Robert Newman

Lives in United States Dallas, TX, United States
Works as a Technology Consultant
Joined on Dec 15, 2004

Comments

Total: 30, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Getty Images asks court to throw out $1B lawsuit (97 comments in total)

It seems to me that if Getty charged a small administrative fee for the images that was substantially lower than other images not in the public domain, then they may have a case. It does not sound like this is what Getty's subsidiary did.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2016 at 21:37 UTC as 33rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

rjalvarez1957: I have a Nikon F2 which appears to have a cloth shutter.

Actually the titanium shutter did look like metal with an embossed pattern on it. It would be hard to mistake it for cloth.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 22:15 UTC

My father bought me a Nikon F in 1960. Mine had the 5.8 cm f1.4, 50mm lens and a titanium shutter and no metering prism. It was a great camera that served me for another 10 years, but lacked a well designed exposure metering system. Nikon kluged the meter into the Ftn version, but it was always clunky to use. When the Canon F1 came out, I opted for their system. I eventually went back to Nikon ending up with a Nikormat, FM, FM2n, and an F100, but went back to Canon which clearly had a better digital offering at the time. The newer Nikons with Sony sensors (D5, D810, and D750) are all excellent, but my investment in Canon glass keeps me upgrading within their product line. Maybe I will go back to Nikon one day, but I am getting to old to jump ship again.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 22:12 UTC as 34th comment
In reply to:

Elliot H: where's the 4x5 sensor &
while you're at it the 8X10

I don't think that anyone but NASA would need sensors that big, but it would be nice to see full coverage 4.5x6, 6x6, and 6x7 sensors so that some of those vintage lenses could be used again to their full potential.

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2016 at 22:01 UTC
On article Massive $33,500 2450mm f/8 NASA lens surfaces on eBay (235 comments in total)
In reply to:

Robert Newman: This is roughly a 12.6 inch telescope. A used Celestron 14" Schmidt-Cassegrain without mount can be had for roughly $6K. While an f11 optic, it has considerably more light-gathering capability (23%) than the $33 f8 lens featured and is a fraction of the cost. As for the $180K used Canon telephoto, you can buy a large refractor scope tube assembly of similar size and f-ratio optic for $25K or so although you would have to wait for the right deal (i.e., no mount).

random78 is a little too simplistic. Almost all camera lenses are well-corrected refractor telescopes. A high quality refractor meant for astronomy is essentially the same kind of optic with a high quality triplet primary. Few long lenses benefit from 18-element designs unless they are zooms. High quality astronomical refractors such as those made by Takahashi are every bit as good as anything Canon or Nikon make, both optically and mechanically. Schmidt-Cassigrain designs are well-corrected too, but are designed for viewing the main object near the center of the field. They make good camera lenses, but are lower in contrast than an equivalent refractor. The Hubble Telescope is a Ritchey-Chretien design which does an excellent job of correcting for a variety of aberrations and other problems. You can find these for sale on Astromart occasionally. Most large optical telescopes use the Ritchey-Chretien design.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2015 at 07:01 UTC
On article Massive $33,500 2450mm f/8 NASA lens surfaces on eBay (235 comments in total)

This is roughly a 12.6 inch telescope. A used Celestron 14" Schmidt-Cassegrain without mount can be had for roughly $6K. While an f11 optic, it has considerably more light-gathering capability (23%) than the $33 f8 lens featured and is a fraction of the cost. As for the $180K used Canon telephoto, you can buy a large refractor scope tube assembly of similar size and f-ratio optic for $25K or so although you would have to wait for the right deal (i.e., no mount).

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 23:41 UTC as 82nd comment | 4 replies

I am sure some well-heeled pro or advanced amateur might benefit from this review, but spending $250-400 on a ball head makes no sense to me. I picked up my two Manfrotto ball heads on Craigslist and eBay for fraction of what these cost. I rarely use a ball head anyway unless I am traveling very light. I prefer my 3-axis Manfrotto and Gitzo heads which also cost less than the reviewed balls.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2015 at 19:57 UTC as 43rd comment | 1 reply

I have my older EyeFi card set up to transfer JPEG files, but even that is relatively slow. I find I have to wait about 10 seconds for a 6-10 Mbyte image to transfer to my i7 laptop. Bursts of files take forever to show up. For studio work this is ok, but for anything else, it just uses a lot of battery power. RAW images for my Canon 5D Mark 3 are about 22-25 MBytes, more than twice as large as the JPG images and I would expect the transfer times to be at least twice as long.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2015 at 20:16 UTC as 22nd comment | 1 reply
On article Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path (1622 comments in total)
In reply to:

Carlos Taylhardat: I wonder when we will have a full frame medium format camera or 8X10 sensor's with hundred of thousands of megapixel's?

I think 80 Mpixel sensors are not very far in the future. Kodak and Sony are capable of 50 Mpixel sensors now for far less than "hundreds of thousands of dollars". 80 Mp sensors could be available in a year or two in cameras that cost less than $8K. Just look what is going on in TV resolution with 4K sets making real inroads and 8K sets technically possible if there were a demand.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 18:10 UTC

For $150 you have many other options including a used Minolta Flash Meter IV (roughly $60 on eBay) which, while the size of a cellphone itself, has many other features and is more robust and less likely to get broken. This is all largely academic, however, since I have never seen a cellphone photographer who bothered to meter. Even pro photographers seldom use a separate meter these days due to the sophistication of the built-in metering systems of their cameras.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2014 at 16:39 UTC as 3rd comment | 2 replies
On article Sony debuts 21MP stacked CMOS sensor for smartphones (94 comments in total)
In reply to:

kwa_photo: I'll say this. Everyone just think about where we were with sensors 5-7 years ago. FF, APS-C, p&s, cell phone, etc. Now look at today. Back then, many would have not thought a 1" sensor could do what it does today. Nor would many have thought of a camera phone being anything that could compete with a "larger" p&s sensor. Yet, here we are.

In 5-7 more years, I'd be willing to bet that high end camera phone sensors will be producing IQ with very good resolution up to ISO 1600 and 3200. We'll see 1" sensors performing at levels of most APS-C (think a6000, XT1) of today and APS-C going beyond what standard FF does today. 4/3 will also progress. FF? Watch out. Look at that Sony A7S. I think ISO 56,000 will be a walk in the park for most.

PDAF and best AF tech today will also look pretty slow as well. It all changes, always does. Sit back and enjoy the ride :-) Of course, I could be completely wrong too LOL!

Keep it civil. There is nothing wrong with his kwa_photo's comment. No need to respond like you know everything already. I too think the progress has been pretty amazing. I have been doing photography in a serious way since I was 12 years old - 56 years ago and the pace of change in the digital age has been like going to warp speed. Everything is improving by leaps and bounds and the available resources for learning about photography today are equally astounding. Prices have gone through the roof, of course, but I guess people buy these products or the manufacturers would not make them.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 00:26 UTC
In reply to:

Jogger: A fullframe Fuji X would be a Leica killer.

These are two completely different markets. While the performance of the new Corvette is excellent, it simply lacks the exclusive image of Ferrari or Porsche which can charge enormous amounts for their exotics like the La Ferrari ($1.2M) or the Porsche 918 ($850K). Ferrari and Porsche are about projecting your personal image through the association with the brand. Historically, Corvette has been about an affordable American made sports car. I am not sure what any of this has to do with cameras.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 15:17 UTC
On article ACDSee Pro 8 and ACDSee 18 announced (53 comments in total)

I have been very impressed with some of the features in ACDSEE Pro compared to Photoshop CC and Lightroom. The latter Adobe products may be more capable, but ACDSEE seems to implement much simpler and more intuitive ways to do things than Adobe. Their rotation tool is a good example. I also like their crop tool and other features in Edit mode. I have not yet tried this latest version, but I am headed that way now.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 11:59 UTC as 20th comment

With all due respect to Mr. Akagi, he hardly said anything that was not obvious to anyone noddingly familiar with the digital camera market for prosumers and professionals.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 18:55 UTC as 78th comment
On article Rare Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM goes on sale in UK (218 comments in total)

For the reported $80K purchase price in the 1990s you could have purchased a hell of telescope with even better optics. It would not have been autofocus, but something like this is not exactly a point and shoot piece of hardware.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2014 at 18:21 UTC as 65th comment | 5 replies

I wish Mamiya would introduce one of these for the RZ67. $15K is a lot of money for a back, but still cheaper than buying a whole new system including lenses. Hats off to Hasselblad for recognizing this latent market.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2014 at 20:49 UTC as 33rd comment | 1 reply
On article Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM review (592 comments in total)

50mm is a focal length that most professional photographers seldom use. Regardless of its optical merits, it is just not something I would ever consider buying especially at the price point at which it is being introduced.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 00:10 UTC as 88th comment | 4 replies
On article Camera from NASA's moon missions sold at auction (104 comments in total)

While touring the LBJ Space Center in Houston several years ago with my young children, I perched my 10-year old son up on a ledge to get a better view of the Moon Rover on display including a NASA modified Hasselblad like the one mentioned on a short hinged arm. When we got ready to move on to another exhibit, I started to pick my son up and put him at floor level. I did not notice that he had braced himself with a foot on the metal arm holding the Hasselblad. A little push from his leg sent the camera crashing into the Moon Rover with a loud thud. We quickly moved on before some NASA employee could detain us. I don't think anything was broken, but we could have easily destroyed a very expensive artifact of the lunar missions.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2014 at 18:51 UTC as 34th comment | 4 replies
Total: 30, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »