Peter1976

Lives in Germany Freiburg, Germany
Works as a Marketing
Joined on Jun 30, 2006

Comments

Total: 19, showing: 1 – 19

wow, what a nice magazine! Also love the technical background information in the shots. Where can I donate to keep it alive?

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 11:24 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

Bambi24: National Geographic used to be a cool channel 15 years ago. It prided itself on accuracy.

It would have never allowed these photoshopped images in a million years back then.

This is currently airing on National Geographic:

-MONSTER FISH!
-The search for Gold!
-Princess Diana in her own words!
-Sex Scandals in France!
-When sharks attack!

need I say more, it's worse than a tabloid

While one can argue about the choice of topics in NG, I don't find most of the photos in the gallery too much photoshoped... at least no. 3, 5, 8 and 9 are absolutely acceptable. They seem to have tone adjustments, color adjustments applied, maybe some shadow liftings... nothing that changes a photo dramatically from an unprocessed one.
Also in analog times, the appearance of a photo was influenced by the choice of film, or by dodge and burn in the darkroom. So where is the problem?

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 08:58 UTC
In reply to:

Photato: Good lighting is at times more important than sensor size, lens, etc
I would buy if it also doubles as a battery charger/backup.
This is the missing link to great mobile computing photography.

but a LF1 or whatsoever camera does not offer indirect lighting / off-camera flash, which leads to nice photos :).

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 08:25 UTC
On article Video: How to make a DIY 'beauty dish' for $12 (30 comments in total)
In reply to:

Digitalis32: I detest umbrella lighting - sure it is cheap and easy to set up, but you give up a lot of control for the sake of cheap, easy convenience. I use softboxes, striplights and beauty dishes with grids a lot so I can control the area of illumination. You can't do that with umbrellas, they just spray light everywhere.

you are completely right, but if you shoot outdoors with no walls where the light could accidentially bounce, umbrellas are quite fine and conveniant.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2017 at 07:02 UTC

Where is the sense of it? It is neither funny nor informative. I don't get it...
What a sad proof of our sick affluent society. Why not waterjetting something old or brocken? Why not giving this lens to a school project or whatsoever? Don't want to be a grinch, but this is just stupid.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 12:35 UTC as 32nd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Mateus1: X-E3 with Bayer CFA and X-T2 tech would be Fuji best selling cam - even better than X-T2 and GFX together.

I would be completely happy with X-Trans in e3. But I would love to have Lightroom handling the files better ;). Because I don't want to buy or learn another raw converter and also have a Canon that I use with Lightroom.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2017 at 15:41 UTC
In reply to:

Peter1976: I really, really hope that the X-series will be continued for a long time. Because... if you invested quite a lot of money in these lenses, it would be a nightmare if the series would die ;).
So, all the best for Fuji!!
And I hope, more third party lens makers like Sigma, Tamron or Tokina will offer their AF lenses for the x-mount, as I think it would give the system another big push and it would lead to more price competition. Fuji lenses are amazing, but also quite expensive for us non-pros :(.

Hi T3, sounds reasonable :). What a great philosophy for a company!

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 12:12 UTC

I really, really hope that the X-series will be continued for a long time. Because... if you invested quite a lot of money in these lenses, it would be a nightmare if the series would die ;).
So, all the best for Fuji!!
And I hope, more third party lens makers like Sigma, Tamron or Tokina will offer their AF lenses for the x-mount, as I think it would give the system another big push and it would lead to more price competition. Fuji lenses are amazing, but also quite expensive for us non-pros :(.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 07:55 UTC as 19th comment | 2 replies
On article Roadtrip Review Redux: The Fujifilm X100F (173 comments in total)

I love Fuji for its colors but also for the feel of the camera itselve, it just feels wonderful in my hands. I used to have an X100S but sold it (stupid me). At the moment I have a Canon system but would love to switch to Fuji, if it wouldn't be so pricy (and if my studio strobes would support it). I wonder if any third party supplier like Sigma or Tamron will ever build lenses for the X-System to bring in some competition and to have some (maybe cheaper) alternatives for lenses.
Anyway, thanks DPR for this article.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 14:21 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply

Thanks DP for this nice article. Please more of this kind!!
I'd love to read more articles about lighting with off-camera strobes and flashes. Photography is about lighting, and there is so much to learn about it :).

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 13:50 UTC as 28th comment
On article PDN announces 2017 Photo Annual contest winners (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joe Pineapples II: Some good photography for a change

hm, I think most of the shots shown have been retouched, pretty sure about that :). Especially No 1 and 10.
Anyway, I like them a lot!

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 13:42 UTC
In reply to:

jadot: I want this. UK availability and pricing anyone?

regarding customs: I ordered an AD600 from China (I live in Germany), it didn't stuck in the customs, everthing went smooth. They included delivery papers that claimed a price of 20$ :).

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 17:06 UTC
In reply to:

andyus08: This is great for on location shooting. I'll grab two when they're available. I own AD600, AD360 so I know how good it is.

One of the main differences compared to hot shoe flashes like the 850 is that the AD200 has a barebulb design. Which is more efficient if you want to illuminate a larger softbox or beauty dish or other light shapers that are supposed to be used with studio strobes.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 17:03 UTC
In reply to:

P Hartung: Don't expect 200ws from these. I like the form factor and their integration into the larger Godox ecosystem, but the AD360 is much more powerful for almost the same amount of money...

You are absolutely right about the AD360 having more power and being similar in price, BUT the AD200 has a much smaller form factor (no external battery, no cords to hassle with). This might appeal to some. And 200w is still enough to fire a 60x90cm softbox for a headshot at f8.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2017 at 16:59 UTC
In reply to:

markus_munich: For me, the 50mm equivalent has always been the ideal companion. Back in the days it was a Nikon FM2 + FE2 with 50 1.8 Nikkor.
Now it's a Nex7 with e 35 1.8. Sometimes in bundle with a Sony a 5000 with 60 2.8.
These travels were shot exclusivly with Nex7 + 35 1.8:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/123682561@N04/albums/72157644680501258
https://www.flickr.com/photos/123682561@N04/albums/72157665171197854

Maybe because not everyone likes the effort it takes (while taking and post processing). Furthermore it only works for landscape photos and hardly for scenes with a foreground (or even people) close to the camera.
I doubt it would work in nightlife in Bangkok or for street photography :)

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 09:09 UTC

Thanks for the article and the effort you made! Thailand is nice, but unfortunatelly it changes (or grows) too quickly. Was on Koh Tao 2002 and then again 2013. Man, what did they do?? No more traveller charme, they built houses without a concept everywhere, pollution, waste everywhere...
Regarding the focal length, I can understand that you didn't feel comfortable with 50mm. My least used focal length, especially while travelling. Cheers, Peter

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2017 at 14:34 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

G1Houston: The myth of the 50 mm focal length: is it really the most versatile because it most closely resembles human vision or is there something else, despite it was made famous by Henri Cartier-Bresson? The former does not appear to be true as many seem to agree that 35-40mm focal length is closer to human vision. In my opinion, the 50mm was chosen in part because it is the lens that is the least expensive to be made fast and small. Take Nikon for example, its 50mm f1.8G is $216 (185 g) while the 35/1.8G is $527 (305g). Back in the film days (Henri's days), all cameras were sold with the 50mm lens as a "kit lens." Thus the popularity of the 50mm lens may be due mostly to cost and size with its good enough focal length thrown in at the end.

+1. I never understood the argument "it most closely resembles human vision"...
My 50mm is also the least used lens in my bag. The most used are 24/25mm (landscape, documentry) and 85mm for Portrait/Studio.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2017 at 14:29 UTC

Really nice photos. Maybe it is worth to mention that a lot of them were shot with an external off-camera flash (beauty dish?) or at least a reflector, especially the ones shot against the sun, right? ;)

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2015 at 16:23 UTC as 13th comment
On article Fujifilm releases X-S1 premium EXR 26X superzoom (383 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bluetrain048: Actually, I quite like it. Many applications don't need full image quality all of the time, but sometimes you have to go the heavy dslr route just to get the level of handling, performance and control that makes photography fun.

Only thing is, I see just one control wheel. What is it with the phobia of external controls? The more controls the better, especially with something so squarely aimed at enthusiasts.

Hm... not sure, but it might be that producing external controls cost more than programming the interface to control things.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2011 at 13:19 UTC
Total: 19, showing: 1 – 19