oscarvdvelde

Lives in Spain Prov. of Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
Works as a thunderstorm & lightning researcher
Joined on Apr 29, 2006

Comments

Total: 226, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Fujifilm X-H1 sample gallery (59 comments in total)
In reply to:

photo perzon: I feel that even in sunny days, the shadows are too deep. Too dark.

I have an X-T1 and you can lift the shadows quite well by setting -2 if needed, and DR200 or DR400. Also you can choose the Pro Neg Std (and now ETERNA) film simulation which does not have strong contrast. And of course in RAW you can open the shadows without problem.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2018 at 13:17 UTC

I'm curious for its performance. Probably it relies on software distortion correction, but it can be a good trade-off if it has good image quality across the frame.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 11:25 UTC as 28th comment | 4 replies

It seems Canon just has not figured out yet that their Greg Paul Miller must have swapped out the sky and its reflection for the one from Elia Locardi's photo.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 15:49 UTC as 82nd comment

I would have taken a step down in resolution and gain a doubling of speed (1977 fps at 2048x1080, or even 2932 fps at 1280x720). You can clearly see that especially cloud-to-ground leaders require more steps to follow them nicely.
My 1000 fps footage and the lightning processes explained: https://vimeo.com/112658202

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2017 at 14:27 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

technotic: DJI make really good cameras now.

This Phantom is from Vision Research!

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 22:29 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: My astrophotography lens is 2,800mm.

Never thought I'd see a 14mm assigned the same term!

Taking photos of animals in a zoo, garden or park: wildlife photography?

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 00:43 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: My astrophotography lens is 2,800mm.

Never thought I'd see a 14mm assigned the same term!

But those Milky Way photographers do not typically shoot any other celestial subjects or even have interest in doing so. It is basically taking a landscape photo at night. It would be an insult to those who are dedicated to astrophotography with all technical challenges that come with it.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2017 at 00:00 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: My astrophotography lens is 2,800mm.

Never thought I'd see a 14mm assigned the same term!

on DPreview, astrophotography often is a code word for landscape photography at night and requires no knowledge of telescopes.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2017 at 23:43 UTC
On article Instagram is 'liking' natural wonders to death (44 comments in total)
In reply to:

Graham Meale: When I visited Horseshoe Bend a few years ago, I was surprised that there wasn't a lookout platform with railings. I remember lying down on my stomach a few metres from the edge and gradually inching forward. Terrified then dirty.

To me it was a pleasant surprise to see that. The danger of getting close to the edge with a risk of falling to death is one of the rare impressions nature can offer,

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2017 at 00:57 UTC
On article Instagram is 'liking' natural wonders to death (44 comments in total)

National Parks in the USA look like open air musea. Even stormchasing has become a mobile zoo. As accessibility and media attention increase it becomes ever more difficult to be alone and experience nature.

They should keep Horseshoe Bend pure and instead *make it impossible* to park nearby.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2017 at 18:34 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply
On article Sigma's new 16mm F1.4 will cost $450, ships this month (359 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: fujifilm’s 16mm f1.4 sells for $999... Good job Sigma!!

Fuji offers for that price a "made in China" XF 27mm F2.8 pancake.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 00:18 UTC
In reply to:

Sacher Khoudari: How does it compare to Fuji's 16/1.4? I expect these to be on the same level.

@dpreview: Please do a comparison of these two lenses!

Update: Looks like Fuji's 16/1.4 is about 30g lighter and 20mm shorter. Minimum focus distance is 15cm (Fuji) vs. 25cm (Sigma). Looks like the specs are in favor of Fuji. But let's see how the Sigma performs :)

The XF 16mm is in fact fly-by-wire, you can pull the focus ring into manual mode and see the distance scale.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2017 at 02:23 UTC
In reply to:

Sacher Khoudari: How does it compare to Fuji's 16/1.4? I expect these to be on the same level.

@dpreview: Please do a comparison of these two lenses!

Update: Looks like Fuji's 16/1.4 is about 30g lighter and 20mm shorter. Minimum focus distance is 15cm (Fuji) vs. 25cm (Sigma). Looks like the specs are in favor of Fuji. But let's see how the Sigma performs :)

Plus the Sigma seems to have no distance and aperture scales.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 21:51 UTC
In reply to:

oscarvdvelde: A 25 cm minimum focus is a pity for Sony/MFT users. With Fuji XF 16mm F1.4 I enjoy the close focus abilities at *15 cm*!

You won 3 cm!
But probably with a different type of lens or maybe a Laowa wide macro.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 15:10 UTC

A 25 cm minimum focus is a pity for Sony/MFT users. With Fuji XF 16mm F1.4 I enjoy the close focus abilities at *15 cm*!

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2017 at 22:04 UTC as 24th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: So as many people predicted LR changed to rental only.

and you even rent the access to your own photos...

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 13:47 UTC

Will you get 12, 24 or 36 shots on that cartridge and then you need to buy a new one?
And with a supposed Yashica digiFilm app will it take one week to process the pictures to JPEG?

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 15:20 UTC as 270th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Schweikert: While I do agree on many points, I have to chuckle when an obvious young blogger/photographer refers to something "way back in March 2008". In my best Fargo accent, oh geez that's a long time ago eh. I'm a Canon user well before that and a Nikon user well before that. Use a 4x5 camera, then you'll notice almost zero innovation for 100 years. Use a 1950's Hasselblad, then a 1990's version and see little has changed.

Canon sells more than anyone so what's the motivation to innovate. No different than Apple with more profit than any other electronics company.

Buy other brands, if Canon's sales volume decreases, then they will take notice. Your power as a consumer is just to buy elsewhere.

I shoot full time. Cameras are tools. If I'm not working, I don't touch the gear. Camera phone is more that adequate on vacation because I get to enjoy and experience instead of being stuck behind a camera.

I always feel like I'm stuck behind a phone when I try to use one to take a shot, a very unenjoyable experience...

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 23:47 UTC

They are already obsolete, since they are not made for the curved sensors we will see in the future... ;)

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2017 at 21:07 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Mfritter: This is a very aggressive price for a MF lens.

I am on the side of Great Bustard in this discussion, but I think Chris Dodkin just means that he needs the maximum quality, so when using anything less he will be able to notice it in the output. And when you factor in the competition on the job, it will count.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2017 at 13:59 UTC
Total: 226, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »