ecka84

ecka84

Lives in Lithuania Lithuania
Joined on Sep 18, 2009

Comments

Total: 1792, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Shooting Greenland in Winter Part 3: Familiar Places (52 comments in total)
In reply to:

Richard in UK: “but had commitments to sponsors, and thus had to try my skill at shooting non-nature scenes that they had asked for.” Yes, the absence of commitment to the subject is all too clear (shame, because that was a real opportunity).

“I took advantage of the situation and of the white conditions to take some surreal images..” Erez – please read a book about surrealism.

“and managed to find some beautiful icebergs surrounded by frozen sea ice, which added a lot to the images.” Well, those ‘beautiful icebergs’ are the polar icecap melting, and depict the loss of ancient habitat for all kinds of wildlife.

I hope that the cultural discussion about climate change might someday become the subject of your photography. Meanwhile we are grateful for the work of real landscape photographers working in the arctic like Camille Seaman, Timo Lieber and Diane Tuft.

Stop living in the world of pretty pictures, stop trying to make everything beautiful. You have skills, use them to make meaningful images.

@Richard in UK
Don't you think that, quite possibly, such photos will be all that is left of it?
I say we should take more pictures while we can :)

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2018 at 17:48 UTC
In reply to:

ChapelThrill23: I would love to see Sigma make small f/2 or f/2.8 primes for full frame E-mount cameras. A big part of the appeal of mirrorless for me is the lower bulk and lighter bodies but having a huge lens gets rid of that advantage. I love the size of the f/2.8 APS-C 60mm SIgma and would love a similar full frame approach. For instance something like the tiny Zeiss 35 2.8 for half the price would be great.

The small and cheap Sigma F2.8 DN crop primes seem to be quite popular. That 20F1.4Art is very "sexy", but I don't really need F1.4 for 20mm (which must be a dream astro lens). And I don't really need a 24F2.8. Actually a 24F1.4 makes a lot more sense to me. Some are using the 19F2.8 DN on A7# (must be as desperate as I am), despite its vignetting.
I think that 40F2 would be very nice as well. Like one of those old Minoltas (Rokkor). OK, fine:), I could live with 40F1.4 if it's smaller than the 35F1.4Art.
It seems like the market is starving for small modern normal FL primes (40-60mm). I had the old Sigma 50F1.4EX and it was beautiful. But its focus shift was killing me (because I often shot F4+), so I've sold it. And then there was nothing else special in Canon world, up until the 40 pancake and the nifty 50 STM were born. The new 50F1.4Art is really impressive, but it is 8 times the price and 5 times the weight, while the ancient optics of the nifty 50 are still hard to beat at F4+.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2018 at 14:20 UTC
In reply to:

ChapelThrill23: I would love to see Sigma make small f/2 or f/2.8 primes for full frame E-mount cameras. A big part of the appeal of mirrorless for me is the lower bulk and lighter bodies but having a huge lens gets rid of that advantage. I love the size of the f/2.8 APS-C 60mm SIgma and would love a similar full frame approach. For instance something like the tiny Zeiss 35 2.8 for half the price would be great.

Some small wide F2.8-F4 (cheap) primes would make me very happy.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2018 at 21:48 UTC
In reply to:

ArthurS: Looks to me like a solution in search of a problem. I use Lightroon a LOT, and I've never felt the need for an "editing console". You can speed your Lightroom use up a lot by learning the keyboard shortcuts. And you don't always have to use a mouse to drag the sliders around, -you can enter numbers directly or you can use the up/down arrow keys to change the values. You can use the tab key to move the cursor from the number entry box of one slider to another, and shift+tab to move back. Are there that many people out there who can't efficiently use a keyboard and a mouse (and are easily separated from their money)?

But I didn't dismiss the convenience of having some programmable dials and wheels for image editing. I just think that the implementation could have been much better, if they'd put them on a full-fledged keyboard. My point is that this Loupedeck is just like the Apple mouse - good idea, but bad design.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2018 at 23:54 UTC
In reply to:

ArthurS: Looks to me like a solution in search of a problem. I use Lightroon a LOT, and I've never felt the need for an "editing console". You can speed your Lightroom use up a lot by learning the keyboard shortcuts. And you don't always have to use a mouse to drag the sliders around, -you can enter numbers directly or you can use the up/down arrow keys to change the values. You can use the tab key to move the cursor from the number entry box of one slider to another, and shift+tab to move back. Are there that many people out there who can't efficiently use a keyboard and a mouse (and are easily separated from their money)?

But when you look at the modern Apple mouse, you understand that those "experts" were right and Apple can't even make a proper mouse :). Just like 35 years ago.
I don't want two keyboards (a keyboard and a loupedeck). It's a stupid design. I want those dials on a single fully functional keyboard. And it should be wireless, backlit and cost $150 or less.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2018 at 23:58 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Why not make a proper keyboard with some extra controls for image editing? This thing doesn't replace the keyboard so I'd have to use both and those duplicated buttons are not really necessary. I can see the precision benefit of turning a physical dial instead of moving a slider with my mouse, but it's a large wired control board of very limited use, that costs like two or three high quality wireless keyboards. Which is a deal-breaker.

.. and for that money it's not even wireless. Can't you see that it is lacking many essential control buttons, so you have to switch between it and a keyboard constantly? This product may seem interesting for people unaware of keyboard shortcuts. I'd be a fool to trade 90% of the functionality (that I'm already used to) for some conveniently programmed dials (with iffy increment steppings).
"keyboard with a pretty dress on is no better than a chicklet type keyboard of an average laptop" - Are you sure about that? :) Those Loupdeck keys seem to be much worse, like the crappy ones from Apple.
Is it backlit?

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2018 at 19:15 UTC
On article Fujifilm GF 45mm F2.8 R WR sample gallery (194 comments in total)
In reply to:

108: Unless one is a pro or a wealthy amateur I can't see why any "standard" enthusiast would buy this over a good FF

@108
You are crazy! :))

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2018 at 17:03 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Why not make a proper keyboard with some extra controls for image editing? This thing doesn't replace the keyboard so I'd have to use both and those duplicated buttons are not really necessary. I can see the precision benefit of turning a physical dial instead of moving a slider with my mouse, but it's a large wired control board of very limited use, that costs like two or three high quality wireless keyboards. Which is a deal-breaker.

Still, it's a large wired board of very limited use that doesn't replace the keyboard functionality. Just look at this beauty https://www.google.com/search?q=logitech+craft+keyboard&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiiy9WZ2eLbAhWlQJoKHcx4D_IQ_AUICigB&biw=2639&bih=2027

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2018 at 16:50 UTC
On article Fujifilm GF 45mm F2.8 R WR sample gallery (194 comments in total)
In reply to:

108: Unless one is a pro or a wealthy amateur I can't see why any "standard" enthusiast would buy this over a good FF

Because it's true. 50% more quality for 5 times the price is unreasonable. I'm trying to be self-critical here :). Limited lens selection isn't permanent and the price should drop with time. I'm not going to buy three different camera systems, just yet :). But when the time comes for medium format, I won't be keeping my FF system(s) for snapshots. Another thing is that maybe (soon, I hope) the real 645 (60x45) mirrorless systems will come to be. And that sensor size would make a much bigger difference than current 44x33 pseudo-MF. Besides, many FF lenses have big enough image circle for medium format. I'm just saying that there's no reason for megalophobia apoplexy :).
And communism is about not having more than you need, while those who want to have a reason for needing more, are terminated. Which makes it a degeneratively stupid and self-destructive system/ideology, that's stuck in the heads of a half of world's population.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2018 at 16:28 UTC
In reply to:

ArthurS: Looks to me like a solution in search of a problem. I use Lightroon a LOT, and I've never felt the need for an "editing console". You can speed your Lightroom use up a lot by learning the keyboard shortcuts. And you don't always have to use a mouse to drag the sliders around, -you can enter numbers directly or you can use the up/down arrow keys to change the values. You can use the tab key to move the cursor from the number entry box of one slider to another, and shift+tab to move back. Are there that many people out there who can't efficiently use a keyboard and a mouse (and are easily separated from their money)?

"a solution in search of a problem" - Exactly!

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2018 at 15:32 UTC

Why not make a proper keyboard with some extra controls for image editing? This thing doesn't replace the keyboard so I'd have to use both and those duplicated buttons are not really necessary. I can see the precision benefit of turning a physical dial instead of moving a slider with my mouse, but it's a large wired control board of very limited use, that costs like two or three high quality wireless keyboards. Which is a deal-breaker.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2018 at 15:30 UTC as 22nd comment | 11 replies
On article Fujifilm GF 45mm F2.8 R WR sample gallery (194 comments in total)
In reply to:

108: Unless one is a pro or a wealthy amateur I can't see why any "standard" enthusiast would buy this over a good FF

@DarnGoodPhotos
"Why would anyone spend FF money when you can get good APSC for less."?
Why would anyone spend APS-C money when you can get good 1" for less.
Why would anyone spend 1" money when you can get good 1/2.3" for less.
Why would anyone spend 1/2.3" money when you can get good phone ...
Why? - Because I'm not blind and I want better image quality.

@panther fan
Well, professionals can have all the cameras they want. It's their business investment. But for me it's rather a waste of money. Maybe I could justify having two or three same format bodies though (If I had too much money). Let's say A7III, A7RIII, A7SIII, or three different brand systems because of their unique lens options and features, like D850+28F1.4E+300F4E'PF+... , 5D4/5DsR+11-24L+85F1.2L+MP-E65Macro+TS-E17/50/90/135L Macro+... and A7III with some small lenses and adapters. I could buy the GFX, but it's just unreasonably expensive with very limited modern lens options. While for FF I can rent whatever I want.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2018 at 12:35 UTC
On article Fujifilm GF 45mm F2.8 R WR sample gallery (194 comments in total)
In reply to:

108: Unless one is a pro or a wealthy amateur I can't see why any "standard" enthusiast would buy this over a good FF

Then why are they making it sound like they have no use for that much quality at all? Even if they could have it for free. It seems like Fuji's "APS-C - smaller, but more than enough" propaganda is backfiring.
I agree that we don't need medium format for snapshots. But I just don't need snapshots. Perhaps for most people that's all they are shooting 90% of the time. But who wants to carry a whole extra camera system just for those few special moments (which often happen unpredictably anyways)? I don't get it. Why would I (a non-professional) have a special (cheaper) camera for shooting crappy images and a good one for the "keepers"? That makes no logical sense. Money is an important factor and that's why I'd rather buy the best tool I can afford, than a bunch of toys for snaps.
My question is (rhetorical, of course) - why come here and preach this kind of humility, instead of exploring the endless horizons of photography and its technological potential? Which is sad (communism level).

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2018 at 21:50 UTC
On article Fujifilm GF 45mm F2.8 R WR sample gallery (194 comments in total)
In reply to:

108: Unless one is a pro or a wealthy amateur I can't see why any "standard" enthusiast would buy this over a good FF

"what do you need such an IQ for ?"
For myself, of course :) ... to enjoy the beauty of it. And I feel sorry for those who can't comprehend it.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2018 at 19:30 UTC

I wonder when DPR will produce their own first digital camera :)

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2018 at 10:04 UTC as 8th comment
On article Hasselblad XCD 21mm sample gallery (129 comments in total)
In reply to:

Indohydra: This is an interesting camera. But frankly, these kinds of "sample galleries" do not allow anyone to understand anything. It is not the execution. The pictures are fine. It is the whole concept of " sample galleries" viewed on a computer monitor. They all look fine even to a trained eye. Anyone who claims to see the difference is a Trump supporter.

I would like to see DPR compare (in some way that we can appreciate) a Sony A7R FF at 42MP with a Hasselblad medium format which comes in at 50MP (which will no doubt become over 100MP soon enough). Sony, after all, is going to be popping out their full frame to over 100MP at around the same time. So, I would like to know from DPR what the useful difference is between FF 50/100MP and MF 50/100MP in principle. I don't care about the brand.

First, smaller sensor requires sharper lenses just to catch up with larger sensor and less sharp lenses. The results of putting the same Otus lens on the X1D might surprise you.
Second, color bit-depth isn't about sharpness, or lenses, or even pixel-peeping.
Third, if you don't need a better sensor, it doesn't mean that the sensor in your current camera is just as good. And the biggest reason why this "medium" format is not much sharper than FF, is that it is not much larger than FF. However, the bit-depth is an entirely different quality dimension. It's just like the difference between 8-bit JPEG and 14-bit RAW, only here it is 14-bit RAW vs 16-bit RAW. Or maybe you see no difference between JPEG and RAW either?
If you put Fuji lenses on X1D, then you will only have the electronic shutter.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2018 at 09:38 UTC
In reply to:

Mortal Lion: Wow 1970ties tech. Did it have to come by donkey over the silk trail?

Who cares ...

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2018 at 19:57 UTC
In reply to:

Mortal Lion: Wow 1970ties tech. Did it have to come by donkey over the silk trail?

No other hand, same hand, only different F-number.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2018 at 19:00 UTC
In reply to:

caravan: Will any of these ever be used to capture images ?

These are something to take pictures of :)

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2018 at 18:19 UTC
In reply to:

airforce1: As a possible alternative shopping choice, Sigma has 2 well reviewed AF lenses for the Emount:

30mm 2.4 Emount lens for $169

https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-30mm-mount-Cameras-Black/dp/B00BQXL5CM/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1529023920&sr=8-7&keywords=sigma+e+mount+30mm+1.4&dpID=31y5%252Bgw-SHL&preST=_SX300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

Also 30mm 1.4 lens $339:

https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-30mm-F1-4-Contemporary-Lens/dp/B01C3SCKI6/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1529023920&sr=8-4&keywords=sigma+e+mount+30mm+1.4&dpID=516%252BgEjcMNL&preST=_SX300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

Even F1.4 and F1.2 are not that fast for APS-C primes. They are like F2.2 and F1.8 on FF.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2018 at 16:36 UTC
Total: 1792, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »