Pat Cullinan Jr

Pat Cullinan Jr

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Sep 21, 2010

Comments

Total: 931, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Exactly how hard or easy how is it to use manual lenses? Such lenses are usually described as "manual-focus," but aren't they "manual-aperture" as well? Do you lose the benefit of automatic diaphragm operation?

Can someone having experience with manual lenses as used with digital cameras itemize the steps required to meter, focus, and shoot? I have a notion that the sequence of steps must vary with the particular pairing of lens and camera. Am I right about that?

Do troubling "gotchas" lie in wait for people using a manual lens for the first time?

Tangentially, Ken Rockwell is all hell on adapters in his piece, "Lens Adapters: A very bad idea" (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/lens-adapters.htm).

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2016 at 02:36 UTC as 20th comment | 17 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: the Samsung NV10 (77 comments in total)

More cat pix, please. Dog too.

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2016 at 01:58 UTC as 27th comment
On article Updated: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV real-world sample gallery (485 comments in total)
In reply to:

peter zuehlke: like the wedding ring shot with the dog's paw :-)

Me too.

More dog photos.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2016 at 08:05 UTC
On article Updated: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV real-world sample gallery (485 comments in total)
In reply to:

cbphoto123: Nice photos. Great choice of lens (35 f 1.4L II) to get the most out of the sensor.

Check. I used a 35mm f/1.4 (Nikkor) for many years for 90% of my photography.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2016 at 08:04 UTC
On article Updated: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV real-world sample gallery (485 comments in total)
In reply to:

gbdz: Probably there is something terribly wrong with these pictures even though I think they look terrific. The color rendition –specially skin– is Canon at its best, on the spot.
I really like the 3-D feel that the smooth transition from highlights to shadows gives.
If this is what out-of-camera .jpgs look like, I have to think over the replacement for the 5DIII that I drowned in the ocean the other day. A Canon with real Canon lenses, no-nonsense functionality plus something I have known for decades now.
Big "Like".

Yes, some of them seem flat.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2016 at 08:02 UTC
On article Second Time Around: Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II Review (294 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sammy the Squirrel: Better than the old Canon G series of which I had three. My last was G14. twice as costly now.

Weeel, you gots ta promoat accaricy in this here DPR thing.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2016 at 07:09 UTC
On article Second Time Around: Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II Review (294 comments in total)
In reply to:

Streetutopia: Does anyone know how long the motor mechanisms in the lens last? $700-$900 for a camera that uses a motor seems risky--but I never see this issue mentioned in reviews.

Thank you!

>how long I will be able to use the camera

And when it fails, will you be able to find a competent service tech? If so, at a rational price?

I go back to days when people would take a broken toaster to a neighborhood repair shop. Today, we throw inkjet printers in the garbage.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2016 at 07:02 UTC

More dog photos. :)

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2016 at 01:18 UTC as 7th comment
On article Still solid: Fujifilm X-E2S Review (230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pat Cullinan Jr: "there are options out there that offer more resolution, or better autofocus, or an entirely different control philosophy."

Could anyone suggest an alternative camera then?

Thanks.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2016 at 07:33 UTC
On article Still solid: Fujifilm X-E2S Review (230 comments in total)

"there are options out there that offer more resolution, or better autofocus, or an entirely different control philosophy."

Could anyone suggest an alternative camera then?

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 08:53 UTC as 14th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Love Photography 888: I sure hope these products are sold with equivalency warning labels. LoL

Ha ha! A hit.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2016 at 04:14 UTC
In reply to:

Mathieu18: ISO is a relative illuminance. So ISO 100, f/8 will result in the same shutter speed across formats. But it's also true that smaller sensors collect less total light, so on a smaller sensor, more amplification is needed to achieve that same illumination, hence the appearance of additional noise from that amplification.

@Great Bustard

It's a hopeless task. I won't undertake it.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2016 at 04:14 UTC
In reply to:

Mathieu18: ISO is a relative illuminance. So ISO 100, f/8 will result in the same shutter speed across formats. But it's also true that smaller sensors collect less total light, so on a smaller sensor, more amplification is needed to achieve that same illumination, hence the appearance of additional noise from that amplification.

"Total light" is utterly incorrect physics — utterly, completely incorrect.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2016 at 09:04 UTC
In reply to:

AngularJS: What about endurance / MTBF?
http://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead

"HDD has much much higher TBW than SSD for sure." —Mike FL

Profitable insight. (TBW = terabytes written.)

Check out this backgrounder/plug by Intel —http://itpeernetwork.intel.com/ssd-endurance-what-does-it-mean-to-you/

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2016 at 12:06 UTC
In reply to:

AngularJS: What about endurance / MTBF?
http://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead

It's a tease.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2016 at 21:22 UTC
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: Any folks here remember the time when FAST glass was for capturing moments in really LOW light and not be obsessed with OOF Bokeh?

What? Don't tell me they're all retired! Noooo!

.

@matthew saville

You're right. Some people* buy a lens or a camera JUST BECAUSE IT'S AN ADMIRABLE PIECE OF ENGINEERING, but which they almost never use.

*I know such a one.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2016 at 02:30 UTC
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: Any folks here remember the time when FAST glass was for capturing moments in really LOW light and not be obsessed with OOF Bokeh?

What? Don't tell me they're all retired! Noooo!

.

"A face is a face, not just a single eye. "

Some faces are just a single nose.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2016 at 02:23 UTC
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: Any folks here remember the time when FAST glass was for capturing moments in really LOW light and not be obsessed with OOF Bokeh?

What? Don't tell me they're all retired! Noooo!

.

I raise an arthritic hand

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 06:29 UTC
In reply to:

Daniel4: Nikon should provide full resolution shots.

They never do.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 06:27 UTC
In reply to:

SVPhotography: Getty's business is playing the middle man. They license photos from photographers and sub-license them out to other people for a fee.

https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article_public.aspx?article_id=2719

So the big unanswered question is: Did Getty license these photos from a photo stealer or did Getty "find" these photos on their own.

Also she put these photos in the public domain.
http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/res/482_high.html

I am not a lawyer but it will be hard for her to sue for copyright violation after putting all her photos in the public domain.

This is not the first time that stock companies charge for public domain photos.
http://uk.pcmag.com/photo-editing-reviews/45646/opinion/stock-photos-will-drive-photoshop-use-into-the-ground

"stock companies charge for public domain photos"

How skeevy can people get?

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 06:20 UTC
Total: 931, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »