Mike Fewster

Lives in Australia Adelaide, Australia
Joined on Oct 13, 2003
About me:

Sony A900, Nex 5, Nex 5n, Rx100, Minolta 5D, Minolta a2, Minolta G4, Konica hexar, Minolta XD7, Mamiya C330, Kodak 290Z

Comments

Total: 37, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Bill3R: Leicas are pretentious.

War photographers did use Leicas. They are very unlikely to use them today. Superbody build quality was fine when the technology changed slowly. Today when camera technology changes fast it is a very questionable attribute. Leicas have had many sensor problems with their digitals and that is not compensated by ultra good bodies. Very high lens build quality is a different matter.
Compare the body build on a Sony RX1 with Leica. They are comparable but you pay for this model Sony as well.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 22:59 UTC
In reply to:

keepreal: Wow. I'd love to see all this and would gladly go on my next summer holiday to a place where it is possible. Maybe I will. Please tell me alternative places, bearing in mind that I live in London, England.

Maybe photographing it shows more here than possible to the naked eye. Can you tell me if that is the case? I have seen lots of spectacular night skies in still photos of various galaxies and the areas nearby where there are enormous clouds of whatever. Is that only possible in photos with long exposures or with merges to effectively up the apparent ISO, or can one see all this with the naked eye and good quality 8 X 40 binoculars?

From Britain you see only a few starts. I have seen more from Italy and a lot more from the USA, but nothing remotely like this.

On a clear, moonless night away from light pollution, you certainly see much more. It doesn't teake much time for a camera to see even more. A 20 second exposure with most lenses wide open and an iso of around 1000 will do wonders.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 06:00 UTC
In reply to:

melgross: So from what the technical editor is saying, jpegs, which never give the best quality, are better because they don’t allow the fine adjustments that RAW processing allows, because you may not be able to duplicate that jpeg using RAW.

That’s just nuts! All of a sudden, any respect I had for that guy went out the window.

I ran a fairly large commercial photo lab in NYC for a long time. We were one of the very first to go digital, and I began my career back in 1969 in fashion and advertising, when I was 19. So I’ve seen a lot of work over the decades.

Anybody that thinks that way is crippled in their understanding of how commercial, color processing works. And if we’re talking about the highest quality, not just the quick reaction wanted here, which is the worst way to evaluate pictures, jpegs are almost never used, for good reasons.

Foveon? 30years? Really?

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2017 at 00:58 UTC

Brand bickering aside, what is clear is that mirrorless are relentlessly overtaking mirror cameras. P&S is now phone dominated. Canikon are wedging themselves out of the future.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 21:13 UTC as 53rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: Except for their superb color meters, Minolta's professional stuff didn't gain much acceptance until Maxxum/Dynax. Really a shame. I had forgotten about this lens. Very impressive. They were great engineers.

Politely, I'd query that. The sRT101 was an absolutely ground breaking model that got a lot of acceptance. Then there are the CLE models. Add IBIS. I agree that Minolta engineers were always stunning and their team went to Sony after Minolta decided they didn't have the electronic technology for the sensor age.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 20:56 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: the idiotic obsession with thinness never ends ....yet another phone with sensors smaller and nastier than the crappiest point and shoots had .... back when point and shoots existed thinness obsessions do not only heut the sensor options .... here they have crippled the battery as well

over processed and tricked out to look reasonable as all makers must do for these
tiny sensors from samsung and apple lc and sony... with tricks to make the sensors seem larger like depth .....

someday someone will make a commitment to larger sensors for more than a single generation and that will change the game for everyone ...

but not today

720 usd? hahahahahahahahahahahaahhaahaahahaahahaahahaahaahh

Cosinaphile, it is more likely that you will see a new generation of flat panel multi lens arrays and the computer grunt of larger cameras to use computational image creation on larger cameras as well. The advantages over the conventional lenses of today would be considerable. I wouldn't laugh too loud or long.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 21:49 UTC
On article Peak Design Everyday Backpack Review (126 comments in total)
In reply to:

RaghavBaijal: The only thing keeping me away from Peak Design backpacks is their prices. Its just ridiculous. I am pushing the trigger to buy the Vanguard Alta Rise 45. For $99 it holds more stuff & Quality seems to be top notch.

Agreed. Vanguard bags are worth a look with interesting design features and tend to be excellent value for money.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2017 at 22:19 UTC
On article In praise of shooting monochrome landscapes (335 comments in total)
In reply to:

PLShutterbug: Lots of talk good/bad about HDR in the comments here. I think Ansel Adams was all about HDR. He invented the zone system specifically to extend the range of tones.

Second, I doubt that Adams would have rejected digital just because it is digital. He was an artist, not a technician. He used film because nothing else was available and 8x10 because it provided him the best tool to accomplish his goal of great photographs. There are fantastic digital cameras available today. Not yet to the standard of 8x10, but once someone comes up with a 4x5 digital back at 250-300MP ... the gain from no longer having to go from negative to print will eliminate the advantage of the large film formats.

Well, I used to use the zone system and extended dynamic range wasn't what I think it was about. Adams understood that we could distinguish ten tones from pure white to pure black. The Zone system enabled you to previsualize the scene in those ten tones and ensure that your final print used that tone range, or at least, use the range as you determined your needs for that particular image.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2017 at 23:10 UTC
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: Is this the holy grail of spray and pray photography for techies?
Thank you Sony; you have fulfilled the ultimate techie's dream — now no one has to know anything about photography, or cameras, but only keep the shutter release pressed down. Not even fingers are needed; stick it with a tape. Mystery and learning thrown out of the window. Basically, this is a thick, FF version of the iPhone concept.

I agree with Triplet. This is the same kind of disgraceful gimicky thinking hoisted on us by Canon and Nikon and Leica etc so that can no , longer revel in the pure joy of being real photographers with 10x8 view cameras

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 01:45 UTC
On article Canon 16-35mm F2.8L III real-world sample gallery (121 comments in total)

How about a comparison with the much cheaper Sony/Zeiss 16-35 F4 FE Full Frame. This lens also gets excellent reviews.
For mine, F4 is now better because of the iso performance of modern cameras. 2.8 is just not needed bulk / weight /cost for this kind of lens.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2016 at 20:15 UTC as 9th comment | 13 replies
In reply to:

Imagingfix: Nice side by side, but the only thing to take from this is the actual specs. Shooting experience, lens options, manual focus, adaptive lenses (capable on both) and physical size are all personal preference. If you really want it all, then buy both. I use mirrorless for its portability and use APS-C Canon for long lens work – using both system for occasional video. If I had to let one system go it would be hard to choose but would probably keep mirrorless and rent a DSLR when needed. Just me!

Just can't agree Robermo. I am a very experienced photographer and use both OVF and EVF. I use OVF for sports and evf for everything else. I love having live histogram available before I shoot in evf. I love the range of info I get in evf screens. I like the ability to see something closer to what I will get on evf. With most action shooters now firing multiple shots to get that magic moment, the (slightly) faster response of ovf has become essentially a non issue anyway. In dim light, the ability to amplify the light in the viewfinder is a huge plus. Let's face it, we don't need such precise views of the actual light any longer, it's why we use RAW.. That kind of fine tuning is now done PP.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2016 at 21:49 UTC
On article SLIK introduces SLIK LITE tripod line (35 comments in total)

This tripod has a problem I find on lots of tripods. I often like to shoot from very low angles. When the legs are flipped right out for very low shots, the centre column is too long and hits the ground preventing the camera being lowered sufficiently to take advantage of the flipped out legs. Can we have a centre column that can be shortened for very low work?

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2016 at 22:23 UTC as 10th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

noisephotographer: The L16 probably won't achieve DSLR quality and probably not even Galaxy S7/ Nexus 6p quality. Maybe Light uses too cheap sensors.
But the concept is intruiging and future generations of the L16 might achieve a very good quality.

I thought this was a Comment section? What more appropriate place for speculation? And the speculation given is reasonable afterall.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 08:38 UTC

It looks rather similar to the Sony semi mirror design that they use in their A mount cameras that also combines mirrorless with a semi mirror and pdaf focussing. So similar that it is a bit hard to see what the excitement is about or why it should get a patent.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2016 at 04:51 UTC as 46th comment | 3 replies

I think this shows Sonys strategy is working brilliantly. Get a solid foothold in the high end away from the lower end that is falling off from phone competition. This will give less unit sales but more profit. A lot of the unit loss will be in the low end models, not the top end models that seem to be bucking camera trends by growing. Sell lots of sensors to phone makers as well as camera makers. The sensor volume sales underwrite the R&R that has helped establish the Sony presence as a major photographic player and look likely to continue to give Sony an innovation edge.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2015 at 22:10 UTC as 34th comment

The mirrorless design just keeps getting more and more cred. Bit by bit (so to speak) public awareness and acceptance grows. The big winner from this release is Sony.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2015 at 20:38 UTC as 62nd comment
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

jonny1976: the difference between a lei q and sony is that after one year you bought both the leica is worth stil 3/4 of price the sony not even half, like any other sony product.
that's why eBay is loaded with a7 sony rx1 that cost much less than their original price, even the a7r2 can be found at 500 dollar discount already?
maybe they not sell like anybody is saying.

technically good camera, when it will cost 1400 in a year or something more it will be interesting to buy. i don't like the ergonomic, the grip is ridiculous and the rec button is where you put your finger.

Jonny you clearly have never held an RX1 or followed them and their prices. The RX1s are all hand assembled and individually calibrated to tolerances way beyond factory assembled cameras. Second hand their value recently has actually been increasing. My biggest regret about the new model is that the used prices will probably start to fall now and I will have to sell mine to get the new model.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2015 at 06:47 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nick932: I know that the liking/looks is a personal opinion but looks quiet ugly with this pop evf periscope. It is almost humorous. Even though Leica Q is slightly larger looks a million times better without this evf periscope. 130 x 80 x 93 mm vs 113 x 65 x 72 mm

Nick. One of those people who buys Leica on their look. Do you prefer the snake skin covered special models or the gold plated Leica special models?

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2015 at 06:43 UTC
On article Second time lucky? A closer look at Sony's new RX1R II (543 comments in total)

This thing is arguably a bargain.
The RX1 cameras are hand assembled and individually tested and calibrated. The mounting of lens to sensor works to tolerances factory assembled cameras can only dream of. The precision of that pairing is part of the secret of the incredible IQ of the RX1 (R). To get better you need either MFT or absolutely the very best glass available on the very best pro level FF you can find. And even then it is highly doubtful that the IQ will be better. You just don't get that precision on an interchangeable camera. Now compare the weight/size of that glass and camera. Now compare the price. And you can carry it around in a (largish) pocket. It is no wonder that the RX1 s have the cult like following they have with owner after owner saying it is the best camera they have ever owned.
No, it isn't the camera for sports and birding and wild life.
The overall build quality is outstanding. My Leica friends are much impressed with its build. Even check the cap.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2015 at 06:36 UTC as 24th comment
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: Every camera company in the world expresses themselves with the output of their cameras.

If Sony is manipulating raw files, it's probably because they are controlling the output for artistic reasons.

Coming from Olympus, Fuji, and Nikon; all my cameras have always worked differently. My D800e was significantly different in the output from my D300 or D200. The reasoning isn't just the sensor; it's how the company wants the camera to perform.

Sony is probably just more obvious in how they do it. But when I look at a Sony image, I'm so impressed with the appearance of their noise. In other cameras, it always looks like someone sneezed on the picture. It just looks horrible. Noise in images is usually not welcome, but the artistic way that Sony deals with noise is welcome to me.

But reality is that *EVERY* camera company controls output. It might not be compressed twice, but it is certainly how they want it to look. Sony controls their output too. And that's all this is. Nothing more.

Perhaps we should be looking at the advantages of what Sony is doing. And they are real. We could then discuss whether the pluses outweigh the minuses or not. Camera files are now very big. This causes problems right along the image production chain from processing time and storage issues. Sony performance clearly benefits from this in some areas. Given how few shots are affected by IQ issues and just how small the iQ problems are, I kind of think on balance the positives outweigh the negatives. All cameras are compromises to some extent (or we would all be carrying around huge, cumbersome devices.)
I'd like to some some analysis of gains v losses but being able to switch between the two would be OK. I'd bet that most users would use the Sony compressed RAW almost all of the time.

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2015 at 21:28 UTC
Total: 37, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »