Michael Thomas Mitchell

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jul 30, 2000

Comments

Total: 46, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

Or an inexpensive Android tablet with a large MicroSD card and a basic OTG card reader should do it.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2018 at 14:36 UTC as 4th comment

While a variety of other cameras may out-spec the 5D Mark IV in specific areas, that camera continues to be the single most VERSATILE cameras available.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 16:10 UTC as 38th comment
On article Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM sample gallery (322 comments in total)

I've used the 85/1.8 for many years, and have long hoped for a stabilized version from Canon. This 1.4 version is nice, but too ridiculously priced. All of my lenses (except a Rokinon fisheye) are Canon, and most are L. But I'm seriously considering a switch to some Tamron lenses, including the 85/1.8 VC for just at 1/2 the cost of this new Canon.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2017 at 20:53 UTC as 18th comment | 2 replies
On article Canon unveils stabilized EF 85mm F1.4L lens (521 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aleks7: sorry guys, 10 years too late...

Sensor-based stabilization has no relevance when we're talking about Nikon or Canon. I appreciate that the Sony has had in-camera stabilization. But I don't use Sony equipment. For that matter, Minolta has in-camera stabilization a dozen or more years ago. (That's where Sony acquired it from in the first place!)

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2017 at 14:25 UTC
On article Canon unveils stabilized EF 85mm F1.4L lens (521 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edgar_in_Indy: Wait, I'm confused. I've been told many times by Canon-faithful that stabilization is not needed for larger-aperture lenses such as 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm 1.4 lenses. If you needed stabilization for those lenses, then you were obviously not doing it right.

That is one of the main reasons that the lack of IBIS on Canon bodies was supposedly no big deal.

Why does everything always have to degenerate into meaningless and unnecessary squabble?

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2017 at 05:12 UTC
On article Canon unveils stabilized EF 85mm F1.4L lens (521 comments in total)
In reply to:

Henrikw: I literally just opened the box with my Sigma 85mm Art 1.4. It looks and feels great, and if I'm lucky it will be pin sharp without much adjustment (the Canon looks a bit mundane).
But I always craved a big aperture 85 with image stabilization. And here it is....guess my Sigma is going back before it has a chance to shine. Sorry Sigma....

Any regrets on the Tamron? I've use the Canon 85/1.8 for many years, but longed for a stabilized version, which would be a boon to my low light wedding work. I don't normally go for non-Canon lenses, but Tamron and Sigma seem to be making some great stuff these days, and the Tamron 85 seemed just about right to me. In fact, I originally intended to pair it with the Tamron 35 VC, its clear partner. But I've held back to see what Canon would have. Now that I see the price, the Tamron is looking even better.

Any regrets with the Tamron? Still recommended?

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 19:28 UTC
On article Canon unveils stabilized EF 85mm F1.4L lens (521 comments in total)
In reply to:

1Dx4me: i do have the canon ef 85 f1.8 but this lens looks like the grand daddy of all 85mm lenses that i know!!! the asking price of this IS lens is not bad for a lens of this caliber, at all. the only drawback for "noodle arm guys" might be the weight (2+lb.....really?) i am very tempted to go for it when it comes out. now, if only canon comes out with 5DsR II camera with some killer features, i'll be very happy!!!!!!!!!

If that's accurate, it puts it at just about the same weight as my old 28-70 f2.8 L.

To put it in perspective, my 15-85 EFS weighs about a 1 1/2 pounds, while the original f1.8 weighs just under a pound.

Basically, we're looking at a lens that weighs about 25% more than a 24-101 f4 IS L. Considering its bright f1.4 aperture and 4 stops of stabilization, I guess it's about right.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 19:25 UTC
On article Canon unveils stabilized EF 85mm F1.4L lens (521 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edgar_in_Indy: Wait, I'm confused. I've been told many times by Canon-faithful that stabilization is not needed for larger-aperture lenses such as 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm 1.4 lenses. If you needed stabilization for those lenses, then you were obviously not doing it right.

That is one of the main reasons that the lack of IBIS on Canon bodies was supposedly no big deal.

You wouldn't have heard that from me!

As a wedding photographer, an 85 prime is standard kit. And low-light is an occupational given. I've wanted a stabilized prime forever. But $1600 is just out of my league. I held off a full year on the Tamron 85 VC, but it looks like they're getting my money. I'll probably add the 35 VC, too, as a versatile, bright, stabilized pair. And both together will cost less than the Canon.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 18:58 UTC
On article Canon unveils stabilized EF 85mm F1.4L lens (521 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael Thomas Mitchell: This is the lens I've waited for since 2001, when I purchased my first Canon DSLR, the D30, along with a 28-135 stabilized lens. I immediately appreciated the value of stabilization. In fact, it was a factor that had me choosing Canon over Nikon from the beginning; Nikon didn't have anything similar for years.

I have no doubt this will be an incredible lens. However, I'm going to have to take a pass. The $1600 price is just too great. In fact, it's just at HALF of Tamron's outstanding -- and also stabilized -- 85 1.8 VC, at about $800 (already not cheap itself).

I've already been using Canon's 85 1.8 for 20 years. The Sigma looks terrific, but the Tamron has gotten such high marks in this area, too, I'm really considering which one will provide the biggest boost for me over the old Canon. I guess it's good to have this problem? ;)

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 16:08 UTC
On article Canon unveils stabilized EF 85mm F1.4L lens (521 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aleks7: sorry guys, 10 years too late...

Huh? I've wanted a stabilized 85 for 15 years. If someone had made one a decade ago, I'd certainly have gotten it.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 14:38 UTC
On article Canon unveils stabilized EF 85mm F1.4L lens (521 comments in total)

This is the lens I've waited for since 2001, when I purchased my first Canon DSLR, the D30, along with a 28-135 stabilized lens. I immediately appreciated the value of stabilization. In fact, it was a factor that had me choosing Canon over Nikon from the beginning; Nikon didn't have anything similar for years.

I have no doubt this will be an incredible lens. However, I'm going to have to take a pass. The $1600 price is just too great. In fact, it's just at HALF of Tamron's outstanding -- and also stabilized -- 85 1.8 VC, at about $800 (already not cheap itself).

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 14:36 UTC as 41st comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Michael Thomas Mitchell: My checked gear is probably more securely packed than normal packing for new gear. Everything is in a Pelican hard roller case with TSA-approved lock. Inside the case, each lens rests in its own foam pad dock reinforced with 1 1/2" thick memory foam for a tight fit. Each lens is held in its own neoprene pouch. Dozens of flights with no problems.

It doesn't work with every airline, but one way to avoid excessive handling is to carry the case to the gate, and then check it upon boarding. Delta lets us pick up our bags that were checked on board at the gate at the destination gate, too, so our heavy Pelican is always handled briefly and personally.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2017 at 22:07 UTC

My checked gear is probably more securely packed than normal packing for new gear. Everything is in a Pelican hard roller case with TSA-approved lock. Inside the case, each lens rests in its own foam pad dock reinforced with 1 1/2" thick memory foam for a tight fit. Each lens is held in its own neoprene pouch. Dozens of flights with no problems.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2017 at 18:15 UTC as 42nd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

photofreak1972: very ridicilous, as Nikon D810 surpasses the Canon 5D MkIV easily.

As I was unfamiliar with the Nikon you mentioned, I investigated your claim and ended up a little perplexed. In many ways, these cameras are very similar. In some minor ways, the Nikon specs pull slightly ahead. But in terms of features, the Nikon falls rather behind Canon's, with slower framerate, lack of touchscreen and phase-detect live view focusing, and lack of 4K. The Canon has more capable AF system, and includes WiFi, NFC, and GPS built in, where the Nikon has none. The Nikon seems really only to offer slightly more pixels and DR at low ISO. But even so, the Canon has less noise at higher ISOs.

Both seem like extremely capable cameras that should satisfy virtually any photographer. But I can't see where you're coming from in your conclusion, sorry.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 23:37 UTC

National Geographic got some nice results with a D1x back in 2002 or so. The D3 was worlds beyond that original(-ish) model. No surprise here.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2017 at 23:01 UTC as 28th comment
In reply to:

Michael Thomas Mitchell: What a shame. Common sense did not prevail. While the monkey may have "pressed the button", there is much more to authorship than that. And trying to establish the primate as an author who cannot even acknowledge his own "authorship" is the same ridiculous slippery slope as are inherent in the argument against gay marriage in which the claimant invariably says "First a same sex person. What's next... marrying their dog?" Of course, dogs can no more give their consent to such thing as a monkey can lay any claim of authorship, thus making it a moot point.

If it had been a child snapping a selfie, then such arguments may at least warrant discussion. But for geez sake, a monkey could not even exercise his rights to the image if he even was declared the author and owner. Have we all just turned idiot?

If a rock falls onto my camera, tripping the shutter button and taking an award-winning mountain landscape, all while I'm chugging water and checking out my hiking map, does the rock have any authorship claims? Your suggestion that "the monkey did all that" seems to suggest that the rock would have more claim to authorship than I would. Does that seem practical to you?

The question of authorship in this case is, while interesting, nonetheless trivial. At best, it is easy fodder for dinner conversation between lawyers who don't get enough of what they do. In the real world, it is a shame it ever went as far as it did. Going beyond the mere academic interest in such matters is what leads us to the ridiculous types of incidents such as where children are suspended from school because they used their PB&J sandwiches as toy pistols during recess. Stories such as this belong in The Onion.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2017 at 23:21 UTC
In reply to:

golfhov: Copyright battle comes up here all the time.
In all fairness the "monkey selfie" was not Slater's work and the user he went after that started this whole entanglement was wikipedia. Not some greedy megacorporation.
Then peta hi jacked the case to promote their agenda. Same as now the photographic community has now hijacked the story to promote their agenda.
TitLe of this story should be struggling photographer cannot cut it in competitive industry.
This article is better than some others bit the original Brisbane article shold be read and the title ignored to truly understand a simple tale of an interesting story involving a cast of shady and incapable characters involved in monkey business

If it's not HIS work, then WHO owns the credit.

In the US, a monkey is not a "who" from a legal standpoint. Rather, it is a "what". I doubt the law even provides for a "what" to be an author for purposes of ownership.

PETA crossed the line from "amusing but impractical legal theory" into "W-T-F" territory.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2017 at 15:33 UTC

What a shame. Common sense did not prevail. While the monkey may have "pressed the button", there is much more to authorship than that. And trying to establish the primate as an author who cannot even acknowledge his own "authorship" is the same ridiculous slippery slope as are inherent in the argument against gay marriage in which the claimant invariably says "First a same sex person. What's next... marrying their dog?" Of course, dogs can no more give their consent to such thing as a monkey can lay any claim of authorship, thus making it a moot point.

If it had been a child snapping a selfie, then such arguments may at least warrant discussion. But for geez sake, a monkey could not even exercise his rights to the image if he even was declared the author and owner. Have we all just turned idiot?

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2017 at 15:28 UTC as 243rd comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

DPPMetro: The awful style of this video is a testament to the self-centeredness of the millenials and hipsters, where it's all about themselves and the entitlement they have to put themselves up on a pedestal and show the world how great they are and that they are very special snowflakes and a gift to the world.

The video is absolute garbage and DPR could have at least told us what the time was to skip to.

People still use the word "snowflakes"?

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 17:04 UTC
On article Review: Nikon D7500, speed and capability (528 comments in total)

A 1.5x crop of a 1.5x cropped sensor... ouch.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2017 at 18:41 UTC as 128th comment | 5 replies
Total: 46, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »