tex

Lives in United States baltimore, MD, United States
Works as a Artist, visual arts professional
Has a website at www.texandrewsart.com
Joined on Nov 22, 2003
About me:

Working artist [photography only one aspect], MFA. Began photography 1978 (1967 as a kid), 35mm, MF and LF photography, darkroom. Independent curator, art wrangler, fine arts repro photographer, appraiser; former collegiate gallery director, former program director for an alternative space, 10 yrs undergraduate teaching, 2 yrs chair of the department; Exhibits specialist at the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden. Former supermoderator of the late Lightcrafts' LightZone forums. Co-founder and webmaster of The LightZone Project, www.lightzoneproject.org

Comments

Total: 135, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

jay jay02: Great news. We might get some unbiased sensor reviews now then

@jayjay02: Exactly. I think it's less an issue with the raw data of the tests (although I'd be a lot more comfortable if I understood to what extent/how the raw scores were developed vis-a-vis a mean value of a larger group of scores from multiples of the same tests run) than it is with the way they are then "processed" as this Petapixel article points out. And their weird nomenclature ("sports" ?----seems to have little to do with the suitability of a camera for actually doing well with sports....) doesn't help at all.

What bugs me about them and others (are you listening, DPR???!!!) is lack of peer review to help de-bug all of the results. Why avoid that step? It would be imperative to me if I was putting my name to something.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2018 at 19:49 UTC
In reply to:

brn: Believable. Mistakes happen. They owned up to it. Good for them.

Absolutely. The cover up and/or denial and/or waffling is always, always worse than the original mistake. Being proactive demonstrates integrity.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2017 at 22:07 UTC
On article These are the best cameras you can buy right now (483 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gesture: I'd like to know best under $750.

BTW: One Panasonic, no Olympus, no Pentax. Don't believe it.

With so many, doesn't Pentax have a contender. K1?

@Howaboutraw. OK, please direct me to the place I can see for myself. DPR's piece on this overstates the problem---and in fact they tacitly admits it. In their piece they also state that the "problem" diminishes the full potential of the camera (while showing up only in cases of extreme contrast, enlargement, and possibly image manipulation---and there's no work with more than one raw processor, btw...). No where do they determine that the camera is therefore junk. Other articles around the web show no differences between the lossy files and the lossless ones.

But also, examples of this problem seem thin on the ground. With today's internet, if you google about a problem and a real one exists you'll get back so many hits it will take days to go through them all. That doesn't seem to be the case here, so just how severe is this problem? I know what I've seen with my own eyes in my own files, contrasted with the 645Z.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 23:19 UTC
On article These are the best cameras you can buy right now (483 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gesture: I'd like to know best under $750.

BTW: One Panasonic, no Olympus, no Pentax. Don't believe it.

With so many, doesn't Pentax have a contender. K1?

@Howaboutraw:

Never once saw a problem with lossy raws in any of my work: artworks, landscape, fine arts repro. Did a bit of event photography with it, it was fast enough (but wouldn't be my first choice for that work). That has been my direct experience.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 17:47 UTC
On article These are the best cameras you can buy right now (483 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gesture: I'd like to know best under $750.

BTW: One Panasonic, no Olympus, no Pentax. Don't believe it.

With so many, doesn't Pentax have a contender. K1?

@Howaboutraw: The loudness of the shutter is a problem for people using it for theatrical/music and quiet event documentation....but so are many other cameras! For standard event photography (just listen to a press conference) it's no problem at all, although for events there are speedier(fps) cameras anyway. The shutter shock rarely affected me---very rarely---and was pretty easily ameliorated. The lossy raw problem was no problem of any kind whatsoever. IMO, this camera's "problems", at least 2 of which were shared by many others, were accentuated by many due to a bias against Sony, one that is now disappearing pretty fast as it becomes clearer by the day what a great job they are doing. BTW, I shoot Pentax now, so I'm not exactly a fanboy (except maybe for Pentax ;-} )

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 15:47 UTC
On article These are the best cameras you can buy right now (483 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gesture: I'd like to know best under $750.

BTW: One Panasonic, no Olympus, no Pentax. Don't believe it.

With so many, doesn't Pentax have a contender. K1?

@Howaboutraw:
"While, except for the new sensor, the Sony A7R Mark I really shouldn't have been released."

Whaaa....? I never had a significant problem with that camera, had it for a year. Those who did only had problems intermittently in select circumstances ----I saw one of them less than 1% of the time. Would still have it if I hadn't needed it for trade-in. A fine camera.

@Sdaniella: For some, in everyday circumstances, smaller and lighter is a boon. It wasn't for me. That points to how much of a moving target ergonomics can be.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2017 at 10:36 UTC
On article These are the best cameras you can buy right now (483 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gesture: I'd like to know best under $750.

BTW: One Panasonic, no Olympus, no Pentax. Don't believe it.

With so many, doesn't Pentax have a contender. K1?

@Sdaniella: I've had both the A7R (great camera!) and now the K1, the backup to my 645Z. I'll take the K1, it's a better camera, although bulkier and heavier. The bulk, however, allows for better ergonomics IMO, better button layout. From what I can see, the files are the same or better (even w/o pixel shift). As someone who has had both cameras (and can compare them both to the Z), I think I can reasonably say this. Others who have not used/had both should maybe reserve judgement.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2017 at 02:51 UTC
On article These are the best cameras you can buy right now (483 comments in total)

OK. So, let's quote: "These are the best cameras you can buy right now"

No digital medium format, no Sony RX1RII. Look at the quotation again.

Has DPR lost all its editors?

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2017 at 22:41 UTC as 91st comment | 5 replies

Next up: The Noctilux 100mm f.000001, with a depth of focus measured in microns, impossible to focus with the naked eye. Similar in ethos to the "Desert Bus" video game.

Alert to non native English speakers and literalists: this post intended humorously.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2017 at 02:39 UTC as 50th comment
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1234 comments in total)

I was in Sony for a few years, and it is wonderful gear (A850, NEX7, A7R). I moved over to Pentax for the 645Z, and now the K1, both of which suit my style and needs perfectly, 90% of the time better than anything else available---video is really the only minus. That said, this new Sony is really an extraordinary piece of equipment. To those who are quibbling about the scores (especially vs. the superb D850), I wouldn't get too worked up about it. But I would be willing to bet that the video on the new Sony is far better than any other cameras in this group. Add in all the rest of it and I'm actually a little surprised it only got a 90.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 14:54 UTC as 111th comment | 4 replies
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1234 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: as optics improve on the wider angle (shorter FL) lenses
where higher resolving power with least distortion is desired across entire fov
is more difficult to achieve than its longer angle (longer FL) lens counterparts

there can be no shortage of progressively more sensor megapixels
so one can expand creative crop from images with very scenic wide panoramic views
and less need to resort to much heavier longer tele lenses which is best for shots taken farther out, than shots taken very in-close, in tighter vantage points

@Thematic & Menneisyys: perhaps consider that maybe English is not her primary language? I think I understand what she is trying to get at. Also, this is the second or third time I've seen people attack her in a rather ad hominem way. Seems not so nice to me, even when disagreeing.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 20:13 UTC
In reply to:

tinetz: Photo magazines and testsites obviously do have a quite important role in photoindustry. Reviews and sales must be somehow related, marketing and sales are related, therefore reviews and marketing are related.

If many sales means big money and this means big marketing budget it is not far fetched to see where interests of magazines and test sites might be. Big players will get more coverage, small players like Ricoh, less.

This does not have to influence test results, but somehow their presentation. Or have you read lately at any site that Ricoh actually seems to top all categories they offer cameras in for IQ ? At least scattered tests indicate this:
- the 645z would have been testscore leader in it's class (DxO)
- the K1 undoubtedly offers best bang for the buck IQ-wise
- the KP gets tested with highest RAW-IQ amongst APSC-cameras (German ColorFoto 12/2017, not online, only print!) beating D7500 and even EOS 6D MII

For Ricoh it seems, Real quality:Marketing = 1:0

To Steelhead3: my experiences shooting my K1 alongside a 5dmkIV in interiors, dim lighting, is that there is little difference I can detect, with a possible slight edge to the K1 for positive AF focus capture (and it's way better in manual focus focus confirm). I can't speak so much to outdoor sports type AF.

But mainly I think Ricoh/Pentax would be a class leader if the had a marketing department that was worth a snot, or a plan at all. They have been their own worst enemies.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 15:16 UTC

I don't believe there was any sort of conspiracy here. Just a ridiculous set of bad judgements and poor handling of a situation (one that Pentax apparently compounded, which I believe, sadly). You see this kind of blundering in politics and corporate matters all the time. probably everyone who works for a company of any kind has seen this sort of thing. Humans are just so very stupid.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 01:36 UTC as 47th comment
In reply to:

TomCak: This statement amuses me: "And, since we have first-hand knowledge of how difficult it is to get a 645Z for long enough to do extensive testing on...".

Really? DPReview/Amazon couldn't afford to buy one outright to do extensive testing?

They have to receive it "gratis"?

@KeepCalm: I actually did just that, and offered to loan it to them while I was in Seattle in June, when I could have hand-delivered it to their doorstep. I got no response from them, not even a "thanks but no thanks" message.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 01:31 UTC
In reply to:

KKnipser: Buhahahaha. That was predicted years ago, when those incompetent liars kept the Pentax 645Z score of 101 under lock when the 645Z came outstanding, crashing through the 100-point barrier to become the highest-scoring commercially-available sensor they’ve tested. - 2 years ago. So the all class leading Pentax 645z was on top of the DSLR sensor pack for 3,5 years.
No other camera ever achieved that.
see pentaxforums.com/articles/photo-industry-news/pentax-645z-ranked-highest-by-dxomark.html
It was so predictable with lame excuses that the Pentax 101 score would only be published AFTER the runners up would eventually catch up (years later).

Yeah, this just looks worse by the day. Couldn't even publish the Pentax score first, even after their "acknowledgement". I'm not at all suggesting conspiracy, but it still just smells bad.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 16:32 UTC

The Casio Forum will be hoppin'....

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 19:42 UTC as 28th comment
In reply to:

Sdaniella: Pentax 645D/Z focal distance is so long/deep, that no matter how good/bad the sensor is, it faces predominantly very narrow fov per FL, which translates into very untaxing long optics, common to portraits than WA Lens of landscape shooters (WA, not just narrow angle image capture)

good medium format lens at the WA FL, to take most advantge of high-rez 50+mp are too few, if at all any.

longer FL are abundant, and far easier to get good optics with minimal chromatic aberrations that plague WA optics.

if you ever wonder why DXO scores for portraits are double that of landscape, it is precisely because its realm is long-narrow (easier) vs short-wide (harder) to achieve absolute best scores

There is some truth to what you say, technically, I think; but those of us using these cameras actually do make "landscape" imagery w/o UWA lenses. In my work I do have to back up my Z with a K1 and an Irix 15, for instance, for certain interior shots I must do. But I am now rarely using UWA in any of my outdoor work, by choice. With my Z and its 4:3 format, the 645 35 lens(roughly corresponds on the Z to a 27ish lens on FF) I have is often too wide for my taste...

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 19:50 UTC

Hmmm...whatever happened to that 645Z score that mysteriously disappeared?

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2017 at 19:49 UTC as 137th comment | 2 replies

Too bad, no Pentax....

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2017 at 20:08 UTC as 26th comment
In reply to:

tex: Well, here's what I would say to both the doubters and the believers. First, take a look at HCB's contact sheets. The final images are ones he selected from many possibilities; thus it would be entirely possible for him to "impose" compositional structure post shutter press through the winnowing process. Second, as pointed out below(and by the master himself), some of this winds up being intuitive/learned through practice and process. To think otherwise is foolish. Next, humans' eyes have a particular FOV, we move through a world that presents us from birth certain organizational patterns both in nature and culture, why would it be controversial that composition would not be random, even with street shooting? I think it probable that there is a biological component to composition. Next, while the author does indeed proffer something to the market, this does not make him a charlatan by that alone. Continued

I would add to all of this that HCB was a cultured man: it is highly unlikely he was not aware of the extraordinary lengths painters went to to compose their objects up until Impressionism (well...some of it ;-} ) and the fashion of off-handed and "spontaneous" compositions that became fashionable for certain styles from then until now. Please delve into pre 19th century painting a little deeper to see. Can one add enough grid lines to make any composition make "sense"? Of course. But a bit of judiciousness is all that is required not to throw the baby out with the bath water. Photographers are so very overwhelmed by "the moment". It's no wonder an attempt to show an iconic "moment" photographer's quite likely interest in the niceties of composition, which would on the surface seem to undermine the magick of the "moment", would draw fire....

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2017 at 18:05 UTC
Total: 135, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »