iae aa eia

iae aa eia

Lives in Brazil Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Works as a English school coordinator and EFL teacher
Joined on Jan 13, 2011
About me:

I was born in Brazil, in a city called João Pessoa. I lived in a few other cities in three neighboring states before moving to where I currently live, about 1,300 miles away down south, Belo Horizonte. Back then, photography was not offered at colleges and universities, I didn't want any other courses, and I never got a higher education. I tried to get in the AirForce—they offered the career of aerial photographer (don't know if they still do)—but I could not get in because they detected a health problem. I started working with social photography. I shot a couple of birthday parties and some portraits, but I wasn't successful. I liked the experience, but I had never been a very social person and the few clients I had I got with the help of my mother.

During this time, I was living by myself and in a different city, and I was not able to prospect any clients by myself or get any references from the few folks I had done work for. I was just to shy to ask for references. I had some issues related to lack of perseverance. I was constantly feeling down since my later teenager years. I ended up giving up and working with motorcycle sales, an area in which I was also unsuccessful because I had to be socially more engaged as well, but I thought that it was going to work just because I liked motorcycles. After a while, I got an opportunity to work at those 1-hour photo labs/shops as a minilab operator. Now I was able to do a better job, probably because I didn't have to have high social skills. I worked isolated most of the time. As a minilab operator, I was considered one of the best at all the places I worked at, thanks to the fact that I loved photography, read a lot of technical literature, and learned with two very good folks how to operate and maintain those machines. One of them had worked at a Kodak laboratory for more than a decade and had opened a photo lab along with two other business partners, the first photo lab I worked at. The other guy was a Noritsu consultant/technitian.

I started getting socially more engaged after I got involved with the church of Christ. If I was as socially engaged as I was after 2 or 3 years attending church and doing volunteering work when I started shooting, the story would have been different. Since I got involved with church, I have been often in contact with Americans and my English improved considerably. It was because of that that I had my first opportunity to teach English, helping some classmates at a course I was attending in which to have English was a very important requirement. My classmates noticed that I liked teaching and that I taught well, and they encouraged me to be an English teacher.

After about six years working at at least four English schools, I got the opportunity to have my own business, which is as a master franchisee for an English school specialized in private classes. This opportunity was offered to me by the same company I had been working for two and a half years as an EFL teacher, but only if I moved to a pretty far away city, which is where I live now. I had terrible headaches when I lived in my previous hometown, but my current hometown is cooler and drier, and it's also better for business, a little more developed, the fried and cooked food is amazing (except baked stuff, nothing special), and the accent is among the nicest in Brazil.

INITIAL INTEREST IN PHOTOGRAPHY
The first camera I've ever shot with was my mother's Kodak Instamatic 177XF, in the 80's; I used to disassemble and assemble it quite often. The first contact I've ever had with photography literature was still in the 80's, when the husband of a distant relative of mine gave me a photography guide composed of two magazine-sized and four less-than-letter-sized books. Each one of the magazine-sized books was divided into many sections, like cameras, lenses, flashes, framing, darkroom, techniques, pro-photographers' galleries, etc; and the other four books focused on specific photo subjects. Only photos and commentaries in these. One was about people, the other was about women, another one about nature, and one about architecture. I loved that kit. Decades later, already late 2000's, when I was able to understand English much better, I could compare them with many other guides and I realized that they were quite complete and technically accurate. Really good stuff for Brazilian standards. It was probably the translation of an American guide.

In 1993, I was living in a city called Natal. I was riding a bicycle when I decided to stop at a newsstand located at a supermarket for a quick look at the magazines, as I used to do. I wasn't looking for anything in particular and didn't intend to buy anything, but while I was browsing, I saw that beautiful red glossy cover magazine with lots of SLRs on it, standing on the top shelf. It was the December's 1993 edition of Petersen's PHOTOgraphic magazine. I was in awe, thinking, "Wow, look at that!" (in Portuguese, of course). I had never seen such an appealing cover (uncommon to Brazilian magazines at that time) and that rich content in terms of equipment. I decided to buy a compact Collins Gem Eng-Port Port-Eng dictionary and a calculator in the same week I bought that magazine, and spent the whole month trying to translate most of the magazine's content and converting feet to meters, inches to mili/centimeters, and pounds and ounces to (kilo)grams, and even dollars to royals (our currency, or 'real/reais' in Portuguese)—well, I started doing currency conversion from 1996 onward, as there was no 'real' in 1993, but only a temporary, transitional currency in 1994, and I was still not interested in currency conversions by 1995). I continued to buy issues of that magazine for the next 6 months. At first, equipment ads, gear guides and articles, and shopping catalogs where the sections I read the most.

FIRST JOB IN PHOTOGRAPHY
In 1996, I was living in Guarabira, a small city in the countryside of the State of Paraíba, and the owners of a photo shop in Natal called me and invited me to move back there and work as a minilab operator. That was my first job. I knew the folks there because they didn't have access to that kind of magazines and I used to go there to show them to them and talk about photography, and we enjoyed doing that and became friends.

While I was working there, I had the chance to handle and use some very nice cameras like the Nikon F3 and FM2, the Minolta Maxxum 9xi and X-370, and quite a large variety of Pentaxes, like the K2000, ME, and P30t; There were other cameras from same said brands and other brands, like Vivitar and Yashica. Canons were rare and I don't know why. I can't remember ever seeing one, except compacts. But, two brands I wanted so much to have an opportunity to see live were Contax, Ricoh, and Zeiss. I just drooled over seeing pictures of Contax bodies and Zeiss lenses. Even one or two of Contax compacts. I also wish I had seen more Olympus SLR's. I also drooled over its µ-II.

I'M GONNA ADD MORE LATER.

Comments

Total: 340, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

First time I read about this on DPR I thought, "What a silly camera." It shocks me seeing now how many backers, how much fund they got.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2018 at 03:16 UTC as 72nd comment
In reply to:

nerd2: So it's equivalent to FF 300mm 2.8 and 12-24 f4 lenses.

Fuji 200mm f2.0 OIS: $5,999, 2.3kg
Canon 300mm 2.8L IS II USM: $6099, 2.4kg,

Fuji 8-16 2.8: $1,995, 805g
Sony 12-24 4.0: $1,698, 565g

Again, the equivalent FF lens is just as light and cheap as APS specific lens. And FF mount has much larger user base, which will keep growing with release of Nikon/Canon FF mirrorless bodies.

I don't question the price because you're trying to deliver great resolution in a smaller area, and that requires a lot of technology too. I don't question the aperture in the wide zoom, because bokeh is not the strongest selling point of it, and the aperture of 2.8 holds the equivalence in terms exposure. I question the tele, though, because now bokeh is a great selling point, and in this case you are just trying to do the same job of a 300 2.8, which is not that much of a big deal. It would if it were, let's say, 1.7.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2018 at 03:38 UTC
On article Hands-on with Nikon's three Z-series lenses (144 comments in total)

It's always possible to identify a Nikon lens without seeing the brand name, but not anymore in the case of the Z ones. I know that this can be the least worrisome issue in practical terms. I just like the idea of being possible to identify a brand by certain product design characteristic.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2018 at 21:41 UTC as 8th comment | 3 replies
On article Leica M10-P adds a touchscreen and removes the red dot (469 comments in total)

It would make more sense to me if they had the red dot in a different color, or shiny silver, or body-color in high-relief, or something like that, like a special edition or model, but just removing it makes it look like a Chinese copy. I know it might sound silly, but I wouldn't buy it. Clean design is a strength in Leica, but this is too much. I wouldn't pay that much money to go home without that red dot, without being able to make people know I have a Leica, my camera is for few, and I am exclusive, eventually me showing up in a picture holding the camera and nobody knows what brand it is.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2018 at 00:54 UTC as 28th comment | 3 replies

If advertisers cheat in the Western world and sometimes the world has to be falling over their heads so that they apologize and learn and stuff, imagine a Chinese company.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2018 at 02:06 UTC as 53rd comment | 1 reply

Nikon would make quite a buzz if they launched a Noct-NIKKOR-like 43mm, and/or changed the advertised focal length of the Noct-NIKKOR in the teaser to 59mm (while making it 60.2mm in paper) because it's 1.4x times the normal focal length and would produce a nicer field-of-view among the short-teles (although 58 isn't that far off).

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2018 at 02:51 UTC as 27th comment

Interesting product. They can make it better if they remove the LEDs. The tube would get quite smaller and there would be less tube ahead of the front element, and offer the LED as an accessory, or they could mount the LEDs more to the back of the lens and use optical fiber to deliver the light to the front, adding very little to the front diameter.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2018 at 21:46 UTC as 72nd comment | 1 reply
On article Fujifilm X-T100 review (338 comments in total)

They could have added 18fps to simulate Super8 film at least. I was already counting my money to buy one just before I learned they hadn't.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2018 at 02:01 UTC as 71st comment
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC RX100 VI review (506 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: I didn't like the video sample. It doesn't look smooth. Considering video as an essential part of a digital camera today, I don't agree with DPReview this is the best choice for a travel camera.

That's what I meant, but used the wrong combination of words. Slower shutter speeds (or longer shutter times.) My bad. Thanks!

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2018 at 00:33 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC RX100 VI review (506 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: I didn't like the video sample. It doesn't look smooth. Considering video as an essential part of a digital camera today, I don't agree with DPReview this is the best choice for a travel camera.

Richard, an ND filter would make it possible to use longer shutter speeds and give it a more natural look with blurred fast movements, but the issue is not really this. There is some kind of wobbling. Imagine a lens that is loosen and keeps moving sideways and up and down. I know the lens is not loosen, I'm just trying to express the issue. Or it's the optical stabilization system element(s) that makes some jerky movements. Something like that.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2018 at 02:27 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC RX100 VI review (506 comments in total)

I didn't like the video sample. It doesn't look smooth. Considering video as an essential part of a digital camera today, I don't agree with DPReview this is the best choice for a travel camera.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2018 at 17:55 UTC as 25th comment | 4 replies

Google follows a leftardy agenda that seeks to control people. This tool doesn't look like contributing too much to that compared to making calls for you and speaking as if it were you.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2018 at 01:51 UTC as 11th comment
In reply to:

MightyMike: Number fudging!

75mm F0.95 (lets say F1.0) should require a 75mm front element.... So... how does it take 72mm filters????

Now if it was a 77mm thread or even more likely an 82mm thread then sure by all means it makes sense.

Mike

By the way, someone said the entrance pupil is outside of a lens. No, it is not. The pupil entrance is the first element (and then, the aperture stop for smaller aperture settings in a non-retrofocus optical design, and always or almost always at the aperture stop for all aperture settings for lenses with a retrofocus design) because you can't gather rays of light that are out of reach of the front element diameter.

Link | Posted on May 1, 2018 at 19:14 UTC
In reply to:

MightyMike: Number fudging!

75mm F0.95 (lets say F1.0) should require a 75mm front element.... So... how does it take 72mm filters????

Now if it was a 77mm thread or even more likely an 82mm thread then sure by all means it makes sense.

Mike

If this lens is really 75mm f/0.95, its front element must be 81mm in diameter, so the filter thread can be, maybe, 82mm. 87mm would sound right. It's more like a 73 or 72mm on paper. But there is a lot of space between the lens and the filter thread, probably more than 5mm, which makes me believe the front element is 72mm large at most, and if you consider 1mm relief on the glass edge, you have a 70mm pupil entrance. 75 (if it's really a 75mm) by 70 equals f/1.07.

In order to be 0.95, considering the pupil entrance is 70mm in diameter, the real focal lens is 66.5mm. I don't doubt this could be the case, although it would sound very wrong to advertise a lens with such a difference. If you take a look at some papers, for example, when a lens design patent is revealed, the real number tends to be fractioned. For instance, a 24-70mm can be actually at 24.76-67.9mm.

Link | Posted on May 1, 2018 at 19:13 UTC
In reply to:

MightyMike: Number fudging!

75mm F0.95 (lets say F1.0) should require a 75mm front element.... So... how does it take 72mm filters????

Now if it was a 77mm thread or even more likely an 82mm thread then sure by all means it makes sense.

Mike

Good point. The ring around the front element should be more than 5mm wide, which would mean that the front element is no larger than 62mm. Let's take 2mm as glass margin (1mm at each diagonal corner of the frame) and we have 60mm. This is equivalent to an aperture of f/1.25. Way less that advertised. Also, I find quite unlikely for it to have any optical tricks under its sleeve considering such a compact optical design of only 5 elements in 5 groups. I'm curious to see what reviewers are gonna reveal about this lens.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2018 at 02:40 UTC
In reply to:

Gon0S: Seriously, this video is so lame as is the title of the video...

Just another try to spit on dSLR...

Just another useless clickbait article coming from Petapixel...

Why on earth put an almost 6k USD to an average 1K lense and use badly taken pics in the worst case this setup could produce, against a lousy chinese addon lense for a forgotten price Apple iPhone...
For same result for the SLR, he could have picked a entry level canon Rebel, and then the price could bet 1035 USD (yeah, the iphone is more or less 1000 USD, not ZERO) vs 1500 USD !

He could compare the performance between a Lada Niva 4x4 vs a porsche 911 trying to climb a mud trail... it would be as awesome and trustable.

No serious person would recommend a piece of crap like that. Come on, this is the US, not a third world country. People should encourage quality, never the opposite. You can find stuff at a low price that can do something, but that kit is total trash to whoever gives importance to optics, and he does considering the gear he uses. That kit exposes nearly all the optical issues engineers have been working on for more than a century to solve. I got the idea of the video, but it was the end, recommending it, even if gently, reluctantly, that upset me.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2018 at 17:47 UTC

That very initial jump in oneself's perception is really hard to avoid, even taking those steps, because we feel very excited by the first things we take and make right in the beginning. It's the beginning. It's like telling a person not to feel extremely excited, encouraged, and not to boast when they drive a car well for the first time, for example. I'm not saying that the steps in the video don't work, but just that honestly putting oneself under the application of them, at least in the very beginning, is very very hard. I can't see reason winning over feeling in the very beginning. In this sense, a person that wants to be a photographer but does not love it, just like it, is at advantage, since their anxiety is lower, their expectations are lower. Anxiety seems to me to be one important factor in this initial high level of wrong perception.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2018 at 02:08 UTC as 37th comment
In reply to:

tranceliner: when the Chinese become the innovators beating the Koreans and Americans....

I think that destroy was the wrong word. I could say subdue maybe. Have control in some way, but more than what the US is to China.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2018 at 01:55 UTC
In reply to:

tranceliner: when the Chinese become the innovators beating the Koreans and Americans....

Besides that, it is a communist country (I know some people that travel there every year to buy stuff and they told me how closed and controlled the country is). But, look, I'm don't care that they are as they are. What bothers me is how many Americans, leftists mostly, let them compete with us as if we were dealing with pairs. China does not want to simply compete with the US. They want to destroy the US.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2018 at 03:00 UTC
In reply to:

tranceliner: when the Chinese become the innovators beating the Koreans and Americans....

Because the leftist in America care poop about how China exploits their workers. China would take much longer to acheive this (if ever) if they played by the Western's rules. Do you have any ideia of how, let's say, the majority of China's population live and what their benefits are compared to the majority of the US population?

I remember, back in the early 90's, how popular it was for some Brazilians to travel to Paraguay to buy cheap counterfeit Chinese products to resell in Brazil to friends. Today they are official sold here in malls. You have access to, for example, JBL headphones copies. Even the logo on the box, which would be a bit different in the past, like Sony is Zony, for example, today they don't even change that. There is only a tiny text on the box identifying it as a counterfeit product. This is intellectual property theft, and I have seen this all these decades.

So, the Chinese have made us and their pop pay a high price for their "acheivements." Wake up!

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2018 at 02:52 UTC
Total: 340, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »