babart

Lives in United States ME, United States
Works as a Pharmacist
Has a website at www.brucebartrug.com
Joined on Jun 23, 2008

Comments

Total: 430, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Ten things we're hoping for from the Nikon D850 (327 comments in total)

A base price of less than 10K.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 21:55 UTC as 27th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

goodgeorge: I am still quite surprised how many beginners spend so much money on Photoshop while we have Affinity for a few bucks or GIMP completely for free.

It's also the power of a very versatile and complete program.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 21:52 UTC

Finally.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 02:06 UTC as 12th comment

Umm, 100mm f/2.8 (135/3.5?), 300gms, and $700. You might have gotten me with that. S o r r y.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 02:00 UTC as 28th comment
In reply to:

babart: I'm so glad I have a Zeiss C/Y 85/2.8 that I purchased for the insane price of $300.

I don't care. The Zeiss is a great lens and good enough for me. I'm not interested in the Leica or the Hexanon. And kindly stop arguing on my post, which simply compared the cost of a used Zeiss to the new Whatever. Thank you.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 21:32 UTC
In reply to:

babart: I'm so glad I have a Zeiss C/Y 85/2.8 that I purchased for the insane price of $300.

I'm sure it's a great lens, Noah, but what's your point? The Leica 80/1.4 costs $2600 minimum, used. My point was that the $300 Zeiss I have is most likely a much better lens than the $2000 replica of an early 20th century portrait lens.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 21:23 UTC
In reply to:

babart: I'm so glad I have a Zeiss C/Y 85/2.8 that I purchased for the insane price of $300.

It's a great lens. As with the 50/1.7 and 28/2.8, it has more tendency to flare than lenses with modern coatings, but the sharpness and contrast can't be beat.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 18:48 UTC

I'm so glad I have a Zeiss C/Y 85/2.8 that I purchased for the insane price of $300.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 12:41 UTC as 18th comment | 13 replies

The graphic arts field has always been dominated by Macs, but even here the ratio is now about 50/50. For the same reasons mentioned by Ortiz, mainly flexibility. Being an illustrator and photographer, I hear problems from both sides. Macs don't always work better than PCs, and Apple software has problems just as Microsoft's. There's also the added advantage that lower price means money to update equipment or buy a different lens :).

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 02:33 UTC as 236th comment
On article Leica TL2 first impressions (361 comments in total)
In reply to:

tedolf: I can't see why anyone would buy one of these over a m4/3 camera.

Tedolph

Very possibly, but this was a few years ago. Technology changes constantly, and I'm aware of the in camera suppression. I'm much happier with APS-C Fuji sensors. Thanks for the comment.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 13:53 UTC
On article Leica TL2 first impressions (361 comments in total)
In reply to:

tedolf: I can't see why anyone would buy one of these over a m4/3 camera.

Tedolph

I sold my M43 gear to buy the Fuji X-E1 several years ago. I miss the tiny lenses but I don't miss the noisy sensors. The E1 is about ten percent larger and heavier than the Panasonic gear, but given the superb sensor I could care less.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 02:13 UTC
On article Leica TL2 first impressions (361 comments in total)
In reply to:

tedolf: I can't see why anyone would buy one of these over a m4/3 camera.

Tedolph

Less noise, excellent lens. However, for the price, I could buy a mirrorless full-frame that wouldn't weigh much more.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 00:11 UTC
On article Photo of the week: The Shining (79 comments in total)

Great catch! Not an uncommon weather phenomenon at Torres, but you certainly took advantage of the brief moment of life. Congrats.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2017 at 15:08 UTC as 27th comment

As an old codger I was tempted to say something sarcastic about dumb phones. Frankly, however, the phones aren't dumb at all, it's (a few) of the people who use them. Like those that text with their elbows on the steering wheel while zipping along at 70mph. I don't own one because I'm retired and occasionally go a month or two without making a phone call on my cell. If I were still working I would have one because smart phones are amazingly useful devices. A way-out example is that villagers in the Himalayas have stopped burning wood and dung and switched to propane.....because with small solar chargers they can call the propane delivery guy. Reduces lung disease among the villagers and the rate of glacier melting because of reduced soot lying on the surface of the ice. Zounds.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 23:15 UTC as 73rd comment

Interesting perspective, one that would certainly be of use in selecting equipment for a given purpose, in this case travel. I would encourage more of the same, as applied to other photographic purposes.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2017 at 02:38 UTC as 20th comment
In reply to:

babart: Very interesting, especially since you indicate they are well-made. I'm using Yongnuo flashes with their radio controller for architectural work, and while they are super for the money ($80 a flash unit) I've already had two fail on me. I fixed one myself but the other is beyond repair. I'm considering buying three of these and the controller, as I often find I need three lights, especially in larger rooms. Thanks for the review!

@BrainBeat: Yongnuos are inexpensive enough to treat as throw-away items, and they work very well. I'll look into Meike, and thanks.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2017 at 13:44 UTC

Very interesting, especially since you indicate they are well-made. I'm using Yongnuo flashes with their radio controller for architectural work, and while they are super for the money ($80 a flash unit) I've already had two fail on me. I fixed one myself but the other is beyond repair. I'm considering buying three of these and the controller, as I often find I need three lights, especially in larger rooms. Thanks for the review!

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2017 at 22:33 UTC as 27th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

new boyz: The bokeh is not bad for a cheap-ish 35mm lens.

Yes, I have the 12/2 for my Fuji equipment and it's an excellent piece of glass. The 14/2.8 is as well, even wide open. Reliable tests indicate the $700 24/3.5 tilt/shift is as sharp as the $2000 Canon equivalent at f/8 and f/11, but of course falls off when opened wider. I do wish, though, that Samyang had made the levers that unlock lens rotation out of metal, not plastic.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2017 at 13:11 UTC
In reply to:

new boyz: The bokeh is not bad for a cheap-ish 35mm lens.

It may only cost $300, but that's about par for most Samyang (Rokinon) lenses. Since I own three, I can tell you the image quality is not cheap. It may not be Zeiss quality but it's close enough for government work.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2017 at 23:44 UTC

Yowzer, this could be my first AF lens for the a7. Currently I use Zeiss, Pentax, and Rokinon lenses (with adapters) because I can't really justify buying lenses for two AF systems, the other being Fuji. I'm retired, so need to watch the pennies :(. Nice to see Samyang putting AF into it's lenses. I have two of their manual focus....the 12/2 for APS-C Fuji and the 14/2.8 in Sony E mount. Both are very decent lenses, especially considering the purchase price.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2017 at 14:54 UTC as 37th comment
Total: 430, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »