Lives in Indonesia Bali, Indonesia
Works as a Indoor, Outdoor Photographer
Joined on Mar 21, 2012


Total: 127, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

LukeDuciel: Do not buy WD My Passport portable HD. Their drive circuit boards are prone to fail and, because of the design, very hard to fix.

Usual USB HD boxes use a separate circuit board to adapt USB port to the standard SATA port on hard drive itself. When the circuit fails, you can still save the drive by connecting to the hard drive via SATA directly.

Western Digital has this brilliant idea to integrate USB driving circuit and SATA port circuit. So when you open the plastic shell of My Passport drive, you see a USB port directly on the drive. When the circuit fails or even the USB port itself wears out (bad soldering etc.), your data is practically gone, even if the drive itself is healthy and strong.

It is not a problem if WD can make their circuit and port durable in use. But this is not the case, at least for me. I already have 3 failed WD My Passport in hands (all 1TB model), among which I could only rescue data from the one with a badly soldered USB port.

Maybe you should stop dropping the drives in your bag with the cable plugged in ;)

There were also many posts about the vulnerability of the older MyBook USB connection, but I never had a problem (currently have 3 installed here..)

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2016 at 07:41 UTC
In reply to:

fatdeeman: What about the Canon Powershot G3? That was an awesome camera. More fully realised than the G2 and the subsequent G5 barely managed to make better on it whatsoever.

Got a G3 after the DC260. Fact is, my DC260 still takes the same photo's but my G3 has very strange colors through the image, it seems like the Canon sensor has degraded over time..

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

Photoman: Would you believe I have one right beside my desk now! I remember that this camera can run scripts with digita software even including Doom!

Hehe, you recalling part of my memory. I tried "Doom" on the camera as well :)

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2016 at 06:25 UTC

Bought the DC260 in 1999 with additional 48 megabyte compact flash as my first digicam. It was a relieve after the Sony Mavica's with their floppies (which we used at work).

The DC took pretty good photo's for that time. I still have it and it still works!

A set of 4AA batteries lasted around 10-15minutes with the (tiny) screen on if I recall right. When you exchanged the batteries for fresh ones, they were very warm from the power drainage :)

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2016 at 06:21 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

Azathothh: Yay another dynamic range article..... yawn

Are you a Canon user? lol

Link | Posted on May 12, 2016 at 13:42 UTC
In reply to:

Tohoh: I have D750. Twilight is used ISO 3200 Max and the wild shooting in low-light, I would drive over isot more than 2,000 low-light conditions. Thus the blind. I was impressed with the D500 advertising is allowed three times improvement in ISO. Why advertise D500 D750 ISO 3 steps for better comparison. Nikon D500 ISO is in list maximum of 50 000 and a maximum ISO Nikon D750 is in list 12800? Why a new camera Nikon D500 ISO respect 4 months, illusions and uncovered expectations and offers a monthly basis is lying? I am very disappointed with the Nikon makretings tricks of the camera D500 , and I do not buy it never.

Don't think that Nikon ever claimed that the D500 has 3 stops better high Iso performance (lower noise) over the D750!

That Nikon made the maximum Iso selectable 3 stops higher doesn't have anything to do with an improvement in Iso performance per-se, just giving users more options.

For normal daily shooting, I use auto Iso in Aperture priority with a minimum shutter speed set depending on focal length or subject movement. My auto Iso is set to a max ceiling of 12800 and although it gets seldom that high in Iso, I rather have a bit more noise then a blurry shot..

Link | Posted on May 3, 2016 at 14:42 UTC
In reply to:

junk1: 7200 is still very impressive, as good as anything out there!

Sure it is. 1 year in technology improvement doesn't change much!

Link | Posted on May 1, 2016 at 04:22 UTC
In reply to:

alcaher: Im not sure if the d750 owners were having too much expectations with the d500 regarding high iso, after all they are used to see great high iso performance. It seems that the d500 is just slightly worst than d750, maybe 1/2 or 2/3 of a stop difference but thats it... I think the d700 succesor will come next year with a much better 24mp d750 sensor 10 fps in order to compete with this year canon 5dmark 4.... any of these cameras will be wonderful cameras but their are FF so their are another story and maybe another price...and as for the d500, well you just pay 2k dollars and you have great lowlight performance (equal o better than old cameras like d3/d700,5mk2, etc), Top AF system, 10fps,4k video, a relative light camera, wonderful base ISO DR, 1.5 x factor for reach, etc

Im dont know why some people make a big emphasis in comparing oranges with apples.

The D810 improved greatly on the D700 both in dynamic range and high iso, so the D500 will be a huge improvement over the D700 as well. We are talking almost 8 years of technology progress here so..

Link | Posted on May 1, 2016 at 04:05 UTC
In reply to:

DongaMogudu: It is also sharper than rest of them. All Canons (70D,80D,7D2) looks same when compared with D500. Nikon is easily 1/2 stop better than Canons at high ISO. Canon did not make any progress in terms of high ISO between 70d, 80d and 7D2.
I think, Canon is always going to do catch up job with respect to Nikon and Sony with slightly less sensor size.

..Or what it was 20 years ago.. Some film age companies went extinct because they didn't feel they needed to innovate..

Sure Sony takes a market share of Canon with it's a7.. camera's and Nikon is not losing their share with Sony sensors in their camera's..

As long as Canon keeps producing their own sensors it will be difficult for them to catch up to Sony (and Nikon with Sony sensors)..
The releases of the 5DS was like a spasm to catch up some ground at both S&N.. Canon could not make an advantage in image quality, only resolution (at cost of Dynamic Range)..

Link | Posted on May 1, 2016 at 03:55 UTC
In reply to:

Yukon Ranger: Glad I didn't fall for the D500 hype. Download the D7200D/D500 @ 3200 ISO and compare faces at 100%. Even at this moderate ISO there are already fine details, lines and hairs the D500 simply does not pick up. ISO performance is a half stop improvement at best, so downsize your D7200 file to 20MP ... boom... advantage nullified.

The advantages of the D500 are AF fine tune, bluetooth, backlit buttons, and improved FPS/buffer. But if you can't get the shot with a 20 frame buffer, 100 won't help either....the moment will have already passed.

The problem for nikon is that a refurb 7200 is like ~750 bucks shipped, add to that a sigma 150-600 C lens and you are up and running with a high performing, extremely lightweight setup for LESS than the D500...with better IQ to boot.

I'll sum up the nikon buying guide for 2016:

-best DSLR IQ: D750
-best DX IQ: D7200
-best DX ISO: D500 @ the cost of resolution and detail

Best (Nikon) DSLR for Image Quality is still the D810, 36MP vs 24MP, Iso 64 vs 100..
The marginally better high Iso performance of the D750 is easily nullified by downscaling 36MP to 24MP ... Boom ... there you go ;)

Link | Posted on May 1, 2016 at 02:37 UTC
In reply to:

stevevelvia50: If your main thing is landscape, casual street and fine art, the d7200 is simply the better choice. The price is Better by far, the build is absolutely fine, it is lighter, excellent AF, high iso is the roughly the same and it has higher resolution.

When you talk about "Best" for Landscape and Fine Art, the only (Nikon) option is the D810 (at this moment).. Highest resolution, Best Dynamic Range..
For casual street photography, maybe a mirrorless is the best, less obvious, even lighter and with same image quality..

Link | Posted on May 1, 2016 at 02:21 UTC
In reply to:

attomole: I think the main thing with APSC is that even in indoor low light conditions without flash, the best examples will get some great results. @ ISO 3200 /6400 still has decent gradation through the shadows and some recovery of shadows is possible without getting a mosaic of coloured dots as soon as you lean on the adjustment, not possible with D200, D80 era cameras, the D7200 has a huge dynamic range, D500 looks like it will be same and maybe slightly better. In this regard the best Nikon APSC's are well ahead of the mFT's (sorry, I like the cameras). Sure, latest 5D's and D750 will do better but performance of the APSC covers all the bases, not so back in the day good "available" light photography was much improved by FF, now APSC has bridged that gap

As far as I remember, crop sensors were invented because large sensors were to expensive to produce, not for the "benefits" of APSC.

Your assumption that FX is only for Professionals is incorrect as there are many enthousiast hobbyist who do change lenses... Agreed that people who bought an FX camera and screw on a 28-300mm (f/3.5-5.6) and always use that could be better of with an APSC..

Covering 24-70 with an 18-35 (equivalent 27-50mm) seems a bit off..

Link | Posted on May 1, 2016 at 02:04 UTC

Looking forward to the review.. If it ever comes and does not end up in the closet where the D810 review got stuck...

Link | Posted on May 1, 2016 at 01:08 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Biowizard: All my photographic life (which takes in film from the mid-70s, up to about 12 years ago, when I switched to digital (mainly)), I have HATED the effects of badly position ND grads. Images look SO artificial, with a linear blurred darkening zone, and as others have noted, where tall objects poking above the gradation remain underexposed while reflections in foreground puddles are blown-out.

You can get SO much better results by squeezing off 5 bracketed exposures in quick succession, covering whichever range of EV you want to play with, and selectively combining them, with appropriate blurred masking, in Photoshop.

Not forgetting, there's probably a good spare 1.5-2EV at either end of your individual raw frames to play with, if you don't want to merge images but simply want to apply some selective exposure compensation masks.

Using Photoshop in this way is frankly no different than dodging and burning in the traditional darkroom - just less hit-and-miss, and a LOT less smelly.


Nothing to do with "HDR", but exposure blending with different layer masks in PS. One exposure for the water and one for the sky.. When you shoot with a Grad, you're stuck with the result, shoot bracketed and you'll have maximal PP flexibility.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2016 at 16:53 UTC
In reply to:

Sirandar: To those that think you can replace this with PP. With a really good camera with the very best dynamic range and low noise, perhaps you can to some extent.

Water just doesn't behave in panorama and HDR because of its patterned but changing nature.

I have spent a good deal of PP fixing moving wave anomalies in panoramas. In light light environments you minimize with burst shooting and cherry picking frames. In low light well ... good luck with that.

The problem with these filters is framing ... what happens if you don't want the light boundary in the middle of the frame. This should come as a set of 3 not 2 with the extra one with the light boundary 2/3 up/down the filter.

Bracket your shots at different exposure, complete freedom in PP. Have something stick up above the horizon like a mountain or a building and it will be dark as the sky with a fixed grad filter. Grad filters were a thing of the film age..

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2016 at 15:10 UTC

Grad filters were things for the film age, on digital, bracket your shots and apply a Gradient mask in Photoshop, ultimate editing freedom ;)

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2016 at 14:56 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Drew1house: I am considering purchasing this camera. I have a 4K Panasonic AG-DVX200 and like the idea of having a second 4k video source. I make my living selling Real Estate... not doing photography and I can afford this but don't want to waste money either. I video & stream conferences sometimes. But the real reason I have good equipment is Real Estate photograph... additional factors are looking more professional when I show up with better stuff than the other guy (I know... I will get made fun of for that remark but it is true...we get hired based on the cars we drive as well - stupid but...)

I have a 7D mark 2 at this point and I love shooting kids football games with it and my 70-200 but I also really love architectural and landscape photography for fun. I have been considering keeping the 7D for shooting sports.

So my question is... do I keep the 7D mark 2 and get a 5DS or possibly get rid of that body and buy this? Just thinking about options... Pro's and cons of each route...

Hasselblad of PhaseOne will even make you (look) more professional ;)

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 09:15 UTC

ISO 409600 (on a Canon sensor), how will that look like LOL!

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 09:13 UTC as 4th comment
On photo Skogafoss Iceland in the Landscape Photo with a Living Foreground Element. challenge (10 comments in total)

So this is a composite? No way the person can stay still for 20sec..

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 02:28 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
On article Nikon D810 firmware C 1.10 now available (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

LeitzKameraAktion: I'm very disappointed that Nikon did not give D810 users the option to keep the viewfinder Virtual Horizon indicator lit red all the time.

The VH indicator briefly lights red when you focus, but then turns grey - making it difficult (and sometimes impossible) to see. What's the point of having this feature if you can't see it clearly at all times?

I would also prefer it if the VH feature was functional all the time. With the current arrangement, you have to select VH each time you switch the camera on.

I want the VH function on at all times, and want to be able to see it clearly; not too much to ask, is it?!?

Good suggestion, I completely agree with you!
But most companies use updates to take care of bugs and don't (want) to spend resources to improve their existing product and show some care for their customers..

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2015 at 16:25 UTC
Total: 127, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »