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: 759, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On a photo in the Flickr Top 15 Photos of 2017 sample gallery (1 comment in total)

So cute.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2017 at 20:17 UTC as 1st comment
On a photo in the Flickr Top 15 Photos of 2017 sample gallery (12 comments in total)

How long did he have to stay motionless in the boat?

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2017 at 20:17 UTC as 1st comment | 11 replies
On a photo in the Sigma 14mm F1.8 Astrophotography Samples sample gallery (6 comments in total)
In reply to:

SirSeth: Impressive. I'd like to get results anywhere close to this good and I just don't know how yet. Maybe I just need to try a faster wider lens, but I usually try to use my A7+OM28mm f3.5 and I either get star tails from rotation of the earth or not enough light to illuminate the foreground. Or too much noise, or Sony is sucking up stars with the star gobbler. I don't know. But these are inspiring and make me want to try again.

Great! I'll try with my 50mm f1.8 next and see how it goes. Narrower field, but much faster.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2017 at 19:31 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1093 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wubslin: As a non-owner of both I can say that the non-ownership experience is exceptional, with the minor caveat that my wallet is weighing me down quite a bit.

Have you looked into the new mirrorless wallet. It's all about not learning from the past and making the same financial mistakes when it comes to quickly depreciating products. Objects in this view may be closer than they appear. :)

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 15:10 UTC
On article Nikon D850 vs Sony a7R III: Which is best? (1093 comments in total)

Oh, I want both. No questions there. ;)

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 15:08 UTC as 185th comment | 1 reply
On article Gear of the Year 2017 - Richard's choice: Sony NP-FZ100 (246 comments in total)

I couldn't agree more. For those who wanted DSLR like battery life and dual slots, things are looking up.

Boring choice for gear of the year, but practical, and it does mark the narrowing between mirrorless and DSLRs--a gap that will live on in many minds even after it has closed.

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2017 at 16:04 UTC as 62nd comment
In reply to:

ttran88: But yet Canon sells more cameras than the two companies COMBINED!!!

People don't develop as fast as technology.

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2017 at 01:50 UTC
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1225 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thomas Kachadurian: I'm looking at the in depth resolution page and truly realizing that we have come to the point where enough is enough. The detail crops are amazing, but who will ever look that deep into an image other than a forensic photographer.

It's time to stop increasing megapixels, 25 is enough for most everything, as we near 50 we're cover for the most demanding applications, but I can't think of them. Whats the point? 80 on the new Panasonic G9, for what?

Let's talk about 20 megapixels at 128,000 ISO without grain or noise and I'll get excited.

Tom

Forgot to mention that for those of us using large MF glass, framing with a wider FOV and cropping after sometimes makes it easier because you can locate the subject in the viewfinder without needing to optimize framing. There is also an assumption that people shooting with a crop sensor are cured of wanting to crop afterward--which just isn't the case. No matter what format I am using, I'm often cropping the to the full extent that the file can handle (and nearly always cropping for composition at the least).

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 16:06 UTC
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1225 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thomas Kachadurian: I'm looking at the in depth resolution page and truly realizing that we have come to the point where enough is enough. The detail crops are amazing, but who will ever look that deep into an image other than a forensic photographer.

It's time to stop increasing megapixels, 25 is enough for most everything, as we near 50 we're cover for the most demanding applications, but I can't think of them. Whats the point? 80 on the new Panasonic G9, for what?

Let's talk about 20 megapixels at 128,000 ISO without grain or noise and I'll get excited.

Tom

@Thomas Kachadurian Having a constrained hobby budget is more real excuse for not having the "right" camera or lens. ;) If reach was my only priority, there are super zooms with ultimate equiv. mm reach. There are other drawbacks of course to those systems. I have a FF because of other values, but I purchased the FD500mm f4.5L because it was a bargain--the biggest glass I could afford. The main reason I purchased that lens is because I can't afford AF big glass like a 400mm or 600mm prime. Those would be the right lenses. :) But for me, I'm just going to buy a XT-1 or G7 to act like teleconverters on my 500mm. I think an A7rii might be in the cards someday as the price is pushed down. The cropping room would be similar to using a 16mp crop sensor on my lens. Bottom line is that us folks wanting to do wildlfe on a budget have to use every tool we have to maximize value--that includes trade offs.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 16:00 UTC
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1225 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thomas Kachadurian: I'm looking at the in depth resolution page and truly realizing that we have come to the point where enough is enough. The detail crops are amazing, but who will ever look that deep into an image other than a forensic photographer.

It's time to stop increasing megapixels, 25 is enough for most everything, as we near 50 we're cover for the most demanding applications, but I can't think of them. Whats the point? 80 on the new Panasonic G9, for what?

Let's talk about 20 megapixels at 128,000 ISO without grain or noise and I'll get excited.

Tom

I'd like more MP than the 24 in my A7 because I want more cropping room for shooting wildlife. The down side is there are no really good very long glass for FE mount. I currently use a 500mm f4.5L and put up with manual focus. I could adapt Canon or Alpha lenses I suppose, but I wish I could afford the A7Riii now. The alternative (not a bad one really) is a smaller sensor that "crops" for you and narrows the field of view. The G9 looks good, but actually thinking about trying a G7 or XT-1 with my 500mm. The down side is the smaller sensor has more noise as the light fades. The upside is that it's faster, lighter, smaller, cheaper, and actually has several reasonably priced native lenses that give over 500mm equiv. FOV. I don't see why sensor makers wouldn't continue to improve senor resolution, DR, high ISO, and read speed. There is no end in sight because they are made with the same fundamental technology as CPUs which roughly follow moore's law---doubling in power every two years.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 18:30 UTC
On a photo in the Sigma 14mm F1.8 Astrophotography Samples sample gallery (6 comments in total)

Impressive. I'd like to get results anywhere close to this good and I just don't know how yet. Maybe I just need to try a faster wider lens, but I usually try to use my A7+OM28mm f3.5 and I either get star tails from rotation of the earth or not enough light to illuminate the foreground. Or too much noise, or Sony is sucking up stars with the star gobbler. I don't know. But these are inspiring and make me want to try again.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 15:30 UTC as 1st comment | 2 replies
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 first impressions (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: I'm surprised Panasonic or Olympus do not make a 300mm f2.8 for the m4/3 system. Such a lens would bring this camera into its own and attract professional photographers. Panasonic makes a 200mm f2.8 O.I.S., which is MUCH cheaper and smaller than a Canon or Nikon 400mm f2.8 lens (mounted on full-frame cameras), but a pro can put a body like a Nikon D500 or Canon 7D Mk II on that 400mm lens and have a 600mm f2.8 equivalent. That isn't a possibility with the m4/3 system. Still, with a $4,500 lens (300mm f2.8 O.I.S.) and a $1,700 body they might be willing to get the m4/3 system just to try it. That would be a lot cheaper and lighter than an $10,000 400mm f2.8 lens.

Thanks fmaxell, You see, I would certainly own an A7Riii and a few choice Zeiss primes if I could rationalize a much higher hobby budget. But, really, with more money why not sample the best from all systems. In other words, if you can, why not go polycameraist? A7Riii, XT-2, G9, FZ300 for me please. It's beats trying to convince everyone that your single choice is better than theirs. This ain't marriage, though you'd think that some have said vows to FF.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 05:00 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 first impressions (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: I'm surprised Panasonic or Olympus do not make a 300mm f2.8 for the m4/3 system. Such a lens would bring this camera into its own and attract professional photographers. Panasonic makes a 200mm f2.8 O.I.S., which is MUCH cheaper and smaller than a Canon or Nikon 400mm f2.8 lens (mounted on full-frame cameras), but a pro can put a body like a Nikon D500 or Canon 7D Mk II on that 400mm lens and have a 600mm f2.8 equivalent. That isn't a possibility with the m4/3 system. Still, with a $4,500 lens (300mm f2.8 O.I.S.) and a $1,700 body they might be willing to get the m4/3 system just to try it. That would be a lot cheaper and lighter than an $10,000 400mm f2.8 lens.

Insistence that every other system must compare directly to FF in every way in order to rate at all is a forum constant. Anything else is not as good which must mean bad. How might we judge cameras differently in a way that is not fraught with such confirmation bias? Surely, this new camera has enough of the right ingredients to make it the best choice for some professionals and many amateurs. I'm guessing they judge the camera differently (as the video on the front page demonstrates). Use tripods less, smaller lighter lenses, environmental seals and ruggedness. Video capabilities... But it's not as good as a D850.... but at what? We shouldn't all measure our preferences the same.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 20:14 UTC
In reply to:

BostonBoy: This morning I spend several hours on the V1.6x Trial SW. Like many others I’m looking at an Adobe replacement. Offering LR as CC only going forward has put me over the edge. After DxO, Capture One, and specialized solutions (such as Phocus) I’m looking for several things as a non-professional user: a) moderate rich functionality for ALL my RAW files, b) contained cost, and c) a solid go-forward path (not necessarily with a Digital Asset Mgmt Solution as I have a clearly structured WF and file system archive.

I just developed X-Trans and Bayer files from 3 modern cameras (D850, XT-2, X1D) with very pleasing result. Could this really be my new “grand unified solution”?!

I will keep testing. Judgement is still out, but it certainly piqued my interest.

I've been demoing Capture One for a week after trying DxO, ON1, and Affinity. It's expensive--unless you are a Sony user. $50 is a deal. University students get a discount. I don't find it too complex. It's very customizable and a 30min. video on Youtube was enough to get up to speed and set it up exactly how I want it. I like that I can use either a catalog or per/session work flow.

Interested in the Windows demo of Luminar because the interface looks smooth. LR and C1 run very smoothly on my system. C1 results have been fabulous compared with the others and has pretty much sealed the deal for me. I do miss the LR adjustment brush, but I don't like the LR DAM and happy to leave that behind. I'll never go subscription and I agree that a lot of people are feeling the same way. I'll be curious to know if that feeling sticks or if when push comes to shove they will just cave and rationalize the cost as "inexpensive for what you get."

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 15:46 UTC

I think that's very impressive. Not perfect, but very obvious sharpness boost.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 01:58 UTC as 126th comment
In reply to:

sbu: TINY SENSOR TINY SENSOR - just wanted to be the first and set the scene for the next 500 clowns shooting other brands with hate for m43.

@entoman I agree that my "blah blah blah" was a little chippy. Sorry for antagonizing. The fallacies remain undisputed. My perspective is that no one can decide for others what is valuable or quality. It's not objective. This is the opposite of bigoted. That would be pushing one's own idea as the only one worth considering. FF proponents argue this like it's a king of the hill battle and that they are objectively correct and this mindset rests on blatant fallacies such as "You can't deny the physics" and "Pros do this... which makes them more right." That's just not true. FF might be best for you. I'm not disputing this or the advantages of FF.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2017 at 18:25 UTC
In reply to:

sbu: TINY SENSOR TINY SENSOR - just wanted to be the first and set the scene for the next 500 clowns shooting other brands with hate for m43.

@entoman Not missing the point. "No one would" .... blah blah blah ... when clearly they do. "Ask any professional..." when there are plenty of professionals using what you wouldn't consider the "best sensor. "How many professionals do you see..." as if what I see (or you see) represents everyone everywhere. Backing up to the "But all professionals do this..." defence is called appeal to authority. You go to town on arguments that I don't make; that's called a straw man. The fallacy that if something better exists, then everything else is lousy is ripe with you.

When I moved to FF I saw clear advantages, but it was not a panacea. There is no reason to disparage smaller formats because your choice is more "discriminating." That's just being bigoted. In this, you have proven why I have a distaste for FF proponents.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2017 at 15:39 UTC
In reply to:

sbu: TINY SENSOR TINY SENSOR - just wanted to be the first and set the scene for the next 500 clowns shooting other brands with hate for m43.

@entoman Instead of reading critically, you contend strawmen that you set up. But just to repeat what you missed in my comment: 1. aspects of FF are enabling in many areas which is great if you value those strengths the most. I know because I shoot FF when I want those advantages. 2. job requirements may necessitate certain tools which makes your closing strawman argument about professionals laughable. 3. And finally, people value different things. But FF proponents are those that slant everything in favor of their priorities as if what they value is more right. I would like this G9 for what looks to be it's significant strengths. Of course I'd also like an A7Riii.

@ZeBebito. The E-M1ii is close to my A7 and I expect the G9 will be also--not in every aspect--but with the speed and image improvements, there are times that the smaller sensor camera enables a better quality image. In a fake hypothetical, you would be right, I could eek more out of my older FF camera.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2017 at 04:50 UTC
In reply to:

sbu: TINY SENSOR TINY SENSOR - just wanted to be the first and set the scene for the next 500 clowns shooting other brands with hate for m43.

I get the tongue in cheek thing, but what I hate about FF proponents (and I shoot with an Sony A7 and Olympus E-1 so go figure) is that they seem to think that their qualification for image quality is all that matters--and that everyone else just doesn't have the sense to see it. The rise in smartphone photography proves that superior DR, and low noise, higher resolution, isn't what defines image quality (although those are enabling for sure) it's getting a picture that represent quality to the viewer. Feeling good about the outcome. If you have to have the best FF body, best DR, best resolution, best lenses.... and without them you can't make a picture that represents quality to you, then that says more about you and how you interpret life satisfaction than it does about objective IQ. I even wager that either you have more money than happiness, or have a job requirement for specific IQ priorities.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2017 at 22:01 UTC
In reply to:

princecody: Is this the Best clone of LR out there? Adobe is so greedy they could care less about longtime customers like myself who could care less about a subscription to the cloud 😏

Jefftan, I don't remember if I can link to another site. If you search Capture One on Youtube, it's the first hit, and it's really good. The complete time is 31:18 by Michael W. It's 3 years old, but applies nicely.

Sunnycal... Interesting about AfterShot and Fuji. I tried a couple of versions back and it just wasn't great or efficient with my Olympus files.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 05:28 UTC
Total: 759, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »