Ferling

Ferling

Lives in United States Wherever I need to go, United States
Works as a Whatever I need to shoot
Has a website at http://ferling.net
Joined on Jun 12, 2008
About me:

Been shooting for 30 years. Everything from MF to whatever fits in the hand, (including video). Ran an in-house commercial studio for 12 years. I currently do limited freelance work, (choosing those assignments that don't involve cheapskates). I prefer DSLRs, shoot MF film on occasion, and don't mind compacts. I don't care what you shoot with, so long as you have appreciation for shooting.

Comments

Total: 161, showing: 121 – 140
« First‹ Previous56789Next ›Last »

"slow camera app start-up"
"long shot to shot times"

Ah, the little things that still make folks angry in the crowd when they miss the shot of their kid at a compelling moment, etc. How many times I've earned a little business by jumping in with a DSLR to save the day and exchange an email address.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2013 at 18:31 UTC as 98th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Shamael: Wow, this will bring Nikon to leadership position, hahaha. How about lower prices on the better stuff. At Nikon, every buton or hinge added, doubles the price.

Adding a hand carved, wooden grip will triple the price.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2013 at 15:40 UTC

This issue always comes up, the one of being that you're only as good as the tools you use. When you also consider that skills matter, and where do they fit? It's really not a blurry line.

How many of you have shot a great image on a DSLR, only to hear others comment along the lines of "Well, yeah. That's a big camera, of course."? But shoot something great with a pocket cam or phone and it's "Man. He's got the skills."

Let me tell you something, it was always about the skills. You see, I could do a lot of things with an iPhone, but I have to admit that there are much better tools that accomplish those same goals, and then some.

So, while vendors would like you read these kinds of articles and think about the phone, the real hero is Stephen and his skillful application. Bravo to you, Sir.

-Keep Shooting

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2013 at 03:13 UTC as 53rd comment

For that price it should have a hand-carved, wooden grip, complete with a gold plated logo.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2013 at 14:01 UTC as 71st comment | 2 replies
On article Did Sigma design the Olympus M.Zuiko 75mm F1.8? (200 comments in total)

Third party OEM is nothing new, so long as they have the tools and talent to meet the clients specs and stick to them. Who cares what the origination address is?

In my search for vintage lenses, I remember an article (for which I can't find the link), that the majority of early Japanese lens manufacturers were all based a stones throw from one another, and consequently, copied each other.

In the 80's Sear's had a few good lenses made by Tokina, and it requires some research to know which ones were gems hiding under the name. Vivitar was well known for utilizing many different OEMs for their lens designs. There were several different OEM's for a given lens (i.e. 4 different 70-200 series 1), and their serial numbers were all telling of those of whom made them, (Tokina, Komine and Kino are regarded as the worthy versions).

It all basically boils down to a great design, supported by a vendor with solid capability. Sigma sells some very decent lenses, so it's no surprise.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2013 at 13:51 UTC as 39th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

offertonhatter: I need to catch up......
Very impressed. Does he still use them all? I hope so. :-)

...and the poor assistant whom has to carry it!

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2013 at 21:29 UTC
In reply to:

fotochase: He can call himself an artist, I guess, but he shouldn't call himself a photographer. He's a "compiler" or an "arranger" of borrowed materials. Being a photographer in my opinion means that you exercise some control over the photographic equipment and the composition of the image.

But he is exercising a some form of composition. Don't we all re-compose some of our shots in post? What about the act of adding HDR, saturation, etc? Making the shot more of what it actually appears in real life?

We can't dismiss the post production process part of being a photographer. Even simple dodge and burn to contrive a look before the days of digital, or creating an arrangement on a copy table and creating another negative from that composition. etc.

I'm always editing other people photos in due course of my work. While I don't take credit for the shot, I do take credit for the edit, the creative part that's mine.

If you go to my website and take a look at my portfolio page, you will seem some examples of extreme alteration. Granted, all the images on that page originated from me. However, I have hundreds of such works done for others (but are either locked out by rights or NDA).

Just appreciate it for what it is, and come away with having learned something.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2013 at 16:31 UTC
In reply to:

Ronie-AAA: Get out of town... if you don't want to disclose the manufacturer of the card than the whole thing is pointless, the picture is nothing to write home about.

"LOL are you new here? Pretty much EVERYBODY on this site cares. Even many of the ones who claim they don't."

Josh, The story about the alligator is interesting in itself, regardless of the gear.

I have friends with Nikons and other brands of camera's/gear with their own stories to tell. I also have a 10 year old canon G5, and my kids still play with the 12 year old Nikon Coolpix. Both still working. Even my Canon 1Ds mk 1 is still working. Couple that with a 1970, all plastic, fully electronic T70 and T90 still shooting like new, and I'm not surprised.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 16:40 UTC

My Dad, a retired auto mechanic, once said that you're only as good as your tools. Skills matter, of course. However, there was a time that only those whom could afford the abundantly expensive gear, got the job.

Bravo for Sony for taking the first step by not forcing consumers to pay steep prices for features that should now be a standard, which are no longer worth the premium.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 16:13 UTC as 29th comment

I don't have a problem with photography. Just people in general. If I could just do away with clients, then my production would go so much smoother. Oh, wait.. :)

It's easy to stand ones ground when a subject is based on an actual experience, and I'll give weight to others whom may disagree, so long as they can prove that they actually did the work and have a real experience to back it up.

Too many folks are just soundboards of others, or decide to treat members as punching bags. Perhaps there is a definitive medical reason or diagnosis for this. Whatever it is, it can be toxic. Dump their accounts and they'll create a new alias and come back swinging.

It's why I fully believe in a "real name" forum. Don't hide behind an alias. I accept that not everyone is going to agree with what I have to say. Good! Correct me, if I'm wrong, and don't generalize. If you have an actual experience to back it up, then share it.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2013 at 16:59 UTC as 59th comment
In reply to:

Ronie-AAA: Get out of town... if you don't want to disclose the manufacturer of the card than the whole thing is pointless, the picture is nothing to write home about.

Who cares what brand of card, or camera. The man had a story to share.

There are plenty of stories out there to justify how tough the Canon bodies are, including CFs. I have my own experiences with dropping them, getting soaked in the rain, etc. I've also accidentally washed a few CFs in the laundry and found them working fine. Stuff happens.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2013 at 15:33 UTC
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: This is why I love these new chinese lighting companies. i cant believe they want 200 bux for this. I just bought a similar thing for $25. I have been in photography for a long time and its great to buy 50 dollar soft boxes and the like

@Vaards. Assuming that this is intended for pro use, I will never understand why folks will go through the motions of a $1500 shoot, maybe setting up another $2500 or more in support gear, and then introduce a weak link of a product like this in their pipeline.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2013 at 18:16 UTC
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: This is why I love these new chinese lighting companies. i cant believe they want 200 bux for this. I just bought a similar thing for $25. I have been in photography for a long time and its great to buy 50 dollar soft boxes and the like

@Vaards. Assuming that this is intended for pro use, I will never understand why folks will go through the motions of a $1500 shoot, maybe setting up another $2500 or more in support gear, and then introduce a weak link of a product like this in their pipeline.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2013 at 18:16 UTC

Time to order some Portra 160 and drag the Mam 645 out. The fall season is upon us.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2013 at 04:44 UTC as 11th comment
In reply to:

Ferling: With anything goes these days; articulating screens, larger sensors, and better EVF, etc. All those features that give one pause to reconsider dumping their DSLR, (trust me, I'd like to dump mine when I eventually retire). Is it time to consider that the differences between a modern PS and DSLR are mute, and we should start asking for more?

My main concern with the habit of pro use, even though I'm shooting non-pro shots, is what capability and IQ can I get when I switch it to "M"? Whether I'm shooting a DSLR or a PS, the time, motions and efforts of composing and taking good shots are the same. So, at the end of the day, when I'm loading up the images into the LR, will I happy with the end results for those same efforts?

Mine is not an isolated issue for pros. I've met many novices in various amusement parks and on family outings whom relented and bought a DLSR, and their reason is pretty much the same: They want quality results for their efforts.

I agree to certain extent. I have 40" prints from an old Pany LX3. You can accomplish a lot with 10MP and very sharp lens when handled correctly.

I've met many a novice at amusement parks, weddings and sporting events, whom upgraded to a digital rebel or other entry level DSLR and remarked on how happy they were to never having to "wait" for the camera anymore. These folks are what point and shoots are targeting, and yet they don't have to be pro or experienced to realize that they want DSLR performance. They spend all day shooting, and want results for their efforts.

It's obvious why vendors are holding back.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2013 at 03:37 UTC

With anything goes these days; articulating screens, larger sensors, and better EVF, etc. All those features that give one pause to reconsider dumping their DSLR, (trust me, I'd like to dump mine when I eventually retire). Is it time to consider that the differences between a modern PS and DSLR are mute, and we should start asking for more?

My main concern with the habit of pro use, even though I'm shooting non-pro shots, is what capability and IQ can I get when I switch it to "M"? Whether I'm shooting a DSLR or a PS, the time, motions and efforts of composing and taking good shots are the same. So, at the end of the day, when I'm loading up the images into the LR, will I happy with the end results for those same efforts?

Mine is not an isolated issue for pros. I've met many novices in various amusement parks and on family outings whom relented and bought a DLSR, and their reason is pretty much the same: They want quality results for their efforts.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2013 at 17:17 UTC as 50th comment | 2 replies

We had a Maciva in engineering, mainly for snaps to support technical docs. Having to shoot off a roll of film, and spend lunch at the Mall for the one-hour lab got to be a hassle. It became so popular that we had to purchase two and create a log book for reservations and sign out.

Floppys? At the risk of revealing my age, my very first computer was a Xerox workstation, 1984. Used it in the Navy for word processing. It required two, 12 inch floppy's to boot up and write too! It was also networked to a shared printer in the captains office. It was a beast. Awesome to be living in such times to experience all this.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2013 at 05:09 UTC as 86th comment
In reply to:

Ferling: While I can understand the negative comments with some users in regards to digital today. In 2000, there was still a huge film user base, and this would have been viewed as a novel, "endless film" toy and seen some sales. I would have loved to try this out and keep the T90, T70 and FTBn going. I have a lot of FD glass that could use some new life, and would most likely get one just for that reason.

Erik. You are correct on the FTb. The T90 would be doable. I still shoot film with it, or simply take it out and cycle the shutter on occasion -they have a history of going bad if left sitting in a box. Which reminds me.. :)

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2013 at 04:40 UTC
Total: 161, showing: 121 – 140
« First‹ Previous56789Next ›Last »