Erick L

Lives in Canada Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Canada
Has a website at http://www.borealphoto.com
Joined on Aug 17, 2006

Comments

Total: 101, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

roblarosa: A lot of people who are commenting either have a reading comprehension issue or have no idea what the difference is between wink and blink.

A wink is on purpose - Gilly.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 02:11 UTC
On article Photographing fireworks: The basics and then some (66 comments in total)
In reply to:

M1963: "F8 (equivalent)"?
It's f/8, irrespective of sensor size. But it can also be f/5.6 if you favour shorter exposures like 3''.
This said everything else in this article is textbook - and of the wise kind. No, you can't do away with the tripod; no, you can't use high ISO and short exposure times; and no - your iPhone won't give you the kind of image you were led to believe it would. Forget it. You need a proper camera for this.

F8 equivalent refers to DOF. And yes, you can hand hold short exposure at high ISO.

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2016 at 12:36 UTC
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)

Nice, like a digital Mamiya 7.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 17:46 UTC as 125th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Aaron801: Why do aerial photography? That's an easy one, if you have the time and money to afford the travel to exotic locations and the gear needed and or the hiring of the plane to be able to do it. If you have all of those items lined up, there'd be no reason not to, right?

For everyone else, there's Google Earth.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2016 at 00:34 UTC
In reply to:

HGFGKM: A much less expensive and (to my opinion) equally satisfying approach to aerial photography is to always ask for a window seat and away from the wings when you travel by plane. It does not always work, what with clouds, haze, the sun against the view....etc. But, when it works, there are many spectacular landscapes to take pictures, especially when traveling over the Rockies and over the Arizona Nevada area. Surprisingly, the small sensor cameras are as good as the more expensive ones. I always try not to miss any such opportunity.

Ideally, get a window seat in front of the plane (away from engine fumes) and opposed to the sun.

EDIT: repeating stuff is what happens when you don't read the whole post. Sorry.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2016 at 00:34 UTC
On article D500 owner formally accuses Nikon of false advertising (475 comments in total)
In reply to:

odpisan: Once upon the time I had Nikon & I sold it because I do not like their market strategy.

They are the first pirates on the photomarket & they organize products only to suck so much money as possible from customers ... with using some despicable marketing tricks. 4 ex.: they say that Nikon has the biggest selection of lenses on the world .. BUT when a new customer buys a Nikon-body, he recognize that only few of lenses are compatibile with his new camera. So .. if customer wants a better lens, he is forced to buy a new - more expensive - body.

It is simply not fair.

But Nikonisti do not see something like that - as some religious believers do not recognize the science & they believe that 6000 years old Earth is flat ...
;o))))

OK .. I told it .. now I am waiting to be embarrassed of Nikonisti.

I sold and AIS lens to a Canon user. He could stop-down meter with his Canon while I had no meter at all on my Nikon.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2016 at 17:29 UTC
In reply to:

alcaher: NASA sucks, they always waste alot of money and resources. Take all that money for better things to do here in our the planet.

How about cutting down on the military instead?

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2016 at 14:50 UTC
On article Crossing the Bridge: Canon XC10 Review (258 comments in total)
In reply to:

nathanleebush: You guys were much too delicate with this monstrosity. "Not so good for: photographers who require RAW file support" .. What is this, 2003? How did the A6300, which seemed to fall from the heavens, only score 5 percentage points higher? It's half the price with 10x the features, and a nicer image to boot, for both stills and video! This emerged like a hot turd from the depths of hell, and will soon return whence it came.. Canon really needs to get it together, but they obviously are not aware of the internet, or they would have fixed their broken product development culture by now. It's amazing to watch them blow their massive video lead with disappointment after disappointment.

smh

How much does that classification matter when broadcast TV is filled with GoPro and cellphone footage?

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2016 at 23:47 UTC
In reply to:

Biowizard: Only two filters are necessary in this day and age: a polariser, and a multi-stop ND, because both let you create images that cannot be achieved in any other way. Arguably, an IR filter too, if you do IR photography.

But graduated NDs are not necessary, Indeed, they nearly always produce unnatural results. For any landscape photo where you want to darken part of the image relative to others, you can simply take a bracketed exposure sequence, and merge as desired in Photoshop.

This approach lets you follow irregularities in the skyline (like mountains, buildings, trees) that an ND grad would artificially darken.

Brian

I'd rather not fiddle with filters while the light is fading.

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2016 at 04:55 UTC
In reply to:

fairfaxian: Always amazes me when photo backpacks appear without a waist strap (cummerbund). Toting weight on shoulders is tiring/painful. All proper outdoor backpacks put the weight onto the waist band, and shoulder straps only need to be thin mesh -not weight bearing.

A belt on a small pack isn't very effective. What puzzles me is the lack of decent side pockets for bottles.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2016 at 02:52 UTC
On article CP+ 2016: Things we found that had been cut in half (135 comments in total)
In reply to:

kineticdg: I have to say I'm a little disappointed in this post. Haven't we said for years that it's not the camera that matters, it's the photographer? Couldn't you find a single photographer who was cut in half for this show? Oh well, maybe next year.

See last picture.

Link | Posted on Feb 29, 2016 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

Horshack: This is what the RX100 would have been if Sony engineers were told the camera doesn't have to fit in a pocket. As it is, the DL 16-50 is thicker than an LX100:

DL 16-50: 106 x 63 x 58 mm
LX100: 114.8 x 66.2 x 55.0 mm

Get bigger pockets.

My jacket pocket can take an Olympus EM-5, a couple of zooms and some accessories. Love that jacket so much I had it repaired for more than I paid for 18 years ago. :-)

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 16:53 UTC

Any word on weather sealing?

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 05:28 UTC as 160th comment | 1 reply
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

photominion: the ergonomics always get left out..

while a small body might be nice to have, a full frame sensor still asks for rather large lenses. Especially, if they're supposed to deliver perfect sharpness all across the frame.
That said, a tiny body with a huge lens simple feels awkward to work with, especially when you have buttons/controls on both sides of the body and have to let go of the lens to adjust settings.

On a tripod this may not play a role, but then again, when you bring a tripod and work with heavy lenses anyways, why would you need 200g weight saved on the camera body?
(You'll need to bring 3 spare batteries anyways, which almost nullifies that weight gain)

I explained above why it's not just weight but also where the weight is.

There are only a handful FF mirrorless cameras and lenses. The systems aren't mature and diverse.

Compare APS vs APS or m43 vs plain 4/3. The GH4 is as big as the 4/3 DSLRs but you also have the tiny GM1 with the same sensor and lenses. You can't have that with DSLRs. With Sony, you can have a FF camera and a tiny a5100 (even the sensor in a tube thing) using the same lenses and batteries. You can even put DSLRs lenses. What's the point, since you need adapters, batteries, etc? It's choice. I don't know about you, but I don't carry everything everywhere all the time. I do like that everything is compatible (well, almost).

If you can't understand that, mirrorless isn't for you.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 07:48 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aroart: I'll be impressed when Camera companies can ... you guys fill in the rest.....

I was gonna say wash my dishes but then, some of them do.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 19:29 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

photominion: the ergonomics always get left out..

while a small body might be nice to have, a full frame sensor still asks for rather large lenses. Especially, if they're supposed to deliver perfect sharpness all across the frame.
That said, a tiny body with a huge lens simple feels awkward to work with, especially when you have buttons/controls on both sides of the body and have to let go of the lens to adjust settings.

On a tripod this may not play a role, but then again, when you bring a tripod and work with heavy lenses anyways, why would you need 200g weight saved on the camera body?
(You'll need to bring 3 spare batteries anyways, which almost nullifies that weight gain)

I switched to mirrorless for bike touring and hiking/backpacking. While it's true that I need more batteries, I now carry the camera around the neck so the camera is always ready. I didn't do this with a SLR, not just because it's heavier but it protrudes more and is front heavy so it swings around a lot more than the mirrorless. I did a 6 day hike with two mirrorless around the neck at all times. I can't imagine doing that with a SLR.

Same with biking, sometimes I swing the camera behind my back. A SLR just keeps rolling back in front while the mirrorless stays put.

One reason to buy a mirrorless is that you can have both a large and small cameras using the same lenses and batteries. I've met my share of backpackers who left their SLR behind and opted for a crappy compact.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 17:19 UTC
In reply to:

TorsteinH: That BSI sensor would be nice in a new Olympus EM1 II ...

"What would it give you more than the original nx1?"

Olympus lenses and the whole m43 system.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 13:04 UTC
In reply to:

Jim Evidon: It looks like a nice little travel pod, but it would be nice if Manfrotto gave up its proprietary camera plate design and adopted the more universal Arca Swiss design. They might sell a few more tripods that way to people who have already invested in the Arca Swiss plates. As one of those people, I would never buy a Manfrotto tripod for that very reason.

I've had 3 Manfrottos and 2 of them broke quickly and the third's locks and legs were always loose, not to mention pinched fingers and branches snagging on the locks. The RC2 head and plates wouldn't lock solid after a while because the material gets grinded out. Awful products.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2015 at 01:40 UTC
On article DSCO by VSCO simplifies GIF-creation (18 comments in total)

Just what I needed for my Geocities page!

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2015 at 15:19 UTC as 2nd comment
Total: 101, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »