Jock Elliott

Joined on Jan 9, 2012

Comments

Total: 31, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article DPReview TV: Video tripods vs photo tripods (87 comments in total)

Thanks for the extremely useful video.

However, 21 kilobucks for a "professional" video tripod. I'll tell ya what they are professing: poverty!

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2020 at 11:41 UTC as 14th comment | 2 replies
On article DPReview TV: Time-lapse photography (113 comments in total)

Definitely would like to see more, including more advanced techniques.

Also, would be interested in recommendations for cameras for time-lapse. For example, is there a budget option for astro/aurora timelapse, or is that an oxymoron?

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2018 at 11:10 UTC as 21st comment
In reply to:

GabrielZ: That’s one chunky lens! 🙂

Nah, too skinny! (grin)

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2018 at 13:02 UTC
In reply to:

Jock Elliott: Jordan:

I have a far more basic question: why do you choose to use a still/video camera to shoot your videos with Chris instead of a "professional" video camera?

Whenever I see news crews out and about, they're using a dedicated video camera. Ditto for the Netflix series -- Shot in the Dark -- that shows freelancers chasing car crashes in LA at night . . . they all use dedicated video cameras . . . professional models.

Other than "proof of concept" for DP review readers, is there an inherent advantage in using the cameras that you use?

Cheers, Jock

I'd like to double-down on what Lone Stranger said: "structured resources" . . . please??

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2018 at 09:16 UTC
In reply to:

Jock Elliott: Jordan:

I have a far more basic question: why do you choose to use a still/video camera to shoot your videos with Chris instead of a "professional" video camera?

Whenever I see news crews out and about, they're using a dedicated video camera. Ditto for the Netflix series -- Shot in the Dark -- that shows freelancers chasing car crashes in LA at night . . . they all use dedicated video cameras . . . professional models.

Other than "proof of concept" for DP review readers, is there an inherent advantage in using the cameras that you use?

Cheers, Jock

Jordan,

Thanks! Very informative.

The videos that you and Chris produce are simply top notch. Put a Gold Star on your chart! (And, yes, I have subscribed.)

Cheers, Jock

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2018 at 09:26 UTC

Jordan:

I have a far more basic question: why do you choose to use a still/video camera to shoot your videos with Chris instead of a "professional" video camera?

Whenever I see news crews out and about, they're using a dedicated video camera. Ditto for the Netflix series -- Shot in the Dark -- that shows freelancers chasing car crashes in LA at night . . . they all use dedicated video cameras . . . professional models.

Other than "proof of concept" for DP review readers, is there an inherent advantage in using the cameras that you use?

Cheers, Jock

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2018 at 10:14 UTC as 10th comment | 12 replies

Some years ago, I entered Leica's annual Oskar Barnack photo contest. The reason? The prize was a Leica digital rangefinder (I forget which model) and the Noctilux f/0.95 50mm lens.

I was drooling over this combo when my wife asked, "Do you really want to be walking around with a camera and lens worth the cost of a car hanging from your neck?"

Short answer: No. Same answer for the Sony A9 plus 400mm f/2.8.

But after I win the SuperBall Lottery, I may have to re-evaluate.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2018 at 11:02 UTC as 28th comment | 1 reply
On article DPReview TV: the Sony 400mm F2.8 is a pretty sweet lens (318 comments in total)

I would love to see a head to head comparison of this combo (A9 & 400mm f/2.8) with the Sony RX10 IV, shooting sports, birds in flight, and other wildlife.

In a "blind taste test"-- ie, looking at the images without identifying which camera took which image -- would the differences between the two rigs be really obvious? And in what applications would the differences be really consequential?

I honestly don't know, but it would be really interesting to find out.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2018 at 10:50 UTC as 30th comment | 4 replies
On article Shooting Greenland in Winter Part 3: Familiar Places (92 comments in total)

It would be interesting to know what, if anything, you do to protect your gear in conditions of extreme cold and blowing snow.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2018 at 09:36 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply

Really good. Really helpful for someone just getting started.

I've been asked to shoot video of some live events. I would love to see a video on so-called "run-and-gun" shooting techniques that are useful when you have to cover an event as it unfolds, and you can't do "set" shots (ie, "we'll put the camera here on a tripod, and you'll stand there . . . " etc.)

In my early experimentation, I've found that the optical image stabilization and the high equivalent f-stop provided by a small sensor camera tend to make the footage look less "at sea"j and more in-focus. What you lose, in general, is the ability to separate the subject from the background with depth of field. Does that make sense to you?

Finally, a general comment: I find your videos to be useful, informative, and entertaining (after all, the mind can absorb only what the seat can endure). Keep up the good work!

Link | Posted on May 30, 2018 at 10:41 UTC as 20th comment
In reply to:

Jock Elliott: Hooray! I'm in.

Finally a manufacturer who understands that, if you can't see the rear screen in the bright sunlight to compose the shot, you have to rely on "Go full wide; spray and pray." (This isn't theoretical; I've been there, done that, trying to frame a shot one handed while holding on to a kayak paddle.)

I can also see this as a backup camera for anyone who will be in extreme conditions and absolutely has to get the shot . . . just in case the "big gun" camera gets splashed with salt water or exposed to high pressure fresh water.

This is very good news, for me at least.

No EVF!

Link | Posted on May 11, 2018 at 11:58 UTC

Hooray! I'm in.

Finally a manufacturer who understands that, if you can't see the rear screen in the bright sunlight to compose the shot, you have to rely on "Go full wide; spray and pray." (This isn't theoretical; I've been there, done that, trying to frame a shot one handed while holding on to a kayak paddle.)

I can also see this as a backup camera for anyone who will be in extreme conditions and absolutely has to get the shot . . . just in case the "big gun" camera gets splashed with salt water or exposed to high pressure fresh water.

This is very good news, for me at least.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2018 at 10:12 UTC as 115th comment | 4 replies

My particular weapon of choice is the OMD EM5 (I picked up a refurb with the 12-50 lens for $500) with the 17mm f/1.8 mounted. The autofocus seems to be instantaneously quick in virtually all conditions . . . press the shutter button, and the AF is locked on so quick it’s like telepathy. It falters only in very, very dark conditions (an unlit room with moonlight bleeding in through a window), at which point the shooter can provide some help with the focus ring.

The combined depth of the camera and lens is thicker than any of the X100s, but a canny shooter could probably put the combo together for less than $800.

Personally, I can't tolerate any "serious" camera that lacks a viewfinder (either optical or electronic). Sometimes I stash a Fuji XP90 in a pocket just to have a camera with me "just in case," and when I use it, the lack of a viewfinder always vexes me.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2017 at 10:54 UTC as 11th comment
On article 2017 Roundup: Consumer Long Zoom Compacts (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

jim seekers: I have a friend who works in a camera shop and i tested the Nikon P900 , Canon SX60 HS and the Sony HX400V, out of the three of them the Sony HX400V has by far the best image Qaulity , Sharpness and Colour Qaulity and I found its stabilisation to be the best, the Canon lost lots of detail and was very soft at 65x and that Nikon gets Duller and Darker when zoomed in, I printed A4 with same shots , ISO , Day and Low Light and the Sony HX400V images zoomed in at 50x kept their sharpness, does anyone else agree with me.

I agree. I have owned the Fz150, FZ200, P900, and the HX400V, which is now my go-to camera. See my comments below.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 11:18 UTC
On article 2017 Roundup: Consumer Long Zoom Compacts (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Whippet: I am probably an idiot but the P900 makes me smile and sometimes laugh out loud. The lens is outrageously good at all lengths and the stabilisation is awesome. OK the sensor is tiny by today's standards but so was the one on my first digital camera which was an Olympus E20p and that took outstanding photos as well. The thing is "it does what it says on the tin", With this camera you crop when you shoot and nothing is too far away and it is all sharp without a tripod (even the moon!). It is absolutely hilarious, it won't replace my D750 but it cost less then my new Sigma 50mm art lens. So, buy it, enjoy it, and smile.

Whippet,

You might enjoy my initial impressions of the P900: https://www.seriouscompacts.com/threads/a-trip-to-the-land-of-astonishment-%E2%80%93-initial-impressions-of-the-nikon-p900.36119/

I eventually gave up on it because of the yellowish cast to the SOOC images (mentioned above), but I have a little "mad money" set aside for whatever replaces the P900. For reach, I agree, the P900 will make you giggle like a boy who has just discovered ice cream.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 09:41 UTC
On article 2017 Roundup: Consumer Long Zoom Compacts (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jock Elliott: I am a superzoom enthusiast. For me, they offer the best bang for the buck for casual wildlife photography.

If you want to see some of my work, check out this post: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58857135 The top two pictures were taken with the FZ150 and the bottom four with the HX400V.

I have owned the FZ150, the FZ200, the P900, the HX400V, and I have some comments on each:

- Panasonic FZ150 -- wonderful camera, doesn't have the low light capability of the FZ200, and the manual focus capability is difficult. My wife still uses it and loves it.

- Panasonic FZ200 -- twice it collected a spot of dust on the sensor, requiring a $100 trip to the camera repair shop. Manual focus required a safecracker's touch. Gone.

- Nikon P900 -- astonishing reach, but images in less than bright sunlight had a yellowish cast that required post processing. Gone.

- Sony HX400V -- 1200 mm ee reach, superb stablization; punchy images , excellent manual focus. My go-to camera.

Hey Biro,

I have not noticed battery drain when the HX400V is turned off. I use it a lot, though, so it would be very unusual for it to go 2-3 weeks without use. I normally carry 3 extra batteries (I got a deal: 3 batteries and a charger for $20), and it is rare to need to change batteries in the field. The thing that I miss most from the FZ200 is the f/2.8 at full telephoto. IMHO, the HX400V shines in image processing (very punchy; I rarely post-process them), reach (better than the FZ200, but not as good as the P900) and image stabilization.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 09:37 UTC
On article 2017 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (508 comments in total)

I very much appreciate the time and effort that goes into the DPR reviews and camera roundups, and I have, indeed, used them many times as "decision support tools" in deciding which cameras to buy. So kudos to all at DPR for your hard work and professionalism. Put a Gold Star on your chart.

But don't you think it about time to start carping -- loud and long and insistently -- about the lack of an optical viewfinder or electronic viewfinder on some of these cameras? As you know, it's a fairly common occurrence to get into a situation where you can't see the backscreen to compose the shot . . . then you have to do a workaround, like shade it with your hand or a hat, etc.

So, how about it folks . . . let's take some points off -- and complain about it -- in those reviews where the camera has no OVF or EVF, especially when it can't be added even as an option. Whaddya say?

Link | Posted on May 19, 2017 at 10:42 UTC as 24th comment | 2 replies
On article 2017 Roundup: Consumer Long Zoom Compacts (193 comments in total)

I am a superzoom enthusiast. For me, they offer the best bang for the buck for casual wildlife photography.

If you want to see some of my work, check out this post: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58857135 The top two pictures were taken with the FZ150 and the bottom four with the HX400V.

I have owned the FZ150, the FZ200, the P900, the HX400V, and I have some comments on each:

- Panasonic FZ150 -- wonderful camera, doesn't have the low light capability of the FZ200, and the manual focus capability is difficult. My wife still uses it and loves it.

- Panasonic FZ200 -- twice it collected a spot of dust on the sensor, requiring a $100 trip to the camera repair shop. Manual focus required a safecracker's touch. Gone.

- Nikon P900 -- astonishing reach, but images in less than bright sunlight had a yellowish cast that required post processing. Gone.

- Sony HX400V -- 1200 mm ee reach, superb stablization; punchy images , excellent manual focus. My go-to camera.

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2017 at 12:07 UTC as 45th comment | 2 replies

Clearly this is a case of turning lemons into lemonade. Steinberg could have said, "Aw, crap, it's foggy." Instead he got creative and beauty is the result.

Wow!

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 12:00 UTC as 3rd comment
On article PIX 2015: An interview with Joe McNally (28 comments in total)

Wow! That is easily the best interview on a career in photojournalism that I have seen McNally presents a lot of wisdom, and I think anyone getting started would do well to take his advice to heart. (As a fulltime freelance writer who shoots photos to illustrate his stories, I have, perhaps, some standing for saying so.) The interviewer did an excellent job as well.

The comments about establishing rapport with subjects and the fact that the photographer needs "food for the soul as well as food for the body" are right on target.

On a scale of 1-10, this interview is at least a 12. Well done.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2015 at 12:35 UTC as 4th comment
Total: 31, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »