Lives in United States United States
Has a website at http://www.kurtlawson.com
Joined on Jun 29, 2007


Total: 30, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

geekyrocketguy: These specs make no sense.
1) It's an alt-az mount, so field rotation would be catastrophic. But there's no mention of a camera rotator... Is someone who is spending $45K going to accept star trailing in exposures over a minute or so?
2) I'm guessing the 0.9 arcsec "separating power" is a lambda/D metric. But that requires at least Nyquist pixel sampling... which 0.7 arcsec pixels are definitely not. So no, you won't be resolving objects separated by 0.9 arcsec.
3) Is this really just a 3-element lens? A Canon 800 f/5.6 on an equitorial mount would beat this in every metric.
4) Limiting magnitude 20, but no mention of the assumptions that went to that? Any system can resolve infinity magnitude objects if they expose for eternity...

Ze De Boni if you're such an expert you can refute each of GRG's points with actual facts and discussion rather than just copying and pasting in specs from a space telescope built in the 1980's (launched in 1990) that has nothing whatsoever to do with this 2021 ground telescope.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2021 at 18:27 UTC

RRS is really not on their marketing game. They should have learned from Peak Design that the correct way to market a travel tripod is to pay every instagram influencer and youtuber around to pimp it out. Also, $1450 is ... absurdly high, and I say this as someone who owns one set of RRS legs.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2021 at 16:43 UTC as 136th comment
In reply to:

geekyrocketguy: Wow, those corners are terrible. Even the shots where the lens is (presumably) stopped down have mush corners.

It's a useful lens if you always put your subject in the center, I guess, but at 14mm, most people will care about corner detail.

LOL what a joke. People who have different standards of what is acceptable vs what is terrible are clowns to you? Ok then. Enjoy your soft corners and lack of understanding about what a sharp lens is for astrophotography. The Iowa lens based on the sample images is objectively softer at the corners compared to lenses like the Sigma 14-24 2.8 art. If you can't understand the difference then I feel sorry for you.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2020 at 21:45 UTC
In reply to:

geekyrocketguy: Wow, those corners are terrible. Even the shots where the lens is (presumably) stopped down have mush corners.

It's a useful lens if you always put your subject in the center, I guess, but at 14mm, most people will care about corner detail.

ecka84 when stars in the center of the frame are sharp and the ones in the corners are "out of focus" by your own admission.... that means the corners are soft, which some people consider to be terrible. Star trail motion does not cause the trails to be larger than the diameter of stars elsewhere in frame. The corners are terrible. There are other lenses that don't have this problem.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2020 at 17:42 UTC
In reply to:

geekyrocketguy: Wow, those corners are terrible. Even the shots where the lens is (presumably) stopped down have mush corners.

It's a useful lens if you always put your subject in the center, I guess, but at 14mm, most people will care about corner detail.

The corners are seriously terrible, like vaseline is smeared on the lens elements terrible.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2020 at 14:28 UTC

This is why you should never just rely on a cloud based solution to safeguard and manage all your data.

Link | Posted on Aug 20, 2020 at 15:41 UTC as 72nd comment | 2 replies
On article Sony 12-24mm F2.8 GM sample gallery (85 comments in total)
In reply to:

Astro Landscapes: Quite possibly the worlds' best astro-landscape zoom...

...narry a nightscape test photo.

DPReview, CALL ME. I can help you!

Yes, DPReview please call Matt. Then maybe you will have sample images that are useful for those of us who like to take photos at night.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2020 at 16:32 UTC

How exciting! I can't wait for still cameras to completely ignore all these new speed gains and still write to card at a glacial pace.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2020 at 22:34 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply

The real sad thing about Instagram is that it has convinced so many millions of people to just consume photography as little thumbnails. It's hard for me to think of the platform as anything other than that. Tiny little low-res representations of images is with likes and comments are the only things it has to offer. If you could see images at a large size like on an iPad, it might dispel some of the illusions of all the heavy processing, skin filtering, and other extreme processing that everyone looks for now when they think of photography.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2020 at 16:22 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
On article Phase One announces new XT camera system (233 comments in total)

Finally a new camera for the top 1% of landscape photographers!
Or is it 2%?
Are there really that many landscape photographers that make enough from that photography to afford / justify this camera system? Or maybe it's just for really rich people who want to get into landscape photography?

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2019 at 14:40 UTC as 34th comment | 5 replies
On article Sigma 14-24mm F2.8 DG DN Art sample gallery (87 comments in total)

Yet again it seems there is no even basic checklist of images to try to take for sample images so that people might actually learn something. Maybe find a wide landscape or cityscape and shoot an entire aperture range of that one view? Such a wide angle fast lens is going to get used for landscapes quite often, so such tests would be useful. There's nothing at all to be learned about wide open performance for night landscapes for instance from these samples. This looks like the person taking the sample images had about 5 minutes to complete the task.

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2019 at 15:28 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

G Master: Canon has to crowdfund to gauge the public’s interest. What about crowdfunding for better sensors?

Unfortunately Canon wouldn't understand or acknowledge what the campaign was about.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2019 at 15:34 UTC

Oh poor Canon. They only Canon had a 3.11 $BILLION profit last year and therefore must seek to find people to crowdfund their ideas.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2019 at 15:33 UTC as 18th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Lotari: Here's a 9216x6912px version, rehosted at imgur:
Not too bad considering size of sensor and optics. Though at 100% it's obvious there's quite a bit of processing going on in background (watercolour effect in foliage, etc).


That full resolution image looks like garbage. So much processing to try to create more resolution.... yuck.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2019 at 17:09 UTC
In reply to:

DougDolde: Where's the lens?

Did you actually look at the photos? There are two lenses even.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2019 at 17:52 UTC
In reply to:

henhen: why stop at 6K? why not have 24K time lapse? i mean its just stitching photos together? sure 24k will be basically useless viewing anywhere, but advertising 6k timelapses is like trying to cover up this cheap product with an over the top price!!

they even say the app is free but "specialized functionality aimed at the likes of the construction industry will incur a fee"... i understand timelapse contstruction is cool, but apparently construction is so different from lets say, flowers, that an extra fee is required?!

The company is in france, but the product is made where?

next month there will be 10 chinese companies with 24K solar powered 40000maH 5g, etc etc. product swith for 50$...if they are not out already

Why don't you actually propose what you think is such a cheap alternative matching the capabilities of these devices. It needs to be weatherproof, have a long lasting battery, internal storage, automatic uploads to the cloud over wifi and/or cellular, have solar power input, and have software for automatically combining all the frames together. Add all that up and let's just see how much cheaper you get.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2019 at 17:50 UTC
In reply to:

khunpapa: Very good spec !

But can't imagine out what situation requires this 220-degree timelapse?

Even in the demo clip, I still couldn't see the reason _why_ one should shell out $1000++ ..

@henhen The technology to pan and scan around a larger video has been around for decades. These days can do it in Premiere, or After Effects, or Final Cut Pro, or whatever really easily. But why fuss about it, you are clearly not the intended market for it.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2019 at 17:43 UTC
In reply to:

Imager of: Or just use your smart phone. They have timelapse now. You can thank me later for saving you money.

Is your phone going to charge itself with its built in solar panel too?

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2019 at 17:38 UTC
In reply to:

NewEraPhotographer: Shame on this production company for shooting a bunch of losers jumping around and showing their ignorance by waving around guns like they are hard or something... have some self respect and tell these "rap" losers to kick rocks if they want to jump around like uneducated idiots in front of a camera. And shame on the rap & hip hop communities for allowing hot garbage trash music like this to be popular. That these clowns make even a dollar making music like this is pathetic and shows why a majority of America has no respect for any of them.

I love it when people present their subjective opinions as fact. This whole thread reminded me of the South Park episode "You're Getting Old" where everything Stan listens to starts to sound like crap. You might think that rap now is crap, but there's clearly plenty of others with a different opinion. You might as well sit in a rocking chair and yell at the new artists to get off your lawn. I also appreciate the assumption that everyone in a creative service industry can always just turn down whatever projects they choose if they simply don't like it. That's hilarious. I've worked on a number of music videos for groups I didn't like, but things like the relationship with the client (not talking about the actual musical act) or the need to continue making payroll are far more important.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2019 at 19:39 UTC

I genuinely don't understand the people commenting here that are so offended that an advancement in technology is listed as a "pro" and thus not having it is a "con."

IBIS and OIS used to be a binary choice - it was one or the other - but technology has shown that you can have both. So for any lens that doesn't have OIS you can add some stabilization. For any lens with OIS you can then take advantage of the lens's corrections as well as the other axis that OIS cannot account for by using both together. That is a technological advancement that increases the capabilities of the camera, for stills *and* video.

It's like dynamic range. New sensor technology advanced to provide more of it. So if you have a sensor that doesn't have modern range, then it is indeed a "con" because technology has moved forward allowing cameras to capture more information

Camera manufacturers are not churches. They make tools. Use the best tools with the best technology. OIS only is limiting plain and simple

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2018 at 16:19 UTC as 170th comment | 1 reply
Total: 30, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »