SirSeth

SirSeth

Lives in United States Hagerstown, United States
Works as a Teacher
Has a website at wallygoots.smugmug.com
Joined on Feb 8, 2004
About me:

My plan is to ever improve my trade, my hobbies, and my relationships with family, friends, and my God. My trade is teaching Math and Computers. My primary hobbies are lutherie (guitar building) and photography. My God is slow to anger and abounding in love. He will not always accuse, nor will he harbor His anger forever; He does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us for our iniquities. For as high as the heavens are above the earth so great is His love for those who fear him. As far as the east is from the west so far has he removed our transgressions from us. If you have questions or gripes about my God, I always enjoy talking with someone who is a seeker. Rock throwers are rarely convinced of anything spiritual and I can respect their desire to believe differently than myself.

Comments

Total: 638, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Updated: Nikon D850 sample gallery (284 comments in total)
In reply to:

LV-426: To be perfectly honest Nikon and Sony pictures always look very flat and less lifelike (and no I am not talking about contrast) compared to brands like Fuji and Canon. I don't know what it is to be honest, but it's the way I see them...

Interested Rishi, I'd like to know what you mean by crush the blacks less. I've always felt that different companies have noticeably different philosophies regarding RAW and JPG optimization. As I understand it now, RAW is a just uncompressed (or compressed less) but not untouched, so somewhere in route someone makes some decisions as to handling of the digital data, the blacks, the contrast,...

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2017 at 21:09 UTC
On article Updated: Nikon D850 sample gallery (284 comments in total)

I think the kayak pictures and red rocks at night show really great aspects of the IQ. Results look sharp, DR excellent, colors good, without pixel peeping. I don't really expect miracles at 200%.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2017 at 14:02 UTC as 77th comment
On article Updated: Nikon D850 sample gallery (284 comments in total)
In reply to:

don-bosco: Mediocre colors and lack of detail, when zoomed in 100%, is not inspiring....These shots are pushing me to cancel my pre-orders. I guess my D810 would fare well into the next few years.

Probably. Not sure detail is going to be the clincher even with a few more MP.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2017 at 13:58 UTC
On article Updated: Nikon D850 sample gallery (284 comments in total)
In reply to:

Harvey Specter: The portraits look nice and sharp. Still not seeing anything that couldn't be achieved with any of the other FX cameras, though.

Were you expecting that? Interesting. How about the D700?

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2017 at 13:56 UTC
On article Nikon D850 sample gallery (188 comments in total)
In reply to:

stratplaya: I must say I'm disappointed by the samples. Most seem dark or underexposed and the subject matter is lacking as well. I would have like to have seen more cityscapes and landscapes, it is a 45mp after all.

With the a9, DPR shot most of the samples in bright daylight. I guess the sun did not cooperate with the D850?

@roustabout66. I see you do have the background. I'm guessing we just have a different perspective. I argue that even with the best sensors a "proper exposure" as in reading off an 18% middle gray will not produce the right exposure for the skies and at the same time as the right exposure for the shadows. Pulling shadows is a way to preserve highlights because once you clip those (which often happens in a middle gray "correct" exposures, then that info is gone. So I think underexposing purposely to preserve highlights is a better exposure decision if shooting RAW.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 22:58 UTC
On article Nikon D850 sample gallery (188 comments in total)
In reply to:

stratplaya: I must say I'm disappointed by the samples. Most seem dark or underexposed and the subject matter is lacking as well. I would have like to have seen more cityscapes and landscapes, it is a 45mp after all.

With the a9, DPR shot most of the samples in bright daylight. I guess the sun did not cooperate with the D850?

roustabout66, there is no "proper" exposure to start with when the most modern sensors made can't capture the DR--especially for scenics with sky. With film and digital we used all sorts of techniques to overcome limited dynamic range including darkroom dodging/burning, grad filters, multiple exposures and blending in photoshop... This has always been the case, but with the newer sensors, shooting RAW to expose the sky correctly and then bringing up the shadows in the foreground in development is just the most reasonable technique for the given technology. It's a lot more versatile than using grads or blending separate exposures. Maybe you know this already if you shoot RAW? If you shoot JPG, you throw away a lot of the exposure latitude information for the optimization that the Nikon programmers feel will make the most people happy.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 00:45 UTC
On article Nikon D850 sample gallery (188 comments in total)
In reply to:

stratplaya: I must say I'm disappointed by the samples. Most seem dark or underexposed and the subject matter is lacking as well. I would have like to have seen more cityscapes and landscapes, it is a 45mp after all.

With the a9, DPR shot most of the samples in bright daylight. I guess the sun did not cooperate with the D850?

Yes, Smoke has also been nearly unbearable in Montana, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington for the last 2 months. Super bad for landscape or telephoto.

The underexposed pictures followed by processed ones are great examples of the malleability of the files. This aspect looks excellent as does fine detail. Superb imo.

They are not the prettiest pictures--but decent samples that show what the camera can do when with mixed lighting and settings. These are not fine art galleries and they shouldn't attempt to try for that.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 19:21 UTC
In reply to:

Bambi24: I don't know what the point of this camera is really.

A puny sensor that won't perform well except when the sun is out.

24-600mm superzoom will cause a rollercoaster in terms of distortion.

And you also can't argue that this thing is compact, it's not, and at 1kg it's very heavy.

And it's super expensive. For $1700 you can just get an APS-C camera with a few nice lenses instead. You'll get way way better image quality for a fraction of the price.

People don't buy a DSLR as an all in one solution or for travel when you want versatility. I shoot FF and have a 500mm f4.5 lens. It's huge, manual focus, comes in it's own trunk, and cost me $1200 for the single focal length. I'm probably buying an FZ300 for an upcoming trip just for versatile reach, 4K video, and not having to wield weight and size around the world. Most of the commenters who are negative think that their needs represent the world. If I had $1700 for this hobby I'd buy several other photo products, but I see a lot of good in this camera and nothing really competing against this product. Better AF is always a boon, especially for those wanting versatility. The 1" stacked cmos is a good sensor and the only thing making the lens size and reach possible.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 19:15 UTC
In reply to:

Anadrol: What does Paint Shop Pro make better than Photoshop ?

Genuine question, I used it 20 years ago last time !

If I could afford to buy a very nice house right now for the same price as I will pay to rent the one I'm in for 5 months then I'd be a fool. The only reason I rent right now is that the buy price is the equivalent of 33 years of rent payments and I'd have to be sure this is where I want to live for the rest of my working life. Still it stinks to rent because thinks that you can never pay off kill wealth potential--even little things like CC.

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2017 at 22:29 UTC
On article Vintage lens shootout: three lenses, one model (76 comments in total)
In reply to:

Daniel Lauring: I don't get using an optically inferior lens to create an effect when you can do the same thing, in post, with a filter, unless it is just about saving money on a newer, better lens.

Think in terms of building a system and filling holes rather than a one lens purchasing decision. Many of my older manual lenses are 95% optically there but take 1/10th the hit my limited hobby budget. There is beauty being able to mount almost every lens ever made on my mirrorless camera (and having modern sensors and focusing aids). There is a definite appeal to the robust metal feel and tactile enjoyment of some of these lenses. Many of them are optically better than I could afford in the modern AF equivalent. For example my FD500mm f4.5L. But I wouldn't want that focal length to be my only lens!

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 21:15 UTC
In reply to:

Sezano: I loved PSP when I used windows but that in a different millennium.
No OS no love.

Windows has changed a lot in this century and PSP is not subscription based. Love.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 20:37 UTC
In reply to:

Imager of: But we all know the pros use macs so this is designed for amatures only? (Since not a mac product)
Serious question.

Pollyanna told me that pros use macs. Seriously.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 20:34 UTC
In reply to:

trungtran: Cloud is the only way to stop the piraters.

There will ways be a way to pirate. It will always result in companies making it harder for legit users to function in ways that work best for them. I will never buy Adobe CC. Ever. Because I don't believe Adobe has the customer's best interest in mind and it's not best for my finances. The first reason is the stronger of the two. If LR goes that way, I'll just find something else. And there will be options because big ugly greedy companies make room for nicer smaller ones. That's the power of free market.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 02:32 UTC

Wow wow wow! Got to love post processing. ;)

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 03:25 UTC as 15th comment
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (815 comments in total)
In reply to:

goblin: DPR, I feel indeed strongly about you spendin I don't know how many pages out of 10 to the FD mount. This is a mount'a been dead'a for 30 years, and is a sign of what's wrong with this article:

- Photography is mostly lenses

- Lenses do age (yes, they do. Even mechanical ones).

- When recommending a system to have fun with - resale value be damned - the FD system is the worst possible. Aside from not being better than the others, it consists mostly of bodies which had a lot of electronics for their time, which is by now failing (the AE-1, specifically, has that beautiful shutter squeak).

Of course, all these concerns can be voided if you had mentioned the correct monster to use with this system: The Canon T-90

- The best film system is the one still made: Nikon still sells film cameras (B&H has them). There are also numerous brand new Vivitar clones (Phoenix, as well as said FM-10) in Nikon mount.

- Voigtlander is still out there, with amazing products.

To be continued :)

Dead for 25 years and and resurrected by mirrorless cameras in 2010 and on. But they didn't become truly attractive and bargainy until Sony released the relatively inexpensive A7 FF. The 3 FD lenses I like very much that I purchased for use on digital are the 85mm f1.8, 80-200mm f4L, and 500mm f4.5L. I would consider buying the 35mm tilt shift as well. My other most used lenses are my OM 28mm f3.5 and 50mm f1.8. So why not buy a film body for use with my "digital" lenses? ;)

Link | Posted on May 22, 2017 at 19:53 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF gallery and first impressions (316 comments in total)

Not too smooth. Beautiful! I would love this lens.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2017 at 04:15 UTC as 26th comment
On article Alpha-better: Sony a9 versus a7R II (505 comments in total)
In reply to:

HenryDJP: Wow after reading this entire article I'm completely baffled that Sony thinks many people will truly see any real benefits of the enormous price increase from the A7RII to the A9. I certainly don't see the $4500 price worth over the A7RII's original $3200 price point. Really Sony? An extra card slot with only one of them ultra high speed? The "My Menu" feature should be offered on all current Sony cameras. It only needs a simple firmware update. This should not be a feature to help justify this enormous $4500 price tag. The reviewer made a great point about the lack of S-Log. Makes no sense when Sony is promoting the 6K oversampling in video. Both features were already available in the A6300.
The reviewer was giving the increased battery life way too much credit. While video recording time is much better, the amount in photography shots only increased by about 100+ more shots. The reviewer gave the battery grip too much credit. You still have to buy it, plus buy two extra batteries.

Previous flagship compared with new flagship seems to me the only reasonable comparison at this point. Of course DPR can compare anything they want, but this works for me.

The upgrades to me are very significant and a $1200 increase MSRP is not at all surprising to me. Not just a new battery, but a more than double the goods is not a small upgrade. Dual card slots for redundancy is not minor either. Without the AF achievements, frame speed, and buffer this camera would really miss the mark to compete in sports and wildlife. A joy stick, My Menu, touch screen, also really add up. I strongly prefer the vertical grip that you never need to remove to replace the complete power system. That's a preference that I would pay more for. So you either have really high resolution or really high speed. I'd like to see an A7iii with the new battery, joy stick, same grip as A9, and near AF coverage and maybe 36mp. Probably differentiate with less buffer and FPS and 1 card slot.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2017 at 01:56 UTC
On article Alpha-better: Sony a9 versus a7R II (505 comments in total)

I think the A9 is the most refined mirrorless camera they have ever produced. The last hurdles were AF tracking, battery life, and redundancy to really tempt people way from a DSLR imo. Little refinements like the My Menu, joy stick, and touch screen really fill out the offering. Now as they plug holes in the lens catalog for wildlife/sports there really is little a mirrorless camera can't do while offering some significant strengths over DSLRs. Very curious to see which technologies Sony will let trickle down to their lower cost options. I'd love the battery, card slots, joy stick, and some of the AF capability in an A7III--maybe with half the speed and buffer of the A9.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2017 at 01:37 UTC as 15th comment | 2 replies

Since there is no exact replacement and the pros and cons are different, wouldn't professionals add to current kit? Maybe sell of one lenses or their back up body? Still it will cost, but people spend more money than that just because they want something. Lots of people also are wanting to upgrade from an older body or D500 class body might find it very nice that the Sony is less money than a D5. I imaging there are lots of new buyers with money to burn too. Seems like a total replacement of used Nikon gear or Canon gear is unlikely or at least worst case scenario from a financial standpoint.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 02:19 UTC as 74th comment
In reply to:

maljo@inreach.com: The new batteries are $80 each and no external charger in the box. Figure 4 batteries at least to match up with a 1DX II or D5 and two chargers because you have a lot of batteries to recharge each night. Many of us with Canon glass would buy the adapter - the price is now over $5500.

Maljo describes the worst case scenario and Eleson the best case. Possibly it's in between? First, there are great 2 and 4 battery chargers out there and no reason to believe there won't be cheaper aftermarket chargers available soon. I'm a fan of the Hahnel ProCube which has inserts for different batteries. Also, I don't expect 7000 shots from one Sony battery under a range of conditions, but if it averaged 2000+ per charge on one battery, then the vertical grip credibly matches or exceeds the D5 that has a promised 3000-4000 per charge on average.

So that's 80 for spare battery (without the grip) and 80 for a good dual charger. The reality may not be so bleak or so promising as the extremes might suggest. All in all, the new battery is much better than the older ones. Significant progress for sure.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 15:43 UTC
Total: 638, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »