Nuno Souto

Lives in Australia Sydney, Australia
Works as a IT damager
Joined on Jul 11, 2007
About me:

Nikon D80 and D200, Oly EM-5, all in RAW, with Corel Aftershot Pro 2 for processing.

Lots of F-series 35mm Nikon bodies, a Zeiss rangefinder, a few Leica and Voigtlander lenses and some Oly and Sigma Art MFT ones.
SLR lenses mostly Nikkor - MF and AF/AFS, some Tamron and Sigma.
Mamiya RB67 and 645 Pro-TL and Fuji 645S rangefinder.
Scanner is a beaut 9000 ED and a brand new plustek Opticfilm 120.
I use Neat Image, Irfanview, Focus Magic and Picture Window Pro for image processing

Comments

Total: 122, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Samsung launches Galaxy TabPro S Windows tablet (98 comments in total)

Who the heck wants to do photo editing in a thing like this?
Just use it as a photo book.
I've got a Tab S II with Amoled and it is a superb media for showing photos. And don't believe for a second those who say it is over-saturated: all you have to do is read the manual/instructions and act accordingly.
It helps: no one is born all-knowing...

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2016 at 11:35 UTC as 1st comment
On article Kodak revives Super 8 with part-digital cine camera (367 comments in total)

Is it April 1st already?
Dang, blink and you miss the first quarter of the year...

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 23:56 UTC as 171st comment
On article Here at last: Nikon announces D500 (1175 comments in total)

Finally, a professional grade DX body upgrade!
Pity it has arrived 3 years after it was (already!) overdue.
The only thing really interesting here is the auto AF calibration.
Long overdue for all dslrs, not just Nikon's.
And thank the gods Nikon hasn't gone Mpixel-crazy like others!
But... 2 grand, Nikon? In this day and age?
Really?
K....
(time to start looking for cheap 2nd hand D7200s from the "I must upgrade" crowd!)

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 08:16 UTC as 122nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: Wow! 50 grand? If I get two, do I get a quantitydiscount?
Dentists of the world, start saving!
Total insanity...

Yes, digital stitching does work for waterfalls. Unless you want to split the waterfall into multiple images. In which case indeed no. But the question then becomes: what on earth for?
As for double negatives, do not assume from my name that I don't know the Queen's language in detail and extensively. And please work at improving your perception of twisted humor. I'm leaving it at that, now: the Usenet used to be full of this type of silly argumentation and posturing and I don't have any patience for it.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 08:10 UTC
In reply to:

Esstee: I know It's outrageous and I'll never own a 50K camera. But the resolution is simply breathtaking. Especially in the landscape scenery samples! *salivating

Amazing how these things work.
50 grand to get a 100MP image!
Yet my 1 grand 16MP EM5 made a stitched pano of the entire Jamieson Valley near Sydney, all 28165X3077 of it (86MP).
It's so sharp each tree at 9Km distance from where I was can be individually separated.
The final print now hangs on a wall in my dining room, all 3 metres wide of it. Everyone who's seen it has dropped their jaw.
I must have done something wrong because I'd need to spend at least 40 grand to get anywhere near something like this! Gotta talk to the financial director about it, she might let me get one of these so I can print each individual branch on those distant trees.
Soooo important!...
:P

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 03:38 UTC
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: Wow! 50 grand? If I get two, do I get a quantitydiscount?
Dentists of the world, start saving!
Total insanity...

I couldn't care less about your interpretations of double negatives. This is not a film vs digital competition!
As for POS camera I'll put mine against any other S camera you care to mention, anytime. Any 8 of them.
What you and other "experts" can't comprehend is that NO ONE in his right mind needs to spend this sort of money on a camera.
Not in this day and age of easy digital image stitching. There is simply no need for this type of equipment, for anything!

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 03:26 UTC
In reply to:

Holger Drallmeyer: yeah but no Facebook button for quick posts? Mew...

and no Instagram button/app?
Shame...

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2016 at 04:09 UTC
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: Wow! 50 grand? If I get two, do I get a quantitydiscount?
Dentists of the world, start saving!
Total insanity...

I couldn't possibly be bothered getting neither this nor the Pentax nor the 5ds. This might come as a surprise to the micro-contrast measurebators in this place but megapixels is the LAST thing I look for in ANY photo gear. The very last. And a large number for that says nothing to me.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2016 at 04:01 UTC
In reply to:

magneto shot: yup professional photographers are earning more and more so the price is just about right for pros to earn. one of the best wedding photographer in my country just needed to do 8 weddings to cover this cost.
I should notify him in case he isnt aware of this, not very sure if he is part of the "audience of professional photographers" because he is still using a paltry D4 with 16 mp.

The reason he's making that much is precisely because he's not chasing up megapixels and is still using his D4!

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2016 at 00:03 UTC

Wow! 50 grand? If I get two, do I get a quantitydiscount?
Dentists of the world, start saving!
Total insanity...

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2016 at 00:01 UTC as 79th comment | 8 replies
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (563 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: Once again, the elephant in the room has been missed...
Mirrorless is by design more precise for focusing for one very simple reason: it doesn't have to rely on a flipping mirror subject to imprecise stops potentially causing it to introduce errors in focusing.
What many slr makers try to hide is that the mirror mechanism is a major cause of failed focus shots in their hardware.
And it's been so since the days of film!
With mirrorless, that is simply impossible. Hence why I switched 5 years ago and have never looked back: if my Oly says it's in focus, it is.
And checking for sure in really difficult situations is as easy as twitching the focus ring: it immediately shows me a magnified section of the image where it's dirt easy to get precise focus on. Try to take a shot of an animal through reeds with a slr and then with a mirrorless camera and it'll become very clear why mirrorless is the way to go!

M W B G: I am perfectly aware how DSLRs do AF and MF. And not one of them can decently AF a wide open 1.2 lens without painful and lengthy micro-adjustments and fine tuning of the AF. As for MF with wide aperture lenses, better forget it!

All I can say - having been at the receiving end of mis-adjusted mirror stops and focusing screens and focus assemblies MF and AF in the film days and more of the same in the DSLR days - is that I'll instantly trade the unreliable AF and manual focusing of a SLR for the convenience and exactness of focus - manual AND AF - of a mirrorless camera, with ANY lens!

I'm not even going into how IBIS leaves in-lens stabilization for dead!

And don't get me started on Medium format film SLRs and how hard it was/is to change a focusing screen in one of them and end up with good focusing! Been there, suffered that!

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 11:23 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (563 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: Once again, the elephant in the room has been missed...
Mirrorless is by design more precise for focusing for one very simple reason: it doesn't have to rely on a flipping mirror subject to imprecise stops potentially causing it to introduce errors in focusing.
What many slr makers try to hide is that the mirror mechanism is a major cause of failed focus shots in their hardware.
And it's been so since the days of film!
With mirrorless, that is simply impossible. Hence why I switched 5 years ago and have never looked back: if my Oly says it's in focus, it is.
And checking for sure in really difficult situations is as easy as twitching the focus ring: it immediately shows me a magnified section of the image where it's dirt easy to get precise focus on. Try to take a shot of an animal through reeds with a slr and then with a mirrorless camera and it'll become very clear why mirrorless is the way to go!

Steelhead: if you think 110 is the format of mirrorless and such provides huge DOF, all I can say is "you got no clue"...
I have as much shallow DOF with my Oly EM5 as you may have with FF or APS-C slrs. It's all got to do with the aperture and focal length of the lenses used.
But please stay convinced a dslr is somehow better at shallow DOF because of the sensor size - CaNikon desperately need folks like you.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 11:22 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (563 comments in total)

Once again, the elephant in the room has been missed...
Mirrorless is by design more precise for focusing for one very simple reason: it doesn't have to rely on a flipping mirror subject to imprecise stops potentially causing it to introduce errors in focusing.
What many slr makers try to hide is that the mirror mechanism is a major cause of failed focus shots in their hardware.
And it's been so since the days of film!
With mirrorless, that is simply impossible. Hence why I switched 5 years ago and have never looked back: if my Oly says it's in focus, it is.
And checking for sure in really difficult situations is as easy as twitching the focus ring: it immediately shows me a magnified section of the image where it's dirt easy to get precise focus on. Try to take a shot of an animal through reeds with a slr and then with a mirrorless camera and it'll become very clear why mirrorless is the way to go!

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 01:30 UTC as 88th comment | 12 replies
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: Memo to CaNikon:
WAKE UP!!!

Absolutely. But I'm not holding my breath. Meanwhile I've ditched all dslrs and slrs, keeping only my trusty NikonF6 for when the bw hook pulls me. The Oly m4/3 now uses all my Nikon, Canon, Leica and Mamiya MF lenses. If Sony mirrorless ever becomes affordable, I'll take one. I prefer to invest in lenses nowadays, rather than waste $ after good $ in the dslr iteration game CaNikon are engaged in. Good luck to those who fall for it. Me, I'm enjoying using amazing lenses for great imaging.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2015 at 00:07 UTC
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: Memo to CaNikon:
WAKE UP!!!

Now,now, Just a Photographer.... :)
You are letting reality creep on "sales volume" statistics quoted out of context and without any relation to the subject matter!
You troll, you! :)

automaticdan: the call is to CaNikon to start doing serious mirrorless. If Leica can do this, so can they.
All we see from them is multiple iterations of a 50 year old design, with the same issues: hard to fine tune focusing, issues with live view and video focusing, lens incompatibility, etcetc.

I moved to mirrorless 4 years ago. As for lenses I use exactly the same (and a whole lot more now!), with incredibly good results. Something you just plain can't do with your dslrs!
And no, I couldn't care less about "fast sports autofocusing": totally, utterly, completely irrelevant to the average photographer.

But keep on defending the "value" of half a century old technology, that's really gonna work long term!
Me? I woke up and moved on years ago.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2015 at 00:52 UTC
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: Memo to CaNikon:
WAKE UP!!!

Dude, I couldn't possibly care less about how many sales each makes. I buy cameras that do what I want. Not cameras that sell a lot.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 11:39 UTC

Memo to CaNikon:
WAKE UP!!!

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 02:16 UTC as 38th comment | 13 replies
On article Rough and ready: Olympus Tough TG-4 review (280 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nuno Souto: Such a pity Oly missed this opportunity to make a truly useful diving camera, with at least 30m capability and a way to fire a slave flash...
Ah yes, all that is available for double the price in the UW housing? Why buy this one in the first place, then...

By the time all the add-ons needed for true scuba diving are in (housing, lens extensions, flash adaptors), the whole setup will weigh the same and cost the same as a dslr in a housing. What is the point then of a small, portable camera...
Someone please make a digital Nikonos, for pete's sake ( or any other kind of sake, I drink them all! ;) )

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2015 at 00:56 UTC
On article Rough and ready: Olympus Tough TG-4 review (280 comments in total)

Such a pity Oly missed this opportunity to make a truly useful diving camera, with at least 30m capability and a way to fire a slave flash...
Ah yes, all that is available for double the price in the UW housing? Why buy this one in the first place, then...

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2015 at 01:44 UTC as 60th comment | 2 replies
Total: 122, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »