JimW-203

JimW-203

Lives in United States Tarpon Springs, FL, United States
Works as a Retired
Joined on Jun 4, 2011
About me:

I have been doing photography since the early 50s while in school and later traveling the world in a variety of positions in the government and private industry. Moved from Boston to Florida in 1988; first, St. Petersburg then Orlando, and now, Tarpon Springs.

Comments

Total: 301, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Mateus1: Panasonic should bring for Pana users 16mm f/1.8 prime instead of this zoom and put to shame overpriced Oly 12/2.

The 15mm FL changes the results somewhat, but the results never approach what I would consider shallow:
15mm @ f2 subject 10' yields 7.12' to 16.8'
with f1.7 yield is 7.46' to 15.2'
How "nice" is that?

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 20:00 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: Panasonic should bring for Pana users 16mm f/1.8 prime instead of this zoom and put to shame overpriced Oly 12/2.

I wonder if the original user of the "nicer DoF" term actually knows what the in-focus range comparison is for a 12mm focal length lens on a four thirds sensor with a subject, say 10 feet from the camera, with f1.7 and f2 apertures.
12mm FL @ f2 with subject distance @ 10 feet yields an in-focus range from 6.13' to 27.4'
The same setup @ f1.7 yields 6.53' to 21.4' in-focus
Thus, you can see it may be very hard for the f1.7 to be seen as significantly "nicer" than f2.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 19:48 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: Panasonic should bring for Pana users 16mm f/1.8 prime instead of this zoom and put to shame overpriced Oly 12/2.

Mateus1:
"I would choose Pana 12/1.7 over Oly 12/2 just for nicer DoF..."

What does "nicer DoF" look like?

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 17:59 UTC
In reply to:

RStyga: I wish they could make this a F2.8-4 and without much difference in volume. :-)

The point sis simple: why expect Panasonic to deviate from their practice of including OIS in their lenses just to satisfy the wishes of a few customers who may use them on an IBIS body? The chances of that happening are slim to none - about the same as asking Jaguar to offer a Ferrari engine in one of their cars because they are superior at high revs. Or, perhaps a bespoke suit at off-the-rack prices.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 16:27 UTC
In reply to:

RStyga: I wish they could make this a F2.8-4 and without much difference in volume. :-)

Gee, you may be on to something! Many of these lenses are made in China; why not a Chinese restaurant menu ordering option? One from column A, two from column B, MSG yes or no, extra garlic please. After all, I should have a seat at the product planning table; they are custom built for me, aren't they? (please note: sarcasm intentional)

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 16:01 UTC
In reply to:

RStyga: I wish they could make this a F2.8-4 and without much difference in volume. :-)

0MitchAG:
"They could get rid of OIS as well! A weather sealed lens is clearly intended for a weather sealed body, like the GX8... which has IBIS."
Why limit the market to just the GX7 & 8? Admittedly, the GX8 is currently the optimum target, but it is not the only one.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2016 at 21:15 UTC
In reply to:

greypixelz: haven't Panasonic gotten the message from Kai and Lok that micro4/3rds is dead? and don't they know that Pentax is the king of WR and that it had just out-sensor'ed them?

I mean, really, Panasonic! :P

AFAIK, L mount refers to the L1 (Feb, 2006 and Panasonic's first true DSLR; followed a year and a half later by their second) and L10 (Aug 2007) cameras from Panasonic. The L1 was their first movement into a larger sensor, the 4/3" using the same sensor as the Olympus E330. Its crop factor was the same as the current MFT cameras, X2. The only difference was in the mount size and flange distance from the sensor - 4/3" is still 4/3" no matter the mount.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2016 at 21:10 UTC
On article The long, difficult road to Pentax full-frame (609 comments in total)
In reply to:

Anastigmat: Do not underestimate the old lenses made in the film era. If they are good enough for APS-C models, they are even better for FF. The reason is that APS-C models actually have far more pixels per square mm than FF. The high resolution of the APS-C sensor means lenses have to resolve more. When lenses have to resolve more, contrast goes down. That is why FF users have been talking about the "snap" that their images have. Therefore the K-1 will actually give old lenses new life. They may not perform as well on a 24 mp APS-C sensor as they will on a 36mp FF sensor. Don't get rid of your old film camera lenses. Keep them as they will perform well on the K-1.

dansclic:

"Old lenses have been désigned for film cameras and thé digital cameras havé nothing in commun with film cameras."

Really?
Just as we have nothing in common with our ancestors other than DNA, culture, heritage, physical characteristics, etc. ad infinitum. The whole point of the exercise of photography is to make a photograph, not revel in the way electrons travel from point A to point B; at the point of the final consumer of photography - the viewer of the image - it matters not one whit if digital or analog, it's the picture that counts, not the technology. Ultimately, it's how the picture moves us emotionally. I suspect few persons go to museums or galleries with a microscope to look at what's on the wall. Regarding old lenses not being designed for digital: true enough, but they're still useful. One of my favorite lenses for use on MFT cameras is a Micro-Nikkor 55 that I have owned for more than 40 years. It still works and the sensor has yet to say no to its light.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2016 at 18:28 UTC
On article Worth the wait? A look inside the Pentax K-1 (651 comments in total)
In reply to:

nunatak: if this had IR and UV capabilities, it'd be a no brainer to add to every photographer's toolbox — regardless of which platform they currently shoot.

the design reminds me a lot of the old P67, and i'm itching to try it out at my local camera store. bravo Pentax — well done. :)

"the design reminds me a lot of the old P67, and i'm itching to try it out at my local camera store. bravo Pentax — well done. :)"

True - but you will find a definite family resemblance in the proportions of the pre-Spotmatic Asahi & Honeywell Pentax cameras of the 60's. They all featured a virtual tower to house the mirror box and the lenses all occupied much smaller portion of the front real estate and set much lower in the face. These cameras were not exactly petite for the time but certainly were when compared to their equivalents today - especially when considerinf the pre-K screw mounts.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2016 at 19:49 UTC
On photo Salzburg Cathedral Ceiling and Dome in the Defining usable space: Ceilings challenge (2 comments in total)

A similar picture accompanies the Wikipedia article on this cathedral - this one is much better.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2016 at 13:51 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On photo St Marija Assunta Mosta Inner Dome in the Defining usable space: Ceilings challenge (4 comments in total)

Thanks for sharing this beautiful image with us - a well-deserved first.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2016 at 13:40 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

taktak91: Like I always say: Everyone has an idea for a sure-to-be-a-top-selling-camera-of-all-time that no one else would ever buy.
Ideals and usage vary too much between users.
Users themselves acquire more knowledge and skill over time, so a perfect camera bought 5 years ago wouldn't feel so perfect now.

Too true... And, not just because the technology has advanced in that 5 year span; more - I would hope - because the user now has a greater appreciation for the subtleties and limitations of their own skills and knowledge. I distinctly recall my first time driving an MG TC with a non-synchro transmission - not smooth at all (me, not it). Over time, it became much more natural (and quieter).

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 13:32 UTC
On challenge Defining usable space: Ceilings (5 comments in total)
In reply to:

RJB138: Question: Your rule "Nothing that identifies the photographer or the equipment used"
I assume you mean nothing in the actual image. When one uploads a photo to a challenge, it will include the EXIF data and SOME of that data is visible when you click on a photo - lens focal length, shutter speed, aperture, ISO, etc. If I download the photo ALL the EXIF data (and possibly the photographers name) is visible.

Is that acceptable?

That information that is uploaded as a default is acceptable. However, nothing in the image, the title or the comments - these areas are discretionary and controlled by the submitter. So, no comment or technical data that says "Sony camera with sigma lens" for example. It is just that I would like to avoid any brand-bias, if possible.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2016 at 18:34 UTC
On challenge Defining usable space: Ceilings (5 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): Is it required that this be of a more or less contemporary structure or possibly something from antiquity ?

From any time, even the future if you can. But it must be a photo of an actual ceiling, not a picture of a picture of a ceiling.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2016 at 18:27 UTC

In image 4 I note the strap lug appears to allow it to pivot somewhat. What I cannot rationalize is why.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 19:14 UTC as 59th comment
On challenge Diamonds (3 comments in total)

If frost works for you, will a baseball diamond suffice?

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2016 at 08:47 UTC as 2nd comment
On photo Remember... in the Using and changing the environment - Landscape Water Features challenge (6 comments in total)

A wonderful example of a photograph that mirrors not only the appearance of an object but the emotion as well. Thank you

Link | Posted on Jan 1, 2016 at 03:41 UTC as 5th comment
On photo PC171750 in the Tools for planning and building - measurement challenge (5 comments in total)

Don't know who gave this a 0.5 vote, but I say sour grapes. Well thought out composition and much care in taking and processing. You even avoided a common trap of the out of parallel sensor:subuject planes - did you use a copy stand? Well done and well deserved. Thank you for your entry.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2015 at 20:32 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

tom1234567: I would like to no how many of these overprice Hasselblad thingy's they sell

I will order when the come down to £1000 in 20yrs???????????
Tom G

Your wait would be in vain. In 1966 I bought a brand new Hasselblad 500c from Sarafian Stores, the dealer in Beirut; the outfit included the body with an 80mm Zeiss lens, three backs, and one finder and I paid less than $750. Today, a used kit of the same configuration would be at least $1000 in acceptable condition. In terms of "tech," basically, there was none - but there was a lot of precision in design and manufacture, though. The following year, I bought the first Nikkor 2.1cm f4 lens imported into the middle east for less than $300; today the same lens sells for well over a thousand bucks, used. Waiting for prices to go down on photo equipment that carries a reputation for quality and performance rarely gains much in terms of real savings.

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2015 at 22:07 UTC
In reply to:

Albert Silver: That is some pretty funky math there. From 28,500 Euros to 12,900 Euros is a 55% discount, not 40%.

True, still a rule of thumb in reading headlines is to expect hyperbole, not critical accuracy. Thus, becoming hypercritical - "the headline reads just 40%, not 'over'." - regarding the use of a word in a headline serves in no way to clarify the discussion. The "over" is in the lead paragraph.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2015 at 19:34 UTC
Total: 301, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »