scott_mcleod

Lives in Australia Australia
Works as a student
Joined on Jun 2, 2007

Comments

Total: 76, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

justmeMN: "DL’s concept and target is users of the D800 series,’ says Inoue"

Huh? That makes no sense to me.

I haven't had a beautiful experience in years. Maybe I ought to buy a Key Mission 360...

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 22:51 UTC
In reply to:

noflashplease: After all of the recent "exoplanet" announcements, which border on unverifiable hoaxes, it's fair to assume that astronomy has dissolved into a meaningless quest for research grants and dubious post-graduate degrees. On the face of it, this looks like junk science mixed with advertising copy. I have my doubts about any ground based optical device of this sort. Moreover, look at the promo photo. Two middle aged, tenured white men with 5 attractive female grad students or adjuncts? That's what it looks like, at least?

It's time to stop funding useless academic departments and pointlessly pedantic research projects.

So Marcy was "in it for the harem" and all his scientific contributions were junk, right?

Sheesh, it's been a long time since I read something as close-minded as this.

As for exoplanets being "unverifiable hoaxes", I am at a loss for words...

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 21:23 UTC
In reply to:

scott_mcleod: I'm sure I'll get reamed for this, but I'm also pretty sure I'm not the only one who wants to know: where are they made? I looked at the images of the lens mounts but I couldn't see any engravings (I guess they were out of the shot)

Thanks for that. I was surprised that the 105/1.4 is made in China and wondered which, if any, other pro lenses were going to be off-shored.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 23:28 UTC

I'm sure I'll get reamed for this, but I'm also pretty sure I'm not the only one who wants to know: where are they made? I looked at the images of the lens mounts but I couldn't see any engravings (I guess they were out of the shot)

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 22:06 UTC as 36th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Tom_A: I still use my film medium format cameras: Fujis and Rolleiflex in 6x4.5,6x6, and 6x9. Even occasionally a Lomo Belair 6x12 with a better Belairgon lens.
It is interesting that this review echoes the film experience in the sense that, yes the resolution can be tremendous, but it's the tonality, for example very subtle skin tones that are truly elevating medium format cameras over smaller sensors/film surfaces.

Indeed! I have a GA645i and a GW690. Scans from those huge negatives are just wonderful to look at - a completely different animal to 35mm, even with the same film.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2016 at 21:59 UTC
In reply to:

ttran88: Will it come with X Trans? I'm hoping it doesn't.

I was about to post the exact same question until I saw yours.

Please let it be Bayer... please...

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 00:30 UTC
On article Canon EOS M5: What you need to know (563 comments in total)

Question for those who have seen the camera *in real life* - many of the photos make the painted parts look a sort of bluish-grey (somewhat reminiscent of the T70 IIRC). Does it look that way to the eye, in natural light, or does it appear a more neutral color?

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2016 at 00:23 UTC as 40th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

dopravopat: "So, about those lenses..."

Please test how the camera performs with the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 and 50-100 f1.8 (via adapter). How they focus in stills mode, if the stated "Image stabilization: Sensor-shift" works and how effective it is. I would really appreciate this, thanks.

How is "5-axis" *digital* IS even possible? I mean, left-right and up-down, plus rotation (which I imagine they count as 3 "axes") but how do you get pitch and yaw stabilization from a fixed sensor? Or am I missing something?

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 10:20 UTC
In reply to:

webber15: Like the metal body on these,,especially when cold...soothes my piles...

I assume you have the ringtone (LOL) set to vibrate?

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 00:10 UTC
In reply to:

Henrik Herranen: "but if your troubled"

My troubled what?

As a non-native speaker of English this kind of trivial mistake mystifies me time and time again. How does it happen? I can understand the confusion of it's/its, because it's genuinely difficult. But how can their/they're/there, you're/your/ur, here/hair/here etc ever be mistaken?

My theory is that only native English speaker can and do make these mistakes. Foreigners learn the words in a different way, and while they do mistakes based on their own language background, I'd be very surprised if a non-native English speaker would make one of these mistakes.

In defense (or defence, take your pick) of native English speakers, there is a tendency among certain types of non-native speakers to use English words and phrases in some excruciatingly obscure fashion, and then proceed browbeat their English-speaking audience for "not knowing" their own language. Often such tirades are supported by online dictionaries and the use of a common Latin root, while conveniently ignoring the fact that English is a West Germanic language, and the antagonist's invariably hails from a different family.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2016 at 00:40 UTC
In reply to:

fireplace33: "Barry Lyndon" is a great film. Watching it is like walking through a series of paintings from the old masters. Slow moving and quite long but intensely enjoyable.

Each set is carefully staged and beautifully shot. That Special lens certainly worked its magic in the low light scenes. Pure romance in the old traditional sense!
I'd definitely recommend it for photographers looking for some tips on composition.

Very true - a gorgeous looking movie.

It also contains some classic Kubric-esque humor which adds to the fun (if you "get" it)

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 23:10 UTC
On article 2016 Roundups: Fixed Prime Lens Cameras (172 comments in total)

The spec line for the Q says it's APS-C but the text says FF...

Link | Posted on May 25, 2016 at 12:14 UTC as 66th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

wildbild: Steve McCurry is interested.

Lol

Link | Posted on May 22, 2016 at 02:13 UTC

Beautiful...

Link | Posted on May 5, 2016 at 22:45 UTC as 20th comment
In reply to:

Henrik Herranen: Assessing skintones by taking a photo of a photo is a bit like a broken pencil - pointless.

The spectral features of a 4-colour print (under artificial light) are vastly different from the spectral densities of real skin. Hence, the results may be quite different.

Real-world example:
- If I take a photo of hot coals with my Canon S90 with white balance set to Incandescent, IR leakage will make the coals appear purple, even close to blue.
- If I take the same photo with my Canon 5D Mark II, the coals are red as they should because this camera has a proper IR filter.
- If I print the 5D2 photo on paper, take a photo of this photo with my S90, then upload it to the web for all to see, it will give a completely incorrect impression of the S90's colour capabilities.

Re: the continuous spectrum source - I would love to see how this looked to various different cameras!

Link | Posted on May 4, 2016 at 23:00 UTC
In reply to:

Cameracist: Still hope for some bigger update for 1st generation a7 cameras :'(

Signed.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2016 at 22:07 UTC
In reply to:

zigi_S: Canon still the best.

No Honda is best!

Err... I mean Chevy!

Umm... forget I said anything...

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2016 at 00:01 UTC
In reply to:

scott_mcleod: So, no AFMA? It's a real shame if that feature is still missing (the 50D was the last XXD body to have it, right?)

My bad - thanks for the correction!

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2016 at 06:45 UTC

So, no AFMA? It's a real shame if that feature is still missing (the 50D was the last XXD body to have it, right?)

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2016 at 06:20 UTC as 55th comment | 4 replies
On article Hands-on with the Fujifilm X70 (263 comments in total)
In reply to:

scott_mcleod: Why would Fuji do this?

- no viewfinder (so you have to hold it at arms' length)
- 1-stop slower lens than the X100
- same generic 28mm FOV as a phone
- no IS...

If it was a couple of hundred $ cheaper and used a standard Bayer sensor then I could almost see the sense in it. Almost.

:(

When I was a teenager I could see a screen held up close. Not any more. But the main point is that having to hold it away from your body greatly increases the risk of shake. Add in the slower lens and you can see where I was going with this.

The 28mm comment was not a bash on phones as such - just that it's one less thing to differentiate it from what everyone already has in their pocket (unlike the X100!) and therefore one fewer selling point in favor of buying a dedicated camera. Also a FOV shared by Ricoh and Nikon (remember the Coolpix A fire-sale prices?)

I probably worded my comment badly due to my intense disappointment at the time... (FWIW I rather the Leica Q had a 35 or 50mm FOV, but that camera would be way out of my price range).

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2016 at 07:26 UTC
Total: 76, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »