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: 1376, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5S Review (589 comments in total)
In reply to:

Slapstick Noir: Why don't Panasonic make full-frame cameras? Why should it be a 'niche' thing in the first place?

You say "ff sells well"??? Not even close to how well cameras with teeny tiny sensors sell. I believe Panasonic are doing well with their GH series. The cost to benefit ratio of building a new line of larger sensored cameras, just to please a handful of fanatics who don't understand the benefits of what they produce, must be horrendous. Why stop with the 35mm compromise? Why not do what clever old Fuji did and bypass it completely??

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2018 at 03:43 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5S Review (589 comments in total)
In reply to:

Slapstick Noir: Why don't Panasonic make full-frame cameras? Why should it be a 'niche' thing in the first place?

Because your "FF" is arbitrary and pointless and not the best thing to use. Why can't you understand that?

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2018 at 18:51 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5S Review (589 comments in total)
In reply to:

Slapstick Noir: Why don't Panasonic make full-frame cameras? Why should it be a 'niche' thing in the first place?

They use the best size sensor for the job. Not some arbitrary size based on old, redundant film! This sensor actually uses more than its full frame too...

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 18:18 UTC
In reply to:

spikey27: If visitors won't respect the tree's delicate nature, by all means fence it - with the kind of razor wire used around prisons for security. Maybe even electrify it to keep the infernal two-legged pests at a distance. That'll teach 'em.

You don't have to be intelligent to see beauty. You do to understand ecological consequences. In this case, the beauty is subjective. I have photographed willows on New Zealand lake edges (a very common sight - this is far from being the only one, unfortunately!), so maybe I actually can separate aesthetics from reality.

I'm not sure that your pity is worth much to me but thanks anyway.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2018 at 21:06 UTC
In reply to:

spikey27: If visitors won't respect the tree's delicate nature, by all means fence it - with the kind of razor wire used around prisons for security. Maybe even electrify it to keep the infernal two-legged pests at a distance. That'll teach 'em.

It pays the bills.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 19:26 UTC
In reply to:

spikey27: If visitors won't respect the tree's delicate nature, by all means fence it - with the kind of razor wire used around prisons for security. Maybe even electrify it to keep the infernal two-legged pests at a distance. That'll teach 'em.

Why put so much effort into preserving a weed, when so many native trees in New Zealand are getting damaged all the time? One of my neighbours, just a few months ago, bulldozed a small stand of native trees aside, just to make it easier to crop his paddock. This story completely misses the point that the tree has aesthetic appeal but is actually not a good thing otherwise. (Crack willow is a terrible weed in New Zealand rivers and around many lake edges.)

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 20:48 UTC
In reply to:

Stigg: there is great concern about damage to a lopsided tree in a lake but no concern about the permanent damage done to the maori people and their culture by the illegal aliens who dropped in uninvited and were never deported. this exceedingly pretentious concern about "the environment" or some symbol of it is pure hypocrisy when there isn't equal or greater concern about a people losing their homeland to illegal aliens. the name of that homeland in this case is aotearoa. new zealand is merely a name chosen by the illegal aliens.

For those interested in how different racial claims worked in New Zealand, you could do an internet search for "Treaty of Waitangi". On paper, at least, the two extant groups of human invaders have an understanding (though, heck, it gets abused!). The early human invaders spent some time before Europeans arrived (and a bit after that time) displacing each other, with such ferocity that cannibalism was considered absolutely appropriate (some even support it today!). Land taken by Europeans (not land sold to them) has been compensated for in a massive, expensive exercise which has spanned decades.

Nothing is perfect and, in many ways, things have gone way too far. However, the original poster has picked the wrong country for a rant which could well be justified elsewhere.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 00:57 UTC
In reply to:

Stigg: there is great concern about damage to a lopsided tree in a lake but no concern about the permanent damage done to the maori people and their culture by the illegal aliens who dropped in uninvited and were never deported. this exceedingly pretentious concern about "the environment" or some symbol of it is pure hypocrisy when there isn't equal or greater concern about a people losing their homeland to illegal aliens. the name of that homeland in this case is aotearoa. new zealand is merely a name chosen by the illegal aliens.

Whoa! The Maori were equally illegal aliens who burnt off most of the South Island. Your comment would start an argument almost anywhere in the world subject to more than one migratory wave! But you are right about the tree - it's just another weed in a totally ruined landscape.

P.S. I'm not going to get into an argument, just pointing out the hypocrisy in your post.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 20:59 UTC

One of New Zealand's problem weeds. It might have aesthetic appeal but please don't "protect" it!

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 19:06 UTC as 23rd comment
In reply to:

noggin2k1: Awaiting the fan club claiming their beloved M43 bodies deliver far superior IQ...

Wild Light tried the same joke again. Still failed. Nobody laughed.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2018 at 17:59 UTC
In reply to:

tedolf: I guess what this really shows is that sensors are not that important?

Tedolph

Except Canon sensors have both high quality and buckets of resolution!

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2018 at 03:47 UTC
In reply to:

Mindprison88: It's a decent lens, but something that immediately throws me off is the unimpressive minimum focus distance of 70 centimeters, as that will severely limit its creative possibilities. I know such characteristic is not uncommon for 35mm lenses of old, but I don't see a reason to copy something so undesirable on a modern-made lens.

Strange...

It would be nice if there was a switch or something that allowed that restriction to be bypassed for electronic view Leicas. It's the downside of so many lovely little lenses!

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2018 at 01:13 UTC
In reply to:

deep7: An interesting alternative for my Leica T BUT ... the M version only focuses half as close as the non-Leica versions and those probably wouldn't adapt. I'll keep using my slower but amazing old Takumar. Using oddball cameras on a budget is actually very stimulating and has helped my photography. Cheaper, manual lenses like this help that happen.

Good, quick review, thanks.

If you are going to do that, you can use extension rings anyway. Good point though. I wonder if anyone makes L/M extendable adapters? I've already butchered one of my L/M adapters to get my Voigtlander 15mm lens to focus past 3 feet (I know, bizarre). Maybe I can butcher another!

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 21:39 UTC

An interesting alternative for my Leica T BUT ... the M version only focuses half as close as the non-Leica versions and those probably wouldn't adapt. I'll keep using my slower but amazing old Takumar. Using oddball cameras on a budget is actually very stimulating and has helped my photography. Cheaper, manual lenses like this help that happen.

Good, quick review, thanks.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 19:15 UTC as 33rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

noggin2k1: Awaiting the fan club claiming their beloved M43 bodies deliver far superior IQ...

I don't know. Wild Light tried to make a joke (but failed miserably!).

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 18:45 UTC
In reply to:

tedolf: I guess what this really shows is that sensors are not that important?

Tedolph

Canon uses sensors which are easily good enough for most people. A lot of people here just don't get how good modern sensors really are. The look of the final image is everything and that has more to do with processing choices than technicalities. The pixel-obsessed would have to be a minority.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2018 at 21:31 UTC

Just goes to show that Canon know what makes a camera sell and it's not (academic) numbers on (dubious) charts. Their cameras may be a little bland but most feel really good in the hand, are easy to use and produce very pleasing images straight out of the box, when looked at as a whole image. There always seems to be some crazy cheap Canon DSLRs on sale somewhere too.

I'm surprised Nikon sell well in the integrated lens category. I see heaps of Panasonic, Sony, Canon and even Fuji in that category but rarely see a Nikon. I'd bet the stats would be wildly different here in New Zealand!

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2018 at 21:26 UTC as 76th comment
In reply to:

noggin2k1: Awaiting the fan club claiming their beloved M43 bodies deliver far superior IQ...

I realise that noggin's comment was light-hearted but there is some truth that getting the shot at all provides superior image quality to missing out completely because you're still getting the beast camera set up (or still carrying it up that hill). It just takes more time and discipline to make the most of a camera like this.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2018 at 19:44 UTC
In reply to:

waldoh: Those Panasonic lenses look fantastic.

A comment made out of pure ignorance.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2018 at 20:15 UTC

"Thank you for your kind, critical comments. Now, please do not forgot to pay, according to our existing agreement". I mean, what is the photographer supposed to say? Did he/she show the clients another person's portfolio or are the grumpy clients too stupid to have looked before they hired this photographer?

I find this story partly amusing, partly a reminder that I did well to retire from wedding photography when I did.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 03:37 UTC as 83rd comment
Total: 1376, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »