Richard Murdey

Richard Murdey

Lives in Japan Kyoto, Japan
Joined on Aug 21, 2002

Comments

Total: 1706, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

In the straight ISO comparison (ISO6400 FF) the 6DmkII is competitive with the D750. It's only in the exposure push test that it fails to keep up.

That means the amplifier noise of the read electronics is the problem, right?

In a practical sense, it means the 6DmkII is fine if you expose correctly and use high ISO when you need to. It's not great if you often underexpose or enjoy pushing the dynamic lighting setting to "extra-high" in post.

On a meta level it's another data point supporting my pet theory that the 6DmkII was released more than a year after it was originally supposed to come out.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 07:52 UTC as 273rd comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: Never having heard of Venmo before, I visited their web site.

It makes frequent mention of being able to "send money to friends and family". But it also says "Use Venmo with anyone" and says you can use it to make purchases in mobile apps.

There is no outright mention of any restrictions, and I would not have guessed from all that I read that informal transactions for used items would not be allowed. It just seems like a Paypal alternative with an emphasis on person-to-person transactions.

At the very bottom of the page they acknowledge that "All money transmission is provided by PayPal, Inc."!

So yeah, I tend to find Venmo at fault here for facilitating the scam. They need to clarify what the limits of their service are and make that information readily available.

@Goodmeme

It's almost comically hard to figure out what Venmo actually is, even the wikipedia entry isn't especially helpful as the relevant line is buried. At least it is there though:

"Venmo was not created for transferring money to people you do not know, but rather it was designed to transfer money between peers who trust each other. Venmo does not have either buyer or seller protection, so avoid using Venmo for goods and services."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venmo

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 00:08 UTC
In reply to:

Rensol: For everyone. Be careful. Another type of scam. I sold a camera on Ebay. Shipping thru USPS via Signature verified INSURED Priority Mail.
You might think it is safe to ship right?
Not so.
Buyer somehow managed to receive package (you will see why I think so) BUT tracking record indicates that passage refused by addressee. And that is it!
Camera does not track beyond that point. So camera box diapered!
USPS somehow denied my insurance claim!!! NO EXPLANATIONS. Web site said letter of explanations sent while I did not receive a single letter from them! Calls to 1-800 yeld nothing as they are not the one who handle insurance claims!

Now listen to this. As one of USPS employees told me off record it is possible for postman to deliver the camera BUT scan it not as delivered but as REFUSED!
So buyer got the camera. Seller does not have proof of delivery. Mistake or insider job by a postman????? I do not know.
What we have for today is that the camera got disappeared!

I don't get it. If USPS loses your insured goods before delivering them or returning them to you, how can they not be liable?

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 23:58 UTC

Never having heard of Venmo before, I visited their web site.

It makes frequent mention of being able to "send money to friends and family". But it also says "Use Venmo with anyone" and says you can use it to make purchases in mobile apps.

There is no outright mention of any restrictions, and I would not have guessed from all that I read that informal transactions for used items would not be allowed. It just seems like a Paypal alternative with an emphasis on person-to-person transactions.

At the very bottom of the page they acknowledge that "All money transmission is provided by PayPal, Inc."!

So yeah, I tend to find Venmo at fault here for facilitating the scam. They need to clarify what the limits of their service are and make that information readily available.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 17:35 UTC as 16th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

milkod2001: Sorry to see Bowens going. Have at work studio Bowens 2x 750 pro 2x 500 Gemini. Still working just fine after 2 years of use. If i had to buy new studio flash lighting systems it would be Godox though. No reason to pay much more for Bowens if other brands do the very same thing for much less. Bowens did not innovate much and thought they are premium brand nobody can match. They were wrong. too sad :(.

Well let's agree on "sufficiently differently" at least. Leica is part brand equity, part actual quality and unique experience.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 01:30 UTC
In reply to:

Amando Hernandez Monge: Deeply sorry. Good and reliable products are not enough to survive in the photography bussiness

Once dominant, entrenched companies that see their market share shrink often become very top heavy, left with too much overhead to support and too much sales and management infrastructure to pay for.

I don't think it was the digital bubble. Lighting technology evolved rapidly with LED and wireless technologies, and aggressive, cut-rate competition could bring those advances to new products faster and more cheaply than Bowens could.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 01:27 UTC
In reply to:

LiangMing: I use LED light to carry around easily, plus my new camera can handle high ISO in most situation without any lighting at all.

@WayneHuangPhoto

He's technically correct even if it was an obvious troll. IF you are willing to use ISO25600 instead of ISO100 THEN you can use lighting which is 256 times dimmer. That's just sensitivity, defined.

The catch, of course, is good luck selling those high ISO photos in a competitive market.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 01:18 UTC
On article Google introduces Backup and Sync for Photos and Drive (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photocounter: When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content...This license continues even if you stop using our Services.

That's a selective quote from the full Google TOS.
https://www.google.com/policies/terms/

"Some Services may offer you ways to access and remove content that has been provided to that Service. Also, in some of our Services, there are terms or settings that narrow the scope of our use of the content submitted in those Services."

The Google TOS is written very broadly to cover themselves from any legal action. Google never publicly displays a photo you haven't shared publicly &c or uses your photos for any purpose other than within the framework of Google photos service.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2017 at 22:59 UTC
In reply to:

gbfOH: The 3-legged thing web site and this article says that their new L-bracket will work with the Canon 5D Mark IV, but a "small adjustment" may be needed to access battery and/or cable doors. I would like to know what is meant by "small adjustment" and exactly which door or doors are blocked by the bracket.

If you care at all concerned about that kind of thing just buy the Kirk model fitted exactly to your camera. "universal" is always going to be a big compromise in fit and utility.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2017 at 01:06 UTC
In reply to:

Bing Chow: Do it once. Do it right. I prefer a dedicated L-Bracket with a raised lip on bottom to conform to the body to prevent accidental rotation. Since I live on a tripod, I consider a L-Bracket to be a must. RRS is asking a lot, but it's a permanent part of my D810. Amortized over my ownership of the camera, it's negligible.

I don't mind the orange.

For an L-bracket, Kirk or RRS.
For regular arca plates, Markins.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2017 at 01:01 UTC
In reply to:

probert500: or just go on ebay - $30-$50 max.. CNC is the great leveler.

Closer to $5 for the two piece universal ones.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Universal-MPU100-Release-L-Plate-Bracket-For-Camera-Body-Arca-Swiss-NEX6-7-/182354540116?hash=item2a752d7654:g:QF8AAOSw5cNYKp6M

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2017 at 21:11 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-A3 Review (209 comments in total)
In reply to:

Blackubuntu: Says it has a Rangefinder "style" and doesn't even have a viewfinder. And discounts the Sony A6000 that does have a viewfinder.... go figure.....

style = appearance

Whether this camera had an evf or not, it would look the same from the front. And from the front it basically looks like a rangefinder (Nikon S1, Ricoh 500, Zeiss Ikon) and not a dSLR (Canon AE-1, Spotmatic).

That's all "rangefinder style" means: a brick-shaped camera with a notched top plate, classic lines, and traditional dial placement.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2017 at 01:20 UTC
In reply to:

OlyPent: Nikon's price-increase with each new lens iteration juggernaut continues. However, it is more or less competitive with existing 70-300mm lenses out there, Sony's being more expensive (though it is probably the best of breed) and Olympus being cheaper, but of course only for m4/3.

Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L probably wants a word.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 07:21 UTC
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: Bokeh on the original wasn't so good, meanwhile the 55-300mm has some of the best bokeh going and is cheaper. Absolutely wonderful, pro-style headshots with decent resolution at 220mm f/8; VR included.

So unless you're photographing sports, don't be too quick to get this one.

Well some of us may want a telephoto for full-frame cameras.

Though that brings up the interesting point as to who this lens is actually for since A. it only works on the D750 and later bodies and B. in FX-land, there are already plenty of nice(r) options, 70-200/4, 80-400, and many and various Nikon and third party 70-200/2.8.

The idea of a "casual" telezoom for FX doesn't make a lot of sense as I discovered myself buying the Tamron 70-300 VC. If I want casual the D3300 with the 55-200 VR does the job well enough and is far less gear to lug around.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 07:05 UTC

Weight has been reduced from 745g to 680g. ED elements reduced from 2 to 1. Distance scale window removed. It's otherwise the same size and shape, though the optical formula has been altered 17/12->18/14.

From all points of consideration, this looks like a cheaper version of the 70-300 IF-ED VR. Instead the price has been - unjustifiably, in my opinion - increased by 40%.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 06:54 UTC as 38th comment | 7 replies
On article Review: Nikon D7500, speed and capability (449 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sarah Terra: A major flaw in the camera is the strap slots, this design was proven to wear bend and break 50 years ago.

Just be aware, a strap with this camera will eventually fail, though I suspect many who purchase this camera won't use it enough to reach that point.

Get the D500, seriously. Save up another 6 months if you have to

I had a Fuji GW690 with the same kind of strap lugs.

They ugly, but they ain't gonna break.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 00:28 UTC
On article Review: Nikon D7500, speed and capability (449 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jorginho: Short version; about the best price/performance ratio any DSLR gets you on the market.

The D750 gets you full-frame, Ai coupling, grip connection, dual slots, equivalent metering and AF modules -- and currently costs about the same price*.

* Nikon has been busy hiking the D750 price in many markets recently, so YMMV.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 00:25 UTC
On article Review: Nikon D7500, speed and capability (449 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: how can a (nikon) APSC 1.5x crop sensor
be 1080p "w/ no crop", but is in fact 1.5x crop 1080p

yet offer 4k "w/ 1.5x crop", and remain 1.5x crop 4k?
or is it actually, a 1.5x crop of a 1.5x crop = 1.5x1.5= 2.25x crop 4k ... narrower than MFT (2x crop)

if the latter, just list:
1080p as 1.5x crop
and
4k (uhd) as 2.25x crop

much more straightforward

Since what is of interest here is how much of the total sensor area is used for the video data, "no crop" sensibly means "all of the available width of the sensor".

Besides, there is no good reason that the video crop factor should be referenced to full frame. If anything you'd chose Super 35, which would mean APS-C *is* about 1.0 crop.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 00:16 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: It's ... okay. More expensive lenses are sharper wide open and sharper in the corners, but the 10-20mm isn't bad at all at f/8. Just not great in the way that the 6.7-13 is, for example, or the Canon 11-22.

Interesting that dpreview chose to turn off auto CA correction. I appreciate it, since it gives a more honest view of the lens, but it must be said that a) DX ultrawide zooms really need to be cleaned up digitally for CA, that's just the way of these things - and b) Nikon will do this automatically by default either in camera or in CNX-D, and it does it very well. The gallery shows the lens in somewhat of an unfavorable light and perhaps unfairly so - normally you'd never see results as bad.

My understanding of it was the dSLRs do not since they are based on legacy (film) standards, but mirrorless systems and fixed lens cameras do. ... but I would like confirmation from someone who knew for sure.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2017 at 22:58 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: It's ... okay. More expensive lenses are sharper wide open and sharper in the corners, but the 10-20mm isn't bad at all at f/8. Just not great in the way that the 6.7-13 is, for example, or the Canon 11-22.

Interesting that dpreview chose to turn off auto CA correction. I appreciate it, since it gives a more honest view of the lens, but it must be said that a) DX ultrawide zooms really need to be cleaned up digitally for CA, that's just the way of these things - and b) Nikon will do this automatically by default either in camera or in CNX-D, and it does it very well. The gallery shows the lens in somewhat of an unfavorable light and perhaps unfairly so - normally you'd never see results as bad.

@Carey

About those exceptions ... are built-in profiles common or rare?

Link | Posted on Jul 4, 2017 at 23:35 UTC
Total: 1706, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »