G Davidson

Lives in Japan Kashiwa, Japan
Works as a Teacher
Joined on Jan 14, 2007
About me:

Future plan- to make books with my photos fused with poetry. At the moment, they are in online galleries and photo-blogs, like-

http://daylifepics.blogspot.com/
http://momentsofinfinity.blogspot.com/

Equipment-

Nikon D300,
Nikon D5100
Nikon D3100
Panasonic LX5
Canon G9

SB-800 Flash
Velbon QHD-41 Monopod

Lenses-

Note- I try to stick to 'bright' lenses, so as to control the depth of field and to have a brighter image in the viewfinder, though for traveling and ultra-wide angles I compromise on this.

Nikon 24mm f/2.8D.......................(street photography, walk-around)
Nikon 28mm f/2.8D.......................(events, walk-around)
Nikon 35mm f/1.8 D.....................(my other walk-around)
Nikon 50mm f/1.4D.......................(low light and portraits)
Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 DX................(events, weddings)
Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR..........(for traveling light)
Nikon 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 VR........(travel)
Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D...................(my DX portrait zoom)
Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 VRII.........(nature, travel, candids)
Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 ED AF..........(candids, nature)

Tokina 12-24mm f/4 ATX Pro-DX.......(wide landscapes, events)
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 HSM....................(portraits, details, bokeh, low-light)
Tamron 90mm SP AF f/2.8 Di...........(macro with amazing, beautiful bokeh)

I recently sold on my Nikon 24-50mm AF, Nikon 70-300mm ED AF and Tokina 28-70mm AT-X AF SV, as they are not so useful on DX and their ranges are covered better by the lenses above.

Most Wanted Lenses-

70-200mm VR
85mm f/1.4D
17-55mm f/2.8 AF-S DX Nikon/ another equivalent zoom for DX, like the Tamron 17-50mm version

Comments

Total: 260, showing: 241 – 260
« First‹ Previous10111213Next ›Last »
In reply to:

mike_2008: The chances of this poor little camera eating away at m43 and nex market share is remote. It offers little advantage over existing cameras, and is an entirely new system, totally incompatible with standard nikon lenses. What's the point? buy a compact you'd be better off.

Well, for Nikon users looking for another mount from DX and FX form their AF-S lenses, this is it and for now only this. I think it might make for some interesting telephotos from the smaller lenses- a 135mm f/1.4 from a mere 50mm could be interesting. It's true, we lose any wide angles, depending on the system itself for that. I suppose we might use telephotos more, though, as for the first time they'd be comparatively small and compact.

It aims to be a step up from even the high-end compacts. Not really a direct competitor to NEX or M 4/3, though of course that is how many will see it. For me, the size, price and lack of interesting lenses are a turn-off. It is still interesting, though. for what the system could be capable of.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2011 at 22:14 UTC
On article Why make a small-sensor mirrorless camera? (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

nickthetasmaniac: "It doesn't make sense for Nikon to do anything that might jeopardize its DSLR sales."

That would make sense if Nikon existed in a vacuum - the only high-performance camera manufacturer in the market.

But it isn't, and the existing mirrorless companies are rapidly bridging the performance gap (although they're not there yet - give it a couple of years...)

If Nikon doesn't cannibalise their own dSLR sales, then NEX/NX/MFT are going to...

I'd agree, but a couple of years is a long time in cameras. Maybe Nikon is prepping another mirrorless system for that moment? Don't forget the other entrants lack such a large DSLR user base to look after.

Mirrorless technologies would have to clearly overtake DX for Nikon to start pointing their user base in that direction. In terms of (especially bright) lenses it's still no contest and it will be a while before many people completely switch to mirror less, just as a tablet is still an accessory to a laptop.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2011 at 07:49 UTC
On article Why make a small-sensor mirrorless camera? (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

Geoffrey Kitt: I don't know why we are all obsessed with sensor SIZE. It is sensor performance that is important. I expect in the future we will see smaller sensors with the capability of today's full frame sensors. We are not there yet, but Nikon's and Pentax's decision to launch small sensor ILCs might be the start of a new direction which will focus R&D on getting better performance from small sensors. After all, the computer industry has managed to put processing power that would have filled a large room fifty years ago into your smartphone today. And nobody is now saying that we need bigger computers!

Exactly- look how the 16mp D7000 outperforms it's D70 older brother. As nanotechnology develops, the is no reason why better, smaller sensors can't emerge, so long as sharp enough lenses can be made for them. This is just the beginning of CX and it already appreas to have good image quality. The potential for miniaturizing even long of extremely wide lenses and being able to have top-notch quality due to the small amour of glass needed could be unprescedented.

But for all this, I think APS-C is still the best size/performance compromise for our present moment. Nikon could well make a 'Nikon 2' series using such a sensor, presumably with all the new technologies in the Nikon 1 and autofocusing their F mount range. Whether they will or not may depend on how successful NEX is at creating a 'prosumer' mirrorless user base.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2011 at 07:38 UTC
On article Why make a small-sensor mirrorless camera? (271 comments in total)

Personally, I can agree with all this to an extent. Nikon has no need for an alternative to it's successful DX line, which is evolving smaller, faster bodies and a wider selection of lenses year by year, unless that alternative is the higher quality FX line that has proved too expensive to make mainstream for some time now.

No, Nikon needs more to differentiate their mirrorless line in something other than large sensors, remembering that a lot of the potential market for such consumer mirrorless really won't care what technology is behind the camera, so long as it has a noticeable speed and quality improvement to their compacts, without requiring ungainly weight. It's not lost on me and perhaps marketeers that a lot of the people buying into smaller DSLRs don't really need quite that much quality and certainly will use them less than expected due to the bulk, but they do need their effectiveness at getting the shot, which most compacts with a decent sized lens can't always manage.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2011 at 07:27 UTC as 114th comment
On article What we want in a macro shot – Background (69 comments in total)
In reply to:

G Davidson: Excellent article, showing how such beautiful macros are composed. I'm interested to know how long a lens was used, is this possible with a 100mm or so lens? The time and patience put into these almost ethereal photos really pays off.

Erez, thank you for your reply! The reason I ask is that using my lens (the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro), it is very hard to keep enough working distance to compose well and keep distractions from the frame, not to mention achieving that beautifully isolating, defocused area that seems to be so important for successful nature photography. Using long lenses, I can see the field of background colour shift as you describe in just a few millimeters and I'd like to do this more with my macros. I often use mine with a 1.4x teleconverter for this reason, but I may well go for a 150 mm or so lens for my next round of bug-hunting. I find that a lot of the shots that really impress me are made with such lenses, along with the amazing Canon 65mm model, which unfortunately has no Nikon equivalent. It may be exotic equipment but the results are sublime.

Thank you again for your inspiring shots and for your helpful advice, reminding gearheads like me to pay more attention to technique!

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2011 at 23:29 UTC
On article What we want in a macro shot – Background (69 comments in total)

Excellent article, showing how such beautiful macros are composed. I'm interested to know how long a lens was used, is this possible with a 100mm or so lens? The time and patience put into these almost ethereal photos really pays off.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2011 at 02:27 UTC as 34th comment | 6 replies
On article Photo Tip: Five for Five (111 comments in total)

A nice and simple article containing a useful tip- slow down and be mindful of what you are doing and instead of 'missing shots' as you may fear, better ones will actually come to you. I think that this article is also introducing one of many forms of 'bracketing' that photographers tend o use to get just the shot they want out of a variety of 'takes'. You can bracket exposure, aperture, even time of day for the changing light, but it is easy to forget to vary the composition.

It's kind of a shame such a mundane subject was used for this, as none of the photos end up being very interesting, but as an emotionally neutral point of departure for trying out such a technique it works fine. I myself like to practice during walks near my place. I seldom get a remarkable shot (though it happens), but it helps hones the skills I use when I have less time to think, or may be overawed by the subject- a great photo needs to be carefully composed, to communicate without distractions.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2011 at 12:45 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
On article Photo Tip: Five for Five (111 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alex Notpro: I'd like some tips on how to organize a photo collection when you have 5x more photos laying around.

Even so it drew out a good tip. Whether you have too many shots from shooting quickly or from getting all these variations, what makes any photographer stand out in this age of digital endlessness is strict editing. Though I also think it depends on the way the photos are being shown- I'll show more to a friend than put in an online gallery, where my reputation will be watered down even though I think the subject is interesting.

I tend to think a good photographer will take a wider variety of images, even of the same subject, but end up showing less. The images will be less records of where they've been and what they've done and more independent images in their own right. It's the ego, with all it's silly games that needs filtering out.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2011 at 12:32 UTC
On article Sony gives more detail of its OLED viewfinder (79 comments in total)
In reply to:

neatnclean: I don't see a real advantage in using white OLEDs with colour filters instead of RGB-colored OLEDs. White OLEDs will inevitably also show some variation in their light emission/spectrum, just the same as RGB-coloured OLEDs. The colour filters themselves are just an additional element in the light path, gobbling up some of the light emitted by the OLEDs = less brightness, less brilliance.
Even more importantly: why are the pixels *rectangular* with 9.9x3.3um? In a high-res OVF I definitely expect to get equal resolution vertically and horizontally! So why not 3.3x3.3um pixels?
And the resolution itself, while better than most current, utterly disappointing low-res EVFs is nothing to really brag either. 2.4M subpixels translats into a measly XGA resolution of 1024x768 real pixels = not even "Full HD" resolution. 10 years ago that would have been quite spectacular, but certainly not in 2011. All in all, this is still at least one product generation away from "good enough for me" EVFs.

The resolution is a great technical achievement, don't get me wrong, but in terms of usability we'll need something much better before it can fully replace an OVF.

I can see how it would be a lot better than a 'bad' OVF and it brings a host of benefits; seeing the final picture simulated, camera information being visible and gain in dim light. I just think we need to see beyond the marketing hyperbole and put things in perspective. The resolution is still a challenge for EVF and it may take another doubling of it before it's as satisfying as a good OVF, which, in this price segment, is what Sony will be competing with (D7000, for example).

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2011 at 13:22 UTC

So they are doing the iPhone thing and forcing people to upgrade after a couple of years if they want the new features, even though in this case processing power isn't an issue. Nice!

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2011 at 00:39 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply

Nice addition to the line and if the optical quality is all they say it is, it should provide some stiff competition to Olympus's collapsible zoom, which comments indicate to be a weak link in the chain, IQ-wise.

I think this will suit videography more than photography, yet since I prefer to zoom to a setting and stay on it for a while, it would suit me pretty well. My only concerns are how dark it is and the tacky appearance with the Zoro-like 'x' mark. It's ultimately down to IQ, but from what I'm seeing it is better to disregard the hype and see it as a consumer lens. But when it is taking on even the LX5 in size, it could be a great travel camera...

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2011 at 11:46 UTC as 46th comment

What a shame, so many sensor generations and still the poor noise level.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2011 at 13:22 UTC as 26th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Looks like a very good and compact super zoom.

I'm more interested in Nikon's P500's offering with it's 22.5mm wide setting and 1080p video, but if this has much better IQ it could make a difference.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2011 at 00:41 UTC
On article Olympus launches VF-3 and announces E-PL3 US pricing (55 comments in total)

Slightly lower res? Sounds more like 30%, talk about going in the wrong direction! I really don't understand m4/3 updates, where useful things get removed. I suppose right now Canikon can breath a sigh of relief, but sooner or later they'll have a built in one like Fuji's.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2011 at 11:29 UTC as 34th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

(unknown member): Gorgeous but still impossible to focus accurately unless you have excellent eyesight.

An autofocus version of this camera would sell in truckloads. I would buy 2 almost immediately for a start!

The LCD with live view is a very powerful compositional tool on a digital camera. I'm also feeling that resolution needs to go up.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2011 at 23:03 UTC
In reply to:

Per PN: I love Leica M. The manual nature means that I improve in my skills because I don't rely on all the automatic settings and autofocus I would have in a DSLR. This camera is not meant to replace DSLRs but its a fun alternative and yes, expensive, but the quality is great. Lenses is second to none. I've had Canon L glass and they don't come close. Lots of magnum agency pros use Leica M.

This is a beautiful, non-distracting camera that a true photographer would appreciate, not that this is taking anything away from the multifunctional world of the SLR. I do find the price ridiculous though, and hope for clones at 1/10th the price that can use the same lenses, just as appeared in the film days.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2011 at 22:54 UTC
On article Panasonic launches FZ47/FZ48 24x superzooms (97 comments in total)

I really for the life of me can't see why they left out RAW. Perhaps they have a higher specced version coming out alongside this and they want to upsell the prosumers to it? As for people who don't want RAW, aperture priority mode, manual focus or really any other feature, just turn it off! The fact is, it is a great help in avoiding noise reduction and with fixing white balance non-destructively.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2011 at 22:37 UTC as 36th comment
On article Street Photographers test freedom to shoot in London (184 comments in total)

It's reassuring to see how professional and decent the police were. I understand the security guards concerns, but these are obviously photographers here.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2011 at 22:31 UTC as 97th comment
On article Panasonic launches FZ47/FZ48 24x superzooms (97 comments in total)

Why no raw?I don't always want my imaged precooked!

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2011 at 07:58 UTC as 67th comment

A very attractive camera, part of only a handful of small digital cameras capable of outstanding results, along with useful features like the evf. Maybe the software isn't up there with the best of them, but the only reason to overlook this is over-rating other cameras of a similar size. The tiny M 4/3 sensor and crummy lenses currently available for Sony's NEX just can't compare.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2011 at 03:41 UTC as 31st comment | 2 replies
Total: 260, showing: 241 – 260
« First‹ Previous10111213Next ›Last »