Lives in United States CA, United States
Works as a Archaeologist
Joined on Aug 9, 2005


Total: 7, showing: 1 – 7
On article Canon EOS 70D Review (684 comments in total)
In reply to:

lakel4444: Hello. I'm a teenager looking to upgrade from my samsung nx300. Would the Canon EOS 70d be a good option for a first-dslr? Or should I go with another camera/brand.


There are an awful lot of things that you probably need to think about. For example, if you plan on out door, all weather use, then a sealed camera is a very good idea. Canon added the dust and moisture seals back with the 70D. You don't want to dunk it a pond, or drag by the strap through a dune, but it won't die in a light rain or start making grinding noises when the shutter moves on a dusty day. DSLR results have more to do with the lens than the body, so one thing that you will discover is that what ever camera you chose, the lenses will tend to increasingly tie you to that brand. So, think carefully. What kind of photography do you want to do? What kind of money do you have/can you stand to spend on it? The 70D is an excellent camera body. So are most others.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2014 at 05:27 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review (704 comments in total)
In reply to:

AngryCorgi: Actually, one would expect that, given the advantage of using a sensor that is 201% the size of the RX100, the G1X mk2 would be 1EV better in regards to SNR. The results of the comparison tool do not bear this out though. If you set the G1X mk2 to ISO3200 and compare it to the RX100 mk3 at ISO1600 (1EV difference), the RX100 mk3 looks better. So while the sensor is larger, the advantage is smaller than if the two sensors had similar technology/efficiency. This is a result of Canon not spending any apparent effort to match other sensor manufacturers' sensor efficiency. This is apparent even when comparing JPEGs, despite the fact that the Sony JPEG NR engine is among the worst available.

You are leaving too many other considerations out of your comparison. For instance, the purported resolutions. The Canon has a bigger sensor, but the Sony has a higher resolution. The Sony will have a big gain in quality simply because there's less sensor crosstalk being captured at a lower exposure, if you compare it with the Canon at a longer exposure. Compare them at the same exposure and ISO.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2014 at 00:26 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review (704 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nomorefilmman: Interestingly, the October, 2014 issue of Consumer Reports Magazine just rated the G1X Mark II as "Our best-scoring camera ever", where it compared 16 Point-and -Shoot cameras for Image Quality, Flash Photos, Video Quality, LCD Quality, and their Viewfinder, after taking the average of scores for each category. Optional Viewfinders were not mentioned in the article.

They state that in THEIR past camera tests, the G1X "is the first to earn an Excellent score for overall image quality as well as flash photos and video", "an achievement unmatched by any SLR or mirrorless SLR-like" (in THEIR past camera tests).

THE ARTICLE DOES STATE, HOWEVER, "That doesn't mean the G1X is the perfect choice for all shooting situations". They mention several "quibbles" with it, and that consumers may have preferences for an SLR, interchangeable lens feature, a superslim camera, or waterproof camera.

So I guess it gets back to what is important to me, with the tests being simply reference info.

I have the G1X (not the II) and have concluded that I will hang on to it until the changes are significant improvements. The G1X really is a handy camera and for simple, daily carry-around use on jobs it does a good job. You cannot get the same boosts in image quality from the RAW image that you might see processing an image from a larger sensor, it offers good quality as it stands. The chief draw back is that it is "pocketable" only in some really big pockets.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2014 at 00:00 UTC
On article Judge strikes down fine against drone photographer (130 comments in total)
In reply to:

GCHYBA: I've been using mine for real estate photography for over a year now. Just too stupid to know the law, I guess.

If you are below 500 feet off the ground you are in "uncontrolled" air space. There are a whole lot of 400, 450, 495 foot high radio masts that are designed to fall below FAA regulatory limits.

On the other hand, if you fly over someone's yard and "lose" the drone in it, they are under no obligation whatsoever to return it to you - in any condition. And, entering their yard without permission would definitely be trespassing, subject to fine and jail.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2014 at 22:14 UTC
On article Judge strikes down fine against drone photographer (130 comments in total)
In reply to:

mr.izo: as i agree that drones can be dangerous (as are other flying toys, rockets etc), i can't belive how much energy in put just to put down drones for comercial use (as maybe some drone could someday see what it shouldn't), while for ex. every child can buy "tactical" knife, laser or gun in walmart and star shooting people (adults ar not much better). so please, give me a break..

A drone sucked up the nacelle of a jet on an approach or take off could kill immensely more than people than a tactical knife or even a misused firearm wielded by the most determined. Not only that, the knife or gun user has to be actively malicious. The drone operator only has to be stupid or thoughtless. In short a drone would offer any moron the chance to be a huge public threat.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2014 at 21:56 UTC
On article Judge strikes down fine against drone photographer (130 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: While I don't use drones for my photography, I think it's appalling that the FAA was trying to regulate this guy "because he was being paid" for the use of the model aircraft he was using. There are many ways to get paid, and if the FAA was to get away with this sort of thing they could start trying to regulate people flying kites, if being paid to do a demonstration or getting money for publicity, and all sorts of stuff. Someone with a sponsor could be regulated by the FAA while in a model airplane stunt flying competition, and they could be charged with "flying the aircraft recklessly" - how about THAT!?!

I believe they want to get their dirty little fingers into everything . . . as if they don't have enough to do, regulating the thousands of commercial airline planes, airlines, thousands of private aircraft, etc. The FAA doesn't need to get involved in drone or model aircraft flight!

The article as written is too uninformative. The FAA claimed the operator was "flying recklessly." If he was indeed reckless, then pushing his nose into one of his rotors would be appropriate. However, if the FAA simply was trying to extract a license fee, that is a different story. The story as reported here doesn't present the FAA case, simply the judge's response to "he broke our policy." Policy is a bureaucracy's attempt to delineate their understanding of the regulations implementing a law. However, the actual regulations are what have force as the judge pointed out, not "policy."

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2014 at 21:41 UTC
On article Iain McKell photographs 'The New Gypsies' (183 comments in total)
In reply to:

gusda9: These people are not original gypsies like I am they are Irish people living in a camp Real gypsys spread from India a thousand years ago They don't even speak the Romani language All of you are very ignorant of the culture of Gypsys We speak a very Distinctive language that is understandable Throughout the world by Other Gypsies Its like seeing any Asian person and saying they are Chinese Really people you need to google stuff up

It's 100s of years ago, not 'thousands.' And Irish "gypsies" are really known as "Travelers." While it was once a fact that "gypsy" was a term of approbation, it now, in English, also means to live a life not tied to any particular chunk of real estate. I'm pretty sure that the author used that sense of the word.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2013 at 02:27 UTC
Total: 7, showing: 1 – 7