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: 726, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

PropaPH: I think everyone would agree that Manny's wife is hot!

Cool. Glad you have such a strong mental connection to your milk.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2017 at 13:49 UTC
In reply to:

NJOceanView: I'm a pro who uses crop sensors 95% of the time because 1) I need the reach; and 2) I don't need super shallow DOF. Clients have never complained about the quality of my images (none complain about the crop sensor designation because they don't understand the difference and don't need to), so I'm glad to read this report. That said, there are times I use FF because of DOF requirements or the need to really minimize noise.

I agree ZDman. It's about acceptable tradeoffs and that's why superzooms have remained popular and capable. The larger the sensor, the harder it is to fund and carry longer lenses. I would love 42mp for my 500mm f4.5L that I currently use on my A7. But adding a $400 XT-1 that gives me comparative field of view of 750mm or picking up a E-M1 for $400 to give me 1000mm EFL, is just a lot cheaper than upgrading resolution and cropping later for similar results. Those bodies also just give me something different for all my manual lenses (and different strengths like the IBIS on the Olympus) for less money.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2017 at 14:55 UTC
In reply to:

PropaPH: I think everyone would agree that Manny's wife is hot!

I'm not offended, Clint. The girl is beautiful. But I strongly disagree with what I believe is rationalization for sexism to say that the reason men comment are because they are "visual" by nature. I would prefer that neither men or women are objectified. You are right that objectifying is normal. It's not a normal I feel should be defended. If you have not heard of the bechdel test, look it up and test our media and the issue become pretty obvious. Woman are seen by our culture as accessories for men. Can we agree that people, generally speaking, are "hot" because hey if you are a heterosexual woman wouldn't you tend to think men are generally speaking attractive? And men tend to think woman are attractive? And Greg OM, good looking does not mean you want to have sex with them. No need to jump off of a cliff because you suddenly value women as people and not just as objects and accessories to man's sexual desires. I know this is counter culture. I don't care. It's worth it.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 18:01 UTC
In reply to:

NJOceanView: I'm a pro who uses crop sensors 95% of the time because 1) I need the reach; and 2) I don't need super shallow DOF. Clients have never complained about the quality of my images (none complain about the crop sensor designation because they don't understand the difference and don't need to), so I'm glad to read this report. That said, there are times I use FF because of DOF requirements or the need to really minimize noise.

Smaller sensors enable a smaller field of view (apparent reach) and cropping with FF may achieve similar results...
1. if you have the money for the high resolution bodies.
2. if you have the money for the big FF lenses
3. if you can handle the heft of the FF system
4. if size is not a priority
5. if the lenses available for the crop camera are also all available for FF with equivalent FOV

I would love to upgrade to the A7Rii for the resolution and cropability, but it means a lot more money, weight, and size then "reach" with available crop sensor (or even superzoom) combos.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 17:45 UTC
In reply to:

BubbleGum: It's a great video and I agree with the guy fully, but he made me laugh my ass off when he said "I posted comparisons on my Instagram account and people couldn't make a difference".
It's same as saying "I drove a Ferrari around a parking lot and it wasn't much faster than Prius".

Yes, but if the differences can only really be seen when you zoom into 100% (or closer) in an editor, then it's a valid point. For example, quality printing at normal viewing distances also don't show huge differences. Same Instagram, Facebook... internet in general. Without pixel peeping, the differences are hard to distinguish and even those differences may often be neither pro nor con (stuff like bokeh which is preference).

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 17:38 UTC
In reply to:

JanMatthys: Sony cameras,... they're all equally bad

Yeah Magnar, moving to FF was not a panacea as would have been implied by proponents. If one can save money and get better lenses with APS-C, they will be better off most of the time because of the better lenses. The improvements are simply not linear respective to sensor size. Diminishing returns, but returns none the less. Of course I'd love an A7Rii mainly due to the increased resolution, DR, and crop room for my telephoto shots, but there is this thing called money.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 17:34 UTC
In reply to:

JanMatthys: Sony cameras,... they're all equally bad

I plan to add a Fuji XT-1 to my A7 and run the same scenario just for fun. I've used almost every format and brand and they all have their strengths. Sony too, but your comment is funny.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2017 at 19:22 UTC
In reply to:

PropaPH: I think everyone would agree that Manny's wife is hot!

We could also objectify Manny who is a good looking man, but we tend to objectify woman because society doesn't value woman in the same way that they do men.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2017 at 19:20 UTC
On article Updated: Nikon D850 sample gallery (319 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 (319 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 83rd comment
On article Updated: Nikon D850 sample gallery (319 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 (319 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
Total: 726, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »