Lives in United States United States
Joined on Nov 11, 2004


Total: 79, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »

I was considering moving to the subscription plan but then Adobe only supports Windows 10 and I never upgraded from 8.1, which has been reliable with a wide variety of hardware and software. 10 offered nothing significant, so why risk aggravation that would all mine. Now that the price seems to be moving to $20 a month, I am definitely out of consideration. No big deal for pros or well healed enthusiasts but not my categories. Oh well, not a big surprise.

Link | Posted on May 3, 2019 at 17:27 UTC as 106th comment
In reply to:

Nikon1977k: Some here are missing the point that what happens in the digital world bleeds into the real world.

For example, fake "likes" interfere with the heuristics which are used by social media sites to elevate articles in order of appearance.

As an example, the Yahoo logon page NEVER has news articles favorable to any Republican President. There are no articles extolling the facts that the unemployment rate is at a decades old low and the labor participation rate is at its highest on 50 years, not to mention that the stock market closed at an all-time high yesterday in 26APR2019.

Sure, Yahoo can choose to suppress positive economic news while ignoring 50‰ of the population in The Republic of the United States of America to make their point rather than increase click-through rates.

Meanwhile, those who get their news primarily from un-social media are ill informed to vote.

The data used to report on the economy is fairly meaningless overall as a reflection of peoples lives. Once in a statistics class the prof said "Did you hear about the statistician who drowned in a stream that averaged 1 inch deep," The point about averages was made.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2019 at 01:03 UTC

Of course, camera sales will drop. Not many years ago, camera sales were riding a high peak when digital killed film and every P&S camera user had no option except to buy some type of digital camera. The brownie market drove sales to levels waiting for the next brownie device. Along came the smartphone with adequate or very good cameras, and this wiped off the high peak sales. Just like in the brownie days, the smartphone is good enough and only pros or serious hobbyists will own a true camera. We can speculate that if the camera companies only came up with very exciting, new technology the camera market would soar dismisses the fact that now the only people seriously interested in imaging want or need a camera. For posting basically forgotten about pics on social media, the brownie camera has been replaced. The camera market is resetting. Even phones are entering this phase.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2019 at 07:04 UTC as 95th comment | 3 replies

Of course camera sales will decline. Phones are plenty good enough for most people just looking to take simple snaps shared on social media. There's no interest in photography as a hobby and the phone has replaced the brownie type devices. Just a few years ago, you needed a digital p&s camera as film was dead. Next, the technology has matured to the point that frequent upgrades were not necessary. This same situation has hit phones, tablets and PCs. My iPhone 6s with fresh battery is fine, 4 year old imaging PC works very nicely. Even the iPad I am using is 4 years old. No need for anything new.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2019 at 01:24 UTC as 30th comment
On article Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4 review (361 comments in total)

Seems like a fine lens for people who like single FL lenses. I do agree that the lack of IS does reduce the low light capability when compared to a slower lens with IS for non moving subjects. Not sure how much of the M target market is interested in a $500 prime. I wish Canon would introduce a higher and more reliable IQ zoom covering the range of 24-100mm and either f4 or 3.5-4.5. The current choices are so-so and adapted lenses are heavy and bulky. Of course, my idea would still be larger than current choices but small than adapted.

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2019 at 23:48 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS RP review (1666 comments in total)

Seems like a decent camera for the price if you are comfortable with the limitations. However, I only have 2 EF lenses, very elderly L telephotos. If I had a collection of EF lenses I would be interested; I have no interest in purchasing FF lenses of quality. Why? Large, expensive. I have been down sizing to smaller and lighter: M5, M lenses, rare use of EFS adapter and EFS lenses. I have even been dabbling with Olympus M4/3. I find that the M and Oly can make 13 x 19 prints that look great, so why carry more, at least for me. Of course, your needs may be different.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2019 at 00:27 UTC as 236th comment | 2 replies

Prints are dying with most photos viewed on a phone and quickly forgotten. For many people, the captured memories or moments will be gone sometime in the near future. A few may be able to look at Mary's or Bob's birthday pics in 25 years but for many, the pics will have disappeared into the digital ether.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2019 at 01:36 UTC as 32nd comment | 5 replies

I wonder about the battery life projection. My M5 has a slightly larger battery and it will only last for day of casual shooting if you remember to frequently use the on/off switch or keep the camera held in a position to stop the eye sensor from keeping the camera awake. Sleep type settings set to minimums. Maybe, the R cameras have a different approach.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2019 at 01:34 UTC as 98th comment | 1 reply

Better be quite good for 50% more than the 14-150. If so, could be the best travel type lens for a compact kit

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2019 at 07:39 UTC as 77th comment
On article Panasonic S1/S1R review in progress (1535 comments in total)

Seems impressive. I hope these isn't a trend to drop smaller sensor product lines. Smaller, lighter, less expensive and yes somewhat less capable still meets the needs of many enthusiasts who may want but don't really need or can't afford this level of product line. I wonder about the future of m4/3 and Canon M line. They work for me moving from full size apsc.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2019 at 17:32 UTC as 179th comment

Limited experience with IBIS, but one issue I have experienced. If the IBIS is subpar or not functioning properly, every lens is affected. Your camera is off to repair for a fix (hopefully) and you may stuck.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2018 at 17:32 UTC as 150th comment | 2 replies

Another step down the path... For a vision of the future, watch the creepy and disturbing movie Ex Machina. I view the ending as Ava escapes into the world like an alien virus that is unstoppable. My wife thinks otherwise.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2018 at 00:02 UTC as 8th comment
On article Three is the magic number: LG V40 ThinQ sample gallery (272 comments in total)
In reply to:

strawbale: For that money I'd buy a RX100iv plus a simple smartphone.
PS: 24mm is wide enough for me on a compact than does a decent panorama shot as well

I tend to agree. When you buy a 800-1200 phone a healthy portion is for the camera, faster processor, image oriented software. Most people would find the $250-350 phones would do what they usually do on a phone. However, phones in this price range get almost no marketing by major vendors. Also, many people would skip a vacation to buy the top of the line models. Marketing visibility and the bling factor I believe. Even mid range phones can take a decent enough pic for temporary viewing on another phone.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2018 at 19:42 UTC
On article Buying Guide: The best camera bargains of 2019 (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

geepondy: There's lots of discussion about some of the Canon M series for beginners but not really appealing to me and I suspect others for one main reason. There's no way I'm going to put up with a 6 plus aperture on a lens at a mere 72mm equivalent which is what the kit lens delivers. If you already have a slew of Canon lenses you can use the adapter but then again that adds size and kind of defeats the purpose of the camera of which why wouldn't you just stick to a DSLR such as a SL2.

Mirrorless avoids front/back focus issues. Canon won't add MFA to Rebel series or the very nice SL2. If you have experienced front/back focus, you won't be happy to not have a tedious but workable fix. Never had this issue...great. Me, not so lucky even with slower lenses

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2018 at 01:33 UTC
In reply to:

Battersea: When will point and shoot or compact cameras feature computational photography in a greater way? Wouldn't a one inch sensor 24-120 compact camera like that be awesome?

Yes, but note that a large part of cost of that $1200 phone is the camera, and processor, etc to drive it vs a $300 phone that can do the same phone basics. If the high end phone capabilities were added to a camera, I could only imagine what that $1000 compact or $2500 mirrorless would cost.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2018 at 16:39 UTC

Very good smartphones I am sure, but also not cheap if you need to buy 2. I just finished paying off our 2 6s Iphones, and we find them to be completely satisfactory. I plan on replacing the batteries at some point and keeping them until they are not functional. I am not cash flush, and don't fall into the category of living on peanut butter to buy the latest, greatest device. It's real needs vs wants. I think the best Android phones in the $250 range would provide all the basic functions, call, text, surf internet, simple games, pics adequate to share with other small devices. Most people look at the pics on a small device and forget about them. Seems like a big chunk of the price difference is for the camera, and mini computer enhancements, not the basic functions. Like buying a M class BMW vs a Corolla. Both get you from A to B in reasonable comfort.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2018 at 01:47 UTC as 105th comment | 2 replies

I was consider moving from LR6 AND CS5 plus plugins to CC but not now. I am still running 8.1 because all my various hardware and software worked fine. Upgrading OS has been a nuisance at best or a time consuming pain with few real benefits for me. I now only upgrade an OS with a new PC. I certainly won't be paying to upgrade to 10, working out hardware problems, drivers, etc. I will stick as is and if necessary move to alternative software. Seems like Adobe and MS have a deal.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2018 at 06:38 UTC as 33rd comment | 3 replies

My experience with a different brand super zoom travel camera is they can push the specs beyond what provides good results. My Pana zs50 ranges from 24-720mm with an equally slow lens in telephoto. Nicely make camera with good features including a small EVF. However, beyond about 400mm, even in bright light, it is difficult to obtain sharp pics suitable for anything other than small device viewing. The combination of optical fall off, slow lens, camera shake, need to increase iso works against pics suitable for more than small prints or social media. With real care managing the factors, it is possible to obtain pics suitable for an 8x10, but the limitations are restrictive. I like the camera, but I consider anything beyond 400mm to be marginal. The sensor is also a more realistic 12 megapixels. Canon used to use a very nice 12 megapixel HS sensor with good results.My Canon 260HS was good over the entire zoom range. 20 hmm. Maybe Canon can beat my Panasonic's limitations.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2018 at 18:54 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply

I have a different brand late model travel zoom that covers from 24-720mm. From 500mm + it is very difficult to obtain a pic sharp enough for a fair 8 x 10. A slow lens, camera shake, noisy sensor and optical IQ all work against decent results except in full sun and a care. If you are just looking at pics on a small portable device, I suppose the results are OK. I usually restrict using the camera to about 400mm, which is where the lens should have finished with a stop faster. Between 24-400mm the IQ is decent for smaller prints and portable device viewing

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 04:13 UTC as 40th comment

I wonder what the optical quality will be for 24-3000mm. In my experience, you can't even rely on a 4x zoom lens not to have significant optical flaws, especially decentering blurr. If these construction flaws can be avoided in a lens with this range, then why can not 4-5x zoom lens be consistently reliable for IQ?

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2018 at 17:37 UTC as 76th comment | 3 replies
Total: 79, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »