GlobalGuyUSA

Lives in United States Los Angeles, United States
Works as a International Trade
Joined on Jun 24, 2007
About me:

My business is marketing international trade, not photography. My hobbies are primarily graphic art and then photography. Take comments with a grain of salt. I'll learn as much from you as I hope to share with others.

Comments

Total: 258, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

66GTO: I like that the cameras can be mounted in angled positions, and not have to be lined up like toy soldiers in a straight line on the wall.

Pretty sure you could just add another bracket on the other side, and it would balance fine even without a connection, by resting on it.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2016 at 06:29 UTC
In reply to:

samfan: The list seems like a random selection of programs that can manipulate color and add some enhancements and effects, with some able to do various kinds of more. Okay, those are things that photographers generally use, I just don't know why these should be PS alternatives then.

Anyway, does anyone know what happened to Pixel? It was a multiplatform program quite on par with PS (during the CS2 era - at least better than GIMP at the time) made by one person. He sold it to someone and I lost track.

Would like to know more as well -- anyone?

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2016 at 05:56 UTC
On article This vibrant hyper-lapse shows off New York in 8K (68 comments in total)
In reply to:

GlobalGuyUSA: Is it REALLY "8K" if its been POSTERIZED due to heavy color saturation?

:-D

P.S. I really like this video, just making joke. (Heavy color saturation can significantly reduce resolution, if it posterizes the nearby colors, merging them together.)

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 07:15 UTC
On article This vibrant hyper-lapse shows off New York in 8K (68 comments in total)

Is it REALLY "8K" if its been POSTERIZED due to heavy color saturation?

:-D

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 07:13 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
On article Tamron files patent for 115mm F1.4 VC lens (65 comments in total)
In reply to:

matthew saville: I'm getting tired of this trend of "Otus-style" lenses that are extremely hefty and rather pricey. (Referring to Nikon's 105mm f/1.4 that weighs in at a whopping 2.17 lbs, I believe)

I'm hoping that Tamron continues to also supply lighter weight and more affordable f/1.8 primes to compete with Nikon's f/1.8 lineup, and IMO, even Sigma's f/1.4 Art lineup.

Its important to remember that Tamron is making f/1.8 lenses & VC-style lenses for everyone. Sigma is making f/1.4 lenses & ART-style lenses for everyone. What they are doing to compete with OVER-PRICED lenses is very helpful to us. Canon/Nikon would charge $3,000 for a prime lens if they could get away with it. Zeiss charges even more.. without AF or VR, no less! haha Tamron & Sigma have a very, very important role to play in keeping prices down even if it saturates the market. This can only help us. Thank god for these choices for those who need them. Bright primes on FX compete with 4/3rds; keeping FX relevant. Its happening now, because cheap lensing technology just now exists.. previously lenses were hand-ground.

Nikon almost finished their f/1.4 lines & f/1.8 line. And they've shown some interesting f/4s (16-35/4 VR; 300/4 VR) and f/5.6s (200-500/5.6 VR), though haven't made a pancake "line" (to compete on size) for some reason. :(

50+MP resolving f/2.8 line must be next.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 23:02 UTC
On article Tamron files patent for 115mm F1.4 VC lens (65 comments in total)
In reply to:

matthew saville: I'm getting tired of this trend of "Otus-style" lenses that are extremely hefty and rather pricey. (Referring to Nikon's 105mm f/1.4 that weighs in at a whopping 2.17 lbs, I believe)

I'm hoping that Tamron continues to also supply lighter weight and more affordable f/1.8 primes to compete with Nikon's f/1.8 lineup, and IMO, even Sigma's f/1.4 Art lineup.

@OP - why? You want to go back to grainy low rez f/2.8 lenses? Oh wait. 100 such lenses already exist. Please take your pick. Its time to finish the f/1.8 and f/1.4 high quality lines.

Nikon and Canon -- and Sigma and Tamron -- will all re-address the f/2.8 line when they are done here. But I am totally on board with your sentiment...

I wish Nikon would make f/4 Prime lenses which are high quality pancake lenses. If Tamron did that, I would love them.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 02:29 UTC
On article Tamron files patent for 115mm F1.4 VC lens (65 comments in total)
In reply to:

TyphoonTW: Two days before the Nikon 105 f1.4 is available? That's such a humongous middle finger from Tamron to Nikon.
I wouldn't like to be the guy who works at Amazon/B&H/Adorama and has to take care of cancelled preorders.

The Tamron f/1.8 VC lenses are BETTER than Nikon's f/1.8 lenses in many respects (not just the VC). They are priced slightly higher, but reflect excellent quality.

I full expect Tamron to make this 115/1.4 VC as a flagship of their latest craftsmanship. This, in turn, may inspire Sigma to finally bring out its 135/1.8 OS, which has been rumored for some time.

These lenses AREN'T easy to make good. But Sigma & Tamron both have the ability to make them. And to make them good. At a lower price than Nikon or Canon. This rumor should be taken seriously.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 02:26 UTC
In reply to:

TN Args: First time I have heard anything described as both sharp and circular. Maybe a saw.

Pizza cutter.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2015 at 08:50 UTC
On article Photo gifts for every budget: 2015 Holiday Gift Guides (20 comments in total)
In reply to:

Franco8: These will also make great Christmas gifts

And lest we forget: KRAMPUS DAY, Dec. 5th!

Not sure the kid'll receive anything on these lists though...

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2015 at 03:51 UTC
In reply to:

Biowizard: As mentioned by others, a bright, golden brass ring should NOT be at the front of any optical system! These guys have #flare, not #flair.

Not to mention, I've never noticed my existing polarisers causing soft focus problems!

Brian

The pathways for light are all using BLACK MATTE. The brass ring is only at angles that cannot direct light into the lens.

If you look closely, the inner part of the filter has a small amount of brass, which is suddenly replaced by the BLACK MATTE, at an angle which would block any flare from the brass.

In other words, you don't have to worry about it at all.

Good note, but better not to make claims which are unproven.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2015 at 23:00 UTC

The biggest losers in Sony buying up the scandal-ridden Toshiba's sensors division will be us -- the consumers. Toshiba was a pressure against Sony getting a monopoly on advancement. You can already see Sony is implementing its sensors in its own cameras first, more than a year before other companies have access to it. It didn't used to be this way -- previously, they gave them to competitors first and only later implemented them in Sony cameras. Nikon, etc, could have had the option to use a Toshiba sensor instead.... but now that option doesn't exist.

I really wish Nikon & Canon had bought Toshiba's sensor business, instead of Sony. It doesn't seem that this is good for consumers. Especially now that Samsung is exiting the camera market, there will be no Samsung surprise. Instead, we're going to feel a Sony monopoly.

Right now, Sony is incredibly innovative, though. So let's see if that holds up. No criticism unless they drop the ball. But they have a responsibility now.

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2015 at 04:01 UTC as 25th comment | 12 replies
In reply to:

G1Houston: Is "Income" the same as profit? Technically Profit = income - expenditure.

What about "revenue"?

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2015 at 03:57 UTC
On article Nikon D810 firmware C 1.10 now available (62 comments in total)

I didn't notice any problem with the D810, except for sometimes I wasn't sure if I had correctly pressed the shutter during movie mode when trying to take a still. Good to know this will smooth that out!

Fantastic camera. Can't wait to see what a D900 brings, given that the D810 is such a pleasure to use!

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2015 at 03:56 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

Schweikert: No need to bag on PW. I am still using my many PW's after 15 years with no issues for studio lighting and strobist setups too. That's quality electronics in my book.

"No need to bag on PW. I am still using my many PW's after 15 years with no issues for studio lighting and strobist setups too. That's quality electronics in my book."

Correction -- that is quality........ 15 years ago. And their technology seems to feel the same as 10 years ago, while being significantly overpriced. I wouldn't mind it if they were at the cutting edge of technology AND offered a more robust build with reliability. But if all you have to offer over the competitor is a reliable build, yet fall behind elsewhere (as they did), it doesn't make sense, when you can get competition that last years for a fraction of the cost (with more than enough left over for spares). This is supposed to be a high-tech option, so its not easy to justify that resting on the brand name and build quality is enough. People who use these things want improved capabilities. And a new generation of photographers want even more.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2015 at 07:03 UTC
In reply to:

weisman: Am I the only one who thinks that a flash on top of a transceiver on top of a camera is a tenuous stack of gear with a cantilever load that's a recipe for failure?
Also, the AF assist beam from the flash is going to move up significantly and may not sit over the camera's AF points correctly. I see this PW unit does not have its own AF assist beam to offset that problem.

Hm. Yes, you might be the only one. Unless you use only the largest flashes, you can easily put a small to mid-sized one on there without any issue whatsoever (I'm assuming PocketWizard won't use plastic screws), and its also good for attaching LED lighting and/or AUDIO, which may be desirable if using video occasionally, moving around, filling, note-taking, etc. The key point is that having the option = good. Not bad.

And I feel doubtful the problem you mentioned is really a problem -- I haven't measured the effect, but the angle of the AF assist beam from a Flash has always been just that, angled. So the "AF points" issue you're theorizing has always been relative to distance. Stacking in this manner is no different than standing one or two feet CLOSER to the object. Most flashes don't suddenly stop working if you step one or two feet forward or backwards. Well, possibly at very close macro distances, maybe?

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2015 at 06:56 UTC
In reply to:

bilmenot: Guys take cover, grandpa is coming !!!
I don't want to use the word, but this beast looks absolutely ugly to me, and the top LCD too small, I expected to see a matrix display, and the articulating screen looks like the beast is in the middle of transformation to something more lethal, or a hidden drone take to flight !!
I hope this is still an early prototype, or a nightmare of mine, I hope to see something as pretty or more pretty than the K3, I don't want a 67, or the shot was taken with a non Pentax lens with heavy distortion ??
I still want a FF, but my wallet is not as swollen as this one, I may take the next bus...

I don't see anything wrong with it from the pics. This is just a mockup anyway.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2015 at 06:40 UTC
In reply to:

Dirk Nuary: What is the term of 'fast' here? It's manual lens isn't it? Of course can't do fast auto focus. And its name is SPEEDmaster, what is this?

"Fast" is referring to the SHUTTER SPEED. Because glass that opens wider (say, f/1.2 [fast] vs. f/8 [slow]) is able to use faster shutter speed times, we say that its "fast." "Slow" glass requires longer shutter speed times to get the same exposure.

The TIME needed to achieve an exposure varies, depending on how wide open you can get a lens. f/0.95 typically being the fastest you're likely to ever see/own. And anything above f/4 generally being considered "slow" because of the longer exposure times needed. (VR helps offset camera shake, but cannot freeze movement, so even a lens with VR at f/4 is still not "faster" than an f/0.95 lens).

f/3.5 and f/4 is generally considered "average" speed (any people with fast glass often stop-down to these "speeds" because they are perfectly fine in normal use and can sharpen the lens when stopped down a bit). f/2.8 is the beginning of fast. f/2 & f/1.8 are fast. f/1.4 and f/1.2 are "very fast". f/5.6 starts to be "slow" & f/8 to f/11 is.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2015 at 05:26 UTC
In reply to:

xiao fei: "stupendously large"
They've got a point. While bigger is certainly inconvenient, after a certain point it makes you feel like a badass.

This is a tripod lens. That's all there is to it.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2015 at 05:17 UTC
In reply to:

Carerra: This is crazy, who would buy this, the weight would be hell, the aperture would be probably terrible at 1.4, you have that gorgeous Nikon 300 F4 compared to this, The Velvet is already peeling off in picture 2

There is no reasoning which can justify bashing innovation.

The company should be lauded for its efforts, not ridiculed.

Let's see the final product, and let each ACTUAL buyer be the judge of the value....

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2015 at 05:16 UTC
In reply to:

Gabriele Sartori: Who would give $3000 to this company?

The company is reliable and produces decent glass. Its manual, not AF, but its decent. The price is for the R&D for an f/1.4 @ 135. You can go SONY if you want a 135 f/1.8 Zeiss.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2015 at 05:14 UTC
Total: 258, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »