AD in KC

Lives in Kansas City
Works as a architectural/interiors photographer
Has a website at www.aarondougherty.com
Joined on Dec 12, 2011

Comments

Total: 120, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

I'm a professional test chart photographer, so this is clearly not the camera for me.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 17:04 UTC as 95th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

MrBrightSide: Lustrous AND sublime?

I'm holding out for Magical. With or without Lustrous and Sublime.

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2017 at 14:00 UTC
On article A Taste of New York is a stunning Big Apple time-lapse (89 comments in total)

Fantastic!

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 21:35 UTC as 57th comment

Features! That's what the pros want, ask 'em! Sell everything for the latest! Use lots of exclamation points!!

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 02:24 UTC as 73rd comment

I wonder if a robotic curator will return my calls.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2017 at 13:53 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

TyphoonTW: Oh, I nearly forgot about the iRubbish bin.

Why the nasty attacks? It's a product - buy one or don't buy one.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2017 at 15:33 UTC
In reply to:

Arca45Swiss: I have the trash can Mac Pro and it's been great. Has been running 24/7 for something like three years without a problem.

Four USB ports isn't enough to run three printers, a scanner and card reader so I had to add a USB hub. Plenty fast for my big IQ180 files

And a ten-port hub is just barely big enough - even when using the sockets in the back of the display, too! So four is fine...

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2017 at 15:29 UTC

Maybe I'm the only one, but I've had a great experience with Drobo.

I've got three: an old 2nd gen 4-bay and two 5D's. The four is retired, though it still works fine. One of the 5's is my primary storage and has an accelerator chip installed, the other is assigned to Time Machine. In the latter I keep two disk packs and switch them out occasionally, one set stored off-site.

For me, they've been absolutely dependable. They make reassuring little clicking noises at odd times, verifying data or something I think. I had some glitches years ago, but those may have been pilot error - I don't even remember.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2017 at 22:45 UTC as 4th comment
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1643 comments in total)
In reply to:

Digital Suicide: I think in the spec comparison table, FujiFilm XT-2 should be in Panasonics place.

PB, true enough, but I guess I'm arguing that it's image quality we SHOULD be comparing. What makes the better photo? specs or image quality? And I'm still not convinced it's very useful to run every camera manufacturer's best efforts through the Adobe filter. I know from experience Canon's DPP is a much better RAW converter with Canon CR2 files, and I bet Nikon's NEF (I think it's called) is better with their files. And we're comparing anonymous lenses, simultaneously... All in all it's not so much apples-to-apples as fruit trays-to-vegetable trays.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 22:13 UTC
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1643 comments in total)
In reply to:

Digital Suicide: I think in the spec comparison table, FujiFilm XT-2 should be in Panasonics place.

These comparisons are worthless: different sized sensors (Digital Suicide mentions) and no mention of the lens used, even (unless I missed it somewhere). And DPR always uses Adobe RAW instead of DPP, so it ends up being a test of Adobe. So much depends on the RAW converter and DPP is so much better than Adobe. Give us a an assesment of how Canon makes photos! Or Nikon or whoever. Make photos using the entire manufacturers' workflow. This really IS science!

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2016 at 17:22 UTC
In reply to:

PanoMax: I think I'll enter a couple of my shots recorded with the Sigma DP3 Merrill. Mind you, there will be no post processing. ;-) Straight out of the camera should suffice.

Should I, or shouldn't I????

db

With a Sigma DP3 Merrill? no post processing? I wouldn't if I were you.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2016 at 22:09 UTC
In reply to:

LarryK: I hate when they bring out new TS lenses, I can't resist the things.

And why is the one of the first things anybody complains about is "why can't I use a polarizer?" You can't, get over it.

Same here, obsolesce. I use it more inside than out. Outside it's usually only for brick or metal with a sheen, they makes skies too weird and cause ripples and a purple cast in most modern windows/glazing. Inside they really intensify paint colors and all, like you say... I only use the 17 tse when absolutely necessary - for that and its schmearing around the fringes.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2016 at 17:08 UTC
In reply to:

LarryK: I hate when they bring out new TS lenses, I can't resist the things.

And why is the one of the first things anybody complains about is "why can't I use a polarizer?" You can't, get over it.

LarryK,

We're talking a polarizing filter, right? not a neutral density filter. It's not just that the brick is too bright--the color is desaturated.

Think of a polarizer looking through the glare on the surface of a pond... You gonna fix that by adjusting the exposure?

"Ever try" using a polarizer, smarty pants?

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 20:15 UTC
On article The whole nine yards: Canon 35mm F1.4L II USM review (338 comments in total)
In reply to:

AD in KC: OK, somebody's got to play Devil's Advocate: Why did Canon put the focusing ring at the far end of the lens when they don't have to? no zoom ring in the way here. When I'm holding a camera securely/comfortably, my left hand is under the camera - the focusing ring ought to be near those fingers.

And yes I love Canon - I make my entire (meager) living using their stuff.

I extend my hand in peace and fraternity....and I support my lens in all its endeavors.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 20:06 UTC
On article The whole nine yards: Canon 35mm F1.4L II USM review (338 comments in total)

OK, somebody's got to play Devil's Advocate: Why did Canon put the focusing ring at the far end of the lens when they don't have to? no zoom ring in the way here. When I'm holding a camera securely/comfortably, my left hand is under the camera - the focusing ring ought to be near those fingers.

And yes I love Canon - I make my entire (meager) living using their stuff.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 15:50 UTC as 82nd comment | 3 replies

I got the first version of this thing and it was useless. Still takes up shelf space because I can't bring myself to throw away something that cost whatever it cost. $160 maybe. I'm too angry to give this new one a chance.

The old one was so obtuse and unintuitive and slow and I had no idea if a card had actually been downloaded even. For all I knew there was a bar of soap inside it. I don't doubt this one is better, but "good"? And who would want this who doesn't shoot raw?

My old laptop needs to be replaced anyway, that's what I'll do if anything.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2016 at 15:32 UTC as 38th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

chriscotec: I shoot architecture for a living and can't imagine life without my T/S-E 17mm. Most projects I do needs a lens that is wider than 24mm for some shots. My 17mm lives on my camera.In the rare cases it is too wide I move the tripod a step in.

Welcome back too architectural photography Nikon (almost).

I agree. A zoom tilt-and-shift lens would be darn handy.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 17:18 UTC
In reply to:

obsolescence: Nikon should have designed a removable tripod collar so that only the camera moves and shift-stitching avoids parallax. But I guess that wouldn't work too well with their humongous pro bodies -- if only they had a mirrorless.

How about a filter holder and adjustable hood/flag for this lens. Don't they listen to us?

I've got an old copy of PTGu, but haven't used it in awhile. I should probably buck up for a license again, but as soon as I do I won't need the program for another couple years!

It looks like PTGui and Autopano are very similar on the surface anyway......

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 16:11 UTC
In reply to:

obsolescence: Nikon should have designed a removable tripod collar so that only the camera moves and shift-stitching avoids parallax. But I guess that wouldn't work too well with their humongous pro bodies -- if only they had a mirrorless.

How about a filter holder and adjustable hood/flag for this lens. Don't they listen to us?

Excellent--I'll look up Autopano!

And it looks like that collar only fits Nikon. There are a couple brackets that fit Canon but they look really clumsy....

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 15:44 UTC
In reply to:

obsolescence: Nikon should have designed a removable tripod collar so that only the camera moves and shift-stitching avoids parallax. But I guess that wouldn't work too well with their humongous pro bodies -- if only they had a mirrorless.

How about a filter holder and adjustable hood/flag for this lens. Don't they listen to us?

Yes, Obsolesense! I 've been writing letters to Canon for years about putting a tripod mount on their TSE lenses - like the (optically mediocre) Schneider shift lens does easily enough. That would save hours of futzing around. Side-to-side is one thing, but most of my stitching is with vertical shots, so there's nothing I can do about parallax - though I will definitely look into Colin's collar...

And AlanG what software do you use for panos? I have been using photoshop, but it always skews vertical lines - and always a little differently between exposures.....

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 14:49 UTC
Total: 120, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »