deep7

Lives in New Zealand (Aotearoa) New Zealand (Aotearoa)
Works as a writer/photographer/ecologist
Has a website at deeppics.com
Joined on May 10, 2008
About me:

God makes it, I see it and photograph it. Sometimes that works well!

Comments

Total: 1154, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

If it's a real problem, then this should be an international issue. One government agency from one country shouldn't be trying to enforce its policies on the rest of the world. Bit arrogant, really!

I guess, despite the really low risks involved, this issue will be legislated on somewhere. What's the bet we end up with three different types of luggage storage on planes, with a special area, under surveillance, for items likes these?

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 03:46 UTC as 12th comment
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tester_v: Capture one is a great tool, try it, you'll never comeback to Adobe...

Capture One provide both options.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 09:01 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1347 comments in total)
In reply to:

jl_smith: I've been using Lightroom since Beta. Loved it.

Recently though I just got tired of paying $10/mo for software that's frankly a little slow in performance, though I know the keyboard shortcuts like the back of my hand.

Gave Capture 1 (10) a try for about the 5th time (I've always done a half-hearted try of it then never bought it). Sure, it's steep in price and has a few quirks, but it's also pretty neat and pretty customizable. I learned this after watching the tutorial videos.

Best thing, it's fast, displays my Fuji files excellently (no need for IXT, which I bought for LR), and has some neat tricks of its own. Perfect, no. Pretty darn good, yes.

So, after canceling my Adobe CC account, I've moved over and while I love Lightroom, I just couldn't stomach paying $10 /mo perpetually and being a slave of whatever Adobe's whim is (or is NOT). Good riddance.

Funny, I've tried Capture One several times too and it was on the last trial that it just clicked for me. I expect I'll go that way too at some stage. The output is fantastic, not sure about the file management just yet.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 08:53 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1347 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: GREAT article! I got sick of paying for updates and stopped at LR5. If and when a new camera prevents that working, I'll quite likely change the way I do things but that new way won't feature any Adobe products. They've had enough money out of me already.

Further, there is no way I am moving to any system that relies on an internet connection. Why on earth would I want to do that?? That's the least reliable part of my computer system by quite some margin!

Why would you want your photos on the "cloud"?? Hundreds and hundreds of gigabytes, which would take months to upload and hours to access again, in the hands of someone else. Put your best ones in a gallery somewhere, sure, but most of my photos are quite happy where I can reach them easily! Good grief.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 08:47 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1347 comments in total)

GREAT article! I got sick of paying for updates and stopped at LR5. If and when a new camera prevents that working, I'll quite likely change the way I do things but that new way won't feature any Adobe products. They've had enough money out of me already.

Further, there is no way I am moving to any system that relies on an internet connection. Why on earth would I want to do that?? That's the least reliable part of my computer system by quite some margin!

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 02:55 UTC as 346th comment | 3 replies
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

nemark: Definitely this is not an evolution (nor a revolution). Each mark is actually completely new camera, so why marjings (MkI, MkII, MkIII)????
And each next I like less. Actually, MkIII I don`t like at all!

I agree. The first one was brilliant. The second lost the viewfinder. The third got a viewfinder back (a better viewfinder, though placed on top like an ugly and impractical wart) but lost a lot of zoom range! Crazy.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 01:12 UTC
On article Take a look inside Leica's factory in Wetzlar, Germany (134 comments in total)
In reply to:

pancho_rivera: Very beautiful factory. Perhaps I should get a Leica. I'm sure the Germans craft better photographic equipment like how their cars are superior to anything made in Japan. Maybe Apple would be better manufacturing the iPhone in Germany as well?

But it's still a Lexus. I feel myself falling asleep just thinking about them...

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 23:19 UTC
On article Take a look inside Leica's factory in Wetzlar, Germany (134 comments in total)
In reply to:

pancho_rivera: Very beautiful factory. Perhaps I should get a Leica. I'm sure the Germans craft better photographic equipment like how their cars are superior to anything made in Japan. Maybe Apple would be better manufacturing the iPhone in Germany as well?

I've been forced to drive rental Yarises (Yari?). Surely the least comfortable vehicle ever made? Not to mention the ambience of pure flimsiness. A Golf, on the other hand, is a nice car.

An iPhone made in Germany would cost vastly more, I think!

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 18:01 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

what_i_saw: Did not get this: It's a full APS-C-sized sensor or, at least, the Canon 1.6x crop version of that format.

I thought there was APS-C sized sensor. What is this at least part?

Except Sigma at 1.7...

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 19:38 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: I think mounting the lens from the G1x m2 on the front of this sensor would actually be an upgrade. I'll trade 36% of the sensor size for a much more flexible lens range that's also a good bit faster (in equivalent terms).

People have been begging for a fixed zoom APS-C camera, this shows them why they shouldn't have bothered. 1" achieves everything this camera is going for.

What's the last fixed zoom APS-C camera, the Sony R1? Kudos for changing that Canon but I find your much cheaper G5x more appealing. It's about 10% less camera than the G1x m3 and 40% less money.

Leica X Vario was the last one I can think of. Even smaller zoom range, even slower lens, no built-in viewfinder but, wow, the photo quality is amazing!

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 19:37 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: Why the hump??? What a wasted opportunity!

Even better, one in the style of the original G1X but with an electronic viewfinder. Why go all out to make a camera small and light and then make it protrude so much in one direction? Crazy.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 19:31 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (417 comments in total)

Why the hump??? What a wasted opportunity!

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 09:39 UTC as 110th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

minababe: The over the top giddiness that I'm seeing over this product is a shining example of how low the bar has been set in today's world. I remember when people used to be excited about things like photo bubbles, the ability to shoot tilt shift in-camera, faster lenses, tilted screens, GPS, wifi, HD, 4K, etc. Now people are all excited about a dumbed down pretend toy camera that uses technology that is a huge step backwards, and actually seeing its regressive tech as some kind of "plus" for photography.

With the bar set so low, no wonder technological progress has crawled to a standstill since the mid-2000s. What next? Getting excited over faux vintage stoves that only work unless we put fake plastic pieces of coal in the bottom? Getting excited over faux ice boxes that only work if we put fake plastic blocks of ice in them?

"Refering to the motorcycle exampe, what's wrong with combining great past visual design with modern technology?" Maybe nothing. Some of us just have trouble with fakeness. A camera that follows long-established design philosophies can be both nice to handle and look good (think of the modern Olympus PenF). Spending a fortune on something JUST because it looks old isn't a choice I tend to make personally.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 01:55 UTC
In reply to:

icexe: You know, at first this seemed really stupid, but the more I think about it, the more I can see a market for something like this.

I'm thinking of those people who want slow things down so they can become more involved in the process instead of relying on the camera to do all the work.

Sometimes it's not about the pursuit of technical perfection, sometimes it's about rediscovering photography as a purely artistic pursuit, about finding satisfaction in challenging ourselves by deliberately restricting the boundaries we work in to see what we can achieve creatively.

Whether this particular approach to slowing things down is ultimately a good idea remains to be seen, but there is no doubt that there is a significant interest in going back to a "purer", less automated form of photography.

It reminds me of playing music on vinyl, it forces you to be more involved in listening to the music.

All these people saying film cameras are cheap are only half right. I've been testing one or two out lately and film processing is far from cheap. It would not take long for the cost to greatly exceed the cost of the "Yashica". What would be intriguing would be to compare image quality...

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 19:05 UTC
In reply to:

minababe: The over the top giddiness that I'm seeing over this product is a shining example of how low the bar has been set in today's world. I remember when people used to be excited about things like photo bubbles, the ability to shoot tilt shift in-camera, faster lenses, tilted screens, GPS, wifi, HD, 4K, etc. Now people are all excited about a dumbed down pretend toy camera that uses technology that is a huge step backwards, and actually seeing its regressive tech as some kind of "plus" for photography.

With the bar set so low, no wonder technological progress has crawled to a standstill since the mid-2000s. What next? Getting excited over faux vintage stoves that only work unless we put fake plastic pieces of coal in the bottom? Getting excited over faux ice boxes that only work if we put fake plastic blocks of ice in them?

While we may disagree on the point of this particular camera, I also wonder at the trend for fake old stuff. At a swap meet on the weekend, I came across what looked like a well-restored veteran motorcycle (the type with a very tall frame, super-skinny tyres and petrol tank within the frame). On closer inspection, it turned out to be a brand new motorcycle complete with puny, modern 125cc engine! With an astronomical price tag to boot. The world of the rich and bored is a strange one.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 19:02 UTC

Poor article. For a start, the headline isn't addressed by the text, which is a good thing because so-called "retro" styling can mean the style is very functional and not "wrong" at all!

Following something that evolved over many years can produce something that is pleasant to use. "Retro" can also mean cameras that unnecessarily use faux DSLR styling but plenty of people like that too. What camera today, not built by Sigma, doesn't have aspects of older cameras about its styling??

The author also shows a complete misunderstanding of the purpose of this camera when he says "In the pursuit of brash consumerism, this newly branded Yashica has forgotten a large part of why we take photos in the first place: joy.". Actually, that is the whole reason for something like this. Simple fun can = joy.

Opinion articles are absolutely fine but are better if they aren't written from inside a very dark tunnel, which doesn't allow a wide view of the world!

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2017 at 05:38 UTC as 86th comment
On article iPhone 8 Plus sample gallery (195 comments in total)

Impressive! Good detail capture, decent processing, reasonably tolerant of bright highlights, pleasing but not exaggerated colour. Considering the size of what is taking the photos, they've done well. The vast majority of customers will be happy, I expect.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2017 at 03:04 UTC as 28th comment

This could be fun. Real film has got ludicrously expensive to process round here. I hope it does well for them. Maybe not for me, though. A lot of the charm with film cameras (the earlier ones anyway) was in the build/engineering and I can't see that being great at this price!

Leica built a digital rangefinder with no screen for reviewing/deleting. That one was a tad pricier...

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 20:53 UTC as 171st comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

fluppeteer: So... fixed focus (at least, that's the only interpretation I can put on "1m to infinity" on a sensor that small - an actual 1m distance on the focal plane is implausible with a sensor that size) and they charge you for changing settings, which is the kind of nonsense last seen when Nikon insisted on an accessory to get at the F5's custom functions.

I have a digital camera with no LCD and, IIRC, a VGA sensor, designed for hanging off a keyring. It feels like a better sell than this. It certainly cost less, and that was a good five years ago.

I went round the U.K. and bits of Europe and the U.S.A. in 2003 with a Fuji Slimshot (as well as film cameras). It was a really skinny little camera with a terribly inaccurate viewfinder, which could hide behind a credit card and shot VGA. To save storage space, I mostly shot it in quarter VGA!! Incredibly, I still look at the photos very often and have even made a large print of one of them (it's abstract and works very well). Best thing was that, when it died, I got a full refund because they basically all died!

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 20:50 UTC
On article Leica M10 added to the studio comparison tool (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: Looks just fine, though it strikes me that there will be close to zero people buying this based on how it performs on test charts! I appreciate the neutrality though.

More than reasonably!

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2017 at 17:51 UTC
Total: 1154, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »