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: 563, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (895 comments in total)
In reply to:

photoshack: Being that I'd used Canon (largest investment, lots of lenses), Sony A7S II, Fuji X100S I have always gone back to FF Canon bodies. I don't care about GPS but could see why travel guys would need it, I don't care about Wireless (I had it, found it clunky and too slow to actually use and chewed battery.) Occasionally I use a Camranger on the Canon for wireless previews, long exposure but really that is more of a toy.

So while people are slamming Canon for its sticking with DSLR form-factor using that old mirror and being "big", I really don't see the problem...the others cannot compare when you are looking for the results. Granted I have looked at Nikons with some envy, but to me they are the real competitor not mirrorless consumer cameras.

So this IV seems like a good upgrade for those who need those features, and the extra MP and ISO range is very good.

I have the Sony A6000 and love that it is small and light. But once I use an adapter and put heavier lenses on it, my hand hurts after a while as only a few of my fingers can grip the body. So the larger Canon 5D bodies are much more comfortable to hold and use with any lens that has significant weight.

The same would apply to the A7 bodies, but there is an optional larger grip for that model so you have small and larger options in the same camera.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 17:31 UTC
In reply to:

Morpho Hunter: Yawn. Does anyone really care about what Canon (and indeed Nikon) do anymore .. especially now that the MK II version of the Olympus OMD EM1 is about to be released .. with it's 40+MP (hand held) high resolution mode. Dunno .. guess there must still be a few die-hard Canon/Nikon guys out there.....:)

I have 3 Sony mirrorless APS-C cameras and they are certainly good enough for my personal photography and many of my assignments. I like the ergonomics of the Canons more and as an architectural photographer, I use full frame bodies, PC and TSE lenses (along with others.)

@Fujica... law of nature? View camera WA lenses use a graduated center filter that cut 2-3 stops.

My point about this sensor design is that if Canon can make a sensor that allows for non-telecentric lenses to work well, then there are more options for lens design... including smaller WA lenses that can be of a traditional non-retrofocus design. There has been steady improvement of sensors along these lines and this is another step.

This was possible with film cameras... look at the 35mm f2.8 lens of the Olympus XA full frame. It is tiny and is very close to the focal plane. Leica and other RF lenses are small but the Leica Ms require special FF sensors and digital correction to get acceptable results.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 17:14 UTC
In reply to:

Morpho Hunter: Yawn. Does anyone really care about what Canon (and indeed Nikon) do anymore .. especially now that the MK II version of the Olympus OMD EM1 is about to be released .. with it's 40+MP (hand held) high resolution mode. Dunno .. guess there must still be a few die-hard Canon/Nikon guys out there.....:)

Maybe Canon's approach is to hold off on moving from DSLRs to mirrorless until they can make some smaller lenses for the new cameras. This kind of sensor may allow for that. As a Sony mirrorless and Canon DSLR user, I still like using my Canons.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2016 at 02:25 UTC
In reply to:

AlanG: I can't understand why individuals want to be in the private funding business. If these companies and individuals won't put up their own money or can't find, friends, relatives, banks, or VC companies to risk their money on these ideas, maybe there is a reason.

Yes I know there are lots of people on Kickstarter asking for money. Why do people give it to them if the risk/reward ratio is poor or unknowable?

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2016 at 14:31 UTC

I can't understand why individuals want to be in the private funding business. If these companies and individuals won't put up their own money or can't find, friends, relatives, banks, or VC companies to risk their money on these ideas, maybe there is a reason.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2016 at 20:46 UTC as 50th comment | 2 replies

In the larger picture of technology, we're not innovating that much today... mostly just improving existing products. There is much less incentive for someone to replace their old flat panel tv with a new model than there was going from a b/w tv to color, or from washing dishes in a sink to having a dishwasher.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2016 at 16:05 UTC as 74th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Bart2016: Whats it matter. The photographer decided to give her photos for free and someone else is making a dollar of of it. Highsmith is not a good business woman giving it away for free to begin with. All of a sudden someone else is charging for it, Oh well. With as much time on the Earth as you have get over it and admit the error to begin with. If she thought her work had value she would have charged for it even $1 a image.

Bart2016... did you read the case? Highsmith is suing because other people got charged or threatened by Getty for images they had a right to use for free. She is not complaining that Getty took advantage of her, but of other people. And I suspect that Getty did this with other public domain images too.

I do agree that photographers hurt the profession by low balling or by giving away photos. As a long time photographer, former ASMP chapter president, former ASMP national director, and APA member, I could tell you countless examples.

Carol Highsmith got her start by photographing the restoration of the historic Willard Hotel in Washington DC for free... in order to publicize herself. Of course the hotel could have afforded to pay to hire a top architectural photographer for this.

She was not an established photographer at that time and several other architectural photographers in the region felt that was a non-professional thing to do that hurt the profession.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2016 at 03:26 UTC
In reply to:

AlanG: The article does not clearly explain the legal issues involved. ANd it could be much more complicated than you would think. I'm assuming that instead of infringement this is mostly about Getty presenting itself as the copyright owner. That violates the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

There are not many cases for precedent on that and it will be very interesting to see, because I have a suit pending trial on the DMCA also. We are looking for other examples and I'll see if we can contact Carol to learn from her.

If anyone else has a DMCA or similar copyright case, please get in touch with my attorney. (Listed at the end of this link:)

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-rights-of-photographers-to-images-used-in-the-real-estate-industry-need-to-be-protected-300128466.html

Yes Steve. I never expected a detailed explanation here. My lawyer is studying the case and the legal opinion of Judy Ginsburg that was linked in another post.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 21:08 UTC
In reply to:

Tariag: She didn't have much damage... Reputation? Hard to value...
Those who have had damage, are those who paid the licence to use pictures that should have been free.
Getty should refund them. Period.

Yes the case is complicated and I can't say that I am qualified to understand it or give an opinion... other than to say that many posts on this thread don't add to my knowledge.

My understanding is there have not been many DMCA claims so we have to see how this one goes.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 17:35 UTC
In reply to:

Tariag: She didn't have much damage... Reputation? Hard to value...
Those who have had damage, are those who paid the licence to use pictures that should have been free.
Getty should refund them. Period.

There are many off the cuff kind of posts here. It is a DMCA copyright claim.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 15:48 UTC
In reply to:

wildbild: What isn't mentioned in the article and what would be interesting to know is, if getty and the library have a contract that allows getty to distribute the photos and therefore charge a service fee. Getty may be ruthless, but may not be stupid.

Stolen images are not the issue. This is about Getty misrepresenting the copyright information of images and then trying to collect payment for images that they have no right to.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 14:54 UTC
In reply to:

Stephen McDonald: The question this raises, is how many other photographers have had their images pirated by this company? There may be several other avenues by which they acquire them. Is there any statute of limitations on making a claim against them? Suppose they've been collecting money for licensing some of your pictures for many years? At a certain point, would they essentially own them legally, because you didn't take action sooner? I would think that this issue would make web-searching services that look for places your photos are being used, increasingly popular.

I'm not a lawyer but this is some of what I understand from before and since engaging a lawyer for copyright infringement.

The image is considered copyrighted by the creator the moment it is made. Registering the image within 3 months of an infringement gives you additional rights to collect legal fees and statutory damages. The infringing party does not get the right to the image just because the infringed party was not aware of it and took no action. Establishing damages is another issue as are DCMA claims of copyright alteration, etc.

It gets very complicated. My case has not gone to trial yet and seemed cut and dry to me. But that is not the case as attorneys can find ways to challenge anything and drag it out. My attorney estimates that the other side has spent well over $100,000 on lawyers just doing research, letters to my lawyer, and the pre-trial motions, etc.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 01:44 UTC
In reply to:

Bart2016: Whats it matter. The photographer decided to give her photos for free and someone else is making a dollar of of it. Highsmith is not a good business woman giving it away for free to begin with. All of a sudden someone else is charging for it, Oh well. With as much time on the Earth as you have get over it and admit the error to begin with. If she thought her work had value she would have charged for it even $1 a image.

I think you miss the point. Getty is threatening suit against others for copyright violation of photos that they do not own.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 01:30 UTC

The article does not clearly explain the legal issues involved. ANd it could be much more complicated than you would think. I'm assuming that instead of infringement this is mostly about Getty presenting itself as the copyright owner. That violates the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

There are not many cases for precedent on that and it will be very interesting to see, because I have a suit pending trial on the DMCA also. We are looking for other examples and I'll see if we can contact Carol to learn from her.

If anyone else has a DMCA or similar copyright case, please get in touch with my attorney. (Listed at the end of this link:)

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-rights-of-photographers-to-images-used-in-the-real-estate-industry-need-to-be-protected-300128466.html

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 23:19 UTC as 61st comment | 2 replies
On article Zenmuse Z3 is DJI's first aerial zoom camera (53 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?

People have been flying various small cameras including the Sony RX100 models on various copters for some time. DJI and others have offered a range of copters and gimbals to accommodate almost any size and type of camera up to and including pro video such as Red cameras.

First with the Phantom series, then with the Inspire and now with the Matrice 600 they have integrated three different size unique integrated camera/gimbals targeted to a range of markets. I bet they know their markets well. That's not enough for you?

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 00:47 UTC
On article Zenmuse Z3 is DJI's first aerial zoom camera (53 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?

It would way more but that is not a big issue as the Inspire can easily lift more weight by trading off a little flight time. The Inspire has two other higher end (and heavier) M4/3rd camera systems - X5 and X5R. These have interchangeable lenses. So they do not need a 1" sensor.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 22:56 UTC
On article Second Time Around: Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II Review (288 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 (288 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 (53 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 (53 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
Total: 563, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »