to the bull. Methinks there is a little too much PC going about.

Well, you do realize that the critique is not about the image itself, but about the role-model being presented. Some people have a problem with their kids (and adults with kid brain power) to be told by National Geographic that this is a normal thing to do.

"Hey, you get great photos out of this. Go and try it yourself. Blame yourself if you get run-over, we are not responsible for that. Thank you very much."

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 22:11 UTC
In reply to:

gonzalu: Geesh, how dangerous is it to take pictures on Safari? Ever gone to Antartica on a photo expedition? Likely dangerous. How about climbing Everest?

I cross the street in NYC every day. Not dead yet. I stand on an open platform on the NYC subway every day. Now THAT is far more dangerous.

Can we just dial back the anxiety a bit? Thank you!

Erm, no. I will try to keep stupid people and kids from following a trend like sheep. That doesn't mean I discourage the courageous from stepping out of the norm. I may discourage trend media from declaring every brave stupidity out there as norm to follow, though.

But since we are now down to the level of personal discrediting the basis for reasonable discussion has already been left.

By the way: Every nutjob getting themselves killed for profane indulgence is one person less to compete with for limited natural resources. So go along. Meanwhile I will try to teach my kids to be courageous and innovative without getting killed by following short-lived social media hypes just for the sake of it. Most photos coming out of that experience are rather bland anyway.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 17:23 UTC
In reply to:

gonzalu: Geesh, how dangerous is it to take pictures on Safari? Ever gone to Antartica on a photo expedition? Likely dangerous. How about climbing Everest?

I cross the street in NYC every day. Not dead yet. I stand on an open platform on the NYC subway every day. Now THAT is far more dangerous.

Can we just dial back the anxiety a bit? Thank you!

Without any preparations it takes me a 5 minute walk to risk my life on an active train track for the sole gain of posting a selfie on some social media outlet.

Now let's go on a Safari or Antarctica on a whim. Meet me there in 10 minutes or so to take a group selfie? Assuming that you really start preparations for that trip now and manage to get there within 1-2 weeks, you would likely only meet other people as properly prepared and conscious about the dangers as yourself.

And why do you stand on that subway platform, why not on the tracks? I mean, you would hear the train soon enough to jump to the side, wouldn't you. And you could take many cool selfies with the people standing around you. Go take some risk for the fun of it. Don't be wimpy, dial back the anxiety.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 15:07 UTC
In reply to:

Jim Evidon: It's a good image. Train tracks are hazardous? Of course they are. Perhaps we should start criticizing war correspondents and photojournalists for exposing themselves to shell fire. Maybe matadors should stop exposing themselves to the bull. Methinks there is a little too much PC going about.

War correspondents don't inspire kids to go to war zones for doing selfies. It is a question of "obstacles" people have to overcome when they try to copy an activity. Putting your *ss at high danger on an active railroad track is easy, even for school kids, going to war or a bull fight is not.

It is also a question of what you promote as "normal" recreational activities over broadly receives channels.

That is not even taking into account legal concerns about walking around on high speed transportation facilities.

And train drivers also really do not like running people to death while on their work shift. Show some respect to their profession.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 10:46 UTC
In reply to:

Timur Born: So the optics are good, but in the past I wasn't convinced by the mechanics and electronics of Tamron lenses. It's 1000 EUR less than the Nikon, but only 80 EUR less than the Canon. So it seems like a good idea to wait for prices to come down a bit anyway.

Amazon Germany is selling the Canon L for EUR 1.718,00. It's out of stock, though.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2017 at 01:27 UTC
In reply to:

Timur Born: So the optics are good, but in the past I wasn't convinced by the mechanics and electronics of Tamron lenses. It's 1000 EUR less than the Nikon, but only 80 EUR less than the Canon. So it seems like a good idea to wait for prices to come down a bit anyway.

Unfortunately I am a Nikon user. ;)

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2017 at 21:43 UTC
In reply to:

Timur Born: So the optics are good, but in the past I wasn't convinced by the mechanics and electronics of Tamron lenses. It's 1000 EUR less than the Nikon, but only 80 EUR less than the Canon. So it seems like a good idea to wait for prices to come down a bit anyway.

Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II USM
54 Angebote: 1.639,99 € - 2.748,00 €

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8E FL ED VR
33 Angebote: 2.595,01 € - 3.179,00 €

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 G ED VR II
30 Angebote: 2.079,00 € - 2.866,94 €

Tamron SP 70-200mm f2.8 Di VC USD G2
54 Angebote: 1.569,00 € - 1.999,00 €

Tamron SP 70-200mm f2.8 Di VC USD
82 Angebote: 889,99 € - 1.999,00 €

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2017 at 11:25 UTC

So the optics are good, but in the past I wasn't convinced by the mechanics and electronics of Tamron lenses. It's 1000 EUR less than the Nikon, but only 80 EUR less than the Canon. So it seems like a good idea to wait for prices to come down a bit anyway.

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2017 at 23:21 UTC as 11th comment | 8 replies
On photo Steep Thrill in the Song Titles- Cheap Thrills challenge (4 comments in total)
In reply to:

lickity split: Great shot , that rider gotta have some set of balls...

Erm, isn't this a plastic figure? It's not like you cannot see the steel-bars holding the whole thing (bike and puppet). ;)

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 16:58 UTC
On photo Steep Thrill in the Song Titles- Cheap Thrills challenge (4 comments in total)

-

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 16:57 UTC as 1st comment

Great video. Thanks.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 15:22 UTC as 16th comment
In reply to:

Dave Oddie: We've "reached out" to Olympus for comment.

Ugh! How about some plain English? We have asked Olympus for comment. Or: We have asked Olympus to comment.

I don't care about original meanings, because in a global digital world there can be new meanings. When you "ask" someone for a comment it somewhat implies that you were in actual contact with that someone and that your request was processed. But that is not necessarily what is happening here.

Instead some American review web-site likely just sent an e-mail to some Japanese camera manufacturer, *hoping* to get any answer. No one knows if said e-mail has been processed/recognized at all, and even then it's unknown if any answers will be given. This sound quite like "reaching out" to me, as in "Hey, we need some more information on this, could you lend us a hand?"

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 10:13 UTC
In reply to:

EwanMC: People get a grip, this is breakthrough in super capacitor tech is from the University of Central Florida in the US of A, not some Borat University of Kazakhstan ... this might be why DPreview takes it seriously ... seriously people. 🤦

It's not like they didn't know how to bomb 100k people into a burning death before dropping atomic bombs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo

But the psychological effect of achieving the same goal with only *one* bomb instead of hundreds and thousands likely was more profound.

Watch: The fog of War.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 07:37 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1378 comments in total)

Does it really track faces and eyes while "Track"ing mode is enabled, not just in standard AF-C/S modes? Or does it just draw a big box like older models did once tracking was enabled?

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 15:42 UTC as 309th comment
On article LensRentals tests the Nikon 70-200mm F2.8 FL ED (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aroart: I'm suprised Nikon would charge so much especially with Sigma, Tamron, Tokina have been stepping up lately and making high quality lenses ... I always thought that advancements in tech make things less expensive, apparently camera companies haven't been given the memo..

Frankly, the build (as in physical) quality of Tamron lenses has kept me from buying a 70-200/2.8. I did comparisons with both Nikon and Sigma versions and both very superior concerning zooming and focus actions. On top of that the Tamron's cause electronic interference noise with (at least) Nikon sensors, which can be problematic for high ISO shooters such as myself.

With my Tamron 24-70/2.8 I live with the compromises, but had to check 4 lenses to find one where the mechanical weaknesses were in parts that I could live better with compared to what the other units offered. And then I had it serviced to improve the optical culprits.

There is no free lunch or lens.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 14:05 UTC
Total: 210, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »