StevenN

Lives in United States United States
Has a website at None
Joined on Jan 18, 2000

Comments

Total: 65, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »

I'll be in the space station.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2017 at 19:49 UTC as 13th comment

I'm in for 0.045%.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 14:38 UTC as 29th comment

Hmmm ... that's a lot of noise. ☠

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2017 at 17:21 UTC as 59th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

neatpicture: finally, pop up flash is gone like most serious cameras. About time. Seriously, if you are down to your pop up, might as well get the shot with your phone and leave the camera in the bag.

@armandino: "@StevenN so now why would you use a popup flash rather than a real flash with far more options if you foresee the need of a flash? Pop-up is like the photographic duck tape. It can get the job done... sometimes. It cannot or even ruins the picture most of the times. Just use the real tool for the real deal. There are reason for which you do not see them in most serious cameras."

Because sometimes I like to travel light. Also, there are many instances where I do not need a fill flash. So I'd rather not have to connect and disconnect my heavy SB800 all the time. I do not "ruin" my photos with a pop-up fill flash.

"Just use the real tool for the real deal."??? Are you serious? If I can get the job done with the "fake" tool, which I will have with me all the time, does not add any noticeable weight to my camera, I will not forget and leave it at home, and I can get good, balanced shots with it, why not use the built-in flash?

I am very happy with my pop-up's results.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2017 at 19:39 UTC
In reply to:

neatpicture: finally, pop up flash is gone like most serious cameras. About time. Seriously, if you are down to your pop up, might as well get the shot with your phone and leave the camera in the bag.

armandino: "@StevenN please show us these fantastic images :-)"

Sorry, I never said "fantastic images." I said "beautiful, balanced photos."

Normally, I don't respond to such badgering, but I'll show you a couple of examples. I shoot a lot of outdoor car shows, where people are looking at engines under a car's hood (bonnet). Their faces are almost always in shadow. If I were to expose for the faces, the background would be blown out beyond repair. That's why it's handy to have a built-in fill flash:

http://www.stevennanton.com/Work-photos/i-sMTVBxZ/A
http://www.stevennanton.com/Work-photos/i-RdHd9Dv/A

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2017 at 16:14 UTC
In reply to:

neatpicture: finally, pop up flash is gone like most serious cameras. About time. Seriously, if you are down to your pop up, might as well get the shot with your phone and leave the camera in the bag.

@armandino -- Your arguments are ludicrous. Who said built-in flashes give bad fill? If you don't know what you're doing they might. But I have gotten many beautiful, balanced photos using the pop up flash on my D750 ... under circumstances where I would not have been able to get a decent exposure without it. Does that mean I don't "know how to use light?" On the contrary, I used the fill because I do know how to use light! 📸

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 03:26 UTC
In reply to:

neatpicture: finally, pop up flash is gone like most serious cameras. About time. Seriously, if you are down to your pop up, might as well get the shot with your phone and leave the camera in the bag.

Sorry, I love the built-in flash on my D750. Instant fill light, whenever you need it.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2017 at 20:48 UTC

I use the Lightroom desktop version (6.8). Does this update affect me, or just CC users?

-------------
Nevermind, apparently it does. Version 6.12 is available.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 16:23 UTC as 4th comment | 2 replies

It says on YouTube that the video is faked.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 14:49 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies
On article Fujifilm X-A3 Review (238 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ben Herrmann: Bingo! Just what I discovered and wrote about after getting the X-A3. I'm a RAW shooter only and in the end, regardless of the issues I discovered (slow and difficulty AF in very low light situations, a 1st generation horrible touch screen, and the inability to view the LCD in any type of bright conditions - whether in sunny or bright cloudy scenarios) I was still very much impressed with the superb IQ I've gotten from mine.

I only hope (yet doubt) that Fuji can release FW updates to correct any of this as there is only so much a FW update can do.

The IQ and DR (well, at least in RAW as I never shoot in JPG) were superb - so this baby is stayin' in my vast collection of goodies.

But yes, when you want to compare (overall) against its various competitors, there's lots to choose from. My entry level Micro 43 cameras blow this X-A3 away with regards to AF speed and touchscreen capabilities.

But "Ah luv's Fuji in general," so it's stayin put!

Ben Herrmann: "... the inability to view the LCD in any type of bright conditions - whether in sunny or bright cloudy scenarios) ."

This may not be true. On my X-A1, if I press and hold the "Q" button, it about doubles the brightness of the LCD screen, making it viewable in bright sunlight. I don't know if they carried this feature over to the X-A3, but you should check.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2017 at 17:43 UTC
On article Mosh pits and sunsets: Shooting with the Panasonic GX85 (141 comments in total)
In reply to:

photomedium: I am sorry but the m43 proves once more to be the little engine that couldn't.
The pics have that 'compressed' signature look of 'not enough light up in here' and overly saturated colors.
I don't remember the last time I have seen a m34 sample set from DPR that didn't have a bunch of low light shots of rock band gig or bonfire or whatever. It almost seems they what to prove the point that m43 doesnt cut it . I'd rather really use a 1' over this. Really apsc is the minimum for low light situations.

Photomedium -- The woman is walking on concrete, not cement. Cement is a powder.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 15:48 UTC
In reply to:

Lensmate: The use of a two camera/tripod setup works well for wide and zoom shots. Double the fun! [and images]
https://www.flickr.com/photos/photosauraus_rex/11861750844/in/datetaken/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/photosauraus_rex/11861743224/in/datetaken/
or long single zoom
https://www.flickr.com/photos/photosauraus_rex/19598821153/in/datetaken/

Manually focus on the first display that goes up, and you can keep your lens set that way for the rest of your shots.

Use manual exposure, too. I use F11 or F16, shutter set at bulb, and watch the display on your screen. Two to five seconds usually does the trick, depending upon how many fireworks bursts you want to capture.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2017 at 23:00 UTC

I learned the hard way not to get too close to the action. Not only didn't I have any spectators, buildings or other objects in the photo to reference my location, burning embers where dropping all around me! So I got a bunch of colorful blasts that were way too high in the sky and could've been taken anywhere.

Btw, mirrorless cameras are way better to use for fireworks.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2017 at 22:56 UTC as 9th comment
On article Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 sample gallery (180 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jun2: It's good lens for $300, not $600. Sigma 19 mm f/2.8 E-amount costs $200. They are more less the same after adjusting to cropping factors

I have the Sigma 19mm and 30mm, both in m4/3 mounts. Got them both for $99 each on sale at B&H. For the money, they are very good lenses. And with the IBIS on my GX85, they work quite well.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 16:11 UTC
On article Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 sample gallery (180 comments in total)
In reply to:

StevenN: Yes, this is a very nice lens, but I just am having trouble parting with 600 bucks for a m/43 prime.

Roger Engelken -- I'm almost willing to bet you're not British. They have more class than you.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2017 at 15:08 UTC
On article Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 sample gallery (180 comments in total)

Yes, this is a very nice lens, but I just am having trouble parting with 600 bucks for a m/43 prime.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 14:37 UTC as 36th comment | 11 replies
On article The DJI Spark is a $500 HD mini drone (96 comments in total)
In reply to:

privater: So this 1st generation of Spark is 300g, almost meet the FAA drone registration lower bar: 250g, maybe next generation will bypass the regulation.

Hobbyists -- who I presume will purchase this quadcopter -- do not have to register their drones any more.
http://fortune.com/2017/05/19/drone-faa-registration-appeals-hobbyist/

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 23:21 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (808 comments in total)

I still have my Olympus XA, complete with case, and my Olympus Stylus. Both are in near-mint condition. I always had one of them with me wherever I went. Today, that task falls to my Panasonic GM5.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 14:50 UTC as 345th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

white shadow: The Lumix GX850 is a useful little interchangeable lens Micro4/3 camera. What I didn' t like about this upgraded model is the use of a MicroSD card instead of the regular SD card. Changing cards is so much more difficult especially for not loosing it or dropping it without realising it. The second is the kit lens now comes with a plastic mount instead of metal as was used in the GF8. This is something a lot of buyers are unaware of.

Other than that the lack of an EVF is not an issue. It is better to keep the cost and bulk down. In fact the selfie flip-up screen as in the GF8 is more useful for waist or low level shooting. This help the photographer more.

Tommi K1 -- I'm sure every one here knows what I'm talking about. The lens flange that attaches to the flange on the camera's body is more durable when it is made of metal. I'm not talking about the internal parts of a lens, I'm talking about the outside part that couples to the camera's body. Plastic flanges are more likely to break than metal ones. When I say "mount," I'm referring to the flange or bayonet that mounts the lens to the camera body.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2017 at 15:14 UTC
In reply to:

white shadow: The Lumix GX850 is a useful little interchangeable lens Micro4/3 camera. What I didn' t like about this upgraded model is the use of a MicroSD card instead of the regular SD card. Changing cards is so much more difficult especially for not loosing it or dropping it without realising it. The second is the kit lens now comes with a plastic mount instead of metal as was used in the GF8. This is something a lot of buyers are unaware of.

Other than that the lack of an EVF is not an issue. It is better to keep the cost and bulk down. In fact the selfie flip-up screen as in the GF8 is more useful for waist or low level shooting. This help the photographer more.

White Shadow: When I purchased my GX85 back in December, its 12-32mm kit lens also came with a plastic mount. Since I am more likely to change lenses on my GX85 than on my GM5, I took the 12-32mm lens (with a metal mount) that came on my GM5 and put it on my GX85, and vice versa.

I don't think Panasonic should cheapen its products like that -- especially since it originally was available with a metal mount.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2017 at 21:29 UTC
Total: 65, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »