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: 462, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 1 - Crop-Sensor (188 comments in total)
In reply to:

mastermoose: After reading this article I can now see why the Samsung NX1 was such an amazing cost effective and versatile camera. Such a shame it was not taken seriously!!!

That is the way forward for NX--to be bought out by someone. Like Konica bought Minolta and Sony bought KM. Of course it would change things significantly and there is no guarantee that they would keep the NX lens mount, but if Nikon bought them out and didn't hold back to protect their FF offerings I could see the D8000 or D500ii being mirrorless and I think that would be great.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 19:58 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 1 - Crop-Sensor (188 comments in total)
In reply to:

mastermoose: After reading this article I can now see why the Samsung NX1 was such an amazing cost effective and versatile camera. Such a shame it was not taken seriously!!!

Yeah, the Samsung NX is in a class of it's own--a really spectacular camera that was killed by it's own creator. The problem with this is so obvious that even it's merits don't save it as a contender on this list.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 01:51 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 1 - Crop-Sensor (188 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: Plenty of offerings below that price that are better suitable for most, but good to see dslr trumps mirrorless :p

To misquote branden10000, "cameras are not yet there as a complete package and most cameras today are a compromise in some way or another" It's why I am lucky to own a mirrorless and DSLR systems--both are a compromise in some way or another.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 01:41 UTC
On article Looking Sharp: A focus stacking tutorial (219 comments in total)

Oh for a tilt shift lens! This is what they are for and no worries about cloning out motion blur or matching exposures. Of course it's an investment, but so is Photoshop and the equipment used in the tutorial. Of course knowing how to do this is a fun skill to pick up and I'm also in favor of stacking apps like Zerene Stacker and in camera Apps like Olympus has been developing. But Sony should make an E-mount tilt-shift.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2016 at 14:21 UTC as 56th comment | 7 replies
On article Looking Sharp: A focus stacking tutorial (219 comments in total)
In reply to:

Prognathous: Focus bracketing should be built into any advanced DSLR/mirrorless camera. Including automatic in-camera merge would be even nicer :-)

Thanks for the interesting tutorial!

You would think that it's only a matter of time before everyone does this, but these things are patented through and through and also there is corporate arrogance. For example, Olympus solved the dust problem in 2001 and it took years before Canon would even admit that it was a problem needing a solution. The Olympus solution is still the best, but eventually other manufacturers have tried to improve sensor dust issues. Still it took years.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2016 at 14:16 UTC
On article Canon EOS 80D Field Test: Barney builds a boat (220 comments in total)

As a kayaker, woodworker, and photographer this video was riveting! Very strong work Barney--stunner boat! Congratulations.

Link | Posted on May 28, 2016 at 01:28 UTC as 20th comment | 3 replies

I just knock the leg of my tripod about a pixel toward each side and combine in post. ;)

Good job Ricoh. Impressive results.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2016 at 02:10 UTC as 108th comment
In reply to:

SirSeth: I mourned the passing to RawShooter and RawShooter Pro when Adobe bought them out. It was the fastest and most intuitive platform I've used. Using LR since, I've never felt like it couldn't be replaced and I really hate Adobe subscription "service" model. ON1 looks more like RawShooter and it looks like they understand that offering a standalone or subscription is essential. I'm looking forward to trying it out. Curious to see what the standalone will cost. But anything that challenges LR is good for me.

That's why I liked it. Super fast to simply develop and nothing more. RS Pro had more options. Also, it used the folder structure I set up myself which I prefer. I don't like LR catalogs. Anyhow, I'll check out Capture One, but I have hopes for On1.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2016 at 04:02 UTC

I mourned the passing to RawShooter and RawShooter Pro when Adobe bought them out. It was the fastest and most intuitive platform I've used. Using LR since, I've never felt like it couldn't be replaced and I really hate Adobe subscription "service" model. ON1 looks more like RawShooter and it looks like they understand that offering a standalone or subscription is essential. I'm looking forward to trying it out. Curious to see what the standalone will cost. But anything that challenges LR is good for me.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 12:49 UTC as 21st comment | 3 replies
On article Readers' Showcase: Phil Garcia (73 comments in total)

Really great images!

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2016 at 13:31 UTC as 54th comment

Not everyone's dream camera, but size and features in that price range strike an attractive balance imo.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2016 at 15:28 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

J A C S: Sony: 68.6 x 59.5 mm, 186g
Canon: 69.2 x 39.3mm, 160g, half the price

So a smaller body means a larger lens with the same design?

The A7II is actually deeper (!) with that lens than the 6D with the 50 STM.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#634.580,380.471,ha,t

And it goes round and round. One can cherry pick examples all the live long day to either minimize or maximize the difference in their heads. The reason why this isn't really helpful, is that size/weight is usually not the only item on ones priority list. For some it might be a very high priority and then they can absolutely get a smaller and lighter kit with mirrorless. Of course someone else can buy large mirrorless lenses for their cameras.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2016 at 22:32 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: It's been a while and my memory on this is fuzzy, but wasn't the first TTL implementation of this concept demonstrated on the Olympus E-300?

I had a couple of E-330 cameras. They were very useful for macro work and the viewfinder wasn't that compared with other entry level DSLRs of the time. Canon seems to be trying to reinvent the wheel in a different way than Olympus, Fuji, and Sony has already patented to death. That's tough. There are only so many versions of round.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2016 at 01:39 UTC
In reply to:

J A C S: Sony: 68.6 x 59.5 mm, 186g
Canon: 69.2 x 39.3mm, 160g, half the price

So a smaller body means a larger lens with the same design?

The A7II is actually deeper (!) with that lens than the 6D with the 50 STM.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#634.580,380.471,ha,t

Arguments minimizing the size difference between DSLRs and mirrorless in general always sound to me like trying to rope a steer with a wet noodle. Maybe the size difference is much more noticeable to some than others. My FF mirrorless system is so much smaller and lighter than my previous DSLRs (even those with pint sized sensors). But I agree, it's also about a shift in thinking. Maybe part of that is noticing how much a difference in size makes.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2016 at 01:27 UTC
In reply to:

Old Cameras: 50/1.8 = good, $249 = great!
70-300/4.5-5.6 = good, $1199 = are you out of your minds?

The price is all in line with what I would expect from a G class lens, Canon L, or other premium level performer. There not many lenses like this designed for mirrorless and with silent zoom for photography and video. It's size may be an advantage and I'll be keen to see the IQ. I expect it to be very good indeed. The price does not surprise me. The price on the nifty fifty does. Great to have a mirrorless nifty fifty. Well done!

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 16:21 UTC
In reply to:

PPierre: Almost everyone on Sony FF has the 55, and they release an 50f1.8... Had they released a cheap 85f2.0 (like, sub $500), they would have made both FF owners and aps-c owner happy.

Even though I think Sony is moving in the right direction with some cheaper primes (28 and 50), I really think they're making a mistake. However, this 50 could come as a kit lens, which would be a good move :)

It may come as a kit lens. Why not? Also, not everyone owning a Sony FF has a 55mm. Far from it. (and not everyone buying a Sony FF in the future will opt for the 55mm over the 50mm). I think it's the right direction without qualification. Of course I wouldn't be opposed to a longer prime that is priced for entry level FF at sub $500. It wouldn't surprise me if they brought out a FF between the A7 series an the A6300 in price as well. Then suddenly the 50mm f1.8 makes even more sense.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 16:14 UTC
On article Sony may split off its imaging products business (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

SirSeth: I wish I knew more about business. Would this enable Sony Imagining to be more competitive because the leaders of the company would be focused on imaging rather than general overall corporate strategy? Would they still answer to Sony corporate? It seems that diversification is helpful for companies to continue to be financially viable over the long term. Many companies have come and gone or been bought out and absorbed by other companies because they had a narrow niche. Why would you want to split your diverse company into several smaller companies? Is it just more options for investors with the result that 3 smaller companies end up making more money than 1 conglomerate? I assume they would continue to share resources under the Sony name, so Sony imaging would get a good rate on Sony chip and video technology from Sony Video. Basically, what problems does restructuring solve and are those problems par for the course when companies become large enough? Anyhow... that's what I wonder.

That makes sense. Thanks for the perspective. It seems it would attract buyers if the company was split into areas of interest and if it makes it easier for investors, while making money for the parent company, then everyone wins. I hope there will be more efficiency too. If Sony imaging, being smaller is able to focus their vision for the company, it will be better for everyone as well.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 16:08 UTC
On article Sony may split off its imaging products business (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: This is great news. Now, call the new subsidiary "Minolta".

"Minoltony"

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2016 at 18:22 UTC
On article Sony may split off its imaging products business (71 comments in total)

I wish I knew more about business. Would this enable Sony Imagining to be more competitive because the leaders of the company would be focused on imaging rather than general overall corporate strategy? Would they still answer to Sony corporate? It seems that diversification is helpful for companies to continue to be financially viable over the long term. Many companies have come and gone or been bought out and absorbed by other companies because they had a narrow niche. Why would you want to split your diverse company into several smaller companies? Is it just more options for investors with the result that 3 smaller companies end up making more money than 1 conglomerate? I assume they would continue to share resources under the Sony name, so Sony imaging would get a good rate on Sony chip and video technology from Sony Video. Basically, what problems does restructuring solve and are those problems par for the course when companies become large enough? Anyhow... that's what I wonder.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2016 at 18:19 UTC as 18th comment | 3 replies

For practical use ISOs should be capped at just more than usable results. But for bragging rights, let's hear it for ISO 6 million.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2016 at 12:32 UTC as 151st comment
Total: 462, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »