Teila Day

Teila Day

Lives in United States FL, United States
Has a website at www.teiladay.com
Joined on Apr 5, 2005

Comments

Total: 586, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

arbux: Small sensor, dark lenses. Medium format in name only. Any Ff camera with glass F2.0 or brighter captures more light and is cheaper + has much more functionality.

arbux... I shoot Nikon/Canon with fast Zeiss glass, Canon 85 1.2, etc... Shooting the Pentax 645Z to be a detriment, in fact it's preferred most of the time. Actually, it allows me a lot of latitude that most Nikon/Canon/etc., can't give.

"Medium format in name only"... well, that's because it's a MF camera by definition in the first place. Kind like saying a large pickup truck is a "truck" in name only when comparing it to a dump truck. Let's not get ridiculous.

Most people shooting for pay, probably don't shoot MF for the same reasons they shoot FF. Two different tools. You're trying to compare a really good spoon to a spork.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 03:24 UTC
In reply to:

phoenix15: Pentax will reduce price 645z by 1500 USD, and they will introduce "true" medium format with 100 Mp sensor. Now the real problem for Pentax is providing the lenses. Two thump up for Fuji with "quite affordable" GFX lenses. Pentax really need to respond quickly.

Nevertheless, I believe this GFX will trouble more to the Canikon with the expensive FF DSLR. I wonder if GFX can be used for action photography with their new AF ?

Phoenix15, I'm sure there's no rush in the Pentax camp to respond to either the Hasselblad or GFX. I really like the increased number of MF offerings though. Keeps the market from stagnating! The bigger issue = lenses and what the cameras offers as a completed "set up" or "rig".

While Fuji has a great lens range, the same can be said (barely) for the Pentax 645 offering which I tend to favor (personal thing). Knowing Hasselblad, the company will nickel and dime X1D customers compared to Pentax/Fuji. But Hasselblad also offers a professional feature that the others don't... highly usable sync speed!

The GFX, Hasselblad's 50c & X1D, and 645Z offer distinct advantages to their prospective buyers and owners. Price, battery life, lens offerings, sync speed, mirrorless, SLR, varied lenses, etc.. all with a great sensor.

The only thing a prospective buyer has to do is see which fits his/her photo endeavors professional or otherwise the best. Awesome time to shoot MF!

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 03:11 UTC
In reply to:

quietrich: A lot of bitching here along the lines of "it's not proper medium format". I may be wrong but I don't remember the same volume of harumph about the X1D or 645Z which both offer the same sized sensor.
I'm definitely in the market for a new digital MF this year, so will be looking at this Fuji once they release the 45mm lens. I prefer the knobs and dials interface over the iphone-type operation of the X1D. The Pentax on the other hand offers a lovely OVF (which I much prefer), and more lenses to choose from - but is that enough to compensate for the bulk and the camera shake from that massive mirror? Looking forward to finding out.
One thing's for sure, Fuji have a long and respected history of innovation in the MF camera market; and it's gratifying to see that continued with this GFX.

mosc..."Medium Format" is no more vague than the term "sports car". If I need to know what performance, maintenance or interior appointment advantages a Porsche 911 Turbo S has over a Ferrari 488, I can delve into it. However I'm not all the sudden dumbstruck because someone says "sporting car".

For those concerned (most seem overly concerned) about the size of a MF sensor, for the love of peaches just look at the sensor dimensions and any "vagueness" should instantly be lifted ;)

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 02:30 UTC
In reply to:

Josh Leavitt: It's now Pentax's turn to counter with a 645Z + 24-70mm f2.8 D FA for $6999. I'd also like Pentax to announce a 645Z Mark II that uses a magnesium/carbon-fiber body to shave off a pound or so, plus the inclusion of an AF sensor similar to Nikons 20K Multi-Cam in the D500 and D5. That would really set the MF DSLR apart from the mirrorless X1D and GFX, if it had a high speed wide-area autofocus system.

Josh, If Pentax redesigns the existing 645 28-45 f/4.5 lens, or create 645 24-70 f/2.8 lens, you can expect that lens to sell at a price that's more than the camera and noticeably heavier than the current premium zoom lens. Sure I'd like the lens to be faster, but that's just nit picking- for most shooting the lens, it isn't even remotely needed and is probably why Pentax won't bring a faster version to market any time soon.

Such a lens would allow many Pentax MF shooters to operate using a two lens kit. the currently imaginary 645 24-70 f/2.8 which you'd need a burro to carry, and a telephoto lens beyond 100mm.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 02:25 UTC

Crash a drone into a public or someone's private property and one should be charged with a felony. Mandatory 6mos in jail and a $5,000 fine. That'll stop most of the idiots from ruining it for all the responsible people out there. Relying on a company's automated "go home" function isn't an excuse. Better yet, before putting them in jail, give them 10 lashings.

From national parks to neighborhoods, these idiots are once again making something that shouldn't have to be regulated, needing to be regulated. It's too easy to stop these people, but our society is too lax when it comes to dealing with people of such ilk.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 19:03 UTC as 5th comment
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vegetable Police: Kit lenses are lame. There has never been a good photo in the history of the world taken with a kit lens. You need at least f1.8 or you might as well just throw your camera in the trash. When I see someone taking a picture, I ask them if that's the kit lens. If they say yes, I throw my tea at their camera in hopes to short circuit the lens and save them the hassle of having to look at those awful pictures.

Unfortunately, some of these lenses are now weather sealed. I find a combination of tea and sand still works pretty well though.

I have a dream, it's not about the appreciation of humor, it's about knowing when and where to be humorous. Being humorous in a thread where many won't understand if you're joshing or not isn't appropriate. It also isn't appropriate to waste the time of people who come to threads such as this to learn.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 17:29 UTC
In reply to:

Teila Day: How much does the printhead cost if a new one is required?

Is the printhead easily user installable? (yes, I realize that many printers require printhead installation by user during set-up anyway)

New coatings reduce clogs by what % in independent testing?.

Can printer sit a week and print w/out issues?

What has Epson done to make the printer more practical to swap blacks, reduce ink use, etc..

How much ink used in cleaning process?

How does it compare to the Canon imagePROGRAF PRO-1000 17 on a practical (not technical) note? ... e.g. what increased quality will a client readily see in the Epson print over the Canon?

Epson produces the best prints in my opinion (price dependent) but I still won't give Epson a dime because I view their products as poorly designed tools that I'd rather not have to deal with. I hope they redeem themselves with this printer.

Vik2012, not "dismissive" at all. The bottom line is that I don't believe anyone here honestly thinks that Epson *can't* make a printhead that doesn't do an excellent job cleaning itself, and that doesn't clog after sitting for 2-weeks. I think to think otherwise is ludicrous, even if the additional cost was $2-3k per printer.

"Epson also says that the new print head has an ink-repellent coating that helps to prevent ink sticking to it and clogging the nozzles."

Ink repelling coating. Well golly gee whiz! Who at Epson thought of that! Ya think after decades of having non-stick ovens, baking pans, skillets... (shakes head) ((chuckle))

It'll be really great if this printer pans out (pun) to be a gem! I'm rooting for them, or any company that solves a well known problem.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 04:11 UTC
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

turvyT: If most cameras come with a zoon lens covering wide, normal and tele (short), and if most present (basic) zoom lenses are pretty good (despite opinions here (check flickr)), and higher isos work much better in digital cameras, why someone new in photography should buy a second lens, unless is for a very specialized goal? People should learn about light, about composition, and about pp, and forget about lenses and cameras. They don't really matter.

Pavel Muller. I can give a monkey a 645Z set to "program" attached to a 300mm lens on a tripod aimed, at a Half Dome in Yosemite National Park. If you shoot from the same position with a cell phone, the monkey will have the better result. Let's make the time of day 9am or 4pm.... still the monkey will have the better shots. Equipment matters.

Ok, let's talk about experience. Here's one for you... Had Ansel Adams tried to shoot stock photography today or make a name for himself in landscape photography, his life's history would be very different. A good eye only takes you so far, and frankly what a photographer with 40 years of experience + a developer/print master could do in the 70's is quickly mimicked today by a 16 year old college photography student with crack'n Photoshop skills, shooting the school's 80mp Phase.

It's not about experience. Most experienced shooters have been put out of full-time work. It's about having an eye, knowing the target demographic & marketing.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 03:16 UTC
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

Murat Sahan: I did like the article. For what its worth I didnt really start to have fun untill I got my 35mm 1.8 so I could blur backgrounds and then I bought a used 10-20 mm Sigma and now was that fun :)

Your distance to the subject is going to give you the most control on "blurring the background" especially if you're using a telephoto lens. Want to blur the background? You can stop your lens down to f/10, get as close as your lens will allow you to get to a subject and your background should be blurred in most cases. Stop a 300mm lens to f/10 as close to a subject allowed by the lens. Then compare the background blur to when you stopped down to f/4 or f/2.8.... ;)

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 02:56 UTC
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

Teila Day: For those newbies who aren't strapped for cash. Peruse the forums and other photography sites first and get a feel for what lenses you'll definitely need for the kind of photos you want to shoot. Then when you make your camera purchase, forgo the "kit" lens, and put that money towards a more versatile lens (e.g. 24-70 f/2.8 or 70-200 f/2.8, etc.)

The difference between f/4 and f/2.8 can be huge both in the looks of the final photograph and how well the camera focuses in dim light (camera focuses with the aperture wide open and stops down to your selected aperture only a fraction of a second before taking the photograph). Plan your purchases wisely. Buy lenses as if you plan to use them for at least a decade before it makes sense to upgrade!

cosinaphile, no, it's just knowing one's equipment and knowing what lens is best for a particular job. There's a reason why lenses like the 17-35 f/2.8, 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 are "bread & butter" lenses when it comes to weddings, and other jobs where the lighting is typically less than optimal, maybe no flash allowed, etc..

You the photographer aren't assured a particular place to shoot from at any given point in time due to people moving all around, etc.. Hopefully you're smart enough to get shots of varying focal lengths from the same position when warranted. That's real-world stuff.

I can use my Zeiss 100mm or 135 f/2 lens over a 24-70 f/2.8 lens, but I'm smart enough to know which lens makes more sense if I'm walking between rows of chairs, large round tables at a VIP gala and not knowing where I might be asked to shoot next (small wine tasting / smoking rooms, etc..)

But that's reality, when it can be silly to don a prime.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 02:32 UTC
In reply to:

Teila Day: How much does the printhead cost if a new one is required?

Is the printhead easily user installable? (yes, I realize that many printers require printhead installation by user during set-up anyway)

New coatings reduce clogs by what % in independent testing?.

Can printer sit a week and print w/out issues?

What has Epson done to make the printer more practical to swap blacks, reduce ink use, etc..

How much ink used in cleaning process?

How does it compare to the Canon imagePROGRAF PRO-1000 17 on a practical (not technical) note? ... e.g. what increased quality will a client readily see in the Epson print over the Canon?

Epson produces the best prints in my opinion (price dependent) but I still won't give Epson a dime because I view their products as poorly designed tools that I'd rather not have to deal with. I hope they redeem themselves with this printer.

Gerard D C, "Actually, Epson's reputation among artists can't be that bad when so many go back and buy another Epson when upgrading. They have the choice not to."

Textbook fallacy. People buy Range Rovers though they have a horrible reputation (deserved) for breaking. The fact that people buy something notorious for breaking (looking at you too Lotus & McLaren!) doesn't mean that a product doesn't have a tattered history of poor design/maintenance.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 02:15 UTC
In reply to:

Teila Day: How much does the printhead cost if a new one is required?

Is the printhead easily user installable? (yes, I realize that many printers require printhead installation by user during set-up anyway)

New coatings reduce clogs by what % in independent testing?.

Can printer sit a week and print w/out issues?

What has Epson done to make the printer more practical to swap blacks, reduce ink use, etc..

How much ink used in cleaning process?

How does it compare to the Canon imagePROGRAF PRO-1000 17 on a practical (not technical) note? ... e.g. what increased quality will a client readily see in the Epson print over the Canon?

Epson produces the best prints in my opinion (price dependent) but I still won't give Epson a dime because I view their products as poorly designed tools that I'd rather not have to deal with. I hope they redeem themselves with this printer.

dinoSnake, yes to requiring regular printing. Double nod to many people not understanding the print head service calls / calibration, etc.. Sure, Canon sells a lot of printers but I'd bet when it comes to people being angry about print head and clogging issues, Epson takes the cake on a per capita basis. They didn't get a reputation from artists and those in business just being totally clueless about their Epson printers.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 00:21 UTC
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

Teila Day: For those newbies who aren't strapped for cash. Peruse the forums and other photography sites first and get a feel for what lenses you'll definitely need for the kind of photos you want to shoot. Then when you make your camera purchase, forgo the "kit" lens, and put that money towards a more versatile lens (e.g. 24-70 f/2.8 or 70-200 f/2.8, etc.)

The difference between f/4 and f/2.8 can be huge both in the looks of the final photograph and how well the camera focuses in dim light (camera focuses with the aperture wide open and stops down to your selected aperture only a fraction of a second before taking the photograph). Plan your purchases wisely. Buy lenses as if you plan to use them for at least a decade before it makes sense to upgrade!

Primes aren't nearly as versatile as zooms when working for hire, and unlike the early 90's and earlier when there was a distinct quality difference between a premium prime and zoom lens, today (practically speaking) the end result after processing is virtually imperceptible. furthermore, you're assuming that a thin DOF is always what a photographer who shoots a prime is after which is a poor assumption.

While a fast prime does offer an even brighter view finder at f/1.4 and faster compared to f/2.8, but that's at the expense of versatility and being able to work quickly in many situations. This is obvious to most working professionals who use premium zooms and primes in their work.

Quite often really fast primes shot wide open yield worse image quality than a high quality f/2.8 zoom wide open. Again, when shooting a gala or wedding in dim light, most professionals will reach for the zoom and raise the iso several ticks and often add a bit of fill light.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2017 at 00:10 UTC
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vegetable Police: Kit lenses are lame. There has never been a good photo in the history of the world taken with a kit lens. You need at least f1.8 or you might as well just throw your camera in the trash. When I see someone taking a picture, I ask them if that's the kit lens. If they say yes, I throw my tea at their camera in hopes to short circuit the lens and save them the hassle of having to look at those awful pictures.

Unfortunately, some of these lenses are now weather sealed. I find a combination of tea and sand still works pretty well though.

@Vegetable Police- While I get and appreciate your joshing, keep in mind that many people new to photography reading the article and comment may not. Remember the audience... Let's not muddle things up for those who come here to learn.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 21:52 UTC
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (295 comments in total)

For those newbies who aren't strapped for cash. Peruse the forums and other photography sites first and get a feel for what lenses you'll definitely need for the kind of photos you want to shoot. Then when you make your camera purchase, forgo the "kit" lens, and put that money towards a more versatile lens (e.g. 24-70 f/2.8 or 70-200 f/2.8, etc.)

The difference between f/4 and f/2.8 can be huge both in the looks of the final photograph and how well the camera focuses in dim light (camera focuses with the aperture wide open and stops down to your selected aperture only a fraction of a second before taking the photograph). Plan your purchases wisely. Buy lenses as if you plan to use them for at least a decade before it makes sense to upgrade!

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 21:48 UTC as 59th comment | 6 replies
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

turvyT: If most cameras come with a zoon lens covering wide, normal and tele (short), and if most present (basic) zoom lenses are pretty good (despite opinions here (check flickr)), and higher isos work much better in digital cameras, why someone new in photography should buy a second lens, unless is for a very specialized goal? People should learn about light, about composition, and about pp, and forget about lenses and cameras. They don't really matter.

@turvyT, actually the types of cameras and lenses not only matter, but can matter a *lot*. You can have 30 years of professional experience and someone with 6 months experience with a 600mm lens will bring back more compelling photographs of nesting birds, lions resting with their cubs, etc.. Likewise, there's far more one can do with 100mp compared to 24mp.

People can learn more than one thing at a time and if someone is interested in Macro photography, then it makes sense that they spend time learning the characteristics of using a macro lens.

Cameras, lenses and types of flash or professional strobe lighting not only matters, but can matter a whole heck of a lot whether you're a newbie or a professional.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 21:40 UTC
On article Buying a second lens: what lens should I buy next? (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

adhemar: If you're wondering which lens to buy then do not buy any. And do not buy an interchangeable lens camera. Use your phone or buy a Sony RX10 or a Panasonic FZ2000 / FZ2500. Anything that is self contained.

I can pretty much guarantee you that the lens you buy today will be obsolete 5 years from now. Sony will change its mount, as it has already done several times. Canikon will have to do it if they want to keep up with Sony. The current mounts and hardware cannot support advances in lens correction, focusing, stabilization and the like.

Do you want examples? I had a Sony A33 - The A-mount is dead for intent and purpose. I moved to MFT. I would have to buy a new 12-35 if I wanted to take full advantage of the new GH5 hybrid stabilization. Buyer beware.

@adhemar, That's ridiculous. Some people wonder what lens to buy because they don't have practical experience with the respective focal lengths. Mention 14, 100, or 600mm and a new person to interchangeable lens cameras may have no clue what those focal lengths translates into (e.g. how close it brings one to the subject from wherever they might be standing). So? There's nothing wrong with learning, and just because a person doesn't know, doesn't mean they can't benefit from having various lenses.

Canon / Nikon lenses that I used nearly 10 years ago, I still use professionally today without a 2nd thought. The mounts haven't changed. Keep in mind that your experiences and camera/lens choices do not define the choices and experiences of others. :)

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 21:20 UTC
In reply to:

Teila Day: How much does the printhead cost if a new one is required?

Is the printhead easily user installable? (yes, I realize that many printers require printhead installation by user during set-up anyway)

New coatings reduce clogs by what % in independent testing?.

Can printer sit a week and print w/out issues?

What has Epson done to make the printer more practical to swap blacks, reduce ink use, etc..

How much ink used in cleaning process?

How does it compare to the Canon imagePROGRAF PRO-1000 17 on a practical (not technical) note? ... e.g. what increased quality will a client readily see in the Epson print over the Canon?

Epson produces the best prints in my opinion (price dependent) but I still won't give Epson a dime because I view their products as poorly designed tools that I'd rather not have to deal with. I hope they redeem themselves with this printer.

virtualreality- Per Epson, there's more to replacing the head than just installing a new one unless things have changed. There used to be some calibration done to the head which isn't done when you or some shop install it without doing the requisite calibrations done during a factory install.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 20:24 UTC
In reply to:

Teila Day: How much does the printhead cost if a new one is required?

Is the printhead easily user installable? (yes, I realize that many printers require printhead installation by user during set-up anyway)

New coatings reduce clogs by what % in independent testing?.

Can printer sit a week and print w/out issues?

What has Epson done to make the printer more practical to swap blacks, reduce ink use, etc..

How much ink used in cleaning process?

How does it compare to the Canon imagePROGRAF PRO-1000 17 on a practical (not technical) note? ... e.g. what increased quality will a client readily see in the Epson print over the Canon?

Epson produces the best prints in my opinion (price dependent) but I still won't give Epson a dime because I view their products as poorly designed tools that I'd rather not have to deal with. I hope they redeem themselves with this printer.

ink used during the cleaning is clearly not the same across all brands. Print head costs are not the same, and the associated costs required to replace the print head if a company rep is required can mean the difference between fixing a printer, or just buying a new one and adding more waste to the landfill because a perfectly working printer (aside from the print head and some other basic maintenance) doesn't make sense to fix.

That's business reality and is why many Epson's have been junked which otherwise would've made sense to keep.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 01:45 UTC
In reply to:

Teila Day: How much does the printhead cost if a new one is required?

Is the printhead easily user installable? (yes, I realize that many printers require printhead installation by user during set-up anyway)

New coatings reduce clogs by what % in independent testing?.

Can printer sit a week and print w/out issues?

What has Epson done to make the printer more practical to swap blacks, reduce ink use, etc..

How much ink used in cleaning process?

How does it compare to the Canon imagePROGRAF PRO-1000 17 on a practical (not technical) note? ... e.g. what increased quality will a client readily see in the Epson print over the Canon?

Epson produces the best prints in my opinion (price dependent) but I still won't give Epson a dime because I view their products as poorly designed tools that I'd rather not have to deal with. I hope they redeem themselves with this printer.

Vik2012, you're 100% correct. My choice is to / and I've always recommended people to vote with their purse. Epson is my favorite printer of its kind when it comes to 'quality' but not practicality or long term ROI.

If Epson had their stuff together, they'd have a lot more people spending $10k or more on their initial order, I can tell you that. Let Epson design a printer that is 99% clog / maintenance free over a 5 year period irrespective of usage and they'll have artists throwing $15k or more at them for the initial order. After 5 years you pay $500 for routine maintenance for another 5 years problem free.

... see how many LF printers they sell then.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2017 at 21:48 UTC
Total: 586, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »