Tord S Eriksson

Tord S Eriksson

Lives in Sweden Gothenburg, Sweden
Works as a bus driver, soon 100% retired
Joined on Jul 3, 2003
About me:

Like to draw, paint, and photograph nature, and identified
flying 'objects' (no UFOs), like the moon, bumblebees, aircraft, and, not least, birds!

Comments

Total: 601, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Don't buy another lens, buy a flash instead (336 comments in total)

Carey Rose's method of shooting with flash (described above) produce sterile, flat, images.

And his for and after photos does not tell us a lot.

Evidently, he is using quite different apertures for the sax player, with bounced flash, and without — I find both really not to my taste but the one without is slightly better, if not much!

But how can you compare them in the first place?

You can produce lovely shots using just flash lighting, but Rose's examples are mostly very sterile shots, like shooting a crime victim lying on an operating table in a morgue, which is supposed to be sterile.

I am in no way a pro, but I love mixing LED arrays with existing lights, including sunshine, or an overcast sky, and fast lenses.

As the very last way out, resort to flash, and then definitely use a mix of a soft on-camera flash, with some assisting flashes on tripods, or held by friends.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 11:53 UTC as 40th comment | 4 replies
On article Intro to drones part 1: Drone basics (113 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tord S Eriksson: There are lots of security risks with drones, not least DJI's. If US Army forbids use of their drones, what about you and me?:

https://www.suasnews.com/2017/08/us-army-calls-units-discontinue-use-dji-equipment/

Then there is the risks of aircraft colliding with drones:

https://www.suasnews.com/2017/07/uk-drones-manned-aircraft-collisions-test-results/

Holger,

I would be very interested in those many cases where drunk passengers has caused aircraft accidents — I've only read NTSB reports about drunk pilots.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2017 at 23:48 UTC
On article Intro to drones part 1: Drone basics (113 comments in total)

There are lots of security risks with drones, not least DJI's. If US Army forbids use of their drones, what about you and me?:

https://www.suasnews.com/2017/08/us-army-calls-units-discontinue-use-dji-equipment/

Then there is the risks of aircraft colliding with drones:

https://www.suasnews.com/2017/07/uk-drones-manned-aircraft-collisions-test-results/

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2017 at 11:45 UTC as 6th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

KansasEye: A mirrorless Nikon is a welcome thing. The problem that I have, and the reason that I have not already pre-ordered, is that the V1 does not shoot stills in 16:9 aspect ration. That is the ratio of my computer monitor, my T.V., my cell phone, and HD video. So, what the heck is Nikon thinking?

If they think I'm going to wait for the V2 to correct this mistake, they are mistaken, again. I'll get the Panasonic LX-5. And it will fit in my pocket.

I applaud Nikon for the effort. And I look forward to samples. But the lack of 16:9 stills means the V1 is dead on arrival, for me.

Long time ago, but I like that the camera uses another format, so I can adjust the horizon without losing image width!

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 18:33 UTC
In reply to:

Robert Soderlund: Get ready for the article called "five reasons to choose a Mac over a PC".

I prefer a Wacom tablet, any day, but of course I have a trackpad!

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 18:25 UTC
In reply to:

Robert Soderlund: Get ready for the article called "five reasons to choose a Mac over a PC".

Just det, Robert!

Mac is far better than Dell, as the Apple logo is more stylish!

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 08:42 UTC
In reply to:

Old Cameras: This is why we can't have nice things.
A drone could damage or take down a plane, its deadly dangerous. All so some jackass with no respect for rules can put pretty pictures in his website. Throw him in jail, fine him heavily and crush his toys. Fire fighting is dangerous and dam expensive.

Collisions with crows have been enough to take out engines on passenger jets, which is a smallish bird weighing about half a kilogram.

Many modern drones, like DJI's bigger ones, weigh several kilograms, including batteries and camera, with a maximum payload of over five kilograms.

Show me the engine that takes that without problems, or which windshield that stands a full hit from one of those!

Even the mighty Condor with its huge span doesn't weigh that much, and they are known to have brought down aircraft, big liners as well as small private aircraft!

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2017 at 19:39 UTC
On article Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 sample gallery (180 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jan Olof: It's perfect for stills on Lumix G80 and even for video 4K when crop factor is 2.35.
An amazing lens.

Yeah, she has a few! Two E-M10 (one version I and one version II) and a GX8.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2017 at 22:29 UTC
On article Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 sample gallery (180 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jan Olof: It's perfect for stills on Lumix G80 and even for video 4K when crop factor is 2.35.
An amazing lens.

Får väl låna en kamera, också!

Have to borrow one of her cameras, as well, then!

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2017 at 21:18 UTC
On article Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 sample gallery (180 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jan Olof: It's perfect for stills on Lumix G80 and even for video 4K when crop factor is 2.35.
An amazing lens.

Seems to be the next one my wife will get! Very, very impressive!

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2017 at 08:41 UTC
On article Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 sample gallery (180 comments in total)

Splendid shots, and it seems to be a very likeable lens!

A delight, in short!

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 10:15 UTC as 53rd comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kanji: I bought one right after reading the DPReview. I owned several Oly cameras before getting the C8080. The lens on this camera was very sharp. It's true the focus was a little slow,but you could bet that when it was locked on it was truly focused. I used it on landscapes, and am still selling photos taken with this camera many years ago! One thing also,with Olys' smart cards,it was very easy to do panos, as the card put special lines in the viewfinder to line up on. Anyway, I still have one ,like new, with the box and all the items that came with it, and I think that I will get it out and use it a little.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/128994023@N05/21669802238/in/album-72157659261061786/

Link | Posted on May 19, 2017 at 09:25 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): I can remember being unable, in-store try-out time, to cope with the viewfinder and the ergonomics, but how wrong I was, when years later I bought one to attempt sharp well-resolved close-ups of items in such hugely different planes of focus that only small sensored machines can manage.

Although now replaced by my LG G4 for such purposes it remains a favourite I will never sell. The lens is MUCH better than either the A2 Minolta or the DSC-828 Sony, because the Sony's was as sharp, yet it had horrific blue fringing on light subjects in bright light.

I think of the 8080 as a studio camera!!

Flash/studio worked great, and macro, and not too bad otherwise, but avoid back-lighting!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/128994023@N05/21867241121/in/album-72157659261061786/

Link | Posted on May 19, 2017 at 09:13 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

RobBobW: I picked up an 8080 in 2004 when it went on sale for $1200 CDN. It was a bargain for what I got. Loved the camera. Built like a tank and wonderfully sharp images. My only issue was the inability to manually focus to infinity (a documented "feature"). I took many thousands of images with it before it was stolen in 2007, allowing me to move on to a DSLR. Lots of fond memories of this camera!

I also bought mine in 2004, with a UV house, and it cost me a lot more, of course.
RAw shooting was horrible, as was back-lighted objects (no nano-coatings then), but otherwise, pretty decent camera.

But technology has really moved on since then!

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 21:41 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kanji: I bought one right after reading the DPReview. I owned several Oly cameras before getting the C8080. The lens on this camera was very sharp. It's true the focus was a little slow,but you could bet that when it was locked on it was truly focused. I used it on landscapes, and am still selling photos taken with this camera many years ago! One thing also,with Olys' smart cards,it was very easy to do panos, as the card put special lines in the viewfinder to line up on. Anyway, I still have one ,like new, with the box and all the items that came with it, and I think that I will get it out and use it a little.

I still got a lot of panoramas I took with my C-8080. Excellent for that, and for low-light and flash photography. The rest is best forgotten!

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 21:38 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

NCB: Seriously considered the C-8080, was highly impressed with the specs. Was into landscape photography and wanted something convenient to take up mountains. While dithering the Nikon 8400 came out, 24-85 lens but less than 2/3 the weight and it would easily fit in a rucksack pocket; I bought it, still have it and use it. I know of people who bought the C-8080 and likewise still have it and use it though. Both cracking cameras.

Often wondered why Olympus didn't continue to develop that line. Nikon brought out the D40 and decided that that was the way to go rather than high end compacts.

It sold so badly that they never recuperated the investment they put into it. Nearly turned Olympus to a part of history, but the older C-7070 sold well, and continued to do so for years, saving the company from a fate worse than death!

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 21:36 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom (105 comments in total)

Oh, my C-8080 is still with me, and it still get some use, not least with flash. But try a back-lighted subject and the LCD and the EVF turns to rivers of lilac rivers, flowing down from top of the screen to the bottom.

Macro and flash was its best side, but panoramas and JPEGs were not that bad.

Took mine to the US, and it died the first day over there, and had to be sent to Switzerland for a firmware update, before it could be used again.

Very much a one-hand camera as pretty much everything could be operated with your right hand, things like focus, zoom, exposure compensation, and so on.

Have taken wonderful longtime exposures with mine at night, and that was kind what it was, slow, and mechanically superb.

It could take RAW images, rare in those days, and was blindingly fast, with an average of over 3 fpm on a good day (yup, 3 frames per minutes, no kidding!). That was really good. Then!

Max useful ISO was 140, normal was 100, or lower. ISO 400 was the upper maximum limit!

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 21:31 UTC as 36th comment
On article Poor piloting causes terrifying cycle crash (10 comments in total)

Hope the drone owner will be forced to pay all hospital expenses, lost income, damage to the bike, and be banned from using drones near people!

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 18:19 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

(unknown member): Obviously a switch won't be financially viable for the individual photographer unless the new camera does something that couldn't be done before and fulfills a need.
The A9 has to prove itself in the field first by outdoing the competition by a significant margin in every important aspect.
Also, You can easily​ upgrade technology and specs but it is hard to gain trust and a good reputation among pros.

And the number of pro grade lenses is still so much smaller than for the Canikon guys!

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 02:37 UTC
In reply to:

MaxiMax: You will always "lose money" when switching over to a completely new system, no matter if it is to Sony, to Canon, to Nikon or any other system. It always depends on how much equipment you have, how old it is, and what is the minimum you need to get in a new system.

I lost around 10K when I switched from Pentax to Nikon (I did try Sony for a while, too), but I got so much for free when switching, a true technology jump, but sure I'd love a Nikon with IBIS!

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 02:30 UTC
Total: 601, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »