James Pilcher

Lives in United States Summit County, CO, United States
Works as a database designer
Joined on May 11, 2004
About me:

Hiker and high country addict. Three months/yr in SW Florida. Fujifilm X70, Olympus Pen F, numerous native µ4/3 lenses, Gitzo carbon tripods, RRS ball heads, Lightroom, Spyder Pro color calibration

Comments

Total: 102, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

The photography world, like much of the rest of the world, seems to have lost its collective mind. I could be wrong about that, but I don’t think so.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2018 at 02:25 UTC as 20th comment

While some of the photographs are interesting, I find much of the prose to be filled with important-sounding hollow buzz phrases.

Regarding the still life: "The work explores the tension between revelation and concealment questioning, amongst other things, the ethical implications of representing and divulging sensitive material of this nature."

Rubbish. If the photographer has to tell you what the image means, then the image has no meaning. The still life questions nothing and has no ethical implications. If it only stands on its own as part of a series, then the image does not stand on its own. Good grief, these descriptions are conceived by people who believe the viewer is an idiot.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2018 at 21:16 UTC as 29th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

James Pilcher: No tripod collar? It doesn't seem designed to accept one. Hmm...maybe that's a serious nod to IS in bodies and lenses?

@tkbslc: I can almost guarantee you that this lens will cause the entire rig to sag on any but the most robust tripod when the lens is fully extended with a 2x TC attached. An optional collar would be nice so a full kit can be attached to the tripod closer to the center of gravity. Or is that center of balance? Oh well, either way...

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2018 at 02:00 UTC
In reply to:

Angrymagpie: Is there any information about the maximum aperture size change vis-a-vis zoom range?

I saw one post that a test user says it's already f/2.9 at 51mm. So, expect the lens to be more of an f/3.5 to f/4 optic. I don't find that objectionable.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2018 at 17:33 UTC

No tripod collar? It doesn't seem designed to accept one. Hmm...maybe that's a serious nod to IS in bodies and lenses?

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2018 at 17:31 UTC as 17th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

OhWeh: A nice alternative to the Olympus 2,8/40-150.

Let's wait for image quality examples. My M.Zuiko 40-150mm f/2.8 Pro just blows me away with its superb image quality. I'll take f/2.8 and great image quality every day of the week. This Leica does look interesting, though.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2018 at 17:30 UTC
In reply to:

DenImage: Wow, thanks Sony, just what the average Sony camera user needs, another unaffordable lens 👍 (sarc).

Bring on the Sigma FE 150-600mm.
Den

@DenImage: Yes, it does make sense when thinking about new entrants to the ecosystem. All manufacturers are always looking for new consumers. No one can assume that every new consumer knows the entire history of Sony cameras. I reiterate: high-priced products, no matter how unobtainable for the average person, are good marketing for the entire system.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 01:50 UTC
In reply to:

DenImage: Wow, thanks Sony, just what the average Sony camera user needs, another unaffordable lens 👍 (sarc).

Bring on the Sigma FE 150-600mm.
Den

Halo products manufactured with “unobtanium” attract buyers at the low end. This 400mm f/2.8 is such a product. Sony may only manufacture six of them (yes, I’m exaggerating at the low end), but the average user and enthusiast will see the company as serious about photography; good marketing.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 14:16 UTC
In reply to:

photomedium: The whole set looks mushy and compressed. Typical m4/3 at ultrawide angle. I don't even think it's the lens per se but the quality seems only nominally better than cell phones, to my eyes. Can someone at DPR please take both apsc an m43 versions out there and take the same shot?

Hard to take your comment seriously when you don't even know what ultra-wide angle means in m4/3.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2018 at 15:18 UTC

Yeah. I really needed to see that. I don't come here for what is little more than political commentary from the editorial staff. I'll probably be banned for not conforming. I dare not write the words that I'm actually thinking.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 05:30 UTC as 56th comment
In reply to:

M H S: "There is a certain magic to Leica rangefinders"

The most tired and silly trope that just won't go away. The laws of physics aren't compatible with pixie dust. Please either quantitatively demonstrate that there is something better (heck, I'd even settle for "different") about Leica photos or drop the whole silly affectation.

@MHS

You really should read closely and consider what is actually written before you respond. Barney's comment is about Leica cameras; he says nothing about the images. In fact, nowhere in the article does Barney say or imply that Leica images are better or different, just "excellent."

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 16:12 UTC
In reply to:

James Pilcher: This Panasonic lens is part of a Japanese camera manufacturers plan. This 200mm f/2.8 introduction will allow Nikon, Canon, Pentax, et al to raise the price on their 200mm f/2.8 lens without appearing to overcharge. Higher profits = well..higher profits.

Yes! That feels much better. Thank you. <smile>

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 01:41 UTC

This Panasonic lens is part of a Japanese camera manufacturers plan. This 200mm f/2.8 introduction will allow Nikon, Canon, Pentax, et al to raise the price on their 200mm f/2.8 lens without appearing to overcharge. Higher profits = well..higher profits.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 15:42 UTC as 59th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

match14: How can this lens be $3000 when the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f2.8E FL ED VR had launch price of $2800?

@match14 : OK, then put your Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR lens on a m4/3 body and be done with it. It's no more complicated than that.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 15:28 UTC
In reply to:

Aaron801: even if I did have the cash, I can see spending that kind of money for a camera... At that point it seems to be as much jewelry as a tool. For me, I feel that there are much better options that cost much less. Still, all that being said, aesthetically these cameras are tops and this finish is really beautiful. I guess that if I chose cameras on aesthetics alone, I'd be coveting one of these... no doubt.

Aesthetics: My Olympus Pen F does that for me. I admire the Q immensely but cannot justify the cost for myself.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2017 at 14:40 UTC

Gotta say: Nice lookin' camera. 28mm Summilux, 24Mp FF sensor, 4Mp EVF. Very nice in silver.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 23:11 UTC as 60th comment

I will never know why so many people denigrate the m4/3 system and its followers. I have used 4/3 and m4/3 since 2004; I very much like the system. We have small lenses for small bodies and big lenses for the times when big lenses are necessary.

I never berate users of other formats, whether larger or smaller than m4/3. I have more class than that.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 21:21 UTC as 54th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

El Chubasco: Ouch! 1TB would not cut it for me and paying double of what I pay now for 2TB is kind of too much. I do not need cloud storage to backup my images, I already have one and the smart previews do everything I need now. I don't see the incentive to switch from Classic to CC besides the new interface.

@GabrielFFontes : That's all well and good about being better for mobile integration. The problem is, I don't remember asking for mobile integration.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 17:13 UTC

This is a mess. I want to think this over (sometimes called "counting to 10") before I declare what I'm thinking about Adobe as a company right now.

Maybe I'll just shoot jpeg and only look at my photos on my camera LCD. That way I don't have to bother with this kind of complexity and money-grabbing (oops, some of my thoughts about Adobe just slipped out).

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 17:09 UTC as 216th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Tapper123: Is such a lens needed in this age of digital PP? Does this have any applications for pros that actually justify its cost, or is more of a collector's oddity?

I think some photographers will explore its capabilities and try to use it creatively. I believe most copies of the lens will sit behind glass in a display case. Or, more to the point, will remain in the original box, which will sit behind glass in a display case.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 23:08 UTC
Total: 102, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »