meanwhile

meanwhile

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Nov 14, 2009

Comments

Total: 661, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Great article!

CANON 50mm f/1.4 II (S Series, 1959).

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 13:28 UTC as 73rd comment
In reply to:

guyfawkes: When saving an image to jpeg after editing the original my software gives me the option to select a quality setting where 100 equals best quality jpeg, but having just saved a jpeg of 450KB from a 16MB RAW image, with the image dimensions remaining the same, on screen I can't see any difference. This represents a reduction to roughly 1/32nd of the original. So what am I missing here with google announcing just 35% saving?

That 450KB file would be 292KB instead.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 21:46 UTC
In reply to:

OlyPent: Eventually, will this thing end-up on the used lens market?

Maybe there's another way in? :-)

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2017 at 01:07 UTC
In reply to:

OlyPent: Eventually, will this thing end-up on the used lens market?

"didn't use a better grade part"

Unless, like some others have surmised (including Roger), it's maybe designed to be a 'crumple zone', so other parts don't get damaged in the fall.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2017 at 00:07 UTC

Ha. Is this the SD Association trolling Sony?

(Yes, I know Sony is on the board too)

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2017 at 01:31 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF bokeh demystified (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

mezastel: Notice how the images Sony shows off has that *Simulated image disclaimer. Why couldn't they use REAL images?

Sure. As they did with most. But there is no Sony 100mm f/2.8 non-STF to use.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2017 at 09:46 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF bokeh demystified (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

mezastel: Notice how the images Sony shows off has that *Simulated image disclaimer. Why couldn't they use REAL images?

The non-STF image is simulated.

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2017 at 01:04 UTC
In reply to:

ybizzle: You would have to be a complete n00b to buy this lens. Spend your money on a prime instead.

"and primes are pretty limiting"

Only if you are, to use your lingo, a n00b.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 10:58 UTC
In reply to:

mosc: Isn't 100mm f2.8 a little... too deep for portraiture? This is equivalent to a 50 f1.4 which would need to be closer but it's not exactly a shallow DOF monster.

The bokeh in an STF lens works slightly differently. Check out some of the portraits done with the 135mm STF. https://www.flickr.com/groups/85748224@N00/

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2017 at 04:57 UTC
In reply to:

TerrificShot Photography: Sony has already a great 90mm f/2.8 macro OSS G,

Do I miss something here ? What is the need for a 100mm f/2.8 macro lens?

——–

Best,

Herve

http://www.terrificshot.com/blog

It's not a macro lens, and it's an STF lens.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2017 at 04:55 UTC
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Dislike when company use beautiful/sexy/appealing models to market their ware as if to say you will be this successful after buying this product. They should feature more people from the Maury Show

Republicans are snowflakes. Small, cold, and if you get enough together they shut down schools.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2017 at 04:52 UTC
In reply to:

Tommi K1: These are beautiful as all the previous ones. But they really get boring all of them because the process is the same. It is like you would be running through a St. Petersburg Hermitage Museum hallways and the hundreds of thousands artwork that are located there. Just after some point your brains can't process them anymore as "you have seen all".

This is one reason why if you are going to do photography or so, you shouldn't look how others have done it or overall look too much others work as you will just start either repeating them or lose the track of your own style.

" you shouldn't look how others have done it or overall look too much others work as you will just start either repeating them"

There is more chance of that happening if you don't look at them.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2017 at 14:25 UTC
In reply to:

quietrich: This type of aerial 'landscape' is so past it's sell by date. Decorative though it can be, it doesn't add anything to what's been done so many times before (Burtynsky, Maisel etc.).
Also the pretentious 'environmental' angle just doesn't stand up - the carbon footprint of each of these images is phenomenal.
"to illustrate the impacts that industry can have on the world around us" - by producing images of the 'toxic sublime' to hang in the corporate headquarters of global capital. I know that many will disagree, but in my opinion this stuff is both artistically and ideologically redundant.

"what is it with you that you can't stand other's opinions"

Putting forward an opinion, and proposing that this work has no value, merit or worth, are two different things.

I think your view of the world is 'artistically and ideologically redundant'. Pompous arrogance has been done already.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2017 at 01:34 UTC
On article F is for '4th': Hands-on with Fujifilm X100F (424 comments in total)
In reply to:

stephend0122: Looks very nice but I won't buy until they weather proof and dust prof as I've had an x 100s which had a lot of dust inside the lens. I spoke to Fuji and they wanted to charge me 350 dollars to replace lens. I declined and traded it in for another weather sealed camera from a different manufacturer. I loved the x100s but unfortunately I hated the dust issue. I love Fuji products though but purchased an Olympus em1. Anyway my wish list for Fuji weather and dust proofing.

"and traded it in for another weather sealed camera from a different manufacturer"

Which one?

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 13:09 UTC
On article F is for '4th': Hands-on with Fujifilm X100F (424 comments in total)

I would love it if Fuji decided to keep making the original X100 at a discount. It is such a wonderful camera, could be the K1000 of a new generation.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2017 at 13:04 UTC as 30th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

dccdp: I'm not from the US so I am not familiar with the intricacies of the American politics. Still... Isn't this kind of whining about one's side losing the election characteristic to more immature democracies? I mean, seeing all these hater comments that find a lot of weird reasons for why Democrats lost (such as "voters are stupid Vodka-drinking rednecks"), makes me think about countries that only now discover democracy, unaccustomed with concepts such as dealing with different opinions, having respect for the one who disagrees with yourself, diversity, and tolerance.

"It looks like humanity has begun to awaken and strike back"

In all three cases you cite, they have simply cut off their nose to spite their face.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 01:56 UTC
In reply to:

HP1999: President Dumpf supporter of evil is not my president. Look at everything O.H. said and did

The speech by actress Meryl Streep was on point.
The last republican president got us in a war with no WMDs to be found. Was part of a massive recession.

Dumpf will isolate and take the US into WW III with his idiotic tweets and lack of diplomacy
Trump will do nothing unless it puts more money in his pockets. Dumpf supporters were blinded by lies so he could win the biggest reality show ever
We have a president with the behavior of a toddler who is spoiled and when they don't get there way it was rigged.
Still Dumpf won't show his tax returns for someone who likes to brag and boast all of a sudden he is shy to be a billionaire (supposedly)

3 million Americans did not want Dumpf and while he won the electoral vote he lost in his home state of New York. His home town did not want this leech
Dark days ahead for all

"mistery"

lol

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 01:50 UTC
In reply to:

HP1999: President Dumpf supporter of evil is not my president. Look at everything O.H. said and did

The speech by actress Meryl Streep was on point.
The last republican president got us in a war with no WMDs to be found. Was part of a massive recession.

Dumpf will isolate and take the US into WW III with his idiotic tweets and lack of diplomacy
Trump will do nothing unless it puts more money in his pockets. Dumpf supporters were blinded by lies so he could win the biggest reality show ever
We have a president with the behavior of a toddler who is spoiled and when they don't get there way it was rigged.
Still Dumpf won't show his tax returns for someone who likes to brag and boast all of a sudden he is shy to be a billionaire (supposedly)

3 million Americans did not want Dumpf and while he won the electoral vote he lost in his home state of New York. His home town did not want this leech
Dark days ahead for all

"Funny that if I intentionally misspell Obama's name"

Not a misspelling, Drumpf is what it originally was before they Americanized it.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 01:49 UTC
In reply to:

Wye Photography: Perhaps the rest of the world isn't really interested in this for-the-rest-of-the-world non-event.

"I do not think Donald will lead us into war"

You are right. Drumpf will not lead you into anything, even war. He will bring the war to you through his arrogance and ineptitude. He is an introductory sentence, nothing more. Never a full paragraph on anything.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 01:46 UTC
On article Hawks Factory announces new 35mm F2 in M-mount (67 comments in total)

Minolta 40mm F/2 M-Rokkor. 1/4 the price. Smaller. Lighter. Renders beautifully.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 14:06 UTC as 5th comment
Total: 661, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »