ThomasSwitzerland

ThomasSwitzerland

Lives in Switzerland Bern, Switzerland
Works as a Technical Projects
Joined on Mar 28, 2012
About me:

Like to take pictures as a hobby. Use both film and a variety of digital cameras accumulated over the years. Prefer the natural direct way with a minimum of post processing.

Comments

Total: 195, showing: 181 – 195
« First‹ Previous78910Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ThomasSwitzerland: Interesting corporate story

I sold all my Olympus digital cameras a year ago, but kept the Pro lenses in the shelf. The color, sharpness and contrast in total is - in my view - even better than Leica lenses I also own. I do not rate by lab charts, but in the field work.

As soon as Olympus offers something like an E-7 four thirds – I will return and buy. I find the MFT some different class – for holidays=ok, or making snapshots. Serious work with MFT – no way. Just by the tiny dimensions, and a high class optical viewfinder cannot be matched. Direct light passed thru glass in the finder will always be better than converted light by sensors and electronic circuits.

Today’s technology will enable FT to have much improved noise and dynamic range behavior. The gap between FT and APS-C will narrow. Olympus will make a smart move by serving the FT market. Because their treasures are the optics.

The future of Olympus continues to unfold. I wish them best of luck and courage.

Hi Ross

I wanted to buy the OM-D EM-5. But I also like design. I personally find the EM-5 looks terrible. Either you do a purely classic design or hi-tech ergonomics. For me the EM-5 is an intermediate step.

Therefore, I sold the E-3, E-630, kept the glass and wait for the balanced, clear direction FT camera.

The E-5 is still based on old sensor technology - end of life cycle. If there is no successor, I will terminate Olympus entirely.

I have MFT Panasonic, also tried their Leica MFT and Sony derivatives. I also use Zeiss and M Leica. In my personal view Olympus is the best. This is a purely subjective view because I am not a scientist comparing Siemens stars. Everybody has different judgments and preferences which I fully respect.

The “best” what I have – you will smile – is my left over E-510 with adapted Leica R lenses or with the Zuiko digital 11-22 mm. I will immediately join any new “E-7” and continue with Olympus.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2012 at 12:30 UTC

Interesting corporate story

I sold all my Olympus digital cameras a year ago, but kept the Pro lenses in the shelf. The color, sharpness and contrast in total is - in my view - even better than Leica lenses I also own. I do not rate by lab charts, but in the field work.

As soon as Olympus offers something like an E-7 four thirds – I will return and buy. I find the MFT some different class – for holidays=ok, or making snapshots. Serious work with MFT – no way. Just by the tiny dimensions, and a high class optical viewfinder cannot be matched. Direct light passed thru glass in the finder will always be better than converted light by sensors and electronic circuits.

Today’s technology will enable FT to have much improved noise and dynamic range behavior. The gap between FT and APS-C will narrow. Olympus will make a smart move by serving the FT market. Because their treasures are the optics.

The future of Olympus continues to unfold. I wish them best of luck and courage.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2012 at 11:03 UTC as 24th comment | 9 replies
On article Editing on the road (114 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThomasSwitzerland: Less is more

Digital seems to offer more. Come on. I came back today from a mountain tour with just 12 pictures – purely hi-tech digital. We must rethink our behavior.

Post processing is complete madness – stealing your personal quality of life.

Let’s go out, look, think carefully - and then take very, very few pictures. It is so much more fun not to post process in the evening; but to have just this more fun with you company or in the restaurant.

In about ten years from now on people will joke about someone having spent time with the laptop or else. I would name it today as: Avoid “Processorbating”.

Hi Bill

If it is fun for you, perfect. But Post Processing means that in-camera technology is still not advanced enough. I don’t like those lazy big camera makers transferring their responsibility to the end-user.

If I take a near perfect picture, I expect a very good picture out of the box. My first step was to convert a Leica-R lenses to Nikon mount with chip. At least I get no color fringes and amazing clarity. I am in the IT engineering and find all those DxO, PS CS6 horrible software - just a mad burden. In my spare time, after having made the right photos, I do not want those mediocre PP software. As I tried hard, I want to have the same – or at least – similar result from camera hardware.

So, with my D5100 and Leica-R 35mm in RAW I get what I almost want – the right pictures. The community will smile about it; but I enjoy a good meal, and my company, and ready made pictures – all hassle over!

Good pictures and good food ..else, what could be better?

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2012 at 17:03 UTC
On article Editing on the road (114 comments in total)

Less is more

Digital seems to offer more. Come on. I came back today from a mountain tour with just 12 pictures – purely hi-tech digital. We must rethink our behavior.

Post processing is complete madness – stealing your personal quality of life.

Let’s go out, look, think carefully - and then take very, very few pictures. It is so much more fun not to post process in the evening; but to have just this more fun with you company or in the restaurant.

In about ten years from now on people will joke about someone having spent time with the laptop or else. I would name it today as: Avoid “Processorbating”.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2012 at 19:17 UTC as 18th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

ThomasSwitzerland: Vision required

This camera is a shame for a long established company. We all need innovation not a me too product. Financial markets are going down - so will the "old" style camera makers. The next two years will be interesting. In this Canon business case, buy the new BenQ arrival - just an example. Does more - and later you might throw it away with less anger. Or just take your present cameras from the shelve - and make pictures.

Who really needs now such a camera <EOS-M>? Does the M stand for mediocre?

The last got the best chance.

I fully agree with the scientific analysis. But Canon is a huge commercial enterprise, not a lab with public funding. You must expect them to offer something truly competitive in the marketplace. Like Apple desperately tries with the next phone (Welcome Samsung?). Evolution is right for the past. Today we need more faster (Moore’s law) and human minds are able to invent and develop. For USD 600 up whatever in this case – I expect much more. Not another … wait and see – good try. Nice PowerPoint in the marketing. I spend my money to get better products – just as I have to deliver more in less time. And such a conglomerate as Canon should be able to supply true innovations. Or if they do not - they might wave to the rust belt of cameras. Others will take over the job gladly (greetings to the dangerous future of the next boring IPhones or Canons if they do not change).

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 18:53 UTC
In reply to:

ThomasSwitzerland: Vision required

This camera is a shame for a long established company. We all need innovation not a me too product. Financial markets are going down - so will the "old" style camera makers. The next two years will be interesting. In this Canon business case, buy the new BenQ arrival - just an example. Does more - and later you might throw it away with less anger. Or just take your present cameras from the shelve - and make pictures.

Who really needs now such a camera <EOS-M>? Does the M stand for mediocre?

Vision is not a gimmick. I would just be happy to have dynamic range, not by merging three shots in camera or Post Processing. Just take a picture and it is close to human vision. That's all. Why do we have Photoshop post engineering nightmare - because of hardware manufacturers like the Big Names fail.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 17:12 UTC

Vision required

This camera is a shame for a long established company. We all need innovation not a me too product. Financial markets are going down - so will the "old" style camera makers. The next two years will be interesting. In this Canon business case, buy the new BenQ arrival - just an example. Does more - and later you might throw it away with less anger. Or just take your present cameras from the shelve - and make pictures.

Who really needs now such a camera <EOS-M>? Does the M stand for mediocre?

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 16:43 UTC as 190th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

ThomasSwitzerland: This sounds like a marketing and sales forum for new equipment. What is the next life cycle in your plans: Six months life spans of cameras?

When do we start to demand real equipment: lasting and not bug fixing on plastics housings with prior sensor embedded systems?
It is our money we might waste in the gimmicks like those Nikons, Canons, OM-Ds of today. Technology to buy self-proclaimed break-throughs. But those Canons-Look-Alikes are not real innovations. Just to grab our$$$ for industry. We live in oversatured markets and desires.

Fun

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2012 at 22:12 UTC
In reply to:

ThomasSwitzerland: This sounds like a marketing and sales forum for new equipment. What is the next life cycle in your plans: Six months life spans of cameras?

When do we start to demand real equipment: lasting and not bug fixing on plastics housings with prior sensor embedded systems?
It is our money we might waste in the gimmicks like those Nikons, Canons, OM-Ds of today. Technology to buy self-proclaimed break-throughs. But those Canons-Look-Alikes are not real innovations. Just to grab our$$$ for industry. We live in oversatured markets and desires.

Today I took pictures with a Ricoh XRX-X. This is a film camera from 30 years ago. No touch panel and ISO confusion. But I also use Nikon, Canon and Olympus on digital at contemporary levels. They are practical but make not better images (to fix people).

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2012 at 21:43 UTC

This sounds like a marketing and sales forum for new equipment. What is the next life cycle in your plans: Six months life spans of cameras?

When do we start to demand real equipment: lasting and not bug fixing on plastics housings with prior sensor embedded systems?
It is our money we might waste in the gimmicks like those Nikons, Canons, OM-Ds of today. Technology to buy self-proclaimed break-throughs. But those Canons-Look-Alikes are not real innovations. Just to grab our$$$ for industry. We live in oversatured markets and desires.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2012 at 21:12 UTC as 21st comment | 4 replies

Just another me too product. Who needs this? And look at the ergonomics. I do not want this camera for my expressions. Fall asleep with such a kind of photographic equipment. Nikon +endless+MP - Canon boring - waiting for the real thing. Maybe just "dynamic true range..."

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2012 at 19:48 UTC as 26th comment | 2 replies
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark III studio samples published (284 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThomasSwitzerland: <reconstructive surgery no matter how 'rudimentary' their 'image' may seem>

Excellent contribution. So we must look to make better pictures and not to buy the gimmicks of industry. Please, who needs Megapixels. We need more devotion to views and perspectives. But anyway, I personally stopped at 16-20 MP; continue to look and try to make better photos. Can also be done quite simply. If we make poor pictures, they even will look worse with 800E or else – what a joke.

Thank you all for those involved replies. I have really learned that more MP are of benefit. And, by the way I had pre-ordered the Nikon D800 (lala feelings, smile). But I also I do 6x9 on Fuji film, then drum scan few just to speak about landscape views and resolution.

Maybe in about 5-8 yrs. from now digital will have that. But we all must believe in where we come from: seeing and feeling with human eyes; not sensors. But in some time ahead sensors will adhere quite close to human eyes. Today, they do not. And in the near future, I will really do wildlife pictures. I confess (Sylvain) not knowing much about this. Lots of space to grow from.

Let’s take pictures!

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2012 at 20:20 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark III studio samples published (284 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThomasSwitzerland: <reconstructive surgery no matter how 'rudimentary' their 'image' may seem>

Excellent contribution. So we must look to make better pictures and not to buy the gimmicks of industry. Please, who needs Megapixels. We need more devotion to views and perspectives. But anyway, I personally stopped at 16-20 MP; continue to look and try to make better photos. Can also be done quite simply. If we make poor pictures, they even will look worse with 800E or else – what a joke.

In this case I agree as your are limited to physical barriers. But why not to take a large tele lens to get the closer feeling from glass to digital, even if it might not look “perfect”. How a lion’s face looks on you must communicate feelings – less than technically perfect shots might be more to the point.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2012 at 18:34 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark III studio samples published (284 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThomasSwitzerland: <reconstructive surgery no matter how 'rudimentary' their 'image' may seem>

Excellent contribution. So we must look to make better pictures and not to buy the gimmicks of industry. Please, who needs Megapixels. We need more devotion to views and perspectives. But anyway, I personally stopped at 16-20 MP; continue to look and try to make better photos. Can also be done quite simply. If we make poor pictures, they even will look worse with 800E or else – what a joke.

I try to think first about the composition to avoid cropping. Saves me post processing - the worst time killer in photography today next to filing with meta data.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2012 at 18:11 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark III studio samples published (284 comments in total)

<reconstructive surgery no matter how 'rudimentary' their 'image' may seem>

Excellent contribution. So we must look to make better pictures and not to buy the gimmicks of industry. Please, who needs Megapixels. We need more devotion to views and perspectives. But anyway, I personally stopped at 16-20 MP; continue to look and try to make better photos. Can also be done quite simply. If we make poor pictures, they even will look worse with 800E or else – what a joke.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2012 at 17:00 UTC as 60th comment | 13 replies
Total: 195, showing: 181 – 195
« First‹ Previous78910Next ›Last »