seri_art

Lives in United States San Francisco Bay Area, United States
Has a website at http://mruthvenart.com
Joined on Mar 12, 2008

Comments

Total: 31, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Throwback Thursday: the Canon PowerShot G1 (148 comments in total)

I didn't have a G1, but did have G2 (4MP) for several years. I made some quite good 12"x18" prints from it.

Link | Posted on Sep 24, 2017 at 03:53 UTC as 7th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: The Canon PowerShot G3 (96 comments in total)

I had both a G2 and G3 and found that both gave superb image quality. I have several very good 12" x 18" prints from those 4MP cameras.

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2017 at 03:57 UTC as 26th comment
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (815 comments in total)
In reply to:

zakk9: To those who would like to have the OM-1 included:
Not a good idea. I loved mine and used it for 30 years, but batteries can't be found anymore, so an adapter is needed.

One camera that should absolutely have been there though is the Nikon F3. It's a legendary camera with professional build quality, manufactured for 21 years, surviving the F4 and mostly the F5 too. Besides the Leica M3, it's the 35mm classic to have, but as opposed to he Leica, the Nikon is a bargain and can easily be found for $2-300,

Many OM-1 cameras have been converted for use of available batteries. I had mine converted, then sold it on ebay several years later. If I were looking for a small 35mm film SLR, it would be the OM-1.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 15:44 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (245 comments in total)

The D80 was my first DSLR (March 2007) but I soon returned it after my tests showed the kit lens had poor sharpness across the image (can't remember the specifics). By then Canon had released its 450D/XSi so I got that and have stayed with Canon since then.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2017 at 21:47 UTC as 13th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: the Nikon D80 (245 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: Does anyone here have the current DxO Optics Pro 11.x and tried a noisy ISO 1600/3200 D80 RAW File with Prime denoise? Would be interesting to see how good it could be....

I have DxO Optics Pro 11 Elite but find no D80 RAW files available here.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2017 at 21:40 UTC

As a pilot shooting through the side window of small planes, I always got good results by (1) 1/1000 sec shutter speed and (2) never touch the camera or hands to the window you're shooting through.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 16:27 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

Romasito: Nice - but would like each scene to be shown 5-10 seconds longer - it is switching too soon, too fast...

Definitely agree with that. Too-short clips with no transition between them meant I couldn't watch it for long.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2016 at 14:42 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Fujifilm F10 (122 comments in total)

I had an F31, bought as soon as introduced and reviewed. I used it for many things, including low light instead of my Canon Pro1. I kept it until I got a Canon XSi in 2008, then sold it on eBay for more than I paid for it.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2016 at 04:09 UTC as 36th comment

I had and loved the XA. Got it for a trip to England and Scotland, kept it for several years.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 01:05 UTC as 64th comment
In reply to:

photophile: Seem to recall the F31fd (might have been a later release) having impressive low light (max ISO 3200!!) performance - at full 6MP resolution. They were still holding their value up until 2010.

In fact, Dpreview wrote: "...the F31fd blows away all its competitors at anything over ISO 200, which is no mean feat."

That's why the F31d brought the money it did on ebay after it was discontinued.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 16:30 UTC
In reply to:

photophile: Seem to recall the F31fd (might have been a later release) having impressive low light (max ISO 3200!!) performance - at full 6MP resolution. They were still holding their value up until 2010.

In fact, Dpreview wrote: "...the F31fd blows away all its competitors at anything over ISO 200, which is no mean feat."

I bought the excellent F31d when they were released in 2007, enjoyed it for a year, then bought my first DSLR and sold the F31d for significantly more than I paid for it.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 14:37 UTC

I sent a link to your video to friends with the subject "weather as art", which it is. In addition, there were moments in the video that would be great still shots, also art.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 05:15 UTC as 18th comment | 1 reply

I disagree. Phone cameras are taking over with the masses because they always have their phone with them and there is no need to carry a second object (camera). Also, phone cameras are now good enough for the masses. Neither of those things is going to change.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2015 at 13:37 UTC as 244th comment
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (467 comments in total)

I didn't like the Photoshop convertion of Canon RAW files when i tried it a long time ago, so I stuck with Canon's DPP for RAW conversions and it just keeps getting better. So I still use my legally-purchased Photoshop CS2 and see no reason to upgrade or care about what Adobe does with Photoshop. If in the future I feel that the cloud subscription version offers something I really want, I'll do that but not before.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2015 at 04:03 UTC as 15th comment
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Review (351 comments in total)
In reply to:

KBarrett: The flash sync speed is 1/50? Holy K1000, batman!

Flash sync speed 1/50 sec is unbelievable and unacceptable. Flash fill in direct sunlight would not be possible. What were they thinking?

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2013 at 14:51 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review (2083 comments in total)

It's the same size as my XSi and 10% heavier. What did it do with the should-have size advantage of the 4/3 sensor and lack of a mirror?

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2013 at 14:35 UTC as 91st comment | 5 replies
On article Battle of the Wi-Fi Cards: Eye-Fi vs. Transcend (184 comments in total)
In reply to:

micahmedia: Anything yet that will transfer directly to a computer or server via internet, without going through a third party server? I talked to Eye-Fi a couple weeks ago and they admitted they still couldn't do it. Had to go through their servers.

You mean that all file transfers from the Eye-fi card go through Eye-fi web servers?

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2013 at 01:55 UTC
On article Battle of the Wi-Fi Cards: Eye-Fi vs. Transcend (184 comments in total)
In reply to:

seri_art: Can you shoot RAW + JPG and have the card transfer only the JPG files?

I'm assuming only one card slot.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2013 at 01:52 UTC
On article Battle of the Wi-Fi Cards: Eye-Fi vs. Transcend (184 comments in total)

Can you shoot RAW + JPG and have the card transfer only the JPG files?

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2013 at 23:27 UTC as 44th comment | 4 replies
On article Battle of the Wi-Fi Cards: Eye-Fi vs. Transcend (184 comments in total)
In reply to:

seri_art: >I would recommend direct connect (card straight to device) rather than an ad-hoc<

I'm not clear what direct connect and ad-hoc mean. Where there is no wifi network available (many outside locations), how do you effectively transfer photos from the card to either an iPhone, iPad, other phone or tablet, or laptop wirelessly?

If you are where you have a good wifi connection (fast), is it better to use the ad-hoc method?

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2013 at 21:11 UTC
Total: 31, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »