Joined on Sep 5, 2011


Total: 7, showing: 1 – 7

Planned obsolescence has been around for a long time. The first Leica SLR metering was not through the lens. The next model was and so on. Only a few cameras like the 500 c series have truly withstood time. I believe all current digital cameras will be obsolete in 3 to 5 years max. Print options have not really improved enough for it to matter. Nor will newer cameras create any better photographers.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 11:33 UTC as 9th comment | 9 replies
On article Hasselblad X1D-50c First Impressions Review (316 comments in total)

The reality is, most prosumer and better cameras produce an image that is satisfying. With a few simple techniques and software, it is easy to compensate for just about any aberration. In m opinion, it would be better to spend the extra thousands on travel and experience than on fussing about what is hanging around my neck. A Nikon D810 with any of the perspective control lenses and you're set for landscapes. Another observation, I think some of the old Planars, Apolanthars and ApoSymmars were and are damn good lenses. Have they been superseded? There is and never will be a replacement for a platinum palladium print from one of those lenses. Actually, I like my Summicron 90 f. 2.0 too.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2017 at 00:48 UTC as 11th comment
On article Leica SL gallery update (218 comments in total)

The SL might be a nice camera, but the Sony evf mirror less R is also very good with inexpensive adapters readily available. I have used the Rokkor 35-70, Leica R Sumicron and even Retina lenses on mine. Photography is about the image not the brand in the hand.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 17:11 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply

This should be much better than a wet or gloved thumb. What about device security at borders? Has anyone ever had the contents of their phone or camera card inspected by border paroles?

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 16:57 UTC as 34th comment

I'm not sure what "real world" means? Does it mean: situations where there is no benchmark of comparison? Is the stadium roof so badly out of square or is it the lens distortion? The 1.8 sounds very impressive. They must be very bright viewing. I don't think the speed is as important as it once was with ISO ratings approaching the stratosphere. One thing for sure, lens quality has not kept up with the capabilities of the bodies. It is nice to see an effort toward improving quality. Almost reminds me of the Summicron, Planar.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2016 at 01:23 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Nikon's New D5 and D500 Push the Boundaries of DSLR (719 comments in total)

The new Nikons are unquestionably great cameras. Apart from "professionals", who uses anyone of these cameras enough to justify spending the extra $? The other issue is the lenses. I have been using cameras and lenses for over 40 years and I think lens quality has actually regressed at the professional end. Sure we have better AF, but most lenses now need serious computer rejigging to compensate for distortions and other aberrations. When will Nikon create a standard lens with the corner to corner sharpness and a distortion free horizon?

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2016 at 11:58 UTC as 21st comment | 2 replies
On article Nikon D4 overview (839 comments in total)

I'm surprised no one commented on the fact the D4 requires a new kind of battery. Besides that, it took Nikon long enough! Anyone with a D3, who tried out a D7000 would find a lot to like about this smaller, lighter body with better low light. I hope the D4 is even better. I am also surprised the D4 stuck with CF cards. Most computers come with slots for SD cards now. I'll wait a bit, when the price comes down. I sold my D3 and D3x in anticipation.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2012 at 19:11 UTC as 49th comment | 8 replies
Total: 7, showing: 1 – 7