Paulo Cortez

Joined on Sep 20, 2018

Comments

Total: 54, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

JasonTheBirder: More plastic for the landfill...

If you do some shopping at a supermarket, you definitely bring a lot more plastic with you than the used to produce this figure and, yes, that eventually ends up in the landfill! Although I think that too much plastic is used in toys, and that a lot of that plastic ends up in landfills, I don't think this is really a toy, and I can't imagine people easily throwing away an action figure with their faces

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2022 at 10:10 UTC
In reply to:

FOTOMASSIMO: My first digital camera!

My first digital was the Sony DSC-P10: great little camera!

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2022 at 20:52 UTC
In reply to:

Keith Cooper: I've got one here to test (RF mount version) and have some notes in the 3rd party lens forum
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66041736

It's still with me, so if anyone has any specific questions, let me know?

Thank you very much! Very enlightening video on the potential of this lens and ways to get the desired results with this type of lenses

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2022 at 22:31 UTC

Inflation starts to show-up...a Samyang 50mm for $750!!! If it was still a f1.2...

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2021 at 19:06 UTC as 25th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Samuel Lucifer: Nice, but how do you put a filter on it?
Or is that just a regular lens hood?

The (apparently) metal hood should be detachable, like the one from the Carl Zeiss 35mm f2.8 FE...and it will likely use a filter with a very small diameter

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2021 at 18:17 UTC
In reply to:

mahonj: Tamron used to have a 135 f2.5 Adaptall 2 lens.
Back in 1979
Nice article here:
http://www.adaptall-2.com/history/Tamron_History.html

I'm sure this will be sharper, but that is what 42 years of progress will do for you.
Nice to see an affordable lens.
Nice shot of the flies getting jiggy.

I own a Takumar (Pentax) 135mm f2.5 with only 90mm and 470g! I suppose these larger dimensions aim to ensure a better performance on the edges/corners of the image

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2021 at 10:11 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: Why does it seem like modern manual lenses are always so huge and heavy? This is 139mm long and 879g

In the peak manual focus SLR era, multiple brands had sub 400g 135mm f2.8 lenses that were well under 100mm long. Sure this is a 1/3 stop faster, but I'd rather save 400g (a full pound) of weight vs 1/3 a stop.

I own a Takumar (Pentax) 135mm f2.5 with 90mm and 470g! I suppose these larger dimensions aim to ensure a better performance on the edges/corners of the image. A friend of mine uses newer full-frame lenses (Sigma Art e.g.) with the Hasselblad X1D and they perform quite well, even in the corners, as they are clearly oversized

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2021 at 10:09 UTC
In reply to:

Jeff Greenberg: -----
is this national park or wildlife refuge?
was permission obtained in advance?
was wildlife disturbed?
(rare birds nest within some waterfalls)
some of us bloody hope DPR doesn't promote
violators of drone laws-ethics seeking clicks-thrills...

@Carlos U: as long as some of that money keeps flowing into Maduro's and buddies' pockets, things won't change. Arco Minero is a territory of destruction and desolation the size of Cuba or Portugal...and many of these ores are shipped to China and the USA

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2021 at 10:06 UTC
On article Venus Laowa 'Argus' 33mm F0.95 CF APO sample gallery (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

mcantsin: With all due respect, but the f0.95 aperture on this lens (and competing 7Artisans, TTArtisan etc. lenses) is a marketing gimmick. More respectable manufacturers wouldn't allow these lenses to be opened more than f1.4.

A lens is also an art instrument and the visual effects resulting from larger apertures have the potential to overcome e.g. loss of sharpness or chromatic aberrations. What's more, one can also learn to determine which aperture is most appropriate for the light conditions. Finally, no one is obliged to use it completely open and what one should consider in the end is the value for money.
P.S. BTW was expecting worse performance when fully opened - looks better than the Fujifilm XF 50mm F1.0 R WR

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2021 at 14:05 UTC
On article Fujifilm XF 50mm F1.0 R WR field review (306 comments in total)
In reply to:

toomix: hm, it looks like bad copy of this lens, I have seen sharper (actually quite sharp) images from it on the f1.0. QC is something fuji needs to work on

@DuxX thanks for the comment to what I wrote. My definition of sharpness is perhaps stricter than yours because it involves resolution and acutance. Most of these lenses that you refer to, when fully open, cannot reach high values in both, with most of them standing out in terms of resolution. This Fuji f/1.0 is weak especially in terms of resolution, despite acceptable IMHO in terms of acutance, although I still think that there are sample issues. By the way, very good performance of this lens in terms of color, with good saturation and few chromatic aberrations (maybe the lighting conditions weren't very demanding)!

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2021 at 22:58 UTC
On article Fujifilm XF 50mm F1.0 R WR field review (306 comments in total)
In reply to:

toomix: hm, it looks like bad copy of this lens, I have seen sharper (actually quite sharp) images from it on the f1.0. QC is something fuji needs to work on

I agree. Nobody expects sharp images at f/1, but even those taken at f/2.8 don't seem sharp enough to me. And I have a very good impression of Fuji lenses

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2021 at 18:46 UTC

This must have been a lot of hard work, with tons of patience in the mix. Some may question the aesthetic quality of the final product, as all art expression is subject to criticism, but kudos to Edd Carr and Tycho Jones!

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2021 at 12:07 UTC as 8th comment

I deeply admire DPR's continuous efforts to motivate people to begin or continue shooting with film, even though your designation refers to "digital". Kudos to you!

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2021 at 15:40 UTC as 21st comment
On article DPReview TV: Our favorite $1000 camera kits (286 comments in total)

Canon EOS Rebel T7 DSLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II and Accessory Kit $449 (B&H)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM $125 (B&H), great for portraits
Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM $299 (B&H), great for landscapes
Both lenses with STM that allows near-silent focusing during video recording.
All new for $873

Alternative: Canon EOS Rebel T7 DSLR Camera with 18-55mm and 75-300mm Lenses $549 (B&H)
Total (with 50mm and 10-18mm) = $973

Not as technologically advanced as a mirrorless or stylish as a Fuji but small and light ... and it does the job!

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2021 at 17:54 UTC as 56th comment | 6 replies
On article DPReview TV: Our favorite $1000 camera kits (286 comments in total)

Ok, Nikon D3500 + Nikkor AF-P 18-55mm + Nikkor AF-P 70-300mm $696.95 at B&H

for portrait - Nikkor AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8G $196.95 (B&H) = total $893.90

for landscape - Nikkor 10-20mm AF-P f/4.5-5.6G VR $306.95 (B&H) = $1003.90

In second hand, it's possible to buy all these lenses and also change the 70-300mm for the VR version easily under $1000

Definitely, small and light outfit!

With same patience, also possible to buy a 2nd hand Nikon D800 + Nikkor 24-120 f/4 for under $1000

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2021 at 16:03 UTC as 74th comment | 1 reply
On article Check out that lens: Zeiss ZX1 studio scene uploaded (158 comments in total)

At least, the ZX1 has the sharpest lens in the group, with a big difference! Just check the corners e.g.! The sensor is also quite decent.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2020 at 16:58 UTC as 36th comment
On photo Green Butterfly With Green Leaves in the Green Challenge challenge (24 comments in total)
In reply to:

David1961: All tasad is doing in the thread link posted below is provide me with proof confirming his stupidity, dishonesty and incompetence because in that thread the host declared the winner a valid entry and clearly explained why.
Tasad and Paulo should read and understand the clear rules properly before making complete fools of themselves posting what I see as pure unadulterated garbage :-)

@David1961 your relationship with this “Green Butterfly With Green Leaves” reaches a degree of intensity difficult to understand...
Regarding the picture, I do not question the award but IMHO this mere greenish dullness it's just a butterfly resting on leaves with an intense green "filter" to apparently meet the requirements of the contest...but tastes should not be discussed.
By the way, I'm obviously not an English native speaker but "unadulterated" is useless after "pure", i.e. a pleonasm

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2020 at 22:44 UTC
On photo Green Butterfly With Green Leaves in the Green Challenge challenge (24 comments in total)
In reply to:

David1961: All tasad is doing in the thread link posted below is provide me with proof confirming his stupidity, dishonesty and incompetence because in that thread the host declared the winner a valid entry and clearly explained why.
Tasad and Paulo should read and understand the clear rules properly before making complete fools of themselves posting what I see as pure unadulterated garbage :-)

Dear David,
There is no need to be impolite, calling people stupid, just because you disagree with the comments made regarding the photo.
When I first saw it, I couldn't help but notice how green it was, by a poor white balance and/or by post-processing, whatever.
So, I decided to make some adjustments ONLY to the Color Balance with PS (you can try it also!), resulting in the image that you can see in the link below.
Anyway, and as the vast majority of the images aren't transferred from the card to the galleries here at DPR without undergoing some post-processing, I DID NOT QUESTION THE AWARD ATTRIBUTION in any way, it was a mere observation of something that seemed very obvious to me.
Take care!
P.S. You meant “adulterated garbage”?

Color Balance with Photoshop
Color levels:
Mid tones +51, -8, +100
Shadows -14, -9, +5
Highlights +31, 0, +25
Preserve Luminosity (checked)

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2020 at 18:05 UTC
On photo Green Butterfly With Green Leaves in the Green Challenge challenge (24 comments in total)
In reply to:

Paulo Cortez: Image very altered to turn green a butterfly that does not have a single grain of green pigment on its wings. Just save the image and adjust the Color Balance in Photoshop and you will see the true colors of the butterfly. Sorry but I couldn't pass up this one

@G_Gordon_ MacDonald sorry but I don't think I'm wrong. Corrected Color Balance at Photoshop: https://photos.app.goo.gl/5G1D4D9hx74d6v1K6

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2020 at 18:32 UTC
On photo Green Butterfly With Green Leaves in the Green Challenge challenge (24 comments in total)

Image very altered to turn green a butterfly that does not have a single grain of green pigment on its wings. Just save the image and adjust the Color Balance in Photoshop and you will see the true colors of the butterfly. Sorry but I couldn't pass up this one

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2020 at 22:57 UTC as 4th comment | 9 replies
Total: 54, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »