Impulses

Lives in Puerto Rico Puerto Rico
Works as a student
Joined on Apr 7, 2013

Comments

Total: 2091, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Your † footnote doesn't seem to correspond with anything, no † before it!

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 19:25 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

RonnyW: As long as there's only paper that has a perforation through my 3:2 pictures no Selphy for me :-(

Huh? I've used Selphys to print 4:3 photos, it's just like any other 4:6 medium... Either crop a little or leave a slight empty border which you can cut off (after their perforated bit)... No reason you have to print past that if you arrange thing properly, maybe I'm confused.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 19:24 UTC
In reply to:

plantdoc: The connection description has me confused. Does the printer support direct wireless connection to a phone or camera? All the info talks about using a network, which has me confused. I want to use phone, camera, tablet and apps to connect directly to the print and not through some other network connection. I found Canons directions for setting up my Pixma all in one rather cryptic and brief. Hope this has better instructions for the moderately computer literate.

Unless it's changed from the CP1200 you can do it either way, thru a network or directly to a phone/tablet. They even have an app for printing tho it's pretty rudimentary and at least on Android I think you don't even have to use it (printer is discoverable).

I don't think it'll work directly from a camera's Wi-Fi, no standard for that AFAIK (maybe with Canons?). It does have an SD slot.

Wi-Fi printing worked very well, I bought the CP1200 with the battery for like $150 (the battery tends to be more expensive on it's own), Amazon has some nice travel cases for it too.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 19:21 UTC

Of course they do.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 19:11 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

tinternaut: I've written before that something like one of these would be nice to have when wandering the streets of any of the African cities I occasionally visit. People often ask to have their photo taken - it would be nice to give them something.

That said, this seems rather pricey for what it is.

I know, like I said, I've used one. I think it's actually closer to 25¢/print if you buy the larger packs. Probably cheaper than Instax, tho Amazon and other services can still beat that by a decent margin... But you do need to sit somewhere and wait for the print to go back and forth thru the printer before it's spit out, easily takes a minute between setup and whatnot.

Instax quality is kinda crap, the mini cameras are still fun tho, and the pricier printer is still somewhat appealing because you can literally hold it in your hand while it cranks out a print in <12s. If we're talking about handing prints out to people spur of the moment while "walking the streets" then that's clearly an advantage over something like Canon's dye sub 4x6" Selphy printers.

The Canon is still the better value, quality and cost wise, since they're priced similarly... Not really the point tho, for certain uses they're very different animals in practice.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 08:03 UTC
In reply to:

tinternaut: I've written before that something like one of these would be nice to have when wandering the streets of any of the African cities I occasionally visit. People often ask to have their photo taken - it would be nice to give them something.

That said, this seems rather pricey for what it is.

I know, like I said, I've used one. I think it's actually closer to 25¢/print if you buy the larger packs. Probably cheaper than Instax, tho Amazon and other services can still beat that by a decent margin... But you do need to sit somewhere and wait for the print to go back and forth thru the printer before it's spit out, easily takes a minute between setup and whatnot.

Instax quality is kinda crap, the mini cameras are still fun tho, and the pricier printer is still somewhat appealing because you can literally hold it in your hand while it cranks out a print in <12s. If we're talking about handing prints out to people spur of the moment while "walking the streets" then that's clearly an advantage over something like Canon's dye sub 4x6" Selphy printers.

The Canon is still the better value, quality and cost wise, since they're priced similarly... Not really the point tho, for certain uses they're very different animals in practice.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 08:03 UTC
In reply to:

tinternaut: I've written before that something like one of these would be nice to have when wandering the streets of any of the African cities I occasionally visit. People often ask to have their photo taken - it would be nice to give them something.

That said, this seems rather pricey for what it is.

I know, like I said, I've used one. I think it's actually closer to 25¢/print if you buy the larger packs. Probably cheaper than Instax, tho Amazon and other services can still beat that by a decent margin... But you do need to sit somewhere and wait for the print to go back and forth thru the printer before it's spit out, easily takes a minute between setup and whatnot.

Instax quality is kinda crap, the mini cameras are still fun tho, and the pricier printer is still somewhat appealing because you can literally hold it in your hand while it cranks out a print in <12s. If we're talking about handing prints out to people spur of the moment while "walking the streets" then that's clearly an advantage over something like Canon's dye sub 4x6" Selphy printers.

The Canon is still the better value, quality and cost wise, since they're priced similarly... Not really the point tho, for certain uses they're very different animals in practice.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 08:03 UTC
In reply to:

turretless: It's a really strange toy. Frankly I can't see the point. " you're basically just carrying around a mediocre digital camera that's glued to an instant printer" says it all.

The analog minis are a lot cheaper tho, key difference.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 00:45 UTC
In reply to:

tinternaut: I've written before that something like one of these would be nice to have when wandering the streets of any of the African cities I occasionally visit. People often ask to have their photo taken - it would be nice to give them something.

That said, this seems rather pricey for what it is.

I bought a Canon CP1200 for my mother recently, it's really nice but even with the battery it's not quite a slick or quick... If you have so much as a table to set up on then yeah, the prints blow anything Instax away. The Instax printers and/or cameras you could use straight out of a bag, no paper tray+faster printing etc.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 00:29 UTC
In reply to:

Impulses: For the price, it should've had Wi-Fi, tho I guess that would make their dedicated printer redundant... Are there any plans to release regular mini models with the square print format or are they gonna try and use the latter to lure people over to the more expensive digicam model?

I know right?

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 00:26 UTC

For the price, it should've had Wi-Fi, tho I guess that would make their dedicated printer redundant... Are there any plans to release regular mini models with the square print format or are they gonna try and use the latter to lure people over to the more expensive digicam model?

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2017 at 10:40 UTC as 33rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

NoMirror99: Headshot: no detail, no sharpness, no point!

Mirror shake... On a mirrorless body? :P OTOH GX8 was the last Pana body to suffer from noticeable SS before they went to a new shutter design and/or started offering EFC options, no clue if that was the culprit tho.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 16:50 UTC
In reply to:

marc petzold: The Photozone Review about this Lens was released almost 2 Months ago. :-)

http://www.photozone.de/m43/1007_leica1260f284

DPR had published some earlier samples... It's not like lens reviews are really their thing, at best they review a handful a year, and it's often not even recently released lenses. Extra galleries are still useful and welcome when you have a few conflicting reviews or are just hoping to check out something not covered by said reviews.

Cameralabs, Photozone, Lenstip, etc all seem to be on top of lens reviews to a much more effective degree. /shrug

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 16:45 UTC
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: Call me a bokeh whore but a 24-120mm f/5.6-8 just makes incredibly dull and 2D images to my eye. In my opinion that is. Unsurprisingly when I see impressive m43s images they're ALL taken with the 0.95 to 1.4 max primes.

What are the cheapest fast primes for m43s? AF is no concern.

Will I find a 50mm f/1.8 STM (85mm 2.8 equi) for a 100 bucks like on my Canon land? Because I do want to go 4K and fast glass aesthetic is the way I shoot.

The bodies are so damn cheap for the video quality they offer, wonderful resolution and lovely colour (Panny that is!) and when paired with fast enough glass that give the shallow DOF and take the sharpness edge off, they look mighty cinematic!

What are the most affordable lens/adapters that can give me DOF equivalent to f/2.8 on FF? Ideally a 25mm/50mm f/1.2 would give me the same look the nifty fifty does, which is all I need really. Cheapest cheapeat. No need for good build quality, sharpness wide open, IS, AF, just the optical look.

As far as short teles, the Oly 45/1.8 has been around a long while and you might be able to find that one used for <$200... The Sigma 60/2.8 can yield somewhat of the same DoF control depending on working distance, it's $210 new and one of the sharpest primes around... Adapted legacy/manual lenses is probably the way to go if you're doing MF for video and/or going as cheap as possible.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 16:19 UTC
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: Call me a bokeh whore but a 24-120mm f/5.6-8 just makes incredibly dull and 2D images to my eye. In my opinion that is. Unsurprisingly when I see impressive m43s images they're ALL taken with the 0.95 to 1.4 max primes.

What are the cheapest fast primes for m43s? AF is no concern.

Will I find a 50mm f/1.8 STM (85mm 2.8 equi) for a 100 bucks like on my Canon land? Because I do want to go 4K and fast glass aesthetic is the way I shoot.

The bodies are so damn cheap for the video quality they offer, wonderful resolution and lovely colour (Panny that is!) and when paired with fast enough glass that give the shallow DOF and take the sharpness edge off, they look mighty cinematic!

What are the most affordable lens/adapters that can give me DOF equivalent to f/2.8 on FF? Ideally a 25mm/50mm f/1.2 would give me the same look the nifty fifty does, which is all I need really. Cheapest cheapeat. No need for good build quality, sharpness wide open, IS, AF, just the optical look.

" I don't understand why someone would use m4/3 and then buy that gigantic 25mm 1.2 for the ridiculous price of $1200. Honestly, at which point is it better to just get a fullframe and even a 50mm 1.8? I really don't get it, but I'm sure some people do... "

If shallow DoF is your bread and butter then yeah, said lens doesn't make much sense... However if you bought into the system to use (and are happy with) some of the other tiny/slower options, then one much faster prime isn't gonna break the camel's back. The rest of the system can still be far smaller... It's a balance thing, everyone finds theirs, you found yours elsewhere.

If someone was making smaller internal zooming high grade f5.6 FF zooms w/sealing for daylight shooting and a full line of smaller high grade f2.8-3.5 primes w/AF for when I just don't need *that* much DoF control then I'd be shooting FF. ;)

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 16:13 UTC
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: Call me a bokeh whore but a 24-120mm f/5.6-8 just makes incredibly dull and 2D images to my eye. In my opinion that is. Unsurprisingly when I see impressive m43s images they're ALL taken with the 0.95 to 1.4 max primes.

What are the cheapest fast primes for m43s? AF is no concern.

Will I find a 50mm f/1.8 STM (85mm 2.8 equi) for a 100 bucks like on my Canon land? Because I do want to go 4K and fast glass aesthetic is the way I shoot.

The bodies are so damn cheap for the video quality they offer, wonderful resolution and lovely colour (Panny that is!) and when paired with fast enough glass that give the shallow DOF and take the sharpness edge off, they look mighty cinematic!

What are the most affordable lens/adapters that can give me DOF equivalent to f/2.8 on FF? Ideally a 25mm/50mm f/1.2 would give me the same look the nifty fifty does, which is all I need really. Cheapest cheapeat. No need for good build quality, sharpness wide open, IS, AF, just the optical look.

The Sigma 30/1.4 is probably the best value as far as AF primes faster than f1.7/1.8 go... I keep forgetting that one.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 16:08 UTC
In reply to:

tinternaut: Ooh, look what Panasonic just hit out of the park*. Bokeh looks worthy of the name they've stuck on it. It's a nice looking alternative to the 12-35 and 12-40, for those who need extra versatility.

* With apologies from a Brit possibly using a bad Americanism (or a good Americanism badly).

Baseball also stopped being the national pastime a while ago, so there's probably a demographic in the US that doesn't even get that. :P

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 15:58 UTC
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: Call me a bokeh whore but a 24-120mm f/5.6-8 just makes incredibly dull and 2D images to my eye. In my opinion that is. Unsurprisingly when I see impressive m43s images they're ALL taken with the 0.95 to 1.4 max primes.

What are the cheapest fast primes for m43s? AF is no concern.

Will I find a 50mm f/1.8 STM (85mm 2.8 equi) for a 100 bucks like on my Canon land? Because I do want to go 4K and fast glass aesthetic is the way I shoot.

The bodies are so damn cheap for the video quality they offer, wonderful resolution and lovely colour (Panny that is!) and when paired with fast enough glass that give the shallow DOF and take the sharpness edge off, they look mighty cinematic!

What are the most affordable lens/adapters that can give me DOF equivalent to f/2.8 on FF? Ideally a 25mm/50mm f/1.2 would give me the same look the nifty fifty does, which is all I need really. Cheapest cheapeat. No need for good build quality, sharpness wide open, IS, AF, just the optical look.

Pana 25/1.7 is often $150, that's the cheapest one with AF and/or >f2 IIRC... There's some tiny and moderataly priced MF f0.95 Chinese lenses (Mitakon etc), and then there's the pricey Voigtlanders, not to mention Oly's even pricier 25/1.2. Not gonna find a lot of native $100 lenses but you can always adapt I guess...

P.S. bokeh whore ;)

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 15:55 UTC
On article Google introduces Backup and Sync for Photos and Drive (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

MEDISN: And when Google makes a compressed copy of your photo it erases relevant EXIF data including when the original photo was taken. I used it briefly as iPhone photo backup but reverted to OneDrive backup as it doesn't change the original and makes it simple to archive on my home server.

I've used Drive, Dropbox, and OneDrive extensively (for personal use and because lots of small office clients depend on that kinda stuff); and MS OneDrive is easily the worst at keeping stuff sync'd up. It'll throw up all kinds of long filename errors and basically just sit there frozen without giving a detailed breakdown of what's going on.

I've swore off it entirely even tho they grandfathered me something like 25GB for free from back when the service was Windows Live Mesh or whatever. Dropbox is easily the best, and the most expensive since they can't compete with Google/MS' server farms. I still use Dropbox and Drive and even Amazon, tho they've had the most convoluted and ever changing desktop clients.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 03:38 UTC
On article Google introduces Backup and Sync for Photos and Drive (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

sh10453: Google has demonstrated more than once that it cannot be trusted or relied on when it comes to image apps.
Picasa, and the NIK collection are just examples.

Besides, this is just a renaming of Google Drive.
Google Drive for desktop PC's has been out there for years, and it's similar to DropBox and other applications for cloud storage.
So beware. If you install this app, it will automatically uninstall and replace Google Drive from your PC

Actually the Drive client will self update to this, it's essentially just an update for the former with integration for Photos... And really poor branding on Google's part. The beta and release timing were kinda botched too, I'm glad to have the Photos integration but it seems there's quite a few bugs still present. They've never been great at keeping any desktop/x86 solutions current and relevant, never mind Linux.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 03:34 UTC
Total: 2091, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »