Freeman-Jo

Lives in United States CA, United States
Works as a You don't want to know.
Has a website at http://www.jotographer.com
Joined on Aug 20, 2003

Comments

Total: 40, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Freeman-Jo: Disclaimer, jut to get this out of the way: I don't do arial photography not do I own a drown.

While I do not agree with government tracking the drone, there is a real safety concern here that are being igrore by many drone operator and it is largely shown that the industry and community themselves cannot control. Ideally, an registration should be required when purchase a drone and may be some sort of insurance is needed, similar to buying a car. But that still doesn't cover the entire community as Drone is not as expensive to make and it could be DIY relatively easy. I think treating drone owner similar to owning a car is a much better idea than what the government is doing.

@chavim, at which point did I compare drone to car? I merely suggest having a drone insurance as a process of buying a drone. The process that buying a drone required a liability insurance that is the part I use having car insurance as example.

But since you have to bring up the issue, while drone cannot do the same type of impact damage due to it size, I can also says that cars don't fly, unless you are Vin Diesel (while in the movie scene) then I let you have a short flight/hop. Yes, drones cannot do the same damage as the car, unless it purposely use to carry explosive device, but neither cars can do aerial damage like drone could also. Drone could much easier interfere with plane and helicopter and damage property that is above the ground.

The reason I propose insurance isn't that it will control people from causing damage, people who are jerks will continue to be, but it would bring awareness of liability and precaution when you buy a drone.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2020 at 16:32 UTC
In reply to:

Razor512: It does 100% nothing for safety. If someone actually plans to do something malicious, they will run their drone with no IDs of any kind.

It is simply a rule that will only be followed by people who have no intention of being scumbags.

I dont think this has anything to do w/ intention here. There are still many who simply ignorance about the law, regardless of intention. Even when the law was lagged before, people were ignorance, and before the law, many are simply immoral and dont want to deal with consequence. These are simply big kids that nobody had told them before that you cant just play baseball on the street. The ignorance of the danger such activity create are no difference, it just thaat drone are new and many still unaware of the danger. People who are being a jerk will continue to be regardless of how strict the law is. The smart one will just try to circumvent the law.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2020 at 00:20 UTC

Disclaimer, jut to get this out of the way: I don't do arial photography not do I own a drown.

While I do not agree with government tracking the drone, there is a real safety concern here that are being igrore by many drone operator and it is largely shown that the industry and community themselves cannot control. Ideally, an registration should be required when purchase a drone and may be some sort of insurance is needed, similar to buying a car. But that still doesn't cover the entire community as Drone is not as expensive to make and it could be DIY relatively easy. I think treating drone owner similar to owning a car is a much better idea than what the government is doing.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2020 at 00:09 UTC as 20th comment | 12 replies
In reply to:

Pritzl: Next week, tune in for the "Appeal of the appeal: How lawyers keep the dough rolling".

Probably not. I'm not a legal expert but from what I understand the next higher court is supreme court. In order to reverse the ruling of an appeal court to either appeal to the supreme court or appeal based on some legal mistep in order to have the appeal court revisit the case. In any event it does not guaranteed outcome. The loser side could also appeal on the penalty imposed, but that does not change the ruling of the case, just the penalty alone.

All of that are going to cost money to both side And I think they are already bleeding enough. I dont even foresee the defendant will appeal even to lower the penalty.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2019 at 15:28 UTC
In reply to:

shigzeo: Not sure why anyone would want to replace easily found AAs with proprietary Lithium batteries especially in flashes.

The killer feature comparing Li-Ion probably is the fast recycle time on full power. Sure 750 full power pops are nice, but they are not necessity at least not for most photographers. It's not the batteries are going to be hard to replace, but on the other hand if you image setting your self up to shoot sport event, and you are gonna set up slave flash on a spot where it's going to be hard to reach or inaccessible during the event, then yes the long lasting battery power may be your number one priority.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2017 at 05:17 UTC
In reply to:

MarcMedios: Honestly, 99% of the feedback in professional forums is negative. Yongnuo is one of those brands that people buy because they are dirt cheap; they are considered flimsy, unreliable, prone to constant failures.

Flash, yes, but I heard a lot of good things on the trigger side.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2017 at 05:11 UTC
In reply to:

Trundling: Does anyone know a photographer who made $75mil in his entire life? That lady is not very wise. She may win a couple hundred (thousand) bucks but her career as a professional photographer will be over. You don't go against the likes of Saatchi and LPK and continue working in advertizing business.

Are you implying that no photographer should make million of dollars? And in your view, any big company should just be able to steal any art work and the artist shouldn't get paid? What, only big company like Disnay should be able to make million of dollars but not photographer?

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 19:33 UTC

Yea like other said, there are other alternative that are much cheaper and already exist, just wont fit in the pocket, but neither is the dSLR. As long as it fit in the same dSLR bag I think that is better. And if this is market for EVIL or pocketable P&S then the price is totally out of whack.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 16:30 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

TriezeA72: Give it a few days and a Chinese version will be available on cheapBay!..... for half the price

But a few days will only get you plastic which will break after a few use. You have to wait for the rip-off v2 or v3 which take a few week/month for something that will be as good as original. As for me, I don't shoot video anyway so I don't care.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 16:20 UTC
On article BPG image format aims to replace JPEGs (204 comments in total)
In reply to:

D1N0: jpegs are mainly used on the web. Compatibility is the magic word. When a large percentage of your audience can't view the image because their browser doesn't supported it, it will not be used, no matter how good it is.

While it's true that most people will not seek out new technology even if it's better. I think for the longest time, it's just not compatibility, but people see jpg as good enough. What BPG offer is a choice and a better one and since it is open source other browser such as firefox may likely jump on it faster than something like IE. Not saying it's not going to happen, but we have also seen that Windows 10 will also support MKV format also. MKV or Matroska format is actually an open format for media container and not necessary a video/audio format itself, just container. The problem with graphic format, even if it's an open standard (no royalty fee), is that company aren't likely to jump in because it may violate some other people patents. And you can thanks the US gov for that. The US copyright and patent law are becoming more ridiculous these days. This isn't a chicken and egg problem. Not a standard problem, not a support in software problem, but legal and money.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2014 at 18:44 UTC

Some of you said this will be your next smartphone. i could be wrong but from the pictures shown here, I don't see any lens cap. And we know where we keep our cellphone, in the pants along with the keychains and whatever else that could scratch this big & awesome lens.
Just a thought.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 21:30 UTC as 76th comment | 6 replies
On article Travel tripods: Comparing 5 aluminum kits (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

Albert Silver: Thanks for the great overview. As a result of this article I will be getting the Sirui T-1005x, which costs half the price as the reviewed model, but will do the job fine. Without this article I would have been clueless on where to look, or what.

After reading many threads I find that the listed maximum weight the tripod can handle doesn't necessary guarantee it will be stable. If you read this review and take a closer look at how well the tripod dissipate the vibration. The heavier tripod(ball head included), with 3.5lbs and heavier, they all do better in term of absorbing the vibration than the 3lbs one. If what you shoot is MFT and no big lens, the T-1005x may not be a bad choice, but it also mean, if you decided that in the future you want to have bigger lens, this tripod may not hold well. I have FF dSLR with grip and a lens as large as 100-300mm f/4. Some day I may even get a bigger lens, so thinking along that line, I would prefer beefier tripod upfront.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2014 at 06:45 UTC
On article Travel tripods: Comparing 5 aluminum kits (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

Albert Silver: Thanks for the great overview. As a result of this article I will be getting the Sirui T-1005x, which costs half the price as the reviewed model, but will do the job fine. Without this article I would have been clueless on where to look, or what.

still don't understand how you come up with half the price? Yes, the leg alone cost just under $100 and you don't count the ball head price? Even comparing the leg alone at the listed price, $100 still more than $170/2. I'm not saying you should spend more than you can afford or need. I just felt that, by spending a bit more I get something that's both a "travel" tripod and can use it regularly even a bit heavier gears. We could all be looking at the term "travel" differently also. I look at it as more like flying to other country with rather than taking it along in the back of the car to the next shoot. At this point, I figure I can afford CF tripod, so that's what I will get since the CF absorb the vibration better than aluminum.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2014 at 06:02 UTC
On article Travel tripods: Comparing 5 aluminum kits (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

Felix E Klee: For today's light weight compacts and system cameras, wouldn't it be possible to create an advanced tripod that just weighs about a pound / 0.5 kg, and that is extensible to a variable height of up to 5 foot / 1.5 m? No market?

Bilora used to make the Biloret, which comes close, and which can be had cheap. However its technology is roughly half a century old. I'm willing to pay up to 200 USD / EUR for a tripod matching the above specs. Of course light weight tripods are not great in wind, but it's not always windy.

Carbon is an incredible material. I used very thin carbon legs for a fun table tripod design: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:363348

I say, you should watch this youtube clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGlE8UK6Ij4 and tune into about 2 minutes 30 seconds.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2014 at 04:09 UTC
On article Travel tripods: Comparing 5 aluminum kits (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael Piziak: Those 5 tripods look very similar - almost as though they were made by the same company.

@trekkeruss, I don't know. One of the tripod I used to have got 2 legs, I think it was broken and I threw it away.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2014 at 04:05 UTC
On article Travel tripods: Comparing 5 aluminum kits (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

Just another Canon shooter: Why aluminum only? There are CF legs at comparable prices.

Considering, this review have the Sirui T-2005x, the most direct carbon fiber equivalent would be T-2205x. So, I don't know which Sirui CF he gonna pick, but I think there will be at least one Sirui in the review.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2014 at 04:02 UTC
On article Travel tripods: Comparing 5 aluminum kits (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mikity: Thanks for a great review, Mark!

How useful did you find the Sirui's retractable spikes? Were there any terrains where you think they actually made a difference, stability-wise, and if so what were they?

Thank you. Very much looking forward to your CF tripod article :)

My guess would be shooting on ice and something slippery, like after a rainy day?

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2014 at 03:44 UTC
On article Travel tripods: Comparing 5 aluminum kits (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

Albert Silver: Thanks for the great overview. As a result of this article I will be getting the Sirui T-1005x, which costs half the price as the reviewed model, but will do the job fine. Without this article I would have been clueless on where to look, or what.

For about $15 more than the price listed, I got a use T-2205x and the same as reviewed brand new G-20x. Of course, I spend like 2-3 days doing research and looking for deals. So I guess I beat the review price.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2014 at 03:42 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2512 comments in total)
In reply to:

veroman: Equivalence is important to understand. But, in the end, I don't think the choice of tool should be based on equivalence but, rather, on the very basics of photography and acquiring photography gear, i.e. budget, subject matter, whether amateur or enthusiast or pro, size and weight one is willing to carry, etc.

I've owned full frame for most of my digital years and am now primarily a micro 4:3 shooter. I'm at a point where the end result hardly looks any different than when I was shooting with the 5D and 1Ds II.

One area where equivalence matters to me and that I do take into account is the ISO setting. ISO 200 is really ISO 400 on my M4:3 gear, and that really is important to the end result.

I think the handwriting is on the wall. I believe that the traditional DSLR is slowly but surely being replaced by these smaller, highly capable cameras ... in the same way that 35mm diminished medium format, particularly 2 1/4".

I think the opposite, while I don't use an APS-C dSLR any more, I think the ISO equivalent is the least significant. I say that because it's a variable that change over time unlike shutter speed or aperture. Think of it this way, in term of IQ, an ISO 800 on an APS-C like Canon EOS 10D wouldn't come anywhere near Canon EOS 70D. In this case we may say it's 6 generation apart. But it is also true that there are improvement over time, it's something we don't say to aperture. And there is no guarantee that maybe in some year, some manufacturer could make a leap over the competitors. And then the equivalency would break.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2014 at 16:29 UTC
Total: 40, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »