D200_4me

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Feb 2, 2006

Comments

Total: 320, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

It's easy for some to forget how good a 'basic' camera can be these days. Put this camera in the hands of someone that knows what they're doing (as shown here for example) and you'll get some wonderful, high quality images. After having switched back to a DSLR from mirrorless, I can say for sure you really don't 'need' the newest, most feature-packed mirrorless to get outstanding images. Some day I'll be back to mirrorless, but for now I'm no rush at all because for my style and subject matter, a DSLR does the job for me...and it does a great job.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2016 at 15:55 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply

My suitcase that I mainly use for business trips is about 2 inches thinner than this one but other than that, it's similar in size (height/width) and I normally don't have any trouble even on the commuter jets like the Canadair CRJ900. Occasionally I'll get a gate agent that gives me that look and insists I take one of the tags to check it at the ramp even though it does fit perfectly overhead. Anyway, I think the roller case in this story would probably not make it overhead on a CRJ900 if the agents see you walking by with it (tag for you).

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2016 at 21:29 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
On article 2017 Sony World Photography Awards accepting entries (48 comments in total)

Very nice set of images.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2016 at 15:55 UTC as 12th comment
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Sony a99 II (442 comments in total)
In reply to:

D200_4me: Maybe this is a route Nikon should take. A DSLR-like mirrorless body that would still accept all their F mount lenses? I would buy it if they made it (assuming the specs were right).

If they do plan on making a new mount for a smaller body size (whether it be APS-C or full frame), they better do it soon because they'll keep losing market share. If they had focused on a larger sensor mirrorless instead of the 1" sensor back then, I think they'd be a much stronger position now. The 1" has its place though...I just think they have waited too long to bring out a large sensor mirrorless ILC.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2016 at 18:59 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Sony a99 II (442 comments in total)
In reply to:

D200_4me: Maybe this is a route Nikon should take. A DSLR-like mirrorless body that would still accept all their F mount lenses? I would buy it if they made it (assuming the specs were right).

The point would be additional functionality that comes mirrorless like fast AF during live view, good quality EVF that's good for what you see is what you get view before taking a shot (makes it easier to adjust exposure up front rather than estimating, taking a shot, check it and then taking another shot and checking the exposure again on the rear screen).

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2016 at 17:04 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands-on with Sony a99 II (442 comments in total)

Maybe this is a route Nikon should take. A DSLR-like mirrorless body that would still accept all their F mount lenses? I would buy it if they made it (assuming the specs were right).

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2016 at 13:41 UTC as 11th comment | 5 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: Photokina's greatest hits (45 comments in total)

2007/2008 was a huge time for Nikon since that's when they basically jumped ahead of canon with the D3 and D700. Before then canon had all the high ISO glory and image quality

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 22:45 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Craig from Nevada: I have spent a fair amount of time visiting US National Parks. The one constant is a complete lack of awareness and common sense of visitors. They simply ignore or disregard signs and warnings (don't swim, don't walk here, don't feed the animals) It is a though they believe the signs were left for someone else and not them.

I know for sure we have our own batch of people who don't listen, but when I visit our national parks and see people doing things they shouldn't, they're almost always foreign tourists.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 15:09 UTC

Well I always thought it was pretty easy to spot. Endless gloomy, moody and dark selfies.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 23:23 UTC as 25th comment | 1 reply
On article Brooks Institute announces closure (132 comments in total)

I guess there are too many 'workshops' being offered today to turn everyone into a Nat Geo photog and they couldn't compete with that. If I see one more Iceland workshop...

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2016 at 20:59 UTC as 34th comment | 5 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: when studio lenses retire (203 comments in total)

I had two copies of this lens and I was not at all impressed or happy with it. I replaced my last copy with the 50 f/1.8G and I like it much better. The 50 f/1.4D is soft. And yes, I did do the AF fine tune to be sure I wasn't just missing focus a little and confusing missed focus/shallow DoF with overall softness of the lens.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2016 at 11:07 UTC as 77th comment
On article Sony a7R II versus a7 II: Eight key differences (397 comments in total)

What they need to do is create a 24MP version of the A7R II and then I'd be more interested. I don't need/want 42MP and I don't want the lesser performance of the existing sensor in the A7 II.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2016 at 13:57 UTC as 74th comment | 5 replies
On article 19 tips for better live music photography (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

RPJG: Thanks for the write-up.

You recommend using Manual, but also state "The last thing you want to do is get caught fumbling with controls when something epic is happening".

Given that the correct exposure can change very quickly based on where you're standing, where you're pointing the camera, and the venue lighting, surely aperture- or shutter-priority with auto ISO isn't a bad idea?

And if you're on M only, then surely there'd be a fair bit of chimping required to make sure you're not losing half your shots? (unless you've been doing this for so long that you can instantly assess exposure just by eye, which I guess most of us can't do)?

Auto ISO and (on Nikon) highlight weighted metering works well. Otherwise, spot metering.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2016 at 12:53 UTC

Those posed portraits of the women on the horses are beautiful. Nice work.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 13:27 UTC as 63rd comment | 1 reply

Back in the day when I thought my Fuji F30 was awesome. How times have changed :-)

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 20:05 UTC as 41st comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

D200_4me: I like Flickr, but honestly the Yahoo main page (search, news, etc) is horrible and seems geared to low information folks. Lots of sensationalized ads pointing you to other questionable web sites.

Instagram is far worse in that respect, but yes....I know what you mean.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 16:52 UTC

I like Flickr, but honestly the Yahoo main page (search, news, etc) is horrible and seems geared to low information folks. Lots of sensationalized ads pointing you to other questionable web sites.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 16:07 UTC as 41st comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

D200_4me: For what it's worth, after owning the X-Pro1, X100S, X-T1, X20 and currently the original X100, I doubt I'll be back unless something major happens with the X-Trans sensor. Either a way to make it have as much details and texture as the bayer type sensors (like that in the X100 and many other cameras that use that type of sensor) or them getting rid of the X-Trans completely. Trust me, I've followed the whole 'smearing' of details debate with raw files and Lightroom and that's not exactly what I'm talking about. Even my JPG files had smoothed out details compared to the original X100 I have and compared to the a6000 I just sold and compared to the Nikon DSLRs I still own. Other than that, I love Fuji's philosophy, level of customization, ease of use, nice lenses and general design of the bodies. But...my old X-T1 just did not have the overall image quality at base ISO my D750/Df has. That has nothing to do with sensor size - I'm talking base ISO. Please get rid of X-Trans...

I had my D700 for over 3 years....because it was a wonderful camera. I'm still waiting for the next 'D700'...which is why I've bounced around a bit over the last few years. The D750 is the closest thing I've found as an equal to a camera that made me very content, but it's still lacking in some way. I'd prefer mirrorless at this point, but it needs to be the RIGHT mirrorless. We're not there just yet, in my own personal opinion. Anyway, it's easy to just accuse someone of 'GAS' rather than to think about what I said and see whether or not it's a valid concern for some shooters (the X-Trans issue). I'll be the first to admit I've bounced around too much lately but there's a reason for it.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 17:26 UTC
In reply to:

D200_4me: For what it's worth, after owning the X-Pro1, X100S, X-T1, X20 and currently the original X100, I doubt I'll be back unless something major happens with the X-Trans sensor. Either a way to make it have as much details and texture as the bayer type sensors (like that in the X100 and many other cameras that use that type of sensor) or them getting rid of the X-Trans completely. Trust me, I've followed the whole 'smearing' of details debate with raw files and Lightroom and that's not exactly what I'm talking about. Even my JPG files had smoothed out details compared to the original X100 I have and compared to the a6000 I just sold and compared to the Nikon DSLRs I still own. Other than that, I love Fuji's philosophy, level of customization, ease of use, nice lenses and general design of the bodies. But...my old X-T1 just did not have the overall image quality at base ISO my D750/Df has. That has nothing to do with sensor size - I'm talking base ISO. Please get rid of X-Trans...

And you can check my galleries if you don't think I can make a decent image with a Fuji camera. I think I do ok. :-) I just don't care for the X-Trans. I fell out of love with it. I'd love an X-T2 type body with a bayer type sensor. It worked great in the original X100. Don't tell me they can't do just as well with bayer in a X-T2 body because I won't believe it.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 17:19 UTC

For what it's worth, after owning the X-Pro1, X100S, X-T1, X20 and currently the original X100, I doubt I'll be back unless something major happens with the X-Trans sensor. Either a way to make it have as much details and texture as the bayer type sensors (like that in the X100 and many other cameras that use that type of sensor) or them getting rid of the X-Trans completely. Trust me, I've followed the whole 'smearing' of details debate with raw files and Lightroom and that's not exactly what I'm talking about. Even my JPG files had smoothed out details compared to the original X100 I have and compared to the a6000 I just sold and compared to the Nikon DSLRs I still own. Other than that, I love Fuji's philosophy, level of customization, ease of use, nice lenses and general design of the bodies. But...my old X-T1 just did not have the overall image quality at base ISO my D750/Df has. That has nothing to do with sensor size - I'm talking base ISO. Please get rid of X-Trans...

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 17:15 UTC as 105th comment | 7 replies
Total: 320, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »