AlanG

Lives in United States Silver Spring, United States
Works as a Photographer
Has a website at www.goldsteinphoto.com
Joined on Mar 3, 2003

Comments

Total: 547, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Second Time Around: Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II Review (259 comments in total)
In reply to:

FuhTeng: No thanks, no EVF turns me off, but I'm happy it exists to continue to push Sony's RX100 family. Now about that RX100 with a touch-screen...

I really don't need a camera to fit in my pocket. I generally use the 16-50 along with the 55-200. I process in DXO and the images are very pleasing to me.

I shot these photos with those two lenses:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4adGwnht7w

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2016 at 00:45 UTC
On article Second Time Around: Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II Review (259 comments in total)
In reply to:

FuhTeng: No thanks, no EVF turns me off, but I'm happy it exists to continue to push Sony's RX100 family. Now about that RX100 with a touch-screen...

I like the left top side EVF in my Sony A6000. I don't see any problem going between that and my Canon 5D SLRs. Being left eyed might make a difference.

While these pocket size cameras are appealing, the A6000 is compact and light enough for me and offers a lot more at a lower price.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2016 at 21:52 UTC
On article Zenmuse Z3 is DJI's first aerial zoom camera (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

photo_rb: It's nice to see DJI do this but it is also a shame that one of the big camera makers cannot put out a lightweight camera module in either full frame or C sensor plus a small selection of lightweight lenses.

You need the stability of a gimbal even when shooting stills unless your shutter speed is 1/250th or higher. I have an APS still camera mounted on a servo controlled aiming platform that allows me to tilt and level the camera, so I know. A gimbal makes it much easier to aim the camera since the copter always moves slightly. The Inspire is so good I can get sharp stills at 1/2 second in mild wind. You will not build a system as good as this without spending a lot more money and many many hours of time designing, building, adjusting, testing.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 16:10 UTC
On article Zenmuse Z3 is DJI's first aerial zoom camera (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

photo_rb: It's nice to see DJI do this but it is also a shame that one of the big camera makers cannot put out a lightweight camera module in either full frame or C sensor plus a small selection of lightweight lenses.

FWIW I have been building multirotors for years.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 22:51 UTC
On article Zenmuse Z3 is DJI's first aerial zoom camera (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

photo_rb: It's nice to see DJI do this but it is also a shame that one of the big camera makers cannot put out a lightweight camera module in either full frame or C sensor plus a small selection of lightweight lenses.

No offense, but it doesn't seem like you have much flying experience or overall knowledge about multirotors.

If you want to use a GF7 you'd need a pretty large machine and appropriate gimbal... not one made for a GoPro. Setting up a system is complicated and not usually as good as a out of box solution... especially for video transmission and overall stability. (The design of the Inspire and its high end flight controller are better than anything you are likely to build anywhere near that price.)

If you are determined to shoot using M4/3rds get the Inspire with X5 camera or get a Yuneec Tornado H920 with CG04 gimbal/camera.

http://www.yuneec.com/Tornado-CGO4

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2016 at 18:41 UTC
On article Zenmuse Z3 is DJI's first aerial zoom camera (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

photo_rb: It's nice to see DJI do this but it is also a shame that one of the big camera makers cannot put out a lightweight camera module in either full frame or C sensor plus a small selection of lightweight lenses.

Some may have a need for higher resolution in still photos thus may want FF or the Hassleblad 50MP. However 24MP APS cameras do a good job and are lighter. (Sony A7 is fairly light... depending on lens.)

For video, this small camera is pretty good and is mostly limited by the processing compression, not so much by the lens and sensor. The next step is the M4/3rds Inspire X5 and X5 Raw cameras. Going beyond that gets into high end larger copter setups.

Keep in mind that the heavier the camera, the heavier the gimbal. And will that heavier gimbal be as responsive and as smooth as a small gimbal that moves much less mass? The ideal is to have the entire platform... copter, gimbal, camera, battery as light as possible in order to have the most nimble and responsive flying experience.... much like a jet fighter can out maneuver a large transport plane. On the other hand windy conditions affect various copters differently.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2016 at 16:15 UTC
In reply to:

justmeMN: Our (USA) suburban City Council is very supportive of drones. They like their usage for construction project proposals, and construction project updates. I suspect that a system like this would be good for that type of commercial usage. When you are dealing with multi-million dollar projects, a $26,000 drone would be just a drop in the financial bucket. In the long run, It's probably cheaper than repeatedly doing aerial photography by plane too.

A lot of my aerial photography is done between 10 and 50 feet off the ground. You can't do that with a real copter in general and if you tried you'd be blowing trees, dust, water... whatever is below you. The small size and maneuverability means I can also fly for video and stills in ways that would be impossible with a copter.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2016 at 03:05 UTC
On article Zenmuse Z3 is DJI's first aerial zoom camera (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

LeonT: Is the Sony QX-1 adaptable? Add a 14mm, 20mm or whatever lens you have instead of this option. Maybe a E-mount powerzoom?

DJI also has an M4/3rd system for the Inspire. The Sony module would be possible on another platform using off the shelf gimbals but I use a Sony A5000 which is light and inexpensive. It's nice to have an LCD when setting up before takeoff. I use the 16-50 power zoom and can zoom it remotely while flying. I use that mostly for shooting stills.

One advantage of the Inspire multirotor and this small sensor camera is that it is incredibly stable and locked in. I get sharp still images at 1/2 second. Using a larger camera on the Inspire or on another platform, while technically better may not give as good a result at slow shutter speeds.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2016 at 03:21 UTC
On article Zenmuse Z3 is DJI's first aerial zoom camera (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

BostonC: 12MP 1/2.3-inch Sony sensor??
why can't they put something like the sensors and lenses such as in RX100IV, LX100 on board?

deleted

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2016 at 03:20 UTC
On article Zenmuse Z3 is DJI's first aerial zoom camera (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

maxnimo: So all those famous Hero cameras don't have any zoom? (Shaking my head in disbelief)

Some Heros have settings for three fields of view for video. They can do this because there are enough pixels on the sensor. For stills you can only get 12mp at the widest angle.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 22:01 UTC
In reply to:

Denis of Whidbey Island: Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems that a system using an A7RII could be cobbled together for about half the price and you'd be able to change lenses.

You can buy a $500 copter complete with everything you need to take 12MP stills using a small sensor stabilized camera. Then there are all kinds of alternatives for custom built, almost ready to fly, and ready to fly systems at many sizes and price points.

This is simply another one. But what is special about what DJI has been doing with the Phantom, Inspire and now the Matrice 600 is integrate the camera, stabilizer, copter, radio, software, hi def live streaming into a out of the box solution that works well, requires minimal setup, and is affordable compared to comparable systems.

I have built 6 multirotors in the past 4 years and also bought an Inspire that worked perfectly right out of the box. I

In my case the Inspire is way better and ultimately cheaper than the two similar size Tarot copters that I built for still (APS format) and video work.

If the Inspire had its M4/3rds camera a year ago I would not have bothered building a copter to shoot stills with my Sony APS.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 20:00 UTC
In reply to:

Flashback: "I'm just ringing to get an insurance quote on my $25,999 Hasselblad drone"

"Okay thanks anyway"

There are companies that insure the UAS itself and liability.

http://www.traversaviation.com/uav-drone-insurance.html?gclid=Cj0KEQjwzZe8BRDguN3cmOr4_dgBEiQAijjVFvPmjuSab6CIW6D8FtEMY9AhSAMpXXFUUqD5WW5AXK0aAmNQ8P8HAQ

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 19:47 UTC
In reply to:

Niala2: What is the user-wiseness know-how explanation for why out if 4(!) rubber feet half are not supposed to touch the ground, but instead device will woble on the middle, hard, sliding metal.. ?

Maybe consider that many other multirotors have similar landing gear (I have several like that) and that DJI has been building large and small machines for quite a while now.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 16:31 UTC

If you don't understand the market for this system, or the technology, why comment?

“It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt” Mark Twain

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 16:26 UTC as 10th comment

This is is a premium product using a high end still camera along with a copter from the world's largest small UAS manufacturer and they took photos of an ugly industrial site?

Full circle...Hasselblad started out as an aerial camera company.

FWIW calling this a "long range drone" is incorrect and misleading.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 00:54 UTC as 36th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Slugsworth: I've been a multiple winner of NG's "Your shot/daily winner" and can say I have never been asked to supply a RAW file, of which I would have obliged no problem. If they had requested RAW files I'm certain that many submissions would have been found out to be greatly "enhanced".

@MyReality... you can't eat a photo credit.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 01:39 UTC
In reply to:

Slugsworth: I've been a multiple winner of NG's "Your shot/daily winner" and can say I have never been asked to supply a RAW file, of which I would have obliged no problem. If they had requested RAW files I'm certain that many submissions would have been found out to be greatly "enhanced".

National Geographic is replacing the paycheck for your photos with a virtual pat on the back.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 23:12 UTC
In reply to:

Slugsworth: I've been a multiple winner of NG's "Your shot/daily winner" and can say I have never been asked to supply a RAW file, of which I would have obliged no problem. If they had requested RAW files I'm certain that many submissions would have been found out to be greatly "enhanced".

I just looked at the terms and conditions on Nat Geo's "Your Shot" site. You agree to let Nat Geo publish and use your photos for anything without compensation.

National Geographic (Fox - Rupert Murdock) can certainly afford to pay for photographs. Why would any photographer undermine the industry by doing this?

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 21:50 UTC
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (802 comments in total)

I think a big selling point of this camera is that it looks way different than DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. So photographers can distinguish themselves by carrying one.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 15:47 UTC as 2nd comment

Where did this film come from? It seems to me if there was anything good on the rolls the photographer who made the photos would have processed it. On the other hand why would anyone shoot so much and not process it?

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2016 at 20:59 UTC as 63rd comment | 3 replies
Total: 547, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »