ManuelVilardeMacedo

ManuelVilardeMacedo

Lives in Portugal Portugal
Joined on Mar 1, 2012

Comments

Total: 1202, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Horshack: I'd take it a step further - transcendence rather than convergence. MILC's true value is how they've shifted the problem domain from what is principally an analog construct (mirrors, levers, obtuse optical AF and metering sensors) to a digital, computational-intensive one (image sensor). This new platform affords a tremendous increase in the amount of data that can be utilized to better solve photographic problems like AF. MILC's have already surpassed DSLRs for AF speed and precision on static subjects, and the NX1 demonstrates that MILCs have now matched DSLRs for tracking as well. The teething, catch-up phase is over; now the benefit of all that image sensor data can be used to do things with AF that DSLRs could never dream of. The NX1 gives us a clumsy glimpse of this, like having the camera trigger a photo at the peak action of a baseball-bat hit. How about having the AF uniquely recognize your child and track him anywhere in the frame? MILCs are advancing at Moore's law now.

Using a camera is just like driving in that you have to understand how a car works before becoming a good driver - unless, of course, you're the kind of person who looks forward to autonomous cars.
And I didn't imply anything when I mentioned your gallery, other than that making pictures just for the sake of sampling the camera's abilities leads to nowhere. As Kertesz pointed out, you have to 'feel' what you're photographing. That's how you can evolve.
Automatisms just mean you're allowing whoever programmed the camera's processor to make the choices for you. They don't really free you. On the contrary, they get in the way of expression. Which might be fine for many, but not for others.
You'll learn much more about photography by looking at pictures made by the generations you tried to ridicule than fiddling with the mode dial of your camera. You can quote me on that.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 22:21 UTC
In reply to:

StefanD: Let's nor forget that the mirror in a (D)SLR is just a mechanical solution to achieve a number of goals:
- See the scene as it will end up in the photo
- Perform accurate exposure metering
- And in a later stadium: Autofocus
As soon as these goals can be achieved at least as good by an electronical solution, the (expensive) mirrors will be totally obsolete. (Except for nostalgic reasons)

Why should electronics be the solution to every issue? As for myself, I'd rather shave in front of a mirror than having my image taken by a camera and projected in a screen... But that's just me, of course.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 18:42 UTC

In my experience, nothing can substitute for a proper optical viewfinder and mirror. It's true that electronic viewfinders have come a long way, but still can't match what a proper SLR - 'D' or otherwise - has to offer.
It's interesting that DPR has chosen the Nikon Df to illustrate this article. I had the chance to sample it and it has the brightest, clearest viewfinder I've ever laid my right eye on. (Second is the Nikon FM3A.) I never got quite the same feeling when peeping through an electronic viewfinder. (Still an EVF is a thousand times better than composing via a screen.)

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 14:25 UTC as 193rd comment | 2 replies
On article #1 in France: Hands-on with DxO ONE (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rooru S: no mention of the QX100...it has a 3.5x zoom with a 1.0 Type Sensor too...! and a better bracket to mount it on several types of mobile phones... Perhaps because DPR doesn't want to hurt DxO?

Right, now that Olympus sponsoring is gone you have to make do with whatever money they throw at you...

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2015 at 23:47 UTC
On article #1 in France: Hands-on with DxO ONE (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

John Thawley: https://flickr.com/photos/38348003@N05/sets/72157654328514118

Not bad. Not bad at all.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2015 at 23:45 UTC
On article #1 in France: Hands-on with DxO ONE (277 comments in total)

I find all the hate comments hard to understand. This is a perfectly valid product, but I can't help noticing whatever DxO does is always followed by this kind of bitter criticism. Again, I can't understand it. Is it because DxO are a french company? Some neoconservative hard feelings still hovering around, perhaps? The 'freedom fries' brigade up in arms?
People should save their criticism for a time when there are sample images to evaluate the merits - or lack thereof - of the ONE. Claiming it's not good because it won't fit when iPhone covers are on is ridiculous.
Hélas...

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2015 at 17:33 UTC as 123rd comment
On article #1 in France: Hands-on with DxO ONE (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bev81 from France: Note: The editor learned French a long time ago and to a relatively poor standard. As such, translations provided in this article are based on minimal research and may contain inaccuracies.

Not bad Barney. Could have been much worse :)

Just curious where you really did learn french.
Frankly, you knew "une couille dans le potage" ???

It's perfectly OK, Barney :)

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2015 at 17:17 UTC
On article #1 in France: Hands-on with DxO ONE (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bev81 from France: Note: The editor learned French a long time ago and to a relatively poor standard. As such, translations provided in this article are based on minimal research and may contain inaccuracies.

Not bad Barney. Could have been much worse :)

Just curious where you really did learn french.
Frankly, you knew "une couille dans le potage" ???

That's 'a testicle in the soup.' Makes a lot of sense.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2015 at 16:51 UTC
On article #1 in France: Hands-on with DxO ONE (277 comments in total)

Pepe Le Pew-style french, anyone? :)

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2015 at 16:49 UTC as 127th comment
On article Canon PowerShot G3 X: What you need to know (614 comments in total)

Can we still call this a 'compact' camera?

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2015 at 08:37 UTC as 134th comment | 5 replies
On article Readers' Showcase: Martin Kozak (77 comments in total)

This is sports photography with a difference. I was particularly impressed by pics no.4, 7 and 8. Great timing. Well done, Martin!

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2015 at 22:17 UTC as 32nd comment
In reply to:

lbjack: Amazing all the carping here, that pulling photos from cine is useless or not real photography or that burst mode is sufficient.

The first rule in photography is GET THE SHOT.
With continuous shooting your chances of getting the shot improve exponentially, even over burst mode.
8 Mp is a benchmark for quality. It will get you "Photo Quality" up to 16" x 20" and "Excellent" up to 20" x 30".

Of course, all this depends on the sensor and the processing algorithms. But in principle, cameras like this are a watershed.

I'm one of those carping. My motto is: "Carp Diem".

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2015 at 10:44 UTC

For some reason this makes me think of fishing with dragnets.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2015 at 17:34 UTC as 24th comment
On article Leica Q In-depth Review (1131 comments in total)
In reply to:

richtea777: what is worrying me here is what appear to be hot pixels scattered all over the place in shadow areas in lower light shots.....check out the bottom row of chairs in the foreground of library shot , the one that has had adjustment.....its concerning as its only ISO 320 ! with some boosted shadows

Richtea777: no matter how hard I looked, I couldn't find any hot pixels. Anyway, if there are any, that isn't necessarily related to the ISO value. I used to get them at ISO 100 in long exposures. According to Ken Rockwell, every digital camera produces them. Hot pixels have to do with sensor temperature (as the name suggests), not with ISO sensitivity. I had the sensor cleaned and the problem seemed to go away - only to return later. It was so infuriating it led me to abandon long exposures with digital cameras.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2015 at 15:10 UTC
In reply to:

rds: Leicas, sadly, have become bling, status symbols, Christmas gifts Mick Jagger gives his posse. *** You won't become Cartier-Bresson by getting a Leica, and photography is not and never has been about the tool. It's about being there and seeing. If C-B were around today he'd use an iPhone or a GoPro.

(Yawn)

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2015 at 13:59 UTC
In reply to:

rds: Leicas, sadly, have become bling, status symbols, Christmas gifts Mick Jagger gives his posse. *** You won't become Cartier-Bresson by getting a Leica, and photography is not and never has been about the tool. It's about being there and seeing. If C-B were around today he'd use an iPhone or a GoPro.

Don Sata, that's true. Some of his portraits, in particular, are so unsharp you'd be forgiven to think those would be write-offs. It's true that he aimed at the heart of the image, even though his 'decisive moment' ethos is not what many people believe it is. The 'decisive moment' is the elusive instant when everything in the framing forms a significant composition.
JF69: go bother someone else. I don't have patience for false morals and hypocrites. Just get out of the way. YOU are the only troll here.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2015 at 11:59 UTC
In reply to:

rds: Leicas, sadly, have become bling, status symbols, Christmas gifts Mick Jagger gives his posse. *** You won't become Cartier-Bresson by getting a Leica, and photography is not and never has been about the tool. It's about being there and seeing. If C-B were around today he'd use an iPhone or a GoPro.

I like radissimo's reply. I love it when debating photography turns into a discussion on supernatural. It's happening all the time.
Henri Cartier-Bresson came to me all dressed in white, with two angels (also dressed in white) by his side, and told me: "I need a GoPro to shoot St. Peter's cats. Life doesn't get very animated in Heaven, you know. There are no street scenes or anything. And they don't allow Leicas up there. Oh well." (All in french, of course; it was not 'oh well', but 'hélas'.)
Actually it wasn't HC-B but Mary, Mother of Jesus, who was talking to me. I fell on my knees and found out I died of boredom while reading comments on dpreview. Mary kept saying: "you should talk to JF69. You should talk to JF69."

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 22:24 UTC
In reply to:

rds: Leicas, sadly, have become bling, status symbols, Christmas gifts Mick Jagger gives his posse. *** You won't become Cartier-Bresson by getting a Leica, and photography is not and never has been about the tool. It's about being there and seeing. If C-B were around today he'd use an iPhone or a GoPro.

So I assume 'stupid' is less offensive than 'silly' for you, right?

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 19:45 UTC
In reply to:

rds: Leicas, sadly, have become bling, status symbols, Christmas gifts Mick Jagger gives his posse. *** You won't become Cartier-Bresson by getting a Leica, and photography is not and never has been about the tool. It's about being there and seeing. If C-B were around today he'd use an iPhone or a GoPro.

JF69, you really should curb your aggressivity. The discussion was going along nicely until your rather blunt reply. Try not to be rude - if at all possible.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 18:50 UTC
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: Even Leica has to survive in this business - hence the Panasonic clones and the T series. They need it in order to continue producing the most desirable cameras in the world, the M series rangefinder cameras, as well as the M-mount lenses, which quality is second to none.
The fact that digital has democratised photography led to there being crowds who will never comprehend the 'M' concept; this explains the incessant Leica criticism we read here everytime Leica launches whatever product. The Leicas are not for those who buy cameras based on specifications.
It's true Leica exposes themselves to ridicule every now and then with those Safari, Hermés, Titanium and Correspondent limited editions, but that's part of the business: as long as there are people willing to buy them, why not? It's a win-win deal.
I don't have the money for a Leica; even if I had, I couldn't care less for rangefinder systems - but I respect the fact Leicas are aspirational products for discerning photographers.

Zlatko, I found the assertion that Canon was doing the workflow for Sebastião Salgado very doubtful - to say the least.
People really should stop making unfounded statements. You're right, that's how myths get spread on the internet.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 18:02 UTC
Total: 1202, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »