SRHEdD

Lives in United States Viera, FL, United States
Works as a Art Director
Joined on Apr 15, 2011

Comments

Total: 62, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

SRHEdD: If the shutter release lag on TTL flash shooting is gone, I'm in. The A7RII has a nasty lag when using their flashes on-body, and with their own wireless transmitter/receiver kit. I'm told that since the "shutter" is always open, it has to focus, close, fire a pre-flash, measure, open for the shot, close to end the shot, and then open again. There is no setting to stop this except for full manual flash shooting. My D750 is much faster in i-TTL use. I can't trust the A7RII to capture fleeting expressions on faces in group photos when TTL flash is used. Is THAT fixed now? It would seem to be, but I'm not buying until I see it with my own eyes.

I may have that sequence off, but you get the idea. The process is too slow compared to a DSLR.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 12:52 UTC

If the shutter release lag on TTL flash shooting is gone, I'm in. The A7RII has a nasty lag when using their flashes on-body, and with their own wireless transmitter/receiver kit. I'm told that since the "shutter" is always open, it has to focus, close, fire a pre-flash, measure, open for the shot, close to end the shot, and then open again. There is no setting to stop this except for full manual flash shooting. My D750 is much faster in i-TTL use. I can't trust the A7RII to capture fleeting expressions on faces in group photos when TTL flash is used. Is THAT fixed now? It would seem to be, but I'm not buying until I see it with my own eyes.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 12:35 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

SRHEdD: I control my camera. It focuses when and where I choose. It shoots at the shutter speed and aperture I choose. I will allow the camera to follow my chosen shutter speed with an aperture, or vice versa when one is more important to me than the other. I buy based on build quality and the quickness with which I can control the camera, and how quickly the camera responds. I don't think a painter would buy a brush that only paints where it's processor decides paint should go, or an illustrator a pen that draws for itself. I've recently purchased a Nikon D500 for its speed. I lock the center AF point on first. In shooting two lacrosse games, at 10fps I have few shots that were not exactly what I intended to capture. I hate that I have to PAY for these extra features I'll never use and that they run up the cost of the body. I'd suggest a NEW, cheaper Nikon with the same D500 sensor, body, drive, AF, PSAM, and metering, stripped of the rest. Less computer, more camera. A 21st century Nikon FE.

Oh I'm sure. It is just a shame the purists aren't a more vocal and more buying group to garner consideration. I'd love that digital Nikon FE. Single shot unless you added a battery grip, 3 metering modes, PSAM shutter speed dial, ISO dial, AF-S/AF-C only. Center area of cross-type AF points. DOF preview. Round, high eye-point finder with curtain. All metal and weather sealed. Single XQD to keep it small, but dual if possible. LCD on top like Nikon Df, and lighted rear buttons like the D500. Less prominent grip unless bigger grip is added, then 5-8fps. No WiFi, no SnapBridge, no NFC. Full frame or APS-C. I'd buy either, or both.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 18:54 UTC
In reply to:

SRHEdD: I control my camera. It focuses when and where I choose. It shoots at the shutter speed and aperture I choose. I will allow the camera to follow my chosen shutter speed with an aperture, or vice versa when one is more important to me than the other. I buy based on build quality and the quickness with which I can control the camera, and how quickly the camera responds. I don't think a painter would buy a brush that only paints where it's processor decides paint should go, or an illustrator a pen that draws for itself. I've recently purchased a Nikon D500 for its speed. I lock the center AF point on first. In shooting two lacrosse games, at 10fps I have few shots that were not exactly what I intended to capture. I hate that I have to PAY for these extra features I'll never use and that they run up the cost of the body. I'd suggest a NEW, cheaper Nikon with the same D500 sensor, body, drive, AF, PSAM, and metering, stripped of the rest. Less computer, more camera. A 21st century Nikon FE.

I don't realistically think it would cost less. But when the Nikon range is roughly $379 to $6499, there should be room for a more pure camera, even if it lives at the higher end of that scale. When I shot film with a Nikon F5, the next pocket over in my bag always held an FM-2 body. That is the contrast in equipment that is missing these days. I've no problem with the automation discussed in this article for those who think they need it or want it, but the entire product line shouldn't be based on processing power and automation. Chevy makes trucks and Corvettes, MB makes diesel sedans and AMG rockets. My favorite restaurant has a sublime salmon but also a kids' menu. In my case, I wish Nikon would cater to those of us professionals who want a well built, fast tool, not a computer with a lens attached (though I'd likely buy both).

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 17:46 UTC

I control my camera. It focuses when and where I choose. It shoots at the shutter speed and aperture I choose. I will allow the camera to follow my chosen shutter speed with an aperture, or vice versa when one is more important to me than the other. I buy based on build quality and the quickness with which I can control the camera, and how quickly the camera responds. I don't think a painter would buy a brush that only paints where it's processor decides paint should go, or an illustrator a pen that draws for itself. I've recently purchased a Nikon D500 for its speed. I lock the center AF point on first. In shooting two lacrosse games, at 10fps I have few shots that were not exactly what I intended to capture. I hate that I have to PAY for these extra features I'll never use and that they run up the cost of the body. I'd suggest a NEW, cheaper Nikon with the same D500 sensor, body, drive, AF, PSAM, and metering, stripped of the rest. Less computer, more camera. A 21st century Nikon FE.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 12:49 UTC as 55th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Albert Valentino: "...ordered to perform community service for Yellowstone Forever." That seems strange as this punisment seems overly harsh, but on the other hand it gives them park access forever as well.

Seriously Al?

Note the capitalized "F" making it a proper name. In this case, of an organization.
Check out http://www.yellowstonenationalparklodges.com/introducing-yellowstone-forever/.

I'd give YOU seven days in jail for not figuring that out.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2017 at 01:19 UTC
In reply to:

SRHEdD: I'd take a good eye with a crap camera over a crap eye with a good camera any day. At my wedding some years ago, I asked my university Photo II class students to show up and shoot away. They loved shooting for their teacher, and getting a few beers and a piece of cake for their efforts. You never saw so many K1000s in one place in your life. Alas, I've just moved in the past week and the album is packed away still or I'd scan a couple to post. They were an insightful, creative, and vastly different group of photos (and films), and we loved them all.

We weren't lucky, we just had a different set of expectations. We did not require technically perfect photos, just photos of us and our friends celebrating a day. More akin to a shotgun versus a rifle. We had numbers in our favor, and photographers who were excited to participate, rather than a gear wrangler with an eye on his/her portfolio. I've personally photographed nearly 500 weddings with everything from a Pentax 67 to an Oly IS-10 to Leicas to Nikon D3s, never once did the camera jump up an make a stellar contribution on its own. I on the other hand I managed to get some decent shots out of all of them. I stopped when I woke up on wedding day dreading the hours ahead. More wedding photographers should consider the same path, and leave the work to those excited to shoot regardless of their camera. Nothing is worse at a wedding (and we've all seen it) than a passive-aggressive photographer wishing he/she was elsewhere, but wants the check.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2016 at 13:41 UTC

I'd take a good eye with a crap camera over a crap eye with a good camera any day. At my wedding some years ago, I asked my university Photo II class students to show up and shoot away. They loved shooting for their teacher, and getting a few beers and a piece of cake for their efforts. You never saw so many K1000s in one place in your life. Alas, I've just moved in the past week and the album is packed away still or I'd scan a couple to post. They were an insightful, creative, and vastly different group of photos (and films), and we loved them all.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2016 at 03:42 UTC as 205th comment | 7 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: Fujifilm FinePix F601 Zoom (48 comments in total)

I had the Leica version!
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7988880748/leicadigilux43

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2016 at 15:29 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies
On article Apple revamps MacBook Pro lineup, adds 'Touch Bar' (866 comments in total)

I was about to complain about the lack of an SD card reader, but then I remember I have/use a 3" Lightning to SD card reader with my phone. Love this little guy.

http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJYT2AM/A/lightning-to-sd-card-camera-reader

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2016 at 12:31 UTC as 17th comment | 2 replies
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2159 comments in total)

I will say this VERY negative thing... I stopped by my local camera store last week and tried the SAL55300 on a LA-EA4 on my A6300, hoping on hope that it would suffice. Not even close. In broad daylight at ISO800, I still had a VERY low number of acceptably sharp shots. That's just CRAZY, and my hands don't really shake that much for an old guy. I need OSS or IBIS or VR whenever possible.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2016 at 19:40 UTC as 301st comment | 3 replies
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2159 comments in total)

I have both cameras, a Nikon Df for lowest light requirements, and a D7100 just save the others when I need to shoot a high number of frames (kids' lacrosse and football). They all serve me very well. I was happy to open the A6300 and get a better build quality and the ability to add my copyright info. That and similar to A6000 performance is perfect for me, I had no real complaints about the A6000 other than those two niggles. If I shoot APS-C, either Sony is preferable to the D7100, but the lack of a reasonable 300mm for the Sony keeps me using the 70-300VR on the D7100. The A7ii was a very nice camera, but the Nikon Df is a better tool for me. I may still go back to the A7ii though. It crosses my mind regularly that I miss the IBIS. The other two A7 bodies are just more than I care to spend. The biggest change for me over the years has been that I can have as many "systems" as I like. I don't have to choose one over the other when "both" is a perfectly fine answer.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2016 at 19:40 UTC as 302nd comment | 1 reply
On article Design, looks and desire: Olympus does it again (391 comments in total)

I bought a silver Nikon DF because it had only what I needed and was full frame. I have other cameras for function, but the DF is a blast to take out for the fun stuff. The Oly E-P5 is the same way for me but was replaced by the A6000, which does most everything well. I love the look of this one, too, just don't know if there is a hole in my bag for it.

I'm lucky to have seen most of the originals these new cameras are sorta based on, and lucky enough to be able to afford both a work bag and a fun bag of kit.

Great article. Pieces like this keep me coming back to dpreview, even after the Amazon tie-in tainted the actual reviews (IMHO).

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 22:32 UTC as 53rd comment
On article Nikon announces Coolpix AW130 and S33 rugged compacts (32 comments in total)

Don't overthink this camera, it is what it is! I have the AW100, took it to the theme parks here in Florida, got great SNAPS with no worries! My sons are playing in the pool, and I throw it in after them. They get priceless SNAPS. I paid $150 for it on closeout at Office Depot, and it has been worth every penny. Low expectations are very easily satisfied. I think it does exactly what it was intended to do, but then I'm not Jacques Cousteau.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2015 at 00:46 UTC as 1st comment

Really nice, but I can put a 35 or a 50 on my A6000 and save enough to pay for the trip to go someplace spectacular and shoot. I have an A7ii, and even it gets left home sometimes in favor of the A6000. I do appreciate the exercise, and hope some of this trickles down to the A7000(?) though...

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2015 at 12:39 UTC as 18th comment | 6 replies
On article Consumer DSLR Camera Roundup (2014) (128 comments in total)

Check this out!

http://www.vieragraphics.com/A58metal.jpg

$22 in parts and 3 minutes and my A58 sports a Sony-sourced metal lens mount. Works perfectly, tested heavily, nice and snug, but not too. Easy upgrade.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2015 at 21:58 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply

The inclusion/exclusion of any one feature wouldn't keep me from buying a camera if it was well spec'd overall. There is always a want list generated by a new model. I really like Sony's design aesthetic. Not bulbous, or with odd design elements for "style." No red triangles in the grip that morph from model to model. A clean, simple, functional device. You want a grip, we'll make one you can add, no problem.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 12:06 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

SRHEdD: I have the RX100 and the WX350. I find I can crop the larger sensor to my desired image and get a better result than using the zoom on the WX350 to compose. Just the diff between the 1" and 1/2.3" sensors I guess. You can find the original RX100 for less than either of these now, AND it shoots RAW. That might be better money spent.

I would add, however, that the WX350 is an awesome little camera. I only went looking for a pocket cam with A, S, M on the mode dial, and the RX100 popped up on craigslist for $250 NIB.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2015 at 11:16 UTC
In reply to:

SRHEdD: I have the RX100 and the WX350. I find I can crop the larger sensor to my desired image and get a better result than using the zoom on the WX350 to compose. Just the diff between the 1" and 1/2.3" sensors I guess. You can find the original RX100 for less than either of these now, AND it shoots RAW. That might be better money spent.

I seldom shoot at the long end of that zoom. I have other cameras for that kind of reach. One of these pocket cameras stays with me in my briefcase for note-related photos and general snaps. In MY use, I can often crop the RX100 images to gain a little more reach and get a better result than the WX350 gave me before I had the RX100. The comment wasn't meant to be taken so literally, but as a practical-use comment in my photo taking situations. Your results may vary.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2015 at 02:46 UTC

I have the RX100 and the WX350. I find I can crop the larger sensor to my desired image and get a better result than using the zoom on the WX350 to compose. Just the diff between the 1" and 1/2.3" sensors I guess. You can find the original RX100 for less than either of these now, AND it shoots RAW. That might be better money spent.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2015 at 01:58 UTC as 69th comment | 5 replies
Total: 62, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »