Bob Topp

Lives in United States Huntsville, United States
Works as a EE
Has a website at http://fotki.com/HBN-Photos
Joined on Nov 19, 2001
About me:

Slowly migrating from D300/D700 to m4/3...

Comments

Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1090 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Rale: I apologize for my ignorance but I am struggling with application of whole ISO-invariance thing. Since shooting at e.g. ISO100+5stops is "almost" as good as ISO3200, why not just shoot ISO3200? Can somebody give me real life example where this would be beneficial?

@The Rale- one can never tell what another poster's level of understanding is on DPReview. I didn't mean to sound overly simplistic, but there are people who would shoot at ISO 3200 or above all the time if they could, without taking other factors into account.

But basically, my answer applies to any case where you actually want a slow shutter speed, as in capturing motion blur. Somehow, I don't think most D500 users will be out fooling with landscapes, but you never know.

Frankly, for the kind of shooting I do, I would like to be able to run the sensitivity as high as possible while using flash- it lets me get a LOT more mileage out of the flash. I've been using the D7200 this way quite a lot at ISO 800/1600, sometimes pulling off as many as six shots in a row before totally discharging the SB-800. This kind of shooting comes with its own set of problems, and I know few people who would care to deal with them.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2016 at 19:14 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1090 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Rale: I apologize for my ignorance but I am struggling with application of whole ISO-invariance thing. Since shooting at e.g. ISO100+5stops is "almost" as good as ISO3200, why not just shoot ISO3200? Can somebody give me real life example where this would be beneficial?

One reason not to use ISO 3200 all the time: If you shoot flash outdoors, you won't be able sync a the shutter speeds resulting from ISO 3200.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2016 at 18:43 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (783 comments in total)
In reply to:

capanikon: Omitting the rinky-dink pop-up flash makes the D500 a more attractive camera, IMO.
Those pop-up flashes are beyond dumb. They belong only on Canon Rebels and the like.

Just a crazy afterthought to this discussion- considering the phenomenal ISO sensitivity of this camera, maybe you won't need the pop-up flash.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 20:00 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (783 comments in total)
In reply to:

Carlos Loff: What the hell happened to the D200/D300 outer frontal/lateral AF switch with AF-C / AF-S options ??? Now it is just AM/AF ??? MY GOOD - CRIME CRIME CRIMEEEEEE

I know, I know, now we press it and dial on the small screen, but I loved the way the manual option switch worked because I could change it with just one finger in the dark

Only because you referred to the "manual" switch, which could be taken to mean either switching it manually, or switching to manual position. I took it as manual position because, after all, aren't all switches manual? Sorry for the confusion.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2016 at 15:47 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (783 comments in total)
In reply to:

Carlos Loff: What the hell happened to the D200/D300 outer frontal/lateral AF switch with AF-C / AF-S options ??? Now it is just AM/AF ??? MY GOOD - CRIME CRIME CRIMEEEEEE

I know, I know, now we press it and dial on the small screen, but I loved the way the manual option switch worked because I could change it with just one finger in the dark

It may be my eyes, Carlos, but without an old-style focusing screen, it is really hard for me to do manual focus at an event. For the situation you describe, i.e., wanting some shallow DOF shots, I have taken to carrying two cameras. I shoot dances often twice a week, and keep the D700 around my neck with an 85/1.8 mounted, and either the D7200 or EM-1 on a Spider belt clip, with 24-70/2.8 equivalent lenses. My issue with shallow DOF is more to do with low light than speed and accuracy. However, I appreciate your approach. One alternative you may want to investigate, though, especially if you use Nikon lenses: after autofocusing, you can manually re-focus while half-pressing the shutter button; to me that is preferable to switching to manual mode, and somewhat faster.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2016 at 21:35 UTC
On article Nikon's New D5 and D500 Push the Boundaries of DSLR (737 comments in total)
In reply to:

Steve Sanacore: I just can't see how either of these cameras pushes any boundaries... The D5 seems like a small incidental upgrade to the D4 which is a camera really only useful to sports shooters. As far as the D500, does anyone buy a cropped sensor camera these days? I guess it's nice to have options, but I still don't see any boundaries being pushed here compare to Sony, Panasonic, Leica, and Phase who are truly making major leaps in design and features. Glad to see Nikon still trying though.

My EM-1 does an admirable job, but cannot match the speed of focusing in low light, or the outright precision, that I can achieve with either the D700 or the D7200. I would expect the D500 to outperform all of them. Where I need only focus on action moving across my field of view, the EM-1 is impressive, refocusing and buffering a high-speed burst; but once the action starts moving fore and aft, all bets are off. ...and the lower the light, the worse it gets.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2016 at 21:44 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (783 comments in total)
In reply to:

Carlos Loff: What the hell happened to the D200/D300 outer frontal/lateral AF switch with AF-C / AF-S options ??? Now it is just AM/AF ??? MY GOOD - CRIME CRIME CRIMEEEEEE

I know, I know, now we press it and dial on the small screen, but I loved the way the manual option switch worked because I could change it with just one finger in the dark

As inmagine pointed out, there's no menu diving. You get a single window on the back screen, set your options and leave. Frankly, for any given task, my AF settings at most change between AF-S and AF-C. Your mileage may vary. I'll add, though, that I still bumped the #!^@'d switch the other night and found myself unable to attain focus, for no understandable reason.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2016 at 21:58 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (783 comments in total)
In reply to:

Carlos Loff: What the hell happened to the D200/D300 outer frontal/lateral AF switch with AF-C / AF-S options ??? Now it is just AM/AF ??? MY GOOD - CRIME CRIME CRIMEEEEEE

I know, I know, now we press it and dial on the small screen, but I loved the way the manual option switch worked because I could change it with just one finger in the dark

Ah, but the old switches were so easy to change without intending to. I have just started using a D7200 and find the center button no problem at all, in addition to being more reliable.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 19:48 UTC
On photo 17_ISO125_Dan5678 in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (2 comments in total)

tough shot getting such a clear reflection in low light- nice job

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 18:58 UTC as 1st comment
On a photo in the Sony RX100 IV Real World Samples sample gallery (2 comments in total)

tough shot getting such a clear reflection in low light- nice job

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 18:58 UTC as 1st comment
On a photo in the Sony RX100 IV Real World Samples sample gallery (1 comment in total)

Nice capture of dynamic range- very pleasing and natural looking.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 18:54 UTC as 1st comment
On photo 20_ISO125_Dan5780 in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Nice capture of dynamic range- very pleasing and natural looking.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 18:54 UTC as 1st comment
On photo 25_ISO6400_Dan-ACR in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (2 comments in total)

Pretty high on the clarity slider, especially with people in the frame. Could probably back it down to 10-15 and get rid of a lot of the noise as well.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 18:50 UTC as 1st comment
On a photo in the Sony RX100 IV Real World Samples sample gallery (2 comments in total)

Pretty high on the clarity slider, especially with people in the frame. Could probably back it down to 10-15 and get rid of a lot of the noise as well.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 18:50 UTC as 1st comment
On article Cold War camera: 1950s Berlin in color (part 1) (122 comments in total)

If you want some more interesting history on the recovery of the city, read about Teufelsberg: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teufelsberg The "listening post" shown in one of the pictures was built in 1972. Ironically, abandoned, it is slowly becoming more of the rubbish comprising the hill.

Because West Berlin was surrounded by the wall, it became very difficult to deal with garbage disposal. The solution was to bulldoze it into higher and higher mounds. When a mound got big enough, it was landscaped and turned into a park. These mounds were built up near Teufelsberg itself, eventually creating a manmade range of hills in what is an ancient sea bottom, and otherwise very flat.

I was unable to travel to the Russian sector due to security issues, but friends who went there to shop and tour on weekends said that (as of the early 1970s) there were still whole city blocks of WWII rubble in East Berlin. By then, W. Berlin was a bustling Weldstadt, as it was viewed then.

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2014 at 15:26 UTC as 8th comment
On photo 20140102-_m5b8792 in the Downtown Outdoors challenge (9 comments in total)

Congratulations

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 18:28 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

Hugo808: Wow, I'd have thought the opposite would be the case with all the great cameras on the market!

We'd better get out there and spend some cash if we want to see an XT-2 or a D400. No point just talking about them.....

We were ready to spend money on a D400 years ago. Some of us have drifted off to M4/3 and Fuji, who knows where? But once those F-mount lenses get sold, there will be no returning. ...nor is the money really there any more.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2014 at 21:57 UTC

I have a Sigma 70-200/2.8 and 1.4 TC, pre-stabilization era. For sports, the lens was used mostly on a monopod for several years. First the TC got a bit loose (floppy). When it would not autofocus reliably, I set the TC aside and continued to use the lens until it, too, became loose. Being on a limited budget, I decided tofix it the best I could. Presently a few wraps of electrical tape hold the main body together well, and ample superglue fixed the TC. The tape is just enough nuisance to keep me from using the tripod clamp though.

I'm pretty sure my habit of leaning on the lens while using the monopod caused the problem in the first place. Now that I hold it, it works fine and shows no more problems. I still think of the lens as pretty much bullet-proof, and it has really strengthened my right-hand grip! In the long run, I'm sure the mass of these lenses is the primary wear factor- and I wouldn't want the added complexity of internal stabilization, at least for my use.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 15:29 UTC as 50th comment
In reply to:

jdhill66: Another situation where this technique is helpful is casual flash photography where near portions are too hot and far portions are too dark.

Not so, Abe,

The article might make me consider buying some extra software, but in fact, it pointed out things about software I already own that I have not taken advantage of. I appreciated the issues addressed by the author, even if this overall topic has to come up pretty often. It always helps to see alternate solutions compared side by side (and without my having to buy the software up front).

Thanks for the effort, Ellen.

BT

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2011 at 20:03 UTC
In reply to:

feinschmecker: Is this the conclusion: "Buy this book on Amazon.com"?!?

@ Mr. Diallo,

What happened to, "The customer is always right?" Yes, we understand that reviews take a long time to do thoroughly, but the fact is that the feature articles, in particular, have grown increasingly fluffy. The recent article on shooting at the beach was just such a fluff piece, and DPReview of ten years ago would not have published many, if any, of those shots unless to use them as examples of what not to do. I will always be an amateur, but I have grown from the comments of the many capable and generally competent participants on this site in the past. I would certainly like to see it remain top notch.

BT

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2011 at 19:18 UTC
Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20