MediaArchivist

MediaArchivist

Lives in United States D.C. Metro, VA, United States
Works as a Rock & roll photog, computer geek
Has a website at www.mediaarchivist.com
Joined on Feb 2, 2013
About me:

Goal: develop the proper shooting techniques and technical skills that allow for the most unusual and hard to obtain shots. This necessarily involves using equipment "incorrectly" and modifying or ignoring many accepted shooting styles.

A good deal of my current effort is directed at musicians on dimly lit stages:
http://www.roxplosion.com/
https://www.facebook.com/Roxplosion/
https://instagram.com/roxplosion/

Comments

Total: 97, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

paulfulper: I would be more worried if it penetrates the fuel tank in the wings , it would drain quickly , or it could ignite .
Otherwise such strike filmed will not destabilize the flight.
If it penetrates the engine then the plane will be able to do an emergency landing with just the second engine. Am I wrong ?

The pilot will have little time to prepare for an emergency landing if it is already about to land, or has just taken off. If an engine is lost mid-flight, however, that is more manageable (but obviously not ideal).

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2018 at 01:52 UTC
In reply to:

Arca45Swiss: What's the attraction to a 50mm lens? I don't even own or want one

I own two 50/1.4 lenses, as well as an old 58/1.2. Don't knock what you haven't tried.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2018 at 10:34 UTC

Does this mean I will have to pay Adobe a monthly fee to keep using the camera?

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2018 at 22:43 UTC as 288th comment | 7 replies
On article Photokina 2018: Zenit and Leica collaborate on new 'M' (490 comments in total)
In reply to:

zerlings: I'd love to try the Zenitar 35/1.0 on my A7iii with a Techart adaptor.

That was my thinking as well (despite not owning an a7iii).

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2018 at 04:50 UTC
In reply to:

DamianFI: I've got three 150's and used a half dozen more, I've never found one with any significant distortion, so not sure how this is a point of difference worth noting in the marketing.

Or is that all it has going for it?

Also of note: zero carbon monoxide footprint (measured in parts per trillion), and zero beta particle emissions.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2018 at 04:00 UTC
On a photo in the Sigma 85mm F1.4 DG HSM Art lens for Sony E-mount sample gallery (2 comments in total)

Ah, the lights. The smoke. The contrasts you see at a live show. Wouldn't a forum to discuss the specifics of concert photography make a lot of sense?

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2018 at 17:08 UTC as 1st comment

I think it's great that folks are doing this. There is nothing wrong with "more options" for outside the box lenses, not mention where people can spend their money.

Not that it matters, but I have no interest in this particular lens. I have had a mild interest in a few of the other, similar lens promotions... but not this one.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2018 at 17:30 UTC as 103rd comment
On article Shooting live music with the Panasonic Lumix GX9 (144 comments in total)

I'd like to see what would happen with this camera in a dark venue with typical LED super saturated stage lighting. It probably would do quite well, but that environment can reveal other shortcomings due to flicker, hot spots (extreme DR), low (or no) light, etc. In fact, this touches upon a glaring omission from this site— a sub-forum just for live performances. There are many issues (photographic and other) that are unique to shooting a staged performance.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2018 at 18:12 UTC as 11th comment

I will be making an announcement soon about my impressions of this video.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2018 at 04:24 UTC as 293rd comment | 3 replies

I'd want to try a walkaround with a fake camera to see how easily and often I miss the standout mount lock. Ah, it's patented! The dealbreaker (for me) is I would have to give up gripping my VG, and gripping (for me) is the reason I use a VG.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2018 at 04:11 UTC as 34th comment
In reply to:

tedolf: Who needs 48mp resolution?

8mp works fine.

tEdolph

I do. 8Mp is not nearly enough for me. About a year ago I had to shoot with my old 10Mp camera and I really, really missed 24Mp. Now I've got 41Mp and I don't want to go backwards. Gimme all the pixels, more more more! I'm not sure about such resolution on a phone, but I am sure there are sufficiently clever people who can make use of that.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2018 at 21:07 UTC
In reply to:

Ilia Snopchenko: So the 80s vogue is coming back? What next, a Mötley Crüe reunion? :)

Where and when are they playing?

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2018 at 01:28 UTC
In reply to:

Elonlukatski: Is this something similar to the old Nikon 105 and 135 defocus AF lenses ?

That was my first thought, too. It also might be a variation (update?) of a typical adjustable soft-focus lens, like the 135/2.8.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2018 at 01:27 UTC
In reply to:

Marc dbr: As a photographer I don't want to be noticed all that much with these white lenses. So what I do is I cover my white lenses with tape so they don't stand out any more. I really don't get why canon even considers making the lens WHITER as part of an UPGRADE...

One of the key target markets for this lens is outdoor sports. A white lens does not get as hot in direct sunlight. There may be other reasons (e.g. "it looks cool") but I don't think the heat issue can be dismissed.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 05:55 UTC
In reply to:

jor23: The best part is the flip and articulate screen. Every camera should have this!

Agreed. Excellent feature add.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2018 at 11:41 UTC
In reply to:

marc petzold: Nice article, well written. And two of my all stars also being mentioned, Canon 5D and Sony R1.

Time travel back into 2005, the two most anticipated Cameras have been the Sony R1, and the Canon EOS 5D, when you've been serious about Photography. Luckily, i could afford the R1 into spring 2006, whereas i ever used it so, and still do...and the 5D a few years later, and also still being using it.

Both have been way long being superseeded by successors, but they still "get the job done" and both have some kind of unique look.

I won't depart from them, even it would being hard into some couple years, when there is no more internal years clock....so the EXIF would being wrong then.

Sony innovated right from the start of the digital camera evolution, let's say DSC-S70, S75...for instance, 717, their Mavica "floppy" cameras, and many others before, and after the mentioned cameras....the A850/A900 FF DSLRs, have been designed by Minolta, but came under the Sony brand then...because...

I used my R1 last year for a concert while my main camera was in the shop. I got more than acceptable results, but with a whole lot more effort (and misses). Outdoors, or with better than super-low light, the old R1 still works quite well.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 10:55 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Go to any major event - sport, news or culture - and see the complete absence of Sony equipment. It's just there for all to see.

I totally get the emphasis on innovation, and the focus on 'photo-enthusiasts'. But the photographers in the field need battery life, weather-proofing and reliable service.

When I can bring a dropped lens into a Sony workshop at the Olympics to get a replacement or repair on the spot - that's when they'll challenge Nikon and Canon.

Olympics? Phase 1: zero. Hasselblad: zero. Leica: zero. If I don't see it in use at the Olympics, it is not gear worth owning. For the same reason, I will never buy a fisheye lens, softbox, wide aperture prime, ND filter, extension tube set, or lots of other stuff I know might be useful for photography other than sports. "Hey, look at all these photographers crammed into the end zone! A few of them are using the same camera I have!"

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 00:51 UTC
On article CMOS image sensor sales at all-time high (77 comments in total)

I recently bought a new car for the first time in twelve years. It has a rear view camera for backing up, which at first I thought was a bit of a gimmick. It was not an option, so I was not paying anything extra for it.

Now I find it indispensable.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2018 at 10:18 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Arastoo Vaziri: Isn't that photograph considered work made for hire, according to the US Copyright Act? The copyright owner is actually Monkey Goose Magazine, unless there's a contractual clause providing otherwise.
This, of course, is no excuse for the rudeness and for using the photo without consent. It's awful that people should feel entitled to use someone else's photos for free.

"It depends"... When I am paid to do a concert, it is usually the band or the promoter hiring me. They agree to my contract, which gives them complete freedom to use the photos *but* I retain the copyright. My part of the agreement is, in part, to not complain if they use them— so when they do I don't. Other times I am collecting the photos for my own use (to promote a future show with the acts I am shooting), so I request that any re-use by the band or venue is done with credit given to me. So far, that has worked.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2018 at 21:04 UTC
In reply to:

marcio_napoli: Of course mirrorless guys have their rights for opinions, so do I.

Just yesterday I was handling my GH4 (unused for many months. I keep it for video only), and looked into the EVF.

Absolutely boring. Boring, boring, boring.

Just like looking into a tiny TV, what's so special about that?

Is that what mirrorless guys really want to take over?

A world where you can't escape from electronic screens even in your photography time?

BTW, I have little reason to care, as I have decades of amazing DSLRs to choose from even if we had no new DSLRs announments from now on.

But it seriously amazes me, how can you guys prefer to see the world throw TVs instead of a clear, real window?

Is the purpose of a camera to take photos? Beautiful pictures, to be enjoyed for many years by many people? Or is the purpose of camera to immerse the photographer in an effervescent aura of almost mythical (and certainly epic) sense of classic photographic/ideological purity of form and essence? The former is forever, and for everyone. The latter is a fleeting moment, and just for you.

BTW, I have little reason to care. I value the destination more than the journey, despite the journey (for me) being quite fulfilling despite not even using a viewfinder-- optical or otherwise.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2018 at 06:07 UTC
Total: 97, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »