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: 890, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

gehairing: Heliskiing is so much pollution to let a few guys have half an hour pleasure skiing down. :o(
This activity should be completely forbidden.
It is...in a lot of countries...but not all.

Your point is fair but, when you say "This activity should be completely forbidden", you can't just draw an arbitrary line.

Our planet is in dire straits, far worse than nearly everyone understands, and it will take a quantum shift in humanity's indulgences to reverse that. Bringing in laws targeting specific activities (undertaken by a rich minority) will achieve very little in terms of the big picture. You don't go heli-skiing so you do your bit. That's a start.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 09:45 UTC
In reply to:

stevevelvia50: One needs to remember that to have the exact same depth of field and shutter speed, I mean exactly the same! on a full frame camera, the iso has to be set much higher on the full frame camera, 800 iso on the Olympus, versus 3200 iso on a full frame (Nikon D5 or Canon 1DX) for example. Things get more interesting then.

String: of course people care!

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 02:17 UTC
In reply to:

Artpt: The noise level seems excessive for most all the shot....iso 500-1600....

Please comment EM1 users...I had an EM1 for 2 years and don't remember the noise this much.

You did allege that, Dan. But you see, it might clear the point but it does anything but clear the photos! Good that you provide the ORF files as well, ta.

I did download a random out-of-camera jpg and it wasn't noisy at all. Phew.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 02:13 UTC
In reply to:

Artpt: The noise level seems excessive for most all the shot....iso 500-1600....

Please comment EM1 users...I had an EM1 for 2 years and don't remember the noise this much.

If the environment is "low contrast", there is absolutely no need to underexpose and push!

Artistic merits aside, most processed photos put up by dpreview staff tend to have a lot of noise, from a range of cameras (not to mention artefacts from pushed exposure, such as grey patches on faces). A bit of simple processing would be fairer to the manufacturers. I have an original EM1 and am always shocked by how bad EM1 images look on this site. It's actually capable of a very clean and detailed photo and I'd imagine the EM1Mk2 would be too.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 19:30 UTC
In reply to:

gehairing: Heliskiing is so much pollution to let a few guys have half an hour pleasure skiing down. :o(
This activity should be completely forbidden.
It is...in a lot of countries...but not all.

While you make sense, to extrapolate from there you'd ban all skiing, maybe also water skiing, mountain biking, surfing and every other sport that requires vehicular transport to get to the location?

That would be unpopular...

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 19:22 UTC
In reply to:

Dave Oddie: We've "reached out" to Olympus for comment.

Ugh! How about some plain English? We have asked Olympus for comment. Or: We have asked Olympus to comment.

"What a load of rubbish. This phrase is neither recent nor lazy. It has been standard British & American parlance for many years." Yes. With a completely different meaning. Not responding is a good idea if it bothers you!

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 03:58 UTC
In reply to:

linda r: Even before this firmware, I occasionally need to take the battery out and re-insert to get the camera to work again. This is not good when I am taking action nature shots, because I miss the shot entirely. Let's face it, Olympus quality control is not good.

Clean your battery terminals. Poor contacts will cause that.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 02:07 UTC
In reply to:

Dave Oddie: We've "reached out" to Olympus for comment.

Ugh! How about some plain English? We have asked Olympus for comment. Or: We have asked Olympus to comment.

The phrase is only recently common in that context and, to most people, means something quite different (basically a charitable act, having its origin in the act of reaching out from shore to help a drowning man).

This current use, which seems to have stemmed form North America, is stupid, unnecessary and, frankly, annoying. It's like the writer would desperately rather be trendy than literate.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 01:15 UTC
In reply to:

justmeMN: "We've reached out to Olympus for comment ..." -DPR

The last time DPR reached out to a company for comment, the company ran away. :-) (Samsung)

No.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2016 at 18:54 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus E-10 (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

TBLF: Still have mine on the shelf for nostalgia, sticky grips and all! 😎

This was my first positive experience with digital coming from a lifetime of film. Before the E10, back when kodak/fuji/nikon was showing joint venture , $10,000 dollar VGA resolution DSLR's at trade shows, I thought digital was a joke and would never threaten film.

This little camera was the first digital I picked up and thought, hey, they are catching up, and maybe they will surpass film some day. The lens is actually very very good.

I take it off the shelf every now and then and stick batteries in it just to remind myself how far we have come. This thing is pretty slow by todays standards, and man, that lcd is tiny, but it still takes a respectable small snapshot and everything works like new except for the sticky grips.

I'm curious. Mine is a very soft rubber but it's not sticky. Does that come from years of hand grime (like a steering wheel on a car on a humid day) or is it a chemical breakdown of the "rubber" itself (perhaps if the camera is stored in a warm place)? If the latter, probably talcum powder isn't such a bad idea? If the former, maybe start by rubbing vegetable oil in and then use meths or white spirits - test on a tiny portion first, obviously!

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 04:19 UTC
On article New kid on the block: YI M1 review (699 comments in total)
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: If this had a built in 17mm I would be very interested. Keep it small fast and portable. Something I can keep in my pocket. Would be nice if it shared easy to my iPhone for editing and sharing to social media. Wait a minute I already have an iPhone camera. Well I guess I don't really need this anymore.

"The Oly 17 f2.8 is garbage". Wow, how lucky was I to get one which was anything but? Or maybe there was something wrong with yours?

Mine produced crisp, punchy images with very smooth backgrounds and great contrast and colour, all out of a ridiculously tiny package. Sadly, it wasn't a lens I hung on to when I "left" m4/3 for a couple of years and tried using Canon gear.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 04:06 UTC

I appreciate the warning. Thanks dpreview! No rush with this one...

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 04:02 UTC as 30th comment
In reply to:

justmeMN: "We've reached out to Olympus for comment ..." -DPR

The last time DPR reached out to a company for comment, the company ran away. :-) (Samsung)

I'm picking they really just tried to get in touch with them. This little trend to say "reached out to" cracks me up. So dramatic!

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 04:01 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus E-10 (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: State of the art! ..... 15 years ago.

This was an incredibly expensive camera in its day, but you couldn't find anything better for the price. You can pretty much see where the E-3/E-5 styling and design came from.

This camera is just a small part of the Olympus heritage, and probably helps explain why they still make cameras today, even while losing money doing it.

entoman, if you can find a shop which stocks a wide range of m4/3, Fuji, Canon, Sony etc. glass and just look at it, you will know how small the m4/3 system really is. The difference is very substantial. And true, they don't use the same sensors as Hasselblads but they are very good sensors anyway, good enough for the vast majority of applications.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 03:12 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus E-10 (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

bluevellet: Am I reading this right? 1/640 was the max shutter speed?

You had two settings. The "normal" one was limited to 1/640 but you could choose a line-skipping method of capture (with interpolated resolution, kinda weird) which allowed much higher speeds, though I forget quite how high. I think it says above in the text.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 03:07 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus E-10 (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

samfan: Olympus always knew how to make good cameras, at least the non-compact ones (meaning digital, as they had some nice film compacts too). Their build and controls are hard to match.

But I still think this hybrid SLR design is kinda stupid as it results both in a shittier viewfinder image as well as less light for the sensor. Of course it's probably cheaper to make than the usual SLR mechanics.

Though Olympus kept trying to create more OVF/EVF bastards with the E-300 series (I think) which were even worse and most likely even more expensive to make as they had both a flip-up (or flip-side) mirror as well as extra sensors. Crazy.

Ironically, the E10/20, E300 (NOT E330) and Vectis S1 would be the three most comfortable SLRs I've ever used. That's why it bugs me that cameras with EVFs so often pretend to be SLRs with a hump, annoyingly placed high and in the middle. That's to appeal to the remarkably conservative bunch of people who buy cameras, sigh.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 03:02 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus E-10 (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

samfan: Olympus always knew how to make good cameras, at least the non-compact ones (meaning digital, as they had some nice film compacts too). Their build and controls are hard to match.

But I still think this hybrid SLR design is kinda stupid as it results both in a shittier viewfinder image as well as less light for the sensor. Of course it's probably cheaper to make than the usual SLR mechanics.

Though Olympus kept trying to create more OVF/EVF bastards with the E-300 series (I think) which were even worse and most likely even more expensive to make as they had both a flip-up (or flip-side) mirror as well as extra sensors. Crazy.

Um...This isn't a hybrid SLR, it just is an SLR. The viewfinder is remarkably big and bright too. Have you actually tried one? I thought not!

The only interchangeable lens Olympus SLR which had the extra sensor in the viewfinder was the E330 (Sony also used the idea). Not even the Panasonic L1 (which shared many components, including much of the viewfinder assembly) had the extra sensor. The E330 did have a pretty tiny and dim viewfinder but not worse than the other SLRs which use mirrors, not prisms. I still have and love the L1 but would love it more if it had the E300 viewfinder. The E300 did not have live view at all so had no use for an extra sensor!

The E300 had a bigger viewfinder than many 4/3 DSLRs, despite it being to the side. Incidentally, I have a Minolta Vectis S1, a very similar design with side hinging mirror and viewfinder off to the side and that viewfinder is pretty nice too.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 03:02 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus E-10 (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

WillWeaverRVA: This camera had one of the best lenses money could buy at the time. I'd love to see a modern version.

Totally agree.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 17:27 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus E-10 (159 comments in total)

" For those who wanted an SLR-like camera..." Um, this IS an SLR!! Sony might call it an SLT but it's a single lens reflex camera either way.

Early this year, I bought the very similar E20. What an amazing camera! The feel of it in your hand is a revelation. Very, very few cameras feel this good. It just makes you want to use it all the time. Image quality is pretty decent, though the shadow noise is hard to control. The lens is gorgeous. A glacially slow but utterly charming camera. And you can still buy new batteries easily.

If it ever stops working, I'll just use it as a hammer.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 17:26 UTC as 42nd comment | 4 replies
On article New kid on the block: YI M1 review (699 comments in total)
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: If this had a built in 17mm I would be very interested. Keep it small fast and portable. Something I can keep in my pocket. Would be nice if it shared easy to my iPhone for editing and sharing to social media. Wait a minute I already have an iPhone camera. Well I guess I don't really need this anymore.

Yours might be but mine was absolutely lovely!

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 16:53 UTC
Total: 890, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »