Doug Pardee

Doug Pardee

Lives in United States Wilmington, NC, United States
Joined on May 28, 2005


Total: 257, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

deep7: The real headline could have been that Canon beat Sony to that title. After all, the A99Mk2 would have been a pretty serious contender, surely? More so than any recent Nikon anyway! Nothing against the Canon though. It is a very well-developed product which does an excellent job.

The A99-II isn't a DSLR. The viewfinder is electronic, not reflected optical.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2017 at 10:38 UTC
In reply to:

havoc315: Does it really make sense to separate "compact system" from dSLR? Especially, look at the award for the Sony 70-200/2.8 -- This lens is not "compact"... it's the same size as a 70-200/2.8 lens for a Canon or Nikon dSLR... And it's unfair to compare this to lenses that are built for m4:3 systems..
Calling the A9 the camera of the year.. but the 5div the best professional dSLR...
But the A9 is a professional camera?

The A9 is not a DSLR. It would be in the category of Professional Compact System ("mirrorless") camera, for which there was no separate award, probably because it would merely duplicate the Camera of the Year award.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 20:34 UTC
In reply to:

Anadrol: What is the best HDR software ? Who tried several ? Thanks :)

Would be great for this site to review them by the way.

@Sannaborjeson I've seen grotesque pictures that were clearly Photoshopped to death. Does that mean that Photoshop=bad taste?

HDR is a powerful tool for dealing with scenes that have higher dynamic range than your camera can capture, and for rendering HDR scenes into a viewable and printable dynamic range. Even with non-HDR photos, It lets you lift shadows and open highlights without sacrificing the overall contrast of an image.

Yes, if you push really hard, you'll get unrealistic results. The same can be said for ordinary contrast and saturation controls. But used deftly, HDR tools can produce some excellent results from challenging source images.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 10:41 UTC
In reply to:

maxnimo: So what's the output format? HDRjpeg? And on what sort of monitor/TV can you view this HDR output?

It's a regular JPEG. That's the fundamental thing that an HDR program does: it reduces the dynamic range in an HDR image down to something that is storable and displayable. The trick is doing it so that the image doesn't lose contrast.

Typically, there's an optional step ahead of that to let you build an HDR image by combining multiple captures at different exposures. But you can start with a single ordinary capture and skip the fusion step.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 21:25 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoUniverse: I thought photography HDR is a 2010 thing and nobody cares about it anymore?

@tinternaut HDR is two complementary processes. Exposure fusion increases the dynamic range over what could be captured with one exposure, then tone-mapping reduces the dynamic range to what can be printed or displayed on a screen. Obviously (?) the trick is to make the limited dynamic-range output image reflect the extended dynamic range in the capture(s).

Tone-mapping will remain a valuable process regardless how good sensors become. Alas, it's (generally) the tone-mapping step that can produce "unnatural" looks, either intentionally or accidentally. So that will also remain with us.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 20:49 UTC
In reply to:

Anadrol: What is the best HDR software ? Who tried several ? Thanks :)

Would be great for this site to review them by the way.

As with just about all software, there is no "best."

From what I can tell, Photomatix is the most popular. It seems to be easy to use, although other packages might be more powerful and give better results in at least some cases.

Nik HDR Efex Pro is also popular, perhaps because it's free, and in spite of some complications getting pictures in and out.

Aurora (which this news item is about) is also well-regarded, but until now it's been Mac-only, and that has limited its audience.

Me, I use Franzis HDR Projects. But that program is extremely technical, with quite a learning curve unless you're satisfied with simply using the presets.

Pretty much all software offers free trials -- well, Nik HDR Efex is completely free. Your best bet is to download the packages you're interested in and try them out yourself. Then you can see what YOU like.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 16:42 UTC

Where are the 6D mk II jokes?

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 16:33 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

daleeight: I couldn't trade in any of my Olympus bodies, including an E-M1 mk II, or a GH-5 or 4 for that matter, for a Sony a9....? Maybe they know someone wouldn't trade it in? or they think that less of the micro 4/3 crowd?

You can't trade in a Sony A6500 on the A9, either. With the exception of the Canon 1D Mark IV, the list is all "full-frame" digital cameras.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 20:39 UTC
In reply to:

kobakokh: its a rebranded one chinese flash... Cheapest flash in the world... With few additional money you can get much better other flashes... Best Chinese brands are Youngnuo and Godox, last one is real great manufacturer of wide range of lighting photo equipment... Buut now in China are at least 5-6 manufacturers of top specification flashes... Youngnuo, Mike, Godox, etc...

This is a rebranded Godox: the VT520.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 01:43 UTC
In reply to:

kb2zuz: Is the GN 33 meters or 33 feet?

Meters, at ISO 100. It'd help if they said that.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 01:31 UTC
In reply to:

82DMC12: So I already have a Godox X1-T trigger and a Godox TT350 for my Sony A6500. If I have the X1-T can I trigger the Amazon Basics flash if it's off-camera on a stand? I assume I'd have to manually set the power using the X1-T?

This is not an RF flash that you can trigger with the X-1T. It can, however, be triggered as an optical slave, firing when it detects another flash going off.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 01:29 UTC
In reply to:

arthur01: This looks a good buy for someone starting out but I have found that old Thyristor type electronic flashes will work on most digital slr's with a hot shoe. You don't get TTL but you get bounce and tilt and swivel and enough manual adjustments to nail your exposure.
I have posted on this on my blog.

Thyristor auto-flashes are nice for on-camera flash, but manual units like this one are great for off-camera flash. Most thyristor auto-flashes don't have optical slaving, while this one offers both first-flash and second-flash slaving.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2017 at 19:21 UTC
In reply to:

rjaywallace: Where is the Fuji X compatible version?

This should be compatible with all digital cameras except some older (2012 and earlier) Sony units. Besides, it's mainly useful as an off-camera optical slave, where it doesn't matter a whit what kind of camera you're using.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2017 at 15:43 UTC
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: My heart is breaking for DPR. I love this site and consider all the editors to be terrific writers and enviably good photographers.
But if editorial staff participating in those banal native advertising videos weren’t bad enough.... somehow this most recent betrayal feels even more unethical because the staff is sacrificing its credibility for such an inconsequential product.
One thing is for sure, the decision makers at DPR have crossed the moral bright line that divides news from hype and have lost forever the right to call themselves American journalists.
And no, a disclaimer at the bottom of the story doesn't absolve you of your sins; either you commit your career to work in accord with journalistic ethics or you don't. There is no middle ground. And actually what you wrote there isn't even a "disclosure." It's just a statement that sounds like it was written by a company lawyer as a preemptive defense for the unholy violation of a wonderful website.

@beavertown: the article ends with this disclosure:
"FULL DISCLOSURE: is a wholly-owned but editorially independent subsidiary of Amazon."

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2017 at 11:18 UTC
In reply to:

Aaron801: What's with Nikon/Canon comparable? If they aren't TTL, wouldn't they work with lots of other stuff? I wonder of I could use one of these (or perhaps another really cheapie, like the Newer) in my setup with my m43 cam? I have a dedicated m43 flash, but it would be nice to have a 2nd flash for off-camera, no-budget studio style set-ups. I actually have the stands and umbrella for a second flash unit and if one of these super-cheap flashes would work for me, it'd be a no-brainer to buy one... I'd be using it rarely enough that I certainly don't need the most robust model.

It absolutely will work as an off-camera flash. It's triggered by seeing your main camera's flash go off, and it can't tell from that what brand of camera it is. The S1/S2 choice lets it work whether your camera uses pre-flash (S2) or not (S1).

Even on-camera, it should work. As far as I know, all digital cameras except Sony use the ISO 518 standard hotshoe for manual flash, and Sony switched to it back in 2012.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2017 at 11:14 UTC
In reply to:

Steve in GA: I have gotten so lazy by relying on TTL, that I can't imagine going back to a manual flash, measuring the distance to the subject and then setting the power level on the flash. Although I used to do exactly that back in the 1970s and 80s when I was shooting weddings.

Maybe this flash needs to be introduced on Throwback Thursday.

Manual flash is widely used for off-camera (especially studio) setups. Check out the Strobist web site.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2017 at 20:29 UTC

I wouldn't think this flash is specific to Canon or Nikon. It's a manual flash, and presumably conforms to ISO 518, with only the single trigger pin in the hotshoe. I'd expect it to work on just about any hotshoe except maybe older Sony models.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2017 at 20:27 UTC as 50th comment
In reply to:

Josh Leavitt: The frustrating part I find in all of this is that registering for a photographic copyright can take up to 6-8 months. Most photographers want to post images to social media right after they're done with post-processing. It would be nice if the US Copyright Office would offer an expedited processing service if EXIF and GPS data were provided along with the photograph submission. We have the tech to make this process much faster today, so why not take advantage of it?

There is no problem with posting your photos immediately. The problem is that if the photo is misused, you'll have to wait until the copyright is registered before you can sue on the basis of copyright infringement. So the lawsuit must wait, that's all.

In this case the plaintiff brought suit before the copyright was fully registered.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2017 at 20:17 UTC
In reply to:

Mariano Pacifico: Nikon never recovered from the "earthquake". Sony's news is about its dominance in sensor not about their camera.

Sony lost in cellphone war ... portable music player ... stereos ... computers ... purchase of Nokia and so many lamentable business decisions.

When did Sony purchase Nokia? It was Microsoft that purchased Nokia.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2017 at 18:33 UTC
In reply to:

Peiasdf: I am guessing his Nikon is B&W consider photos of his kitchen and bathroom are B&W. And I certainly hope the vintage photos are originally B&W and he didn't scan it B&W to show vintage

The roll shown is Verichrome Pan, which is a B&W film.

I don't think any color negative process prior to C-41 -- in use since 1972 -- is currently able to be developed into color. For slides, I don't think any process other than E-6 -- in use since 1976 -- can be developed into color. However, I'm far, far from being an expert on the subject.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2017 at 14:57 UTC
Total: 257, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »